Lifetime Ban for A-Rod?

[Starscream]

Originally Posted by AdamJoshua

So they announced 12 but no Arod yet, he get's his own announcement, I suppose when you are recruiting players to use that clinic and roids it's a special case, shmuck.

The players confirmed to be suspended by FoxSports.com are:

• Nelson Cruz, Texas Rangers outfielder (50 games, no appeal).

• Everth Cabrera, San Diego Padres shortstop, (50 games, no appeal).

• Jhonny Peralta, Detroit Tigers shortstop (50 games, no appeal).

• Antonio Bastardo, Philadelphia Phillies reliever (50 games, no appeal).

• Jordany Valdespin, New York Mets outfielder, (50 games, no appeal).
• Francisco Cervelli, Yankees catcher.

• Jesus Montero, Seattle Mariners catcher.

• Cesar Puello, New York Mets outfield prospect.

• Fautino De Los Santos, San Diego Padres pitching prospect.

• Sergio Escalona, Houston Astros pitching prospect.

• Fernando Martinez, New York Yankees outfield prospect.

• Jordan Norberto, free-agent pitcher.

What's the punishment for all of the prospects?

[kelmac07]

Originally Posted by AdamJoshua

• Jordany Valdespin, New York Mets outfielder, (50 games, no appeal).

• Cesar Puello, New York Mets outfield prospect.

Two Mets...go figure. Two Yankees too...three if you count Montero (He used to be a Yankee).

The good news is that Valdespin hasn't contributed anything to the big ball club in over 6 weeks...so this hurts us how?

[The Poet]

I don't get this at all. As I've said before, I am not a fan of A-Rod. Plus, as a Yankee fan, I can see the potential benefits of getting rid of him and his contract, at least in the long term. But to give him over 4 times the penalty issued against others, for something they they have yet to prove? Is that right? MLB is using the excuse that A-Rod is a repeat offender, yet a) he has never tested positive for PEDs, and b) he has never been disciplined or penalized in the past. How can they possibly invoke some sort of "three-strike rule" under these circumstances?

Hey, it is what it is, or what it will be, but I don't think it is just. Is he guilty? It would not shock me if he is. And if he is, then smack him hard. But smack him fairly and justifiably, not just because he's an @$$.

[The Poet]

The latest report has the suspension handed down by MLB to have been reduced from the reported 214 games . . . down to 211.



A-Rod will doubtless appeal, so who know when this ban will start.

[Blueface]

I am confused. I just don't get the "we need proof" audience.

If an employer (MLB in this case), suspects and feels they have evidence an employee (A-Rod in this case and a bunch of other employees) have been involved in what they deem inappropriate and unacceptable for the work environment and said employer decides to fire some, punish others with suspensions and perhaps even excuse a few, that is wrong how? They have to prove it to who?

Question, where is their player's union? Why aren't they asking for the evidence? Or filing suit? If and when that happens, then and only then will the employer need to show said proof. Until then, they obviously feel they have the goods to support their decision.

My only gripe is how short that suspension list is and I know the reason why as there would otherwise be no players left to play the game. That is the truly sad part.

[Dave128]

Originally Posted by Blueface

I am confused. I just don't get the "we need proof" audience.

If an employer (MLB in this case), suspects and feels they have evidence an employee (A-Rod in this case and a bunch of other employees) have been involved in what they deem inappropriate and unacceptable for the work environment and said employer decides to fire some, punish others with suspensions and perhaps even excuse a few, that is wrong how? They have to prove it to who?

Question, where is their player's union? Why aren't they asking for the evidence? Or filing suit? If and when that happens, then and only then will the employer need to show said proof. Until then, they obviously feel they have the goods to support their decision.

My only gripe is how short that suspension list is and I know the reason why as there would otherwise be no players left to play the game. That is the truly sad part.

We are only the fans that watch the game from our couches. I have no doubt that all of the evidence was presented in the proper manner to the proper people and that the union did what they could to help the players as best that they could. My biggest gripe is that I thought the penalty was 50, 100 then lifetime ban. How did they collectively come up with 211? Also, why does it appear that ARod is the only player that will be granted an appeal? We can only sit here and speculate as to what really happened behind closed doors. In my opinion, there are so many unaswered questions with all of this that it makes my head spin.

[The Poet]

Originally Posted by Blueface

I am confused. I just don't get the "we need proof" audience.

Guilty, with or without proof?


OK, sounds fair to me.

[Blueface]

Originally Posted by The Poet

Guilty, with or without proof?


OK, sounds fair to me.

I think I am misunderstood.

Of course I believe there should be proof.
I just don't believe we are the judges of said proof.
I don't believe we are at liberty to know at this time.

As I mentioned earlier, compare it to a criminal or civil case.
Action is taken such as an indictment.
Eventually, accused accepts a plea or is tried. If the latter, then the evidence will be presented. If accepts a plea, the world will never know.
Unfortunately, this is an employer, with contracts and clauses and can act very differently in a manner as they wish.

If A-arod does not challenge it, rest assured the evidence sufficed.
If he challenges, just like the criminal going to trial, then we will eventually know and be able to still debate it all as opinions will always differ on what each of us considers just punishment.

[Starscream]

Originally Posted by Blueface

I think I am misunderstood.

Of course I believe there should be proof.
I just don't believe we are the judges of said proof.
I don't believe we are at liberty to know at this time.

As I mentioned earlier, compare it to a criminal or civil case.
Action is taken such as an indictment.
Eventually, accused accepts a plea or is tried. If the latter, then the evidence will be presented. If accepts a plea, the world will never know.
Unfortunately, this is an employer, with contracts and clauses.

If A-arod does not challenge it, rest assured the evidence sufficed.
If he challenges, just like the criminal going to trial, then we will eventually know and be able to still debate it all as opinions will always differ on what each of us considers just punishment.

I agree with that.

[357]

Originally Posted by The Poet

Guilty, with or without proof?


OK, sounds fair to me.

I think most of those who chose not to appeal, did so to prevent the evidence from being made public. Would you accept 1/3 pay reduction at your job without a fight if your accuser had nothing on you?

[yourchoice]

Originally Posted by Dave128

Also, why does it appear that ARod is the only player that will be granted an appeal?

It's my understanding everyone had the right to appeal, but only ARoid is choosing to do so.

[Starscream]

Originally Posted by Blueface

I am confused. I just don't get the "we need proof" audience.

If an employer (MLB in this case), suspects and feels they have evidence an employee (A-Rod in this case and a bunch of other employees) have been involved in what they deem inappropriate and unacceptable for the work environment and said employer decides to fire some, punish others with suspensions and perhaps even excuse a few, that is wrong how? They have to prove it to who?

Question, where is their player's union? Why aren't they asking for the evidence? Or filing suit? If and when that happens, then and only then will the employer need to show said proof. Until then, they obviously feel they have the goods to support their decision.

My only gripe is how short that suspension list is and I know the reason why as there would otherwise be no players left to play the game. That is the truly sad part.

The MLB isn't the employer, the Yankees are (i'm assuming it still works that way). It would be a different story if the Yankees handed out punishment b/c he's signed with them. If I were a team owner, I would be highly upset if the league tried to ban one of my players without evidence.
I'm probably wrong here though in regards to the business side of the game and how it works nowadays.

[Blueface]

Originally Posted by Starscream

The MLB isn't the employer, the Yankees are (i'm assuming it still works that way). It would be a different story if the Yankees handed out punishment b/c he's signed with them. If I were a team owner, I would be highly upset if the league tried to ban one of my players without evidence.
I'm probably wrong here though in regards to the business side of the game and how it works nowadays.

Of course his employer is the Yankees but I see them as Cadillac, where baseball is GM as it relates to control of rules for the league.
Interesting point you raise as we haven't heard a word from the Yankees but I am sure the savings in pay justifies that for them.

[Starscream]

Originally Posted by Blueface

Of course his employer is the Yankees but I see them as Cadillac, where baseball is GM as it relates to control of rules for the league.
Interesting point you raise as we haven't heard a word from the Yankees but I am sure the savings in pay justifies that for them.

I'd bet the Yankees are hoping for the suspension. It'd save them a ton of money and headache.

[AdamJoshua]

Originally Posted by Starscream

The MLB isn't the employer, the Yankees are (i'm assuming it still works that way). It would be a different story if the Yankees handed out punishment b/c he's signed with them. If I were a team owner, I would be highly upset if the league tried to ban one of my players without evidence.
I'm probably wrong here though in regards to the business side of the game and how it works nowadays.

You sign a contract that says you will uphold the values set by MLB, I'm sure there is the same for each individual team, but up on top of the ladder is MLB.

Supposedly there are 100s of names in the files, the person that gave the names was pissed off how MLB has handled it and hasn't been cooperating as of late, so they say.

I have a feeling the yankees aren't as ticked off as they are pretending to be, unless it's the fact they wanted him banned for life so they could get out from under his huge contract, same reason he was fighting for a shorter ban.

Oh well he'll hit just as good without playing as he has when he was playing, the problem is they need to bring up / get a full time 3rd baseman for next year, then go back to arod after that, sucks to be them.... haha

[357]

Aroid was punished under a different rule, one about damaging the sport. It's penalty is subject to the commish only if I remember correctly.

[shilala]

Originally Posted by 357

Aroid was punished under a different rule, one about damaging the sport. It's penalty is subject to the commish only if I remember correctly.

That'd be it. I know it was something outside the CBA because I heard that, but had no idea what.
Thanks, Mike!!!

[Blueface]

Interesting article in today's USA Today.

http://usat.ly/14FHL1F

[Dave128]

Thanks for clearing that up for me, fellas.

[gorob23]

Originally Posted by Starscream

I hate A-Rod because he steals signs from second and sells it to the man up,

I would blame the catcher for this not the runner at second for doing his job... now the PED's that a whole different ball game.

Just my .02 I'm done

Rob