60 Minutes A-Rod Story

[KC_Connection]

Originally Posted by The Rick

The 50, 100, and lifetime suspensions are for failed tests, I believe. A-Rod technically never failed a test, hence the non-standard suspension.

So it was a completely arbitrary decision, yes.

[GloryDayz]

Originally Posted by KC_Connection

So it was a completely arbitrary decision, yes.

I thinks that means he has to play for the Royals next year... Woot!!!!!!!!!!!

[alnorth]

Originally Posted by KC_Connection

So it was a completely arbitrary decision, yes.

Well to be fair, they have solid evidence that he used steroids in 2010, 2011, and 2012. We already know he used in 2001-2003. (We'll ignore the fact that he likely used every year of his entire career since there's no proof of it) If those last 3 were all positive tests, it would be a lifetime ban.

With the evidence that baseball uncovered, we don't need a positive test to ban A-Rod for one full season.

edit: apparently the commissioner's office broke it down this way, for 3 seperate and distinct violations: 50 games for testosterone, 50 games for IGF-1, 50 games for HGH, and they tacked on the last 12 for obstruction.

[KC_Connection]

Originally Posted by alnorth

Well to be fair, they have solid evidence that he used steroids in 2010, 2011, and 2012. We already know he used in 2001-2003. (We'll ignore the fact that he likely used every year of his entire career since there's no proof of it) If those last 3 were all positive tests, it would be a lifetime ban.

With the evidence that baseball uncovered, we don't need a positive test to ban A-Rod for one full season.

edit: apparently the commissioner's office broke it down this way, for 3 seperate and distinct violations: 50 games for testosterone, 50 games for IGF-1, 50 games for HGH, and they tacked on the last 12 for obstruction.

There is no precedent for any of this. It's a completely arbitrary breakdown outside of the drug agreement the players made as part of the CBA (if you ignore the fact that it conveniently saves the NYY a full year of ARod's salary and keeps him away from baseball for a full year).

[alnorth]

Originally Posted by KC_Connection

There is no precedent for any of this. It's a completely arbitrary breakdown outside of the drug agreement the players made as part of the CBA (if you ignore the fact that it conveniently saves the NYY a full year of ARod's salary and keeps him away from baseball for a full year).

The arbitrator's judgement was apparently attached to A-Rod's federal lawsuit, so everyone can now read it.

Apparently all parties, MLB, the union, and A-Rod's lawyers all agreed that the section of the rules that spelled out the 50 game, 100 game, and lifetime ban punishments did not apply. They all agreed that a different section applied where the commissioner can suspend a player for just cause due to violating the drug agreement absent a positive test, but that section does not have a specifically required penalty spelled out.

The union and A-Rod's lawyers argued that if there is any penalty at all, it should be treated the same as one positive test and it should only be 50 games.

MLB argued that there was no mandated penalty, and given the severity of the violation and the cover-up, the 211 games they wanted was fair.

The arbitrator said its true that the 50 games do not apply here, but its still useful as a benchmark. He also flatly rejected the argument that it should be treated as one single violation because it was 3 seperate banned substances taken over 3 seperate years, and there was already a precedent for punishing a first-time use for both of 2 different substances. (so instead of saying its all one violation, the precedent says you can say 50 games for this, 50 games for that)

So, its 50 games for each of 3 banned substances, plus a few more for the cover-up (which they also have a precedent for punishing), all backed by plenty of precedent. The only thing thats new is the total number of games, but we've also never had a player come up for using 3 different PED's over many years and then trying to block an investigation.

[KC_Connection]

Originally Posted by alnorth

The arbitrator's judgement was apparently attached to A-Rod's federal lawsuit, so everyone can now read it.

Apparently all parties, MLB, the union, and A-Rod's lawyers all agreed that the section of the rules that spelled out the 50 game, 100 game, and lifetime ban punishments did not apply. They all agreed that a different section applied where the commissioner can suspend a player for just cause due to violating the drug agreement absent a positive test, but that section does not have a specifically required penalty spelled out.

The union and A-Rod's lawyers argued that if there is any penalty at all, it should be treated the same as one positive test and it should only be 50 games.

MLB argued that there was no mandated penalty, and given the severity of the violation and the cover-up, the 211 games they wanted was fair.

The arbitrator said its true that the 50 games do not apply here, but its still useful as a benchmark. He also flatly rejected the argument that it should be treated as one single violation because it was 3 seperate banned substances taken over 3 seperate years, and there was already a precedent for punishing a first-time use for both of 2 different substances. (so instead of saying its all one violation, the precedent says you can say 50 games for this, 50 games for that)

So, its 50 games for each of 3 banned substances, plus a few more for the cover-up (which they also have a precedent for punishing), all backed by plenty of precedent. The only thing thats new is the total number of games, but we've also never had a player come up for using 3 different PED's over many years and then trying to block an investigation.

There's nothing backed by precedent about a 162 game suspension for PED use in the sport of baseball. It's entirely new territory no matter how anybody attempts to explain the reasoning behind the punishment.

[alnorth]

Originally Posted by KC_Connection

There's nothing backed by precedent about a 162 game suspension for PED use in the sport of baseball. It's entirely new territory no matter how anybody attempts to explain the reasoning behind the punishment.

This statement is simply flat-out wrong.

There is precedent for punishing a player for 50 games even without a positive test. Check.

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.

There is precedent for punishing for a cover-up. Check.

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?

[KC_Connection]

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.

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?

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?

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).