However, I am not sure there is any evidence that would allow someone to overlook his betting on baseball. If someone was going to be removed from the banned list, then I would think Shoeless Joe would be near the top of the list. MLB banned him because he knew of the fix; not because he participated in it. At least MLB had no proof that he participated in it. Also, I think there is evidence that Jackson made at least 1 attempt to meet with Commiskey prior to the start of the World Series to inform him of the fix, but he refused to take the meeting for whatever reason. Also, I believe there is a conflict of interest issue during his hearing since his appointed lawyer happened to also be the White Sox's lawyer.

I know several attempts have been made to get whatever commissioner to re-examine his case and each time they have declined for various reason. I do think part of the reason could also be that MLB doesn't want to risk the possibility of having to admit that MLB and Commissioner Landis made some critical mistakes in the handling of the investigation. Or even worse MLB having to publicly admit it banned a player that shouldn't have been banned (maybe even viewed as innocent of the charges) because of the legal ramifications it could mean for Jackson's living family members.

Even though Rose is a blemish on MLB's legacy, I think Shoeless Joe may be a potentially bigger blemish. I do think at times MLB may have even seen the 2 cases connected. If MLB re-instated Rose, then there is a pretty good chance it would have to address (aka re-examine) Jackson's case. I don't think MLB wants to do that given how much time has passed and no one is alive with any first hand knowledge of the case.