Posted by MikeT23 on 1/13/2014 1:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 1/13/2014 12:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/13/2014 9:00:00 AM (view original):
If you watched 60 minutes last night, you know they have tons of evidence that he was on a PED program. 

If you believe that 60 minutes segment was anything other than an MLB PR piece, I have a bridge to sell you.

What does 60 minutes gain from helping MLB against A-Rod?

More viewers.  More $$$ for ads, etc....

Posted by dahsdebater on 1/13/2014 4:02:00 AM (view original):
I don't think at this point he's trying to argue that he's innocent, he's trying to argue that he's only liable to the suspension mandated by the rules.

Then he needs to work on his message: 

"I have been clear that I did not use performance enhancing substances as alleged in the notice of discipline, or violate the Basic Agreement or the Joint Drug Agreement in any manner, and in order to prove it I will take this fight to federal court," Rodriguez said in his statement.

Posted by AlCheez on 1/13/2014 2:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dahsdebater on 1/13/2014 4:02:00 AM (view original):
I don't think at this point he's trying to argue that he's innocent, he's trying to argue that he's only liable to the suspension mandated by the rules.

Then he needs to work on his message: 

"I have been clear that I did not use performance enhancing substances as alleged in the notice of discipline, or violate the Basic Agreement or the Joint Drug Agreement in any manner, and in order to prove it I will take this fight to federal court," Rodriguez said in his statement.

I find it difficult to believe that ARod really thinks that this will make it as far as a federal court, since it has virtually no chance in hell of doing so.

More likely this is just more grandstanding on his part, issuing denial after denial after denial in the media without ever allowing himself to be put in a position to do so under oath.  Much like when he ruffled up his feathers and walked out of his own hearing back in November.

NEW YORK (AP) - A federal judge said Monday that Alex Rodriguez cannot file portions of arbitrator Fredric Horowitz's decision under seal as part of a lawsuit seeking to overturn the one-year suspension from baseball given to the New York Yankees third baseman.

U.S. District Judge William H. Pauley III denied a request by Rodriguez's lawyers that was supported by the Major League Baseball Players Association. It came a day after the founder of a now-closed Florida anti-aging clinic said during a "60 Minutes" interview he administered an elaborate doping program for the 14-time All-Star starting in 2010. MLB Commissioner Bud Selig told the program that Rodriguez's actions were "beyond comprehension."

"Given the intense public interest in this matter and Commissioner Selig's disclosures last night on '60 Minutes,' it's difficult to imagine any portion of this proceeding should be filed under seal," Pauley said.

Pauley said there was a presumption in federal courts that the public should have access to documents. He said the presumption of access could be overridden if there was evidence the courts were being used improperly to force otherwise confidential information to be made public.

"There's no evidence here of any bad faith," he said.

Howard Ganz of Proskauer, representing MLB, said the league was not seeking to seal any parts of the written decision, which was issued Saturday but has not been made public.

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/13/2014 4:09:00 PM (view original):

NEW YORK (AP) - A federal judge said Monday that Alex Rodriguez cannot file portions of arbitrator Fredric Horowitz's decision under seal as part of a lawsuit seeking to overturn the one-year suspension from baseball given to the New York Yankees third baseman.

U.S. District Judge William H. Pauley III denied a request by Rodriguez's lawyers that was supported by the Major League Baseball Players Association. It came a day after the founder of a now-closed Florida anti-aging clinic said during a "60 Minutes" interview he administered an elaborate doping program for the 14-time All-Star starting in 2010. MLB Commissioner Bud Selig told the program that Rodriguez's actions were "beyond comprehension."

"Given the intense public interest in this matter and Commissioner Selig's disclosures last night on '60 Minutes,' it's difficult to imagine any portion of this proceeding should be filed under seal," Pauley said.

Pauley said there was a presumption in federal courts that the public should have access to documents. He said the presumption of access could be overridden if there was evidence the courts were being used improperly to force otherwise confidential information to be made public.

"There's no evidence here of any bad faith," he said.

Howard Ganz of Proskauer, representing MLB, said the league was not seeking to seal any parts of the written decision, which was issued Saturday but has not been made public.

That makes sense. The arb ruling should stay sealed per the confidentiality of the JDA. Unless Arod gets the thing into court, in which case it has to be unsealed. He doesn't get to keep it confidential if he takes it to court.

Jeff Joyce on MLB Round Trip made an interesting point tonight. He said after reading through the arbitrator's report, ARod would have been better off if he'd actually failed a test. Then MLB would have pretty much had to punish him according to the rules and give him 50 games. Instead, MLB had to find another way to bring him down.

According to Joyce, the arbitrator said he gave ARod 50 games for "each substance" he was using, plus 12 more for trying to obstruct the investigation. If all they're going on is Bosch's word, that seems pretty suspect.

It's Bosch's word corroborated by his lab records and text messages between Bosch and A-Rod.

I believe the most damning evidence of "something" is a deposit of 49k from A-Rod corp with the investigation in full swing.   As I understand it, all other transactions were with cash(thus making A-Rod even dumber for finally leaving a money trail). 

Of course, paying cash for legal supplements seems a bit odd also.

He obviously was roiding.  Read some of the arb statement last night, and it seems that by taking 3 different illegal drugs, you can be suspended for 150 games. Eh.

My lawyer friend who enjoys arguing (kinda like you guys, except I see him. and hes a friend) brings up a decent point about the 162 games - there isn't anything in the CBA that allows for suspending someone outside the field of play.  If you do something within the field of play, you can be suspended, but if you don't do anything illegal outside the field of play, and ARod really didn't aside from the roiding, there's nothing in the agreement that allows you to suspend him.  So he's been arguing for 50 games. Interesting.  I kinda just want this to go away.

The Commissioner's "Best Interests of Baseball" clause gives him that jurisdiction.

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20130801&content_id=55523182&vkey=news_mlb&c_id=mlb

I don't believe Selig invoked that clause for A-Rod - wasn't this all cited as being under JDA/CBA?

Yea, if he used that clause, it would make some sense.  It wasn't in the arb report though.  AlCheez is right.

Has anyone in baseball been suspended for beating his wife, witnessing a murder or something along that line?    I know the NFL will hit you up for "bad behavior" but has MLB ever done it?    I can't think of anyone.    If so, seems A-Rod, although guilty as **** of pretty much all charges, has a legal leg to stand on.

There is a "best interests" clause in the CBA. 

Article XII B:

Conduct Detrimental or Prejudicial to Baseball

Players may be disciplined for just cause for conduct that is materially detrimental or materially prejudicial to the best interests of Baseball including, but not limited to, engaging in conduct in violation of federal, state or local law. The Commissioner and a Club shall not discipline a Player for the same act or conduct under this provision. In cases of this type, a Club may only discipline a Player, or take other adverse action against him, when the Commissioner defers the disciplinary decision to the Club.