Interesting Article...

the_fix_is_on

Registered User
Forum Member
Feb 23, 2002
901
0
0
Western Maryland
MLB's secret probe in 1989 reveals involvement

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ESPN.com news services


It appears Pete Rose wasn't the only person from baseball involved with gambling in 1989.

Major League Baseball's front office secretly conducted a gambling investigation centered on umpires amid the Rose gambling probe 13 years ago, the New York Daily News reported Friday.

According to documents obtained by the newspaper, the investigation produced a written report by Rose investigator John Dowd and two years' probation for two of baseball's most highly regarded umpires Frank Pulli of the National League and Rich Garcia of the American League.

The report stated the umps were disciplined for "associating and doing business with gamblers and bookmakers," which violated Major League Rule 21 -- the "best interests of baseball" rule. Late commissioner Bart Giamatti started the probe and was signed and enforced by his successor, former commissioner Fay Vincent.

Dowd told the Daily News the two umps cooperated with the investigation and were sanctioned for placing bets with "local bookies." Pulli still works for baseball as an umpire supervisor, a job he has held for the last two years, and Garcia is being considered for a similar job.

"It's serious when you try to protect the game from this whole problem of gambling, which raises issues of debt and compromise," Dowd told the News. "We were acutely tuned in to how serious it was with people trying to associate with Major League umpires."

According to the Daily News, MLB confirmed the gambling sanctions and defended its decision to keep the investigation a secret, its hiring of Pulli as a supervisor and its plan to bring in Garcia.

"They made a mistake," Executive vice president of baseball operations Sandy Alderson told the Daily News of the umpires. "From my standpoint, there's absolutely no question about their integrity, commitment to the game or to the profession of umpiring."

Vincent recently told the Daily News the umpire probe didn't rise to the level of the Rose case because there was no proof the umps bet on baseball, as Rose was accused of doing. Rose has been banned from baseball and denied admission to the Hall of Fame.

"If there was any case involving umpires," Vincent told the paper, "it didn't involve betting on baseball." ;) <I>Yea, right.</I>


<I>Any time human beings and money are involved, crazy things can happen. </I>
_ The Fix is On :)
 
W

wondo

Guest
Not sure the rules governing umpires, but players and other baseball personnel can bet other sports outside of baseball legally without issue from MLB. I think what this article is suggesting is that the two umpires should have placed their bets in sanctionned vegas sportsbooks and not through a bookie. Maybe I'm misreading it....

Don't take this personally becuase I'm not busting your chops, but that's a rather big assumption you make without knowing any details to say that the umpires bet baseball. People can bet, and still keep their integrity and self control, which is probably what these umpires did -- bet football on a sunday afternoon from their couch.
 

fletcher

Registered
Forum Member
Jun 21, 2000
16,136
9
0
63
henderson,nv.
wondo is right players and coaches are not resticked from sports wagering,just not allow to bet baseball and it is to be donr through vegas or with a agent or acting as an agent off shore.

as for umpires ctown guy would know that rule was a director of umpires for the pcl or i think thats what his title was so he could shed some light maybe.

as much as i like pete rose he bet baseball and that is a knowen fact ,he can say what he wants but there were slips and tapes,that is a strick violation of major league baseball for rookie league to the show.but i might add he isnot the only person ,but he won't admit it.

should he be in the hall of course,what he did as a player proves that,a lot worse them him in there now.
 
Last edited:

Nick Douglas

Registered User
Forum Member
Oct 31, 2000
3,688
15
0
48
Los Angeles, CA, USA
I would vote for Rose if he admitted to gambling and apologized, but not before. I hope I am not opening up a can of worms by putting in my opinion on the subject, but that is just the way I feel. Until he admits and apologizes, I say no Hall of Fame for Pete Rose.
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top