The decision to change the policy on permanent ineligibility reflects a desire for redemption for players historically shunned for gambling-related scandals, aligning with contemporary views on rehabilitation and second chances.

Rose's immense contributions to baseball as a player should not be overshadowed by his past mistakes, and this ruling provides an opportunity for historical recognition of his achievements.

Advocates for Rose's inclusion in the Hall of Fame argue it reflects a shift in perspective on redemption, as many feel his past actions do not represent who he has become in his later years.

Critics argue that allowing Rose and Jackson to be eligible for the Hall of Fame posthumously disregards the core values of integrity and fair play that baseball represents, compromising the sport's reputation.

The reinstatement of players with serious violations raises a slippery slope concern, suggesting that future Hall of Fame eligibility could include others with similar or worse conduct, thereby diluting the standards of entry.

Trump's vocal support for Rose and the political implications of his potential pardon could influence public sentiment, but may also politicize a sports issue that fundamentally deals with ethics and morality.