By Nick Reiher

For years, his supporters want to see him elected, despite the lying, cheating and infantile behavior. And I just do not understand.

It makes me wonder about our country and one of our oldest institutions.

The hue and cry by his supporters of course spiked again recently after Pete Rose died at 83. They believe he should be elected to Major League Baseball’s Hall of Fame, based on the way he represented the best of America’s Pastime with his hustle and gamesmanship during his career.

Oh, and how can you not have the all-time leader in hits in the Hall of Fame?

“Charlie Hustle” (a moniker that would come to have an entirely different meaning) already was a shoo-in for the Hall, even before he broke Ty Cobb’s hits record in 1985 with a single off Eric Show of the Padres. He would finish with 4,256.

Surpassing Cobb could have meant not only a place in Cooperstown, but a separate wing. Rose epitomized the tenacity and “win-at-all-costs” personality that defines hard-nosed baseball and energizes the fans.

Four years later, Major League Baseball designated Rose a pariah, permanently ineligible to participate in the game. A couple years after that, the Hall of Fame voted to bar anyone deemed “permanently ineligible” from baseball for election and induction.

My friend, Kevin Kollins, and I used to friendly-argue about this, with him saying Rose’s betting had nothing to do with baseball.

My reply always would be, “He was placing bets on his team, (Yes, I know, to “win”) in uniform, in the dugout at the ballpark. It couldn’t have been more about baseball than if he had done it during a post-game interview.”

Finally, after years of lying, in 2004, Rose admitted he had bet on baseball and his team.

During, and even after, those years, he bad-mouthed the commissioners who wouldn’t reverse the ban, and, in general, acted like a spoiled, entitled brat.

Pretty harsh words for a guy who just died, huh? Truth be told, he should have been happy they let him keep his record in the books.

No such luck for “Shoeless” Joe Jackson, one of eight “Black Sox” banned from baseball for allegedly throwing the 1919 World Series. His .356 lifetime average would have put him third behind Cobb and Rogers Hornsby.

Babe Ruth said Jackson was the best hitter he ever had seen and modeled his own batting style after him.

Jackson’s teammate, knuckleball pitcher Eddie Cicotte, also was no slouch, and likely would have made it into the Hall were it not for that indiscretion.

There have been others banned from baseball for life for throwing or attempting to throw games, pretty much small-timers, but not since Rose.

The bans we hear about now are mostly “three strike” decisions handed down for using PEDs or other illegal drugs.

So, you might say, what about Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens? They broke the rules. Should they be in the Hall?

PEDs became popular because Major League Baseball turned a blind eye, wanting to get back the fans they lost during the strike in 1994-95. And Cal Ripken Jr. breaking Lou Gehrig’s “unbreakable” record of playing 2,130 consecutive games in September 1995 could do only so much.

My take on PED-infused records: If they were good enough to get into the Hall before they took them, let them in. After they pass.

Some say sentiment and that sports betting now is legal ultimately will get Rose into the Hall. That would be silly. Legalized sports betting is for the fans; not the players.

And for you legal sports bettors, wouldn’t you like to know if there was any shenanigans among teams or players before you threw down that wager?

Rose’s was no small-time indiscretion. He was flouting one of MLB’s strictest rules, one that aimed to make sure a “Black Sox” scandal never again happened. To keep the game clean. Or as clean as possible.

But, playing on the fact he had broken one of baseball’s longest-held records, he whined, belittled and lied for years about it. Because he was Pete Rose. And people loved him.

People still do. Fans, former teammates, even former opposing players.

Often, we sneer when justice seems to favor those in power — celebrities, sports figures, high-profile politicians — who get a better shake than most of us would under similar circumstances.

I would take the under on me ever breaking Rose’s lifetime hits record. But what is the bar? How good, how famous, how powerful do you need to be to thumb your nose at the rules and still be considered among the best?

I don’t remember hearing much backlash after Lance Armstrong was stripped of his titles. Because fewer care about cycling than they do about baseball?

What does it say about our country if we drop integrity from America’s Pastime? Or are we too jaded a country to care?

Rest in peace, Pete. And let this argument rest once and for all.

Nick Reiher is editor of Farmers Weekly Review.