Manfred’s latest gaffe

[HowAboutThat]

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.

 

[Redskins Rick]

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.

 

[MCO'sFan]

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. 

[makoman]

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.

[GoldGlove21]

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.

[Sports Guy]

He’s the worst.

[survivedc]

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.

[Can_of_corn]

9 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

He’s the worst.

[SteveA]

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).

[survivedc]

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.

[HowAboutThat]

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...

[GoldGlove21]

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.

[Frobby]

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.    

[SteveA]

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.

[Can_of_corn]

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.