I agree, but they do, so why should gambler's be any different.
They shouldn't be any different. But, that doesn't mean they should allow the gamblers to continue. It means they should stop allowing the juicers.
I agree, but they do, so why should gambler's be any different.
If he had, yes it was. Look at some of the detail in the report and ask yourself if you were MLB: Would you rather have your official investigation reveal that or any one of his many gambling partners instead??My point wa the credibility of "reports" when the commission has an agenda. Do you think it was in MLB's best interest to say Rose had gambled on his team to lose?
Because he's dead. :While we're at it, why not reinstate "Shoeless" Joe Jackson?
While we're at it, why not reinstate "Shoeless" Joe Jackson?
Because he's dead. :