1 of 5

No

Write now Article Tools

Dwight Gooden. Darryl Strawberry. Leon Durham. Vida Blue. Keith Hernandez. Ferguson Jenkins. Steve Howe. Otis Nixon.

Each of these well-known baseball players has two things in common: They were all suspended by Major League Baseball because of criminal drug use, and they're all eligible for the Hall of Fame.

In fact, Fergie Jenkins is already in the Hall of Fame.

Football player Ray Lewis was indicted on murder charges in a double homicide - although the charges were reduced as a result of a plea bargain - and not only was he not suspended by the National Football League, he was celebrated as the Most Valuable Player in Super Bowl XXXV. He will likely receive strong consideration for football's Hall of Fame.

Professional sports' hallowed Halls are populated by plenty of athletes whose character and morals are hardly beyond reproach - you'll find racists, criminals, chronic alcoholics, and spousal abusers, to name but a few of the flaws.

Yet one of sports' all-time greatest competitors, Pete Rose, remains banned for life from his sport because he gambled.

It hardly seems fair.

In this day and age in which athletes will regularly try to gain an unfair competitive advantage through the use of banned drugs, it seems positively inane that sports will ban an athlete for life because of something that created no competitive advantage.

Of course, there's a very fine line.

If an athlete is betting against himself or his team, then doing what he can to assure a loss, the integrity of the game has been damaged - and a suspension is certainly in order. If the player is given a second chance and the problem is not rectified, further punishment should be considered.

Yes, Pete Rose had a gambling problem. Yes, he bet on baseball games. But he had so much confidence in his own abilities - and those of the other athletes on his team - that he regularly bet on them to win! (If that's viewed as such a crime, sports announcers should be forever banned from using the cliche, "Put his money where his mouth is.") The fact is, there has never been any evidence that Pete Rose bet against his team, or that his gambling activities resulted in the integrity of any game being damaged.

Should Rose have exercised more caution in his choice of extracurricular endeavors? Certainly. But does he deserve a lifetime ban because of them? No.

Ultimately, Rose's is but one case, and each should be judged individually on its own merits.

But there should be no rule that arbitrarily bans an athlete for life because of gambling.

Learn more about this author, Jeff Axelrod.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

Add your voice

Know something about Should gambling on professional sports get an athlete banned for life??
We want to hear your view. Write now!