Quote:
Originally Posted by alnorth
This statement is simply flat-out wrong.
|
It isn't. There has never been a 162 game suspension for PED use in MLB, nor is there anything in the CBA that designates a 162 game suspension for PED use in MLB. Not sure how that could even be argued.
Quote:
|
There is precedent for punishing a player for a first-time use for two different kinds of substances and having the punishments run consecutively instead of concurrently. Check.
|
When had that been done before?
Quote:
|
There is precedent for punishing for a cover-up. Check.
|
They didn't tack on any extra games for Melky Cabrera's PED suspension in 2012 when he had a fake website made to cover up his use. What's the difference here?
Quote:
|
Your only objection seems to be that 162 games is too convenient of a number (which was the arbitrator's call by the way, Selig wanted no hard limits, and 211 games), but what if it was 175, and they said 25 games for the cover-up instead of 12? Then its suddenly ok? Why couldn't they just round it to one season and call it good?
|
My objection is they broke entirely new ground here with this suspension (but yes, that giving a player an entire season for PED use, which had never been done before, is rather convenient for the league/NYY).