Pete Rose still bets on baseball and it’s why he’s still banned

(AP) In the end, all the debates, all the excuses and all the platitudes didn’t matter. What mattered was this: Pete Rose bet on baseball then and he still bets on baseball now. If you want to know why Rose, the man with the most hits in history, won’t be allowed back into the game after Monday’s ruling from MLB, you needn’t look any further. It’s that simple.

Pete Rose broke one of MLB’s most widely known and cherished rules back when he was employed by the Cincinnati Reds. Now, he was trying to get back in the game, to prove that he’d served his time, that he’d changed and that the new MLB commissioner Rob Manfred should open the doors again. Only there was one thing: Rose still bet on baseball.

Not only that, but he still wasn’t being completely truthful about it. Consider this from Manfred’s explanation of why he rejected Rose’s appeal:

“During our meeting, Mr. Rose told me that he has continued to bet on horse racing and on professional sports, including baseball. Those bets may have been permitted by law in the jurisdictions in which they were placed, but this fact does not mean that the bets would be permissible if made by a player or manager subject to Rule 21.”

That section came with this footnote:

“Even more troubling, in our interview, Rose initially denied betting on baseball currently and only later in the interview did he ‘clarify’ his response to admit such betting.”

So even when Rose had the chance to sit down with the commissioner and sell himself — at a time in which he should be as perfect and charming and endearing as possible — he was still lying about whether he bet on baseball. Even all these years later.

It’s fitting, considering one piece of evidence that heavily influenced Manfred’s decision was a notebook from 1986 that indicated Rose bet that season as a player. Rose had previously denied ever betting on baseball as a player. According to Manfred’s report, Rose “could not remember” facts about 1985 and 1986 during their September meeting.

Manfred said in his verdict that Rose didn’t have a “mature understanding of his wrongful conduct.” Rose’s camp said in their rebuttal statement that he was “constantly working to remain disciplined, compassionate and grateful.” Manfred said Rose presents “an unacceptable risk.”

If Rose were reinstated by baseball, it would mean that he could be hired by an MLB team, perhaps as a hitting coach or a manager or a special assistant to the GM. The reality of Rose getting such a job would be slim even if he were reinstated. But even if that happened, it’s hard to believe — considering what we’ve learned from Manfred’s report — that Rose would stop gambling.

And that’s really the point here. It wasn’t about Rose getting the type of cushy job that 4,256 hits would buy him, were he a normal player. And it wasn’t about Rose getting into the Hall of Fame, which is another matter outside the commissioner’s jurisdiction.

What Manfred had to decide in the appeal was this: Had Pete Rose learned to stop betting on baseball yet? Was he ready to tell the truth? Had he, now that he’s 74 years old, gained the maturity and enlightenment necessary to admit his wrongdoings and own his mistakes.

The answers were no, no and no. And thus, so was Manfred’s answer.

More MLB coverage from Yahoo Sports: