Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
Except for the fact that no other player/team on the list of 13 is doing it?
Report: A-Rod banned through 2014?
- Thread starter mabrowndog
- Start date
Except for the fact that no other player/team on the list of 13 is doing it?
EllisTheRimMan said:
So what? That's their choice. The players have choices here, it's silly to kill one of them for not doing what all the others did.
Apparently Cruz was going to appeal too and changed his mind, much to the chagrin of his team.
EllisTheRimMan said:
Good for them. But that doesn't make what ARod is doing by exercising his rights to be wrong. As for the Yankees, they'd be opening themselves up to all sorts of legal issues if they willingly sat a contentious, eligible player under these circumstances.
We get it. You wish every player involved would have doing the "right" thing. I'm sure we all do. But ARod's decision to appeal, while distatsteful, isn't wrong
Time for me to go "META" and explain myself better. I don't have a major gripe about PED use in baseball, but the powers that be (writers, owners, many fans) do. I wish MLB would treat this issue more like the NFL and NBA and just ignore it. But since they have decided not to and this Biogenesis case is so huge, I just want it to go away and appeals by hated teams/players like A-Rod/NYY on the cusp of passing all time slugging greats (remember, many PED haters argue that the sanctity of the record book is at stake), just adds fuel to the fire.
PEDs have tainted a great era in Sox history and some of our most beloved players (e.g. Ortiz/Ramirez). More outrage by PED haters fueled by this scandal is just bad for the game, IMO. If your gonna make it an issue as a league and try to stamp it out, I would prefer all cases be settled quickly and cleanly (ahem). This is turning into a circus and that is bad for baseball.
PEDs have tainted a great era in Sox history and some of our most beloved players (e.g. Ortiz/Ramirez). More outrage by PED haters fueled by this scandal is just bad for the game, IMO. If your gonna make it an issue as a league and try to stamp it out, I would prefer all cases be settled quickly and cleanly (ahem). This is turning into a circus and that is bad for baseball.
All Yankee-Haters should be praying that A-Rod appeals and wins a reduction in his suspension that puts him back on the field for as big a chunk of 2014 as possible. All Yankee-Haters.
I would not be surprised to one day learn that A-Rod has been regularly using PED's since High School.RedOctober3829 said:
From the official MLB press release (which is a bit hard to find on MLB's own website, BTW):
So he's getting a 50-game suspension under JDPTP provisions and a 161-game suspension under Basic Agreement provisions? What are the relevant Basic Agreement provisions being used by the Commissioner here?
So he's getting a 50-game suspension under JDPTP provisions and a 161-game suspension under Basic Agreement provisions? What are the relevant Basic Agreement provisions being used by the Commissioner here?
Going through the motions begrudgingly. It is his right to do so. We ALL would in that situation. TOO much money at stake for A-Rod not to appeal. Have at it dude. No one I love to see hanging and twisting in the wind other than A-Rod and the MFY's. Really will enjoy this process. Drag this nightmare on to the inevitable crash!E5 Yaz said:
Has anyone tried to estimate just how long an appeal could take? Rest of the year? One month? Forever?
EllisTheRimMan said:
Then your ire should probably be directed at Selig. I'm 99% sure A-Rod would be agreeing to a 50 game ban for his first official offense just like all the others (or a ban the likes of what Braun got) if Selig hadn't quadrupled his punishment outside the schematic of the CBA.
Has anyone tried to estimate just how long an appeal could take? Rest of the year? One month? Forever?
I believe they have up to 45 days.
I believe they have up to 45 days.
Can anyone confirm once suspended the Yankees are off the hook for his salary in terms of the cap?
86spike said:
Point taken. Selig may be the only person in baseball I dislike more than A-Rod. They can both go suck a dick.
EDIT: And the US Congress, deserves some ire for this as well... what a trio of crap - A-Rod, Selig and Congress.
From what I heard on one of the shows. The hearing has to happen in the next 20 days and the arbiter has 25 days to make his decision.strek1 said:
Montana Fan said:
Something similar was just said by baseball writer John Shea. He said it's a good bet that ARod played more baseball games under the influence of PEDs than Barry Bonds.
It will be interesting to find out whether the MLBPA basically had already told Bud "You're welcome to try and scare Rodriguez into agreeing to a >50-game suspension, but you don't really have CBA grounds to do so."
I'd bet the arbiter sends this to court, so he probably can easily play out the entire season.Dan Murfman said:
scottyno said:
I still don't understand why the Rangers are upset. Even if Cruz did appeal, that doesn't guarantee that he's around for the rest of the season, does it? I mean, if he appeals and wins, sure, that's great for him and the Rangers. But if he appeals and loses (which considering he chose not to appeal, a loss is the most likely outcome of an appeal), they'd still need a replacement for him for the remainder of the season plus the post-season should they reach it. Basically, they'd still have to replace him for some period of this season regardless, so they should have been more proactive to do so if they don't have a good internal option.
Unless the Rangers are claiming they didn't know Cruz was going to get whacked (that maybe he'd go the way of Gio Gonzalez and get cleared), it's their own damn fault for not having a contingency plan in place to replace Cruz.
Montana Fan said:
This has long been rumored/discussed/assumed to be the case. There was all kinds of talk about it in Florida high school baseball circles back in the day and I think it was addressed in one of those books that came out about him a few years ago.
This would signal that he will be playing the rest of this season out. I would think now that his suspension would be all of 2014 and part of 2015.
RedOctober3829 said:
Assuming it isn't reduced - which I think might just happen. Just can't see them suspending anyone for more than a season.
Doc Zero said:
A good friend of mine is a rabid Yankees fan. He foams at the mouth regularly. He's of the position that the commissioner should ban him for life even if wouldn't clear his salary from the Yankees. He's angry... seething even, about the idea of ARod taking the field again. He's the kind of fan who was livid that Leyland didn't take the risk of holding Rivera back for the 9th inning in the All Star game because "That's Mo's inning!!!1!!" We've been arguing back and forth about this whole thing as rumors have swirled and reports have varied from banned for life to suspended and allowed to play during his appeal.
He doesn't care that it would be pissing on the CBA, he doesn't care that it would set an awful precedent, and he doesn't care that it is out of alignment with how other offenders are being handled. He wants ARod out of the game, no matter the cost. I suspect, there are plenty of people who agree with him. My friend is also the kind of fan who hates Girardi and "his binder!" because he doesn't pay enough respect to the way the game is supposed to be played... "on the field, not on a computer." So he's firmly established himself as irrational and overly emotional. However, there are plenty of Yankees fans in NY who are similar and the team isn't blind to that.
I agree with you that they are likely to simply play him as long as they can and then move on once he is suspended, but I would be shocked if there haven't been multiple meetings about this in which someone or several people seriously suggested sitting him or even cutting him. He's an enormous headache for the Yankees and they can't win in this situation. Either they play him or they don't. If they don't, they're wasting a roster spot and are likely making a mediocre team worse. If they do, he either plays well or he doesn't. If he plays well, maybe they hang on to the hope of a playoff spot and draw in some extra fans at home but they will have to deal with the PR hit which will be massive coming from the fans and local media skewering them for playing him, even if ti's the only logical thing.
And then there's the scenario where he plays and sucks. Fans will go trip over themselves trying get on Francesa's or Steven A. Smith's show to demand the Yankees cut him or DFA him. There are no good outcomes for the Yankees here. The haters should be happy, no matter what... it's just a matter of how good it is for people who are looking for that schadenfreude.
Ed Hillel said:
Jon: That ball is hit deep. IT IS DEEP... IT IS FAR... IT IS... a home run. So ARod goes deep in his first game back and, you know, Suzyn, it strikes me how utterly different that home run was from the one Derek Jeter hit in his first at bat back with the club, on the first pitch... capturing that moment in a way that only a man such as he could do. Isn't Derek Jeter great?
Suzyn: ...
Jon: Suzyn?
Suzyn: Just a minute!
Jon: Uh, Suzyn? What are you...?
Suzyn: DEREK... JEEEETEEEEEER!
Jon: So Robbie Cano steps in and...
What a mess, I'm loving it, only thing that would be even greater than this, is if the game was against Sox in Fenway...Oh Lordy
mauidano said:
I'm curious as well. I wonder if the PA won't concede the bad acts (PED use/Coverup) and simply argue the length suspension was too great.
While that seems to be the least damaging approach (PR-wise), all the bad acts get discussed anyway, since they're the basis for the suspension.
So maybe we get to hear A-Rod argue he was completely innocent. . .which'll be interesting.
Then again I'm not sure how much control A-Rod will have over the process. Does he get to use his own legal team?
***
In the meantime the Yanks get a PR black eye and A-Rod will be showered with Boos.
This'll be epic.
***
Another related thought - A-Rod's kind of unique among the bio-genesis players since he's a self-admitted, supposedly contrite, PED user, who praised the testing program and took the public position that PEDs should be out of the game. He's also a franchise player, and a supposed role model.
I wonder how all that factors in, if at all, to the arbitrator's decision.
PS- It's dangerous to speculate about cases in the absence of fact, but I'm really stumped for a defense here, other than "the suspension was too long."
And even then I'm kind of stumped. A full year's ban (plus whatever's left on the current year) seems pretty reasonable. (Assuming solid evidence of A-Rod interfering with the investigation, Bosch testifying against him, all the suspended players testifying that they used PEDs from Bosch, any players testifying that A-Rod recruited for Bosch. . .)
And even then I'm kind of stumped. A full year's ban (plus whatever's left on the current year) seems pretty reasonable. (Assuming solid evidence of A-Rod interfering with the investigation, Bosch testifying against him, all the suspended players testifying that they used PEDs from Bosch, any players testifying that A-Rod recruited for Bosch. . .)
It was Tom Verducci.DrewDawg said:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/mlb/news/20130805/alex-rodriguez-suspended-biogenesis-legacy/
I asked Rodriguez about steroids, the worst kept secret in baseball. He looked at me with wonder. Steroids? What do they do? Why would players take them? It was chilling to listen to his feigned ignorance. He had played in two especially dirty clubhouses in Seattle and Texas and by 2002 steroids were an open secret in the game, and yet here was Rodriguez asking me questions about steroids. Of course, by his later admission, at the time he was loaded to the gills on Primobolan, a steroid favored by bodybuilders that can be taken orally or by injections.
Another really strange thing in the article, "As one former Texas teammate described to me, Rodriguez forges friendships with clubhouse kids and young players, at least until they get to know him"
Rovin Romine said:
re the bolded, on what basis? The established penalty for a first-time PED infraction is 50 games. The MLB penalty (if any applies) for all the other things Rodriguez may have been involved in seems to be much more murky.
Edit: There is also the Melky Cabrera precedent of only getting 50 games despite coverup/interference behavior.
Interesting that if he hits a few more homers and reaches a certain amount (Career) he gets a big incentive bonus. You would think the MFY would try to void that aspect of his contract (If not the entire thing) because of his cheating and lying.RedOctober3829 said:
Jeezus, are the Yankee fans going to boo him? When they do their positional, first inning chants, are they going to skip him?
Harry Hooper said:
I keep seeing this Melky "precedent" as a reason that they can't/shouldn't go after A-Rod for covering up, but I don't see it. Melky tested positive. His 50 games was automatic for the offense. There was no way for MLB to tack on extra games for it, especially since the cover-up is something that only came out in the appeals process (another important distinction, IMO).
In this case, MLB is operating slightly outside the JDA since none of these players are getting hit due to positive tests. Frankly, I think ARod covering up is more like catching a guy trying to use a whizzinator during a test or something. It's all coming out in the discovery phase rather than the appeal, which gives MLB a bit more leeway in considering it during the penalty phase.
Just for fun, I looked at every team each player has played for in their career. Here is a look at each team relative to how many of today's players have played for them.
NYY 4
NYM 3
Texas 2
Seattle 2
Houston 2
Phil 2
Oak 2
Cle 1
Det 1
Ari 1
SDP 1
NYY 4
NYM 3
Texas 2
Seattle 2
Houston 2
Phil 2
Oak 2
Cle 1
Det 1
Ari 1
SDP 1
Red(s)HawksFan said:
Why couldn't MLB have tacked on more games to Cabrera's suspension, regardless of when the evidence emerged, assuming that the Commissioner in fact does have the power to go beyond the JDPTP provisions? MLB seemingly chose not to pursue it.
Cabrera case: MLB has evidence of use (positive test result) = 50-game suspension under under JDPTP provisions. No additional discipline applied under non-JDPTP provisions despite evidence of other shenanigans. .
Biogenesis cases: MLB has evidence of use (documentation & testimony) = 50-game suspension under JDPTP provisions. Additional discipline applied under non-JDPTP provisions to Rodriguez based on evidence of other shenanigans.
Tim Naehrings Girl said:
This is truly remarkable. Given the size of the legal bills MLB must pay every year and given the fact that they have known about this for months, I am dumbfounded how they could need more time to do the paperwork.
Was it really impossible for them to prepare everything in advance of the announcements?
Yikes!