enquirer.com

News
Front Page
Local
Sports
-Bengals
-Reds
-Bearcats
-Xavier
Business
Health
Technology
Weather
Traffic
Back Issues
Photographs
AP Wire
-World
-Nation
-Sports
-Business
-Arts
-Health

Classifieds
Jobs
Autos
General
Obits
Homes

Freetime
Movies
Dining
Calendars
Weekend

Opinion
Columns
Borgman

GoCinci
HelpDesk
Feedback
Circulation
Subscribe
Phone #'s
Search

E N Q U I R E R   S P O R T S   C O V E R A G E
Friday, February 25, 2000

If Selig forgives Strawberry, why not Rose?




BY PAUL DAUGHERTY
The Cincinnati Enquirer

        Baseball's favorite lost soul just flopped off the wagon again; its favorite pariah is still vainly thumbing a ride. It's a question for higher minds why the game concludes Darryl Strawberry's baseball life is worth saving (and re-saving) and Pete Rose's is not.

        How many times must Strawberry test positive before he gets to join Rose's league?

        Bud Selig has bent so far backward to help Strawberry, the commissioner could pass as a contortionist. As thanks, Strawberry has mocked Selig's trust. The timeline of Strawberry's screw-ups reads like the life story of a celebrity loser.

        In lovely chronologic detail since 1987, Strawberry has been: Charged with breaking his first wife's nose. Arrested for waving a gun in public. Admitted to alcohol rehab. Ordered to repay $350,000 in skipped taxes. Sentenced to six months' home confinement. Found to have tested positive for cocaine. Charged with failure to pay child support. Caught soliciting an undercover policewoman. Caught with more cocaine and, of course, caught with more cocaine.

        And yet there he was with the Yankees in October, batting .333 in the postseason, including two home runs, enjoying the cheers of New Yorkers. Cashing his winner's share, getting sized for another ring.

Repeated relapses
        I'm no fan of Rose being reinstated. I believe, like Selig, that Rose bet on baseball. If only for appearances' sake, he should never be in position to sway a game. (Rose should be in the Hall of Fame, however; it's a museum, not the Vatican.)

        But at what point does fairness take over?

        You can argue Strawberry's sad love affair with cocaine hurts only himself, while Rose's need to gamble could harm the game. You can grasp that premise. But your grip is weakening.

        Not that baseball worries about hypocrisy. But when does it start becoming hypocritical that baseball suffers Strawberry's annual relapses while keeping Rose in the Green Room, tapping his foot?

        If you're going to be hypocritical, why not take the full plunge? If you're going to let Darryl back in yet again, why not Rose?

Double standard
        The collective bargaining agreement makes it difficult, if not impossible, for Selig to ban Strawberry. Fay Vincent tried to ban Steve Howe, baseball's original poster boy for cocaine ruin; an arbitrator ruled Vincent couldn't do that.

        It's also possible Selig won't need to go that direction. Strawberry will be 38 in a month. If Selig suspends him for the season, Darryl may be done, anyway.

        But does anybody else see the justice scales tipping sideways on this one?

        Baseball to Darryl: Get treatment.

        Baseball to Pete: Get lost.

        Darryl: Play in the World Series.

        Pete: Buy a ticket.

        Darryl: How can we help you?

        Pete: Stop bothering us.

        Darryl: Come on in.

        Pete: You're blocking the doorway.

        Bud Selig didn't call me back Thursday. Here's what I wanted to ask him:

        Does it get harder to justify Rose's ban every time Strawberry violates your trust? Who's worse for baseball's image? How does it look to have a known drug addict and wife abuser in the game, and not Rose? How does it play to have John Rocker in the game, spewing his hateful nonsense all over the pages of a national magazine, and not Rose?

        Who has done more to hurt the game's image? And at what point, exactly, is baseball no longer Strawberry's savior but rather his enabler?

        Every time another player's screw-ups cause him to be suspended and not banned, Rose looks a little more picked upon. Doesn't he?

        Said Selig in a radio interview Wednesday: “I don't want to get back into the Pete Rose thing. Integrity is a very critical issue. Without integrity, the game doesn't have anything.”

        Agreed. Whose integrity has meant more? Darryl's or Pete's? Baseball says Darryl's. What a world.

        Paul Daugherty welcomes your comments at 768-8454. Fair Game, a collection of his columns, is available at local bookstores.

       



Reds Stories
Young fed up with trade rumors
- If Selig forgives Strawberry, why not Rose?
Camp Griffey now complete
Casey still has skeptics despite .332
New signee Santiago faces uphill battle

Bengals leave Anderson waiting, wondering
Samuels ready if Bengals want tackle
Chiefs coach likes Dillon
Local boxer 1 win from Olympics
NKU men, women sweep Southern Illinois
Badin girls win 9th title in 10 years
Mason slams Withrow
Princeton holds off Fairfield
Springboro has Wight stuff
Cincinnati girls basketball roundup
Cincinnati boys basketball roundup
Ohio boys basketball scores
Ohio girls basketball scores
local divers win state titles
N.Ky. girls basketball roundup
Kentucky boys basketball scores
Kentucky girls basketball scores


 
Search | Questions/help | News tips | Letters to the editors
Web advertising | Place a classified | Subscribe | Circulation

Copyright 1995-2000. The Cincinnati Enquirer, a Gannett Co. Inc. newspaper.
Use of this site signifies agreement to terms of service updated 4/5/2000.