Earlier this week, ESPN’s Outside the Lines released a report detailing the revelation that Pete Rose bet on games in 1986 when he was still a player with the Cincinnati Reds. Some condemned the report as a hatchet job of Rose, even though it was a typically well-researched OTL piece, while others came to the rather obvious conclusion that this would be another nail in the coffin of Rose’s hopes of reinstatement.

For some reason, Rose’s continued employment at Fox Sports became an issue after the report. Fox issued a statement to Sports Illustrated about the report, affirming their commitment to Rose as an MLB analyst.

“FOX Sports has no comment on the recent news pertaining to Pete Rose other than his status as a guest baseball analyst for FOX Sports 1 is unchanged. Pete is next scheduled to appear on America’s Pregame, MLB Whiparound and FOX Sports Live on July 1.”

I’m mainly curious why anyone would think Fox would cut ties with Rose after the OTL report. The fact that Pete Rose bet on baseball isn’t a secret. Should the fact that he bet on baseball AS A PLAYER really change anything from Fox’s standpoint? I don’t think so.

Are we somehow going to take Pete Rose, MLB analyst less seriously now that we know he bet on games as a player? I personally wouldn’t, and I don’t think many viewers at home also wouldn’t. Rose is a damn good baseball analyst, and while he’s certainly a flawed person, I don’t know what Fox letting him go would prove.

[Sports Illustrated]

About Joe Lucia

I hate your favorite team. I also sort of hate most of my favorite teams.

Comments are closed.