MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred took Pete Rose’s name off baseball’s lifetime ban list last week with the announcement of a new policy that “permanent ineligibility ends with the passing of the disciplined individual.” The move raised all types of positions, for and against, regarding his eligibility for election for the National Baseball Hall of Fame in Cooperstown.

After reading the opinions in news stories and social media, I put them into five groupings.

 The Purists

This group believes Rose’s death doesn’t change the fact he broke MLB’s Rule 21, which states “any player, umpire, or Club or League official or employee, who shall bet any sum whatsoever upon any baseball game in connection with which the bettor has a duty to perform, shall be declared permanently ineligible.” They will never support Rose’s election to the Hall of Fame because he admitted to betting on baseball games. No exception should be made.

The Sentimentalists

This group never believed Rose should have been given a lifetime ban by Commissioner Bart Giamatti in 1989. They believe Rose was one of the all-time greats of the game, and the Hall of Fame is incomplete without Rose’s bronze plaque. They argue that Rose never bet on his own team to lose.

The Disheartened

Former Cincinnati Reds broadcaster Marty Brennaman recently told the Cincinnati Enquirer that he thought Pete Rose’s family should reject any consideration for Pete to be voted into the Hall of Fame. Brennaman’s position, which represented many others, was that MLB waited too long to reinstate Rose, coming five months after his death. They are dismayed he was not alive to see his eligibility for the Hall restored. Rose had applied for reinstatement multiple times over the years, the last coming in 2022.

The Critics

Manfred reportedly met with President Trump in April, where one of the topics was the removal of Rose from baseball’s permanent eligibility list. Trump had been an advocate of this position since his first presidential term. At one point he said he would issue a pardon for Rose, as though he had direct power over the game. There was a huge backlash on social media from people who were critical of Trump for trying to insert himself into the process. Many those critics actually didn’t care what happened to Rose. Manfred became the target of criticism for seemingly bending to Trump’s influence.

The Skeptics

The earliest Rose would be eligible for voting into the Hall is 2027, when the Classic Baseball Era Committee (formerly known as the Veteran’s Committee) meets to consider candidates who played before 1980. The committee consists of 16 members representing Hall of Fame players, baseball executives, and veteran media members. Some argue that committee members may still harbor feelings that Rose will not be a shoo-in for election because he doesn’t meet the “character” requirement for election. For many years after his ban, Rose denied that he ever bet on baseball. He also served a five-month sentence in 1990 for tax evasion.

Where do I stand on Pete?

Personally, I fall into “The Sentimentalist” category. Call me a “softie” for overlooking his gambling. But his style of play and results on the field made an enormous impact on the game in his era that shouldn’t be downplayed or snubbed. He is worthy of a bronze plaque.

I met Pete Rose in 2013 while in Las Vegas. He frequented one of the casinos where he sold his autograph for $75. Since he had been a frequent topic in my Family Ties book about baseball’s relatives (Pete Jr. was also a major leaguer), I figured he would trade his autograph for a copy of my book. Well, it didn’t work out that way. I paid him to autograph a copy of my book, but I got to shake his hand and take a photograph with the “Hit King.”