What Rose did was far worse than what the people the did roids did.

No, no, no.
You can't justify claiming it was worse. Not at all.
Rose has no equal for playing the game with respect and complete integrity. His transgresions were off the field.
The players who made a mockery of competitive sports with the outrage of PED's fall into the same category as the Black Sox gang. They harmed the integrety of the game. On the field.
The transgressions of the steroid era and cheaters have actually made Rose, as a HOF canidate, smell like a rose.

You do realise that what the Black Sox did and what Rose did is very similar. If Rose bet on hockey, no one would care, but he bet on HIS GAMES. That means, if he bet on his team to lose, he could make changes to give his team a disadvantage, basically directly destroying the fairness of the game. The fact that he was the manager made it even worse, because he controlled the whole game. If he bets on baseball when he is retired, I don't care.

Roids gives one player an advantage, that is not too big, but is an advantage. Roids are now against the rules.
Betting on baseball has ALWAYS been the biggest rule in baseball. It gives someone who bets against their games a direct connection to the outcome of the game, especially when it is done by a manager. So what if Rose had a good career, he broke the biggest rule in baseball. Bonds had an amazing career, are you saying that excuses his actions?

No.

Pete Rose broke one of the oldest rules in the proverbial book - in most clubhouses there are (or at least used to be) signs up acknowledging the fact that gambling of any sort would not be acceptable. I, for one, don't care when these trangressions occurred - Rose bet on baseball and lied fervently enough about it that I wouldn't be shocked to find out he bet against his own team, bet while he was still playing, and the like.

And, for the sake of argument, has anybody considered that, statistically, he doesn't really deserve to be in the Hall? He was a compiler - nothing more. He benefited from playing on teams with players far more talented then he (Robinson, Morgan, Bench), was a poor to mediocre fielder (Gold Gloves mean nothing - Palmeiro won one playing 28 games at 1B and Jeter has won three), had very little power, was a terrible baserunner, and slugged a meager .409 for his career. And, in counter to his hits record argument, he led the league in outs thirteen times (and holds the career record by 1200 outs), led the league in GIDP twice, led the league in time caught stealing four times, and had a stolen base percentage of less than 50% seven times.

Did Rose ever bet on baseball when he was a player? If he didnt then he should go in there as a player. The hall should separate what he did as a player from what he did as a manager.

I agree with Cards fans, just as long as they don't have evidence he bet on baseball while he was a player. Let him in! I just have a funny feeling they will let him in, when he is no longer on this earth, which is just a spiteful tragedy.

A guy with 4256 career hits and no proof of having bet on the game while playing, should be let in.

Without question.

He's a Legend and that's that!

Someone should have a national televised interview with Rose and ask him if he ever bet on baseball when he was a player. If he says no then he has a case to go into the hall just as a player and if he says yes then the experts were right all along. Its that easy.

I don't care about his betting, put him in the HOF now. Just like Joe Jackson. He is one of the most prolific, high-energy guys in baseball history.

People make mistakes. Big mistakes.

You shouldn't condemn someone for not being perfect, considering it's not possible.

A guy like Pete Rose, deserves a second chance. That second chance is HOF consideration.