AROD May Be Banned from Baseball?!?!

[conor912]

Despite my previous comment, I think it's pretty hard to justify banning when he's never even been suspended once. What kind of message does THAT send?

[Deertick]

I heard that Arod took out an 'end of career' insurance policy that guaranteed him the value of his contract.

Why would someone do that? It is a guaranteed contract. Even if he cuts a leg off, the Yanks have to pay. Unless he was betting the come on getting banned....

[Sean]

Jim, interesting terminology. And if you are correct about that policy, that would be very revealing.

[rdwyer]

I still like the old fashioned way. Floozies and booze.

[ScottFandango]

He says he is ready to play, but do the Yanks want him?

I think they will say he is unhealthy and can't play....they are buying their time until his suspension is announced...

Remember, baseball is playing by THEIR OWN RULES now (see Braun's 65 game/rest of the year suspension). This is not 50 nor 100 nor 150 games....

they made up their own rules for this and they will do the same for Aroid= lifetime ban

[Exhibitman]

If MLB and MLBPA are serious about getting the game cleaned up they could resolve the problems with three simple things in the CBA:

1. Give teams the option of voiding the balance of multi-year contracts of officially punished PED users;

2. Mandate WADA random testing of any player caught using PEDs for the rest of his career; and

3. Mandate a morals clause in every contract that requires the signatory to swear under penalty of perjury that he hasn't used PEDs and that expressly states that the club is relying on that representation of fact in choosing to enter into the agreement. If he is proven to have violated that condition, the club could then go to court and seek to void the contract for fraud independent of MLB discipline.

Look, if I had the skills and needed a boost before free agency, I'd use PEDs give the slap on the wrist sanctions in place. As it stands now, a guy like Braun can take a penalty that represents a third of his income for his least lucrative contract year, rest up until next year, and then come back and get paid the balance of his contract. That isn't a deterrent, it is a cost of doing business, like the anticipated cost of killing and maiming a certain number of people every year from exploding Ford Pinto cars rather than fixing the gas tank. Players like these a-holes need a hammer like punitive damages hanging over their heads so that they aren't tempted to make a cost-benefit analysis in the first place. "Oh no you don't" clauses are commonplace to prohibit risky activities like motorcycling or playing basketball, so why not for PED use?

[ctownboy]

Exhibitman,

In this thread or the Ryan Braun thread, I said a similar thing and amde a similar proposal.

For a first time infraction, the player is banned for one year and his contract is voided. When he comes back, he gets a one year deal, at league minimum pay and there can be no incentive clauses or anything which allows him to make any extra money from baseball during that year.

For a second violation, the cheater has his contract voided (again) and he is banned from baseball for life. This means no consideration for the Hall Of Fame. No working as a coach, manager, special assistant or ANYTHING to do with MLB.

take away the greed and ego factors and most of these guys will stop using PED's.

Oh yeah, one other thing, if MLB has the goods on these players and they have broken the law, turn over the evidence to the Feds or local police and let them face criminal charges.

David

[HOF Auto Rookies]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

If MLB and MLBPA are serious about getting the game cleaned up they could resolve the problems with three simple things in the CBA:

1. Give teams the option of voiding the balance of multi-year contracts of officially punished PED users;

2. Mandate WADA random testing of any player caught using PEDs for the rest of his career; and

3. Mandate a morals clause in every contract that requires the signatory to swear under penalty of perjury that he hasn't used PEDs and that expressly states that the club is relying on that representation of fact in choosing to enter into the agreement. If he is proven to have violated that condition, the club could then go to court and seek to void the contract for fraud independent of MLB discipline.

Look, if I had the skills and needed a boost before free agency, I'd use PEDs give the slap on the wrist sanctions in place. As it stands now, a guy like Braun can take a penalty that represents a third of his income for his least lucrative contract year, rest up until next year, and then come back and get paid the balance of his contract. That isn't a deterrent, it is a cost of doing business, like the anticipated cost of killing and maiming a certain number of people every year from exploding Ford Pinto cars rather than fixing the gas tank. Players like these a-holes need a hammer like punitive damages hanging over their heads so that they aren't tempted to make a cost-benefit analysis in the first place. "Oh no you don't" clauses are commonplace to prohibit risky activities like motorcycling or playing basketball, so why not for PED use?

As much as I would love to see that terminology in the contracts, I don't think players will agree to that, but I hope they do and maybe the union can get some leverage into that.

[ctownboy]

I used to work in the financial services industry. I had to get a drug test before I was hired. I had to agree to being randomly tested (if they thought I was doing drugs) and they could fire me for a failed test. There was nothing athletic about my job. I am sure there are other professions where tkaing a drug test and failing it would also get you fired.

Now, if I (and others) had to go through that then I would think that if enough fans made enough of a stink about steroids and PED's then MLB and the Players Association would be able to hammer out a contract where players would get their contract voided or terminated for a failed test.

If the two sides couldn't or didn't agree about this then it would show which side was serious about getting the cheaters out of baseball and which wasn't.

David

[t206blogcom]

Will today be the day we finally get the verdict?

[iwantitiwinit]

I just bet a guy at work $200 he gets more than 100 games (pre-appeal), watcha think?

[drmondobueno]

A-Fraud has too much money and too many attorneys. He will find a way to get what he wants.

Maybe if the fans pelt him with specimen cups.... he will go away

[ctownboy]

No, A Rod hasn't failed a drug test but he HAS admitted to prior steroid or PED use (after lying about it or not saying anything for years when he was asked about it).

Also, if you read the article on Fangraphs concerning Ryan Braun's suspension, it was said that a player who hasn't failed a drug test but who is caught in this type of scheme/scandal isn't necessarily tied to the 50/100/permanent ban penalties. It was said this could/would fall under a different set of infractions where those rules might not apply. That is why there are reports that A Rod could be suspended 150 games. That is also why the head of the Players Association said that players found guilty and who lose their appeal could be suspended 5 games or 500 games.

In this situation, it is up to the Commissioner to set the punishment for the crime.

If Selig has the goods on A Rod (and the Yankees want him gone as much as most fans seem to want him gone) and he wants to set an example then banning A Rod for life is a possibility. He would then join the Black Sox players and Pete Rose as examples.......

David

[ScottFandango]

Originally Posted by conor912

Despite my previous comment, I think it's pretty hard to justify banning when he's never even been suspended once. What kind of message does THAT send?

a GREAT MESSAGE!

if MLB gets rid of the once PRINCE OF BASEBALL, then anyone can go...

this should scare the rest of the players straight!

[HOF Auto Rookies]

According to the JDA (Joint Drug Agreement),

‘A Player may be subjected to disciplinary action for just cause by the Commissioner for any Player violation of Section 2 above not referenced in Section 7.A through 7.F above.’

So, the issue with this is what and how do they define ‘just cause.’ Is it the reports, biogenesis etc. Do they trust the word of Bosch?
The JDA provides two means only for suspensions: positive drug tests and reasonable cause. The tests can be scheduled, random, or based on ‘reasonable cause.’

Section 3 paragraph C,

‘In the event that either Party has information that gives it reasonable cause to believe that a Player has, in the previous 12-month period, engaged in the use, possession, sale or distribution of a Performance Enhancing Substance (including hGH) or Stimulant, the Party shall provide the other Party, either orally or in writing, with a description of its information (“Reasonable Cause Notification”), and the Player will be subject to an immediate urine and/or blood specimen collection, or a program of testing, as determined by the IPA, to commence no later than 48 hours after the Reasonable Cause Notification was provided.’

To date, baseball has only suspended players for positive tests (until Braun). Now, they CAN, under the JDA, suspend players for participating in the sale or distribution of a prohibited substance (Sec. 7, paragraph E-F). The issue with this is that they are statements form Bosch, whether or not they believe is sufficiently substantiated, I don’t know. If any suspensions were to happen, the player’s union would argue that you can’t go jump from a 50-game suspension to 100-games.

MLB could have tested these players on a ‘reasonable cause’ basis up to 48 hours after they got the report in January.

If the Yankees try to void A-Rod’s contract, you look into the Uniform Player Contract.

Termination, By the Club, 7.(b) ‘The Club may terminate this contract upon written notice to the Player (but only after requesting and obtaining waivers of this contract from all other Major League Clubs) if the Player at any time shall: (1) fail, refuse or neglect to conform his personal conduct to the standards of good citizenship and good sportsmanship or to keep himself in first-class physical condition or to obey the Club’s training rules; or (2) fail, in the opinion of the Club’s management, to exhibit sufficient skill or competitive ability to qualify or continue as a member of the Club’s team.’

Any attempt to void a contract will most likely result in a grievance filed and potential lawsuits. If a player is suspended, they can file civil lawsuits with Bosch and Biogenesis for defamation. The Players could say that they have been falsely portrayed in engaging in unlawful behavior which harmed their reputation. Breach of confidentiality agreements is another. If they had agreement with Bosch and Biogenesis to keep information confidential even upon the threat of a lawsuit. Plus, A-Rod’s contract is fully guaranteed, it simply cannot be voided unless it has some type of moral clause or other clauses with specific references to steroids or PED’s.

The league is run by a CBA, and in the CBA there is not instruction stating a players’ contract can be voided per JDA. An exception is the ‘best interests of the game’ clause.

CBA: Article XII – Discipline – B (Conduct Detrimental or Prejudicial to Baseball):

‘Players may be disciplined for just cause for conduct that is materially detrimental or materially prejudicial to the best interests of Baseball including, but not limited to, engaging in conduct in violation of federal, state or local law. The Commissioner and a Club shall not discipline a Player for the same act or conduct under this provision. In cases of this type, a Club may discipline a Player, or take other adverse action against him, when the Commissioner defers the disciplinary decision to the Club.’

Now, teams do not have to pay a player if the player is unable to play due to being injured or disabled as a result of their drug abuse, but in A-Rod’s case, his hip surgeries were warranted. Teams are also able to withhold salary if a player is unable to play due to legal proceedings or jail time cause by violation of the drug policy. The Yankees can try to get a doctor stating that his hip was caused by steroid use or other use of PED’s on the banned list.

MLB will try to get 100-game bans for the players based on one, the doping itself, and two, lying about it. Remember, this is how well you can trust Bosch, who is trying to save his own face. MLB has more to lose than to gain with this, because all of these suspensions wouldn’t be from failed drugs tests, but the credibility of Bosch.




WHEW. Now, I can write pages and pages and more on this topic, it's so complicated, yet unknown. This is my take on it from having read the CBA and JDA. As far as my earlier statement in regards to suspensions, based off of looking into this more, I can see them in being justified, just not the 100-games or lifetime ban.

Cheers,

Brent

[BigJJ]

The Head of the Players Union and the Commissioner put in place a system that did not enforce the rules.

In order to compete with the guys who were taking prohibited substances, others started to take such substances.

Most players have 5-15 years to make the vast amount of money their family will need to live on for years. It was unfair to the players, to put them in a position where many felt they needed to endanger themselves, to earn money for their families.

Every time they hand out a sentence for the pre-2005 prohibited substance crew, I think - What about the guys who put the inadequate enforcement policy in place? They ought to be punished. Think of the tens of thousands of kids trying to make it pre-2005, who felt they had to endanger themselves to compete for their families.

I am not talking about the current players who are under a new and improved system. I consider them at fault in whole.

But Arod had to compete at that time against all of baseball's substance users.

And we all knew, didn't we? How could the Yankees not have known? How could MLB not have known?

The Union was not protecting its players by having them compete as to who could take more substances and get away with it. They did a miserable job of protecting the health of their players. Worst union handling I have ever seen.

And horrible job by the Commissioner's office in this regard.

If Arod pays a price, shouldn't they?

The Commisioner and Former Head of the Union have not paid a price have they?

But we have already lost many young players to cancer and shortened lives as a result. Even Arod may have irreparably injured his body. And he was an effective competitor - before everyone around him started getting very large.

Where is the true justice?

[conor912]

Originally Posted by ScottFandango

a GREAT MESSAGE!

if MLB gets rid of the once PRINCE OF BASEBALL, then anyone can go...

this should scare the rest of the players straight!

I disagree. MLB layed out a process and should follow that process. Banning him without ever have suspended him just to deter other guys from using is like handing out the death penalty for a misdemeanor in hopes that it will curb misdemeanors when in fact it will just create a whole lot of death penalties. Maybe that's not the best analogy, but you get my point.

Edited to add that I dislike him as much if not more than anyone and am not taking his side.

[Jcfowler6]

How can A-Rod fight the facts. He isn't going easy. Here's a link to an article I read.


http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports...nsion/2579977/