Saltzer's Shots: Ban A-Rod for Life

[mp170.6]

Actually, I understand it very well. Sure, in an ideal world, an arbitrator should live in a bubble. But they don't. I don't think you really believe that they do, which is why you said in an "ideal world". So, my point still stands. But, even assuming that they did drag some arbitrator out of a bubble, that arbitrator will consider the effect of the precedent that s/he establishes. This isn't like the old salary arbitration where the arbitrator has to rule for one side or the other. S/he would have some latitude on the ruling. So, it would, as I say, most likely end up where back where they negotiated with A-Rod. The difference is, under that scenario, baseball could still maintain its integrity.

 

As for trying to predict what will happen in an arbitration, I guess you aren't too familiar with the legal process. That's what lawyers do all the time. You can't make an informed decision about seeing without measuring the risk of potential outcomes. Doctors do it all the time too (there's an 80% chance that this medicine will cure this disease so you should take it . . .). It's hardly a waste of time.

 

As for determining whether or not it will be a gross miscarriage, that happens all the time, regardless of what the facts are or are not in the situation. It's about the perception. The perception is that A-Rod is guilty (and his actions really have not helped his cause). So, even if he proves it, to the vast majority of baseball fans, who won't follow the nuances of the arbitration, it will appear that he got away with it. Since the vast majority of fans don't follow things as closely as many on here do, that will put pressure on baseball, the players union, and others to fix this perceived injustice.

 

You seem to be hoping that the arbitrator gives in to public pressure, and thereby renders his decision in the most corrupt way possible.  It's like discussing the mafia and a jury in the same breath.  They don't belong together, and neither does public opinion in a discussion about arbitration. 

 

I wish you understood how foolish it is to predict how arbitrators are going to rule on any matter.  Like I told you earlier, they are not required to justify decisions based on statute or case law, and in many cases the decisions leave out detailed justifications for their ruling.  So you get a decision without any accompanying explanation.  This makes it all but impossible to discern their thought process or even guess how they might rule again.

[Lifetime]

There will not be an arbitrator. 

[mp170.6]

There will not be an arbitrator. 

 

None of us know for sure until the discipline is actually handed down.  The New York newspapers don't exactly have a reputation for accuracy.

[Lifetime]

It's not just NY newspapers reporting this stuff. The deal reportedly being negotiated, is a lesser ban if no appeal is attempted or a lifetime ban under the "best interest" clause which cannot be appealed. Either way, no arbitrator. 

[mp170.6]

It's not just NY newspapers reporting this stuff. The deal reportedly being negotiated, is a lesser ban if no appeal is attempted or a lifetime ban under the "best interest" clause which cannot be appealed. Either way, no arbitrator. 

 

Many media sources are reporting based on whatever the NY newspapers are saying. 

 

Aside from that, arbitration could still be used outside of the CBA if MLB and MLBPA mutually agree upon it.  There's a lot at stake here by dragging this out.  The Yankees might be able to sue MLB for A-Rod's back wages if the suspension / ban is overturned. 

[Lifetime]

Again, if they use the "best interest" clause it can't be appealed. That's the primary reason for using that clause for a lifetime ban. The point of the settlement offer is to avoid arbitration. If the clause is invoked, recourse becomes a lawsuit. 

[mp170.6]

Again, if they use the "best interest" clause it can't be appealed. That's the primary reason for using that clause for a lifetime ban. The point of the settlement offer is to avoid arbitration. If the clause is invoked, recourse becomes a lawsuit. 

 

What I'm saying is that in lieu of a lawsuit, MLB and MLBPA could still use arbitration outside of the CBA provisions if both sides agreed to do so. 

[Lifetime]

And what I am saying is, the whole purpose of the settlement negotiation is to avoid arbitration. They aren't going to then agree to arbitration if the settlement is not reached. 

[mancini79]

The door has been shut on a settlement. It's now a full court press for a lifetime ban. ARod will either win and face no suspension or be forced to retire.

[mp170.6]

And what I am saying is, the whole purpose of the settlement negotiation is to avoid arbitration. They aren't going to then agree to arbitration if the settlement is not reached. 

 

This could take years to resolve in the federal court system, and if the ruling goes against MLB, they may be on the hook for A-Rod's salary -- not the Yankees.  It is MLB taking the bat out of A-Rod's hands.  Should the court find MLB erred in doing so, it wouldn't be fair to make the Yankees pay his salary while he was forbidden from playing.  There's nothing preventing an arbitration hearing to speed this up provided both sides agree. 

 

You might not realize that settlement negotiation happens all the time during the course of arbitration hearings.

[Lifetime]

This could take years to resolve in the federal court system, and if the ruling goes against MLB, they may be on the hook for A-Rod's salary -- not the Yankees. It is MLB taking the bat out of A-Rod's hands. Should the court find MLB erred in doing so, it wouldn't be fair to make the Yankees pay his salary while he was forbidden from playing. There's nothing preventing an arbitration hearing to speed this up provided both sides agree.

You might not realize that settlement negotiation happens all the time during the course of arbitration hearings.

I doubt it would take all that long to resolve in court. There's nothing preventing an arbitration hearing, that doesn't mean it would happen or that it would be prudent. Aside from that, it's not logical that the settlement hinged on the player agreeing to void arbitration appeal. If they aren't going to do that, they face the stiffer penalty. It makes no sense for MLB to insist on taking arbitration off the table, only to accept arbitration later in an even more complicated matter. Again, the point of the negotiation is to avoid the arbitration process.

And yes, I realize that settlement negotiation happens all the time during the course of arbitration but that's not really relevant to the point here.

[shellback]

then i woke up screaming from lawyer nightmare

[mp170.6]

I doubt it would take all that long to resolve in court. There's nothing preventing an arbitration hearing, that doesn't mean it would happen or that it would be prudent. Aside from that, it's not logical that the settlement hinged on the player agreeing to void arbitration appeal. If they aren't going to do that, they face the stiffer penalty. It makes no sense for MLB to insist on taking arbitration off the table, only to accept arbitration later in an even more complicated matter. Again, the point of the negotiation is to avoid the arbitration process.

And yes, I realize that settlement negotiation happens all the time during the course of arbitration but that's not really relevant to the point here.

 

Why would this case move quickly through the court system?  Other cases rarely do.  The court isn't going to care that A-Rod is 38 and that his playing time is running out. 

 

They can settle at any point they want without having a judge decide using arbitration, mediation, whatever.  It's silly to say arbitration wouldn't make sense at a future date without knowing what they are up against, or what each side wants to accomplish.  And this could change dramatically in the coming days and weeks.

[Lifetime]

It's silly to assume they would opt for arbitration later when avoiding it was the basis for settlement. 

 

And of course they can settle at any point, that's not in dispute here. 

 

Typical federal civil cases take 1-2 years to go to to trial In NY. That time frame can be reduced/increased depending on the legal maneuvering the parties engage in. 

[sneaky_flute]

bud selig is an old piece of shit who wants to "atone" for ignoring the ped issue by making one of the most influential players the "fall guy." selig is nothing but a grandiose weirdo who isn't fit to be commissioner.

[Tank]

What I gathered from an interview with Fay Vincent on MLB Radio yesterday, if Selig uses the "best interest of baseball clause" it falls outside of the arbitration process and would end up in court.

 

I think it will be interesting to see what evidence they have against Rodriguez, not just for PED use, but rumors are they have evidence showing he tried to cover up and obstruct the investigation with payoffs and that is what is leading baseball to throw the book at him.

Agreed. There seems to be a huge push by someone to bypass the 50-100-150 game suspension trail, and I'd sure like to know why.

[FireThemAll]

I disagree with the article completely almost. Banning A-Rod for life lets the Yankees out of a huge mistake. Also, why is A-Rod a special case? How come Braun only gets a half a season ban but A-Rod should get life ban?

[Lifetime]

Because Braun agreed to the deal. Also, it has been reported that there is much more evidence against arod beyond abuse, including recruiting and attempting to coerce a coverup. 

[FireThemAll]

Because Braun agreed to the deal. Also, it has been reported that there is much more evidence against arod beyond abuse, including recruiting and attempting to coerce a coverup. 

 

Why does that matter? There needs to be some kind of rule that justifies how much abuse gets you how many games suspended. You can't just be pulling numbers out of a hat saying X amount of incidents gets you banned for life and X amount of incidents only gets you 50 games. I'd like to see where exactly these lines are being drawn.

[Lifetime]

There doesn't have to be specific rules except for failed tests or violation of the policy. Because of the nature of what arod did in addition to the PED use, they were holding a lifetime ban under the "best interest" clause over his head if he didn't agree to waive appeal. The "best interest" clause is at the discretion of the commissioner and cannot be appealed. 

[arch stanton]

I wonder how much effort Bud will put into finding and punishing the leakers of information that was supposed to remain confidential. This is also a violation of the agreement and just as much a conspiracy as what Rodriguez did. 

[Lifetime]

What's a violation of the agreement? And how does Bud go about punishing the leakers? 

[arch stanton]

Isn't confidentiality a part of the agreement? 

[Lifetime]

Confidentiality of whom, the violators? 

[arch stanton]

Yes