Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Philip

Manfred’s latest gaffe

Recommended Posts

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2898515-rob-manfred-mlb-was-never-going-to-play-more-than-60-games-this-season

 

Manfred has said there was never any intent to have a season of longer than 60 games. That is a de facto admission that he was deliberately lying every time he mentioned any other options. His comments are pretty direct and seem to be a clear admission of collusion, bargaining in bad faith, and possibly many another negotiating sin.

Can any lawyers in the group chime in? Trevor Bauer seems to be angry, but he’s not a lawyer. I’d love to hear from someone who is.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Philip said:

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2898515-rob-manfred-mlb-was-never-going-to-play-more-than-60-games-this-season

 

Manfred has said there was never any intent to have a season of longer than 60 games. That is a de facto admission that he was deliberately lying every time he mentioned any other options. His comments are pretty direct and seem to be a clear admission of collusion, bargaining in bad faith, and possibly many another negotiating sin.

Can any lawyers in the group chime in? Trevor Bauer seems to be angry, but he’s not a lawyer. I’d love to hear from someone who is.

 

I believe there is evidence that there was bad faith bargaining on both sides of this disagreement.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Redskins Rick said:

I believe there is evidence that there was bad faith bargaining on both sides of this disagreement.

 

I agree. It makes no sense to actually say this out loud. He clearly thinks he's the smartest guy in the room. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Philip said:

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2898515-rob-manfred-mlb-was-never-going-to-play-more-than-60-games-this-season

 

Manfred has said there was never any intent to have a season of longer than 60 games. That is a de facto admission that he was deliberately lying every time he mentioned any other options. His comments are pretty direct and seem to be a clear admission of collusion, bargaining in bad faith, and possibly many another negotiating sin.

Can any lawyers in the group chime in? Trevor Bauer seems to be angry, but he’s not a lawyer. I’d love to hear from someone who is.

 

Some random thoughts:

If there is some legal problem the MLBPA certainly has a lot of expensive lawyers on retainer.

Just because you don't intend to agree to more than 60 doesn't mean you wouldn't if the price was right.

Also they always have the backdrop that they had to put safety first, even if no one believes it. The fact that a bunch of complexes had to shut down in June kind of supports the idea that they probably shouldn't have really been playing in June. The union's first proposal was for like 114 games, that doesn't look that reasonable.

I don't have a strong feeling about this, but Bauer is a loudmouth and you'll hate anything Manfred does so there's that.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, I wish they was no baseball or sports for 2020. I don't feel that my wanting to watch sports, the owners wanting to make money, and the players wanting to get paid should outweigh the risk to players and their families. The MLBPA has had strikes before and not worried about baseball being played. I don't see the importance of having baseball this year. For that reason, 60 or 70 game in a season seems to be of little importance to me. The players are thinking about their bottom line and the owners of theirs. I don't see what either has to do with the actual fans in this instance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, GoldGlove21 said:

Honestly, I wish they was no baseball or sports for 2020. I don't feel that my wanting to watch sports, the owners wanting to make money, and the players wanting to get paid should outweigh the risk to players and their families. The MLBPA has had strikes before and not worried about baseball being played. I don't see the importance of having baseball this year. For that reason, 60 or 70 game in a season seems to be of little importance to me. The players are thinking about their bottom line and the owners of theirs. I don't see what either has to do with the actual fans in this instance.

The players are allowed to opt out for their safety if they wish.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, survivedc said:

The players are allowed to opt out for their safety if they wish.

But forfeit their salary.

Only "at risk" players can opt out and get their salary.   Since there are no players over 60, that list is probably pretty small.   Ex Oriole Jason Johnson had diabetes, he would probably qualify, but I don't know if there are any players with diabetes currently in MLB.   (Ravens all pro TE Mark Andrews does have it).

Not sure what other conditions apply.   Chad Bettis, a cancer survivor, just announced his retirement.   Maybe Carlos Carrasco qualifies.

But for the most part, a player who opts out will lose his salary, as there are very few players who are personally at risk.   The guys opting out and forfeiting their salary are doing it for their families (at risk relatives, pregnant wives, etc).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SteveA said:

But forfeit their salary.

Only "at risk" players can opt out and get their salary.   Since there are no players over 60, that list is probably pretty small.   Ex Oriole Jason Johnson had diabetes, he would probably qualify, but I don't know if there are any players with diabetes currently in MLB.   (Ravens all pro TE Mark Andrews does have it).

Not sure what other conditions apply.   Chad Bettis, a cancer survivor, just announced his retirement.   Maybe Carlos Carrasco qualifies.

But for the most part, a player who opts out will lose his salary, as there are very few players who are personally at risk.   The guys opting out and forfeiting their salary are doing it for their families (at risk relatives, pregnant wives, etc).

Yes, forfeit their salary for not performing the work they otherwise get paid for.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, makoman said:

you'll hate anything Manfred does so there's that.

I dislike his actions intensely, but you seem to think that there is no reason for that dislike.

But if he does some thing productive, I will not dislike it.

Still waiting...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, survivedc said:

Yes, forfeit their salary for not performing the work they otherwise get paid for.

The Government just sent people checks because they wanted businesses to close down due to COVID-19 to keep people making $10 an hour safe. Because these guys make more than normal they get nothing because they didn't "perform"? People who get unemployment are not performing their duties either and they didn't agree to a contract guaranteeing them a given salary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ll be happy if conditions exist that allow them to get their 60 games in.   Frankly, it’s looking worse by the day right now and who knows how things will look in late July when they plan to start up.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, GoldGlove21 said:

The Government just sent people checks because they wanted businesses to close down due to COVID-19 to keep people making $10 an hour safe. Because these guys make more than normal they get nothing because they didn't "perform"? People who get unemployment are not performing their duties either and they didn't agree to a contract guaranteeing them a given salary.

The governement only sent checks to people that make under $100K/year, I believe.

  • Upvote 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, GoldGlove21 said:

The Government just sent people checks because they wanted businesses to close down due to COVID-19 to keep people making $10 an hour safe. Because these guys make more than normal they get nothing because they didn't "perform"? People who get unemployment are not performing their duties either and they didn't agree to a contract guaranteeing them a given salary.

They could try and get unemployment. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

Orioles Information


Orioles News and Information

Daily Organizational Boxscores
News

Tony's Takes

Orioles Roster Resource

Orioles Prospect Information

2018 End of Season Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2019 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats






  • Posts

    • Third Bass was an epic 90s rap group...Steppin to the AM and Triple Stage Darkness are legit. Serch being goofy looking hurt the band IMO. However producing Nas’s first album is a career...in any league.   Also scew the Nats and their nonsense ground crew. Next time they’ll just have the sprinklers accidentally malfunction.  
    • Difference being, the home team was ahead in the Wrigley Field game.  To me, the grounds crew is the home team's responsibility.  If the home team is ahead or tied when such an incident occurs, suspend the game.  If the home team is behind - game over.  That is fair.
    • Yes.  Had to make it baseball related.  😉 And that's a sweet sample in that one, two actually. Prime '91 hip hop.
    • Did you intentionally spell Bass wrong so I'd be left scratching my head? Lol!
    • I was also under the impression that the lefty reliever was done. My recollection may not be accurate, but I think I remember that the Nats' manager had come out of the dugout to remove the lefty reliever, Freeman, and summon a new pitcher from the bullpen.  MASN broke for a commercial, and when they came back, the grounds crew was starting their misadventures with the tarp. Did the Nats actually remove Freeman from the game, or did the umps call for the tarp before the manager made his way out to the mound? If the manager told the ump that he was taking Freeman out, I would assume that whoever he had called for from the bullpen was officially in the game when it was halted, even though he never threw  a pitch, and that guy will be required to either finish the inning or face three batters when play resumes on Friday. One piece of good news for the Orioles - if they had resumed the game today after a rain delay and Fry's arm would have cooled down, Hyde almost certainly would have had to replace Fry when the bottom of the sixth started.  Now he will have the option of leaving Fry in the game if he so chooses.
    • Actually I don't believe I ever saw that one. Funny because I've seen almost all of their shorts over the years.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Popular Now

×
×
  • Create New...