Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Page 1 of 2 pages
NYDN: MLB done talking with Alex Rodriguez, who faces minimum 214-game ban after latest outburst
This is the statement I object to. ARod isn't blaming anyone for anything, least of all for his steroid use.
I will say this, there’s more than one party that benefits from me never stepping back on the field. That’s not my teammates and not the Yankee fans.'
This is what narcissists do. They are incapable of any serious self-criticism, any self-reflection, of admitting any guilt. When reality intrudes, it's always somebody else's fault, somebody is deliberately messing with their perfect world, out of jealousy or something.
I doubt the Yankees got steroid suspension insurance on A-Rod so that's probably moot. They probably DID get injury insurance, which just might have something to do with their vehement insistence he's not ready to play yet.
OK. Like I said, I can see how the obstruction thing could possibly fly under best interests and, yeah, that it potentially could have screwed up several cases would make it moreso.
Morty: Depends more on what the doctors say, doesn't it?
The fact that ARod said he was ready to play, that he had a doctor who backed him up, and then he did in fact play (in the minors) would be a major problem for any argument that he was unable to perform due to injury in July/August 2013.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if he volunteered to cooperate with the insurer, purely out of spite.
You mean the doctor who merely reviewed ARod's scan, never examined him directly, and was recently disciplined by the state of NJ for steroid dispensing irregularities?
It's true that some issues with respect to the JDA are issues of first impression. But I believe that "best interests" simply will not fly here, and that discipline in connection with these issues can only happen under the JDA, which specifically has a "catch-all" type clause, and either this would be covered by that or it wouldn't.
But if it would, I still don't see MLB being allowed to set a suspension of more than the 100-game max set out in the JDA. Discipline should be equitable and fair, and I think giving a player a suspension of 214 games (or a permanent suspension) without notice that he was on the hook for that would not be upheld. This would exactly be, as ARod said, a "creative way to cancel my contract."
Alex walked four times last night in four PAs.
To follow up on my own post: I will say that while I find stacking violations within a particular section of the JDA to be very unlikely to be upheld (e.g., they have him on 3 separate occasions of use so they will go directly to a permanent suspension under section 7A), I do think there is a better chance that multiple first suspensions from separate sections of the JDA to could be upheld (e.g., 50 games from 7A and 100 games from 7F to add to 150 games).
And, in a dumb new twist on Friday night in Trenton, Rodriguez wanted the world to think he is fighting and fighting and fighting so that future players aren’t victims of MLB and teams like the New York Yankees trying to violate the sanctity of their long-term guaranteed contracts.
Rodriguez — and lawyers who think they’re smarter than everybody else — sure better hope that the feds don’t get more and more involved in the business dealings of Biogenesis and Bosch, because you know what happens then?
Fighter and victim and lover of the game Alex Rodriguez gets deposed, and has to answer some of those questions and all of those questions under oath.
In that moment, Alex Rodriguez treats the whole world like suckers all over again, and acts as if he cares about anybody’s money besides his own. He is fighting, all right. For that.
Did you worry about the laws of baseball and the terms of your contract, the one you say others are trying to violate, when you went to a phony anti-aging clinic because of your own obsession with growing old in baseball, and your growing obsession with breaking the all-time home run record?
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/yankees/lupica-poor-li-a-rod-article-1.1417080#ixzz2b1qwtXU2
Stupid but honest question, since I haven't been following this latest soap opera:
What, exactly, has A-Rod been charged with that would warrant his being treated any differently than any of the other players involved with this clinic? Much as I'd love to see the Yankees get out of his contract on the grounds of freeing up some payroll, is there any possible chance of this happening?
"I think we all agree that we want to get rid of PEDs -- that's a must. I think all the players, we feel that way."
His goal should be to go through usual game-play actions, not get on base.
That wasn't all ARod said; obviously his own interests are his primary concern, but Lupica seems unaware that standing on a principle helps the people who come after you also.
ANY anti-aging clinic is going to deal steroids and some sort of hormone cocktail. That's what they do.
Notification (section 3 and 7L) only explicitly refers to positive tests but does state that a player will not be punished for a second positive that occurred prior to notification of the first unless the first violation is subsequently overturned or rescinded. I think Ray's argument here is more clever than the "you can't stack" argument. Somewhat in support of this is that "reasonable cause" testing is only possible if there is reasonable cause to believe a player has used within the last 12 months. It does seem odd that you could suspend a player (for a very long time) based on evidence of use 2-3 years ago but you wouldn't have grounds to request extended testing
As to ARod's doctor's opinion ... c'mon, you think the insurance company wouldn't bring out its own un-impeachable medical expert to look at ARod's films? But that's really trivial anyway ... that was a dispute over a minor strain and whether ARod should have been back about a week ago. Any insurance claim will be about the hip.
January 13, 2006: Bagwell is examined by Dr. James Andrews, in Birmingham. [...]
January 27: Based on Andrews' and Astros team physician David Lintner's findings, the Astros file an insurance claim to recoup $15.6m of his $17m salary (91.8%). [...]
April 18: The Astros file suit against Connecticut General Life Insurance Company. Fisher files a 20-page brief with the lawsuit:
"To acquire this disability coverage, the Astros paid $2,409,343 in premiums to CIGNA, The terms of the Policy are relatively straightforward. The Policy provides a schedule of benefits payable to the Astros in the event (a) Mr. Bagwell becomes totally disabled and (b) the terms of and conditions of the Policy are met...In section 2 on page 6 of the Policy, the benefits scheduled for the 2006 regular season that CIGNA, by contract, agreed to pay are $85,748 for each regular season day that Mr. Bagwell misses due to a total disability. Plaintiff has timely presented a claim for these benefits to Defendant. Defendant has denied the claim. Hence, the lawsuit."
December 16: The Astros settle on an undisclosed amount with Connecticut General. Baker Botts' Ty Buthod and McLane's attorney Wayne Fisher released a joint statement that said:
"The Houston Astros and Connecticut General Life Insurance Company have reached an amicable resolution of the lawsuit brought by the club relating to the total disability policy on Jeff Bagwell. The details of the resolution are confidential."
That same day, Bagwell retires:
"Physically, I can not do it anymore. I wish I could. I wish I could continue to play and try to win a World Series in Houston. But I'm just not physically able to do that anymore. ... I feel very blessed to have met all of you, to be part of the Houston Astros for 15, 16 years."
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
Login to Join (0 members)
Page rendered in 2.4371 seconds, 75 querie(s) executed