All Forums > SimLeague Baseball > MLB > See ya in 2015
1/17/2014 3:30 PM
Posted by burnsy483 on 1/17/2014 3:00:00 PM (view original):
Sounds like he can sue his union for not 100% supporting him.  It's their duty to do that against MLB when ARod appeals a decision.  I think his biggest complaint was that Weiner said publicly that ARod should settle on a number of games rather than fight for no games.
Isn't it the responsibility of the representative, whether it's one's lawyer or union leader, to advise their client on what course of action is most likely to result in the best outcome?

If ARod had agreed to a negotiated settlement of a smaller number of game, such as 100 or whatever, as Weiner advised him to, wouldn't that have been a better outcome than 162?  Was it really reasonable to believe their was even the slightest chance that he was going to get the suspension completely tossed?
1/17/2014 3:40 PM

As ridiculous as this sounds, an innocent man believes the system will work for him.   He believes those representing him are 100% behind him and believe in his innocence 100%.     And, with A-Rod, you never know if he truly thinks he did nothing wrong(and I believe Clemens believes exactly that about himself).  

1/17/2014 3:48 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 1/17/2014 3:30:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 1/17/2014 3:00:00 PM (view original):
Sounds like he can sue his union for not 100% supporting him.  It's their duty to do that against MLB when ARod appeals a decision.  I think his biggest complaint was that Weiner said publicly that ARod should settle on a number of games rather than fight for no games.
Isn't it the responsibility of the representative, whether it's one's lawyer or union leader, to advise their client on what course of action is most likely to result in the best outcome?

If ARod had agreed to a negotiated settlement of a smaller number of game, such as 100 or whatever, as Weiner advised him to, wouldn't that have been a better outcome than 162?  Was it really reasonable to believe their was even the slightest chance that he was going to get the suspension completely tossed?
By saying that publicly, he's arguing that it hurt his case in the arbitration hearing.  "Even his own union doesn't believe in him."  He can, and should, privately share his thoughts on the best strategy, but you should back up your worker.
1/17/2014 5:01 PM
I would assume that Weiner and the MLBPA did share their thoughts on the best strategy to pursue with him and his lawyers, but that he rejected settlement as a possibility.  Weiner and the MLBPA saw ARod's strategy as un-winnable, and he was being an uncooperative "client".

If this was a matter of lawyer/client, the lawyer would probably withdraw from representing the client if he/she felt that the client was being uncooperative and unreasonable.  The union didn't really have that luxury, so they did the best they could to wash their hands of this particular case.
1/17/2014 5:10 PM

The PLAYER"S Association shouldn't be "washing their hands" of a PLAYER'S case. 

1/17/2014 5:13 PM
Let me put it this way.

I think the union has an ethical responsibility to do what they feel is in the best interests of their members, as a whole in general and on a case by case basis for specific cases.

"Fight this to the bitter end" did not seem like if would be in the best interests of the MLBPA for this particular case, because there was a 0.0% chance that an independent arbitrator was going to completely toss the suspension, or even reduce it to something lower than what a negotiated settlement would have resulted in.

Trying to fight the battle the way ARod seems to have insisted it be fought would have undermined the credibility of the MLBPA which, as you know, has traditionally been the strongest union in professional sports since Marvin Miller became it's Executive Director in 1966.

1/17/2014 5:16 PM
Arod is required by law to sue the MLBPA for his motion to be heard in court. It's still a long shot but, if he hadn't sued the union too, he'd have zero chance of seeing the court room.
1/17/2014 5:29 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 1/17/2014 5:13:00 PM (view original):
Let me put it this way.

I think the union has an ethical responsibility to do what they feel is in the best interests of their members, as a whole in general and on a case by case basis for specific cases.

"Fight this to the bitter end" did not seem like if would be in the best interests of the MLBPA for this particular case, because there was a 0.0% chance that an independent arbitrator was going to completely toss the suspension, or even reduce it to something lower than what a negotiated settlement would have resulted in.

Trying to fight the battle the way ARod seems to have insisted it be fought would have undermined the credibility of the MLBPA which, as you know, has traditionally been the strongest union in professional sports since Marvin Miller became it's Executive Director in 1966.

Undermined the credibility with who exactly?    The general public?  A) not their problem  B) everyone knows A-Rod is A-Rod.   Other players?   Stand by the member no matter the circumstances seems like a good thing if you're a member.

1/20/2014 12:31 AM (edited)
I have to agree with tec. I was a union rep. for 10 years and it's not always in the best interests of the union to "stand by the member no matter what." You still have to know if it's a "winnable" battle in the first place and what the ramifications will be for the rest of the membership should the union use a "defend our member at all costs" strategy. Sometimes the settlement is the obvious best option, and, in A-Fraud's case it would seem, in retrospect, that would have been his best course of action.
1/21/2014 12:09 AM
It's also possible that ARod truly believed he would get "fair" treatment. Braun made a mockery of the appeal system, publicly destroyed the handler's reputation, attacked his accusers in the media, etc. And he got a nice tidy offer of 65 games and a fresh start this season.

MLB clearly wanted to make an example of ARod and went to extraordinary (unethical/illegal?) measures to bring him down. I'm sure that factored into ARod's defiance. He may have started to see himself as a victim - and in some small way, if you're comparing him to the treatment and suspensions of others, he was.

MLB got the result they wanted, but I think they hurt their own public credibility a lot in this as well.
1/21/2014 5:55 AM
Exactly what did MLB do that was unethical or illegal?
1/21/2014 9:24 AM
Posted by tecwrg on 1/17/2014 5:13:00 PM (view original):
Let me put it this way.

I think the union has an ethical responsibility to do what they feel is in the best interests of their members, as a whole in general and on a case by case basis for specific cases.

"Fight this to the bitter end" did not seem like if would be in the best interests of the MLBPA for this particular case, because there was a 0.0% chance that an independent arbitrator was going to completely toss the suspension, or even reduce it to something lower than what a negotiated settlement would have resulted in.

Trying to fight the battle the way ARod seems to have insisted it be fought would have undermined the credibility of the MLBPA which, as you know, has traditionally been the strongest union in professional sports since Marvin Miller became it's Executive Director in 1966.

From what I understand, the MLBPA has a responsibility to defend all of their players in any appeals process to the best of their ability.  ARod is arguing they did not do that, and he seems to have a point.  And what's the worst case scenario in not fighting for ARod as best as they could?  They're just doing what a union is supposed to do.

That said, it doesn't seem to be enough to overthrow the entire suspension.  
1/21/2014 9:25 AM
Posted by tecwrg on 1/21/2014 5:55:00 AM (view original):
Exactly what did MLB do that was unethical or illegal?
Working with/paying off criminals is probably unethical.  I don't know how you collect good evidence about how someone worked with drug dealers though, without working with the drug dealers yourself.
1/21/2014 9:28 AM

Deals are made for testimony all the time.   It seems a little sleazy but it is a fact of life.

1/21/2014 9:48 AM
Posted by burnsy483 on 1/21/2014 9:25:00 AM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 1/21/2014 5:55:00 AM (view original):
Exactly what did MLB do that was unethical or illegal?
Working with/paying off criminals is probably unethical.  I don't know how you collect good evidence about how someone worked with drug dealers though, without working with the drug dealers yourself.
Would it had been better if they had just let ARod's people purchase the documents themselves so that they could be destroyed?
of 9
All Forums > SimLeague Baseball > MLB > See ya in 2015

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.