Skip to content

MLB to appeal Braun ruling to federal court? Good luck with that.

Feb 24, 2012, 11:00 AM EDT

lawsuit gavel

ESPN is reporting that Major League Baseball is considering appealing the arbitrator’s decision in the Ryan Braun case to federal court:

Sources said MLB is livid and is evaluating the possibility of suing in federal court to have Das’ decision overturned, but that they did not expect a decision to be made until after Das issues his written report within the next week or so and MLB lawyers have a chance to review it. There are very limited grounds by which either party could sue, but sources said MLB officials believe Das’ ruling was based on a faulty reading of the policy.

This would be a foolish waste of time.

Arbitration is chosen by parties for the express purpose of avoiding litigation.  Courts are well aware of this. And in order to not undermine the integrity of arbitration awards, they very, very rarely overturn them.  Indeed, The Federal Arbitration Act provides the grounds for review of an arbitration decision. Such review is limited to overturning awards obtained by corruption or fraud. Or where the arbitrator himself is shown to be corrupted or to have engaged in misconduct of some kind or has shown a “manifest disregard for the law.”  Federal courts do not look at the facts and evidence anew and substitute their judgment for that of the arbitrator.

So great, MLB, sue in federal court if you want. But you will waste money. You will piss off the union, one of baseball’s most exciting young and marketable players and the rest of the players as well.

Oh, and you will almost certainly lose.

  1. jpirish - Feb 24, 2012 at 11:14 AM

    I swear your on a vendetta with this Braun Test. Craig you Really want the job with the Union don’t cha. Didnt camps open this week?. Get off the Braun deal He will do this again and get Busted You can take it to the bank. Then you can represent him ….Suck Up

    • phillyphreak - Feb 24, 2012 at 11:38 AM

      I can’t wait until you get banned or leave.

      • madhatternalice - Feb 24, 2012 at 12:15 PM

        Actually, I can’t wait until jpirish learns the difference between “your” and “you’re.”

      • pauleee - Feb 24, 2012 at 12:18 PM

        Not to worry. As soon as actual baseball starts, they will all go away. Becasue they don’t like baseball. They’re all on here to piss on our sport and because football ended a couple of weeks ago.

      • jwbiii - Feb 24, 2012 at 2:36 PM

        madhatternalice, I think contractions are fourth grade material. You may have a while to wait.

    • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Feb 24, 2012 at 11:41 AM

      Curious, but What’s with the Random capitalization Of words in your Posting? Is there a Problem with Your shift Key?

    • hammyofdoom - Feb 24, 2012 at 11:47 AM

      OR, he used to be a lawyer and has far more experience on the topic than 99 percent of baseball writers and a similar number of his readers? Perhaps he is angry because he knows that as a lawyer this is ridiculous and a total waste of time. I dont know, just my assumption

      • phillyphreak - Feb 24, 2012 at 12:02 PM

        Check your logic at the door please!

      • hammyofdoom - Feb 24, 2012 at 2:08 PM

        Sorry 😦 I’ll go hide in my corner now

    • saucepaws - Feb 24, 2012 at 12:04 PM

      @jpirish: This might be the worst written post I have read on HBT. This dandy has it all: periods following question marks, random capitalization, run on sentences and the use of “cha” instead of “you”.

      On the flip side, this youngster should be very proud of being able to spell big words like “vendetta” and “represent”. If you keep that up, you’ll pass grade 3 one of these days!

      • Old Gator - Feb 24, 2012 at 1:48 PM

        saucepaws: depending on how patient you are, scroll back a few years. jpirish’s post is atrociously written but I assure you that there are posts back there so much worse that his wouldn’t even rank.

    • WhenMattStairsIsKing - Feb 24, 2012 at 12:15 PM

      Just shut up.

    • sabathiawouldbegoodattheeighthtoo - Feb 24, 2012 at 12:41 PM

      So, is Braun saying he is clean and the sample was tempered with? Seems like he should be suing the collector.

      I have not heard him say he was clean.

      • jwbiii - Feb 24, 2012 at 2:58 PM

        “If I had done this intentionally or unintentionally I’d have been the first one to admit it. I truly believe this substance never entered my body.”

  2. sdelmonte - Feb 24, 2012 at 11:16 AM

    And of course, if the owners can sue, so can the players. Why open this can of worms?

    • Old Gator - Feb 24, 2012 at 1:51 PM

      Because fishing season opens at around the same time as spring training? I hear the northern snakeheads are really biting this year.

      Personally, I’m looking forward to meerkat season. Filling my warheads with napalm, greasing the racks under my Piper Cherokee’s beautiful candybar wings….

      • Gamera the Brave - Feb 24, 2012 at 2:46 PM

        I love the smell of meerkat in the morning…

  3. randygnyc - Feb 24, 2012 at 11:21 AM

    They must sue if anyone within and outside of baseball is going to take MLB’s drug testing, seriously. After MLB’s responses yesterday and today, I’m convinced they are convinced of his guilt AND the proper protocols were followed. This at the very least to retain their credibility.

    • phillyphreak - Feb 24, 2012 at 11:46 AM

      Credibility how? Because someone in the office leaked the report? It’s apparently not the first time a ruling has been overturned-only the first time it’s been leaked. So MLB loses sometimes and they seem fine with that. But oh no, they can’t have people believe that they’re testing process is less than perfect, because then, hey, the steroid witch-hunt may uncalled for.

    • danrizzle - Feb 24, 2012 at 11:59 AM

      If MLB’s credibility is at issue, then I’d say that would be more greatly damaged by running to court to try to set aside an alternative dispute resolution that they agreed to be bound by under its CBA. They agreed to have these disputes submitted to binding arbitration, and then they lost. Unless it turns out that the third (neutral) arbitrator was somehow improperly influenced by Braun or the MLBPA, then MLB should suck it up and honor its agreement. To do anything else would raise questions about its credibility.

      And if the credibility or enforceability of MLB’s drug testing policy is at issue, I fail to see how running to court to overturn an arbitrator’s decision would assist that. It would probably make the initial findings of the drug testing process in the future more likely to result in suspensions, but that has nothing to do with credibility. In my opinion, its credibility would be worse because players would have less of an incentive to appeal questionable process.

      • CJ - Feb 24, 2012 at 12:30 PM

        ^^^^^^^ this.

        1) MLB running to court does far more harm than good to their credibility.
        2) MLB’s credibility was only hurt in this case by the fact that the suspension was leaked before Braun’s appeals process was completed.
        3) MLB’s credibility wasn’t harmed to begin with as this was the first time a suspension has been overturned in their drug policy’s history. If anything it shows fairness in the process and enhances credibility. What exactly is credible about an appeals policy that always upholds the original decision?
        4) Temperature is a huge factor in urine samples and MLB’s policy for storage and handling should probably be a little more specific in this regard. Where I come from 40 degrees isn’t “cool” it’s cold. A fridge with other perishables isn’t a suitable place for storage. Samples in these scenarios should be stored in a regulated cooling device with a digital thermostat under lock and key, and these should be provided to the collectors. NOT in a 35-40 degree fridge next to the milk. That’s not secure, and it’s not a scientifically proper temperature for stable storage where reliable results are needed.
        5)And don’t give me any crap about plasma/blood sampling storage temps like in the other thread either. If you don’t know the difference between blood and urine, then take a piss in someone’s heart and see what happens….

      • CJ - Feb 24, 2012 at 12:38 PM

        for some completely asinine reason I was thinking this was a urine test in question, but it is in fact a blood test. So I’m pretty sure #5 no longer applies 😀

      • Gamera the Brave - Feb 24, 2012 at 1:17 PM

        CJ maybe #5 doesn’t count, but your composing the phrase, “…then take a piss in someone’s heart and see what happens…” made me laugh out loud at my desk. Thanks much.

    • koufaxmitzvah - Feb 24, 2012 at 12:14 PM

      Thank you, Randy. Nobody should take MLB drug testing seriously.

      While we’re at it, nobody should take ESPN reporting seriously, either.

      Both of them fucked up royally with this entire fiasco. And it is a fiasco, albeit there is only one victim here.

      • Chris Fiorentino - Feb 24, 2012 at 12:32 PM

        Again, how exactly did ESPN “fuck up”? What they reported, that Braun was suspended for 50 games for violating the drug policy of MLB, was 100% true. he was suspended. He appealed. But won his appeal and the suspension was overturned. Something can’t be oveturned unless it actually was there, right? It was the arbiter’s decision not to suspend Braun. It was the arbiter’s decision to OVERTURN the suspension. If you want to say this is supposed to be a private process and it wasn’t supposed to become public, then beat up the source. I fail to see the reason for the outrage at ESPN.

      • koufaxmitzvah - Feb 24, 2012 at 12:52 PM

        Their report was based on an anonymous source that leaked the information before the suspension was allowed to take any effect because of the mandatory appeals process. Therefore, it can be argued, that ESPN was reckless and embarked in potentially libelous fashion by reporting on, apparently, nonfactual evidence. I’m no lawyer, but I would think Ryan Braun would have a case against them similar to Carol Burnet vs the Naitonal Enquirer.

        Weak journalism. The entire 24/7/365 structure for “news” is ripe for fallcies and bullshit.

      • gendisarray - Feb 24, 2012 at 1:17 PM

        Ryan Braun is a public figure, so he would have to prove that ESPN acted with malicious intent or a reckless disregard for the truth. That’s a tough standard to meet here.

      • koufaxmitzvah - Feb 24, 2012 at 1:49 PM

        Public figure, yes. With the right to maintain privileged information confidential, I believe. ESPN may not have been outwardly malicious towards Braun, but I bet it can be proven that they behaved recklessly in order to “scoop” the competition, and thereby tainting all facts related to this case. Shit, if Braun doesn’t sue them, maybe MLB or WADA will. (Although WADA ain’t gonna do shit but sit around and say, “We don’t trust your baseball records.” Ask a soccer fan– or an Olympic snowboarder– what they think of WADA.)

        If ESPN doesn’t jump so fast, this case is nothing and Braun’s name is driven through the mud for the 3rd month in a row.

      • badmamainphilliesjamas - Feb 24, 2012 at 2:49 PM

        I suspect it is a HIPAA violation–if so, it wouldn’t matter that Braun is a public figure.

  4. stevem7 - Feb 24, 2012 at 11:27 AM

    Yeah, let MLB go ahead and sue. They are the ones in breach here. Their representative is the one who chose to ignore the facts involved in processing the sample. Rob Manfred chose to ignore the agreed upon procedure and instead voted to invalidate the agreement. So when MLB sues, the union should declare the Drug Agreement null and void and refuse to have any player tested as they have clear and convincing proof that MLB doesn’t care how it convicts any player. There is a reason for specific steps and if MLB doesn’t with to follow them then there can be no agreement.

  5. yankeesfanlen - Feb 24, 2012 at 11:30 AM

    The quote I heard on the radio was something like “Yip, blah blah, Yap…but we support the process”. Guess that was corporate simpleton-ese for “We didn’t pick the right guy to arbitrate”.

  6. muskyhunter2542 - Feb 24, 2012 at 11:32 AM

    This is a joke!!! JUST MOVE ON!!!

    • - Feb 24, 2012 at 11:43 AM

      I hope you directed this at MLB. Because as long as MLB is pushing the issue, it will be a point of discussion.

  7. drunkenhooliganism - Feb 24, 2012 at 11:32 AM

    Can braun sue mlb for leaking the failed test?

    • cur68 - Feb 24, 2012 at 11:44 AM

      If any part of this process was an abysmal failure, there it is right there. I sure hope Braun does sue MLB. MLB for its part should be publicly pursuing the blabbermouth in its ranks as opposed to floundering like a lame hippo on an ice rink trying to slag the arbiter.

      • Old Gator - Feb 24, 2012 at 6:58 PM

        I really like “lame hippo on an ice rink.” How do you say that in Beaver?

      • cur68 - Feb 24, 2012 at 7:14 PM

        “Hippo boiteux sur une patinoire.”

    • gendisarray - Feb 24, 2012 at 11:44 AM

      It’d be great if he could sue them and win, but how would he prove his case? It’s not like ESPN is going to give up its sources on the leak.

      • drunkenhooliganism - Feb 24, 2012 at 11:52 AM

        Good point. MLB can claim that maybe braun leaked it.

        Can he sue them for being self-righteous hypocritical assbags?

  8. Chris Fiorentino - Feb 24, 2012 at 11:34 AM

    MLB is wasting their time here…like Craig said above, even if the guy misapplied the standards(which I agree with Drew and think he totally did) then Federal Court isn’t going to overturn it. It’s over MLB…it’s over. It’s so simple of an argument that too many people are trying to make too much out of it. You either think that Braun used a banned substance and got away with it or you think that his sample was tainted and he never used a banned substance. Period. There is no grey area. So are you a realist or a conspiracy theorist? That is the big question here.

    • Jonny 5 - Feb 24, 2012 at 11:56 AM

      Couldn’t misapplying the standard be construed as misconduct? Surely if the protocol could be construed as “broken” when it wasn’t, then misapplying the standard could be construed as “misconduct” within the case. Right? Judges rulings are frequently overturned and i don’t see what makes an arbiter any different.

      To be honest I don’t see how a wrong decision by the arbiter could be so vehemently defended as if it’s the correct decision here. I just don’t get it.

      • Chris Fiorentino - Feb 24, 2012 at 12:02 PM

        J5, I couldn’t agree with you more about everything you wrote. Except that I believe the standard is more like willful misconduct of the arbiter. Technically, you can read that provision within MLB’s rules either way and not be willfully guilty of misconduct. I guess. I don’t know any more than anyone else who isn’t intimately involved with the process. I do know one thing…there sure are a TON of conspiracy theorists hanging around the HBT comment sections. I’ve never seen anything quite like it. I guess people are so desperate for baseball they just want to see Braun playing no matter what he did.

      • phillyphreak - Feb 24, 2012 at 12:10 PM

        I’d argue that the conspiracy theorists are not the ones saying due process played out. I’d argue that they are the ones who are angry (like yourself) that he wasn’t suspended and believe it was a technicality.

      • Chris Fiorentino - Feb 24, 2012 at 12:21 PM

        First of all, I couldn’t give a rat’s ass if Braun was suspended or not. Period. Good for him that he gets to play those 50 games. Maybe the Brewers will be a .500 club now. Who cares? I’m a Phillies fan who once again will watch my team win 100+ games, the over-hyped NL Least by double digits, and then the season will truly begin.

        However, when I disagree with something, I am going to debate my side. And my side is this…either the sample was tainted or it wasn’t. If you believe the sample was tainted, then you are saying someone opened the sample, tainted it, then resealed it perfectly so it looked sealed when it got to Montreal. To me, THAT s far more of “conspiracy theory” than the guy, who has been doing this for years and isn’t just some schmuck, did what he normally does when he gets a sample on a non-business day, and thinking the FedEx places were closed, he simply kept the sample on his person until Monday. This apparently happens ALL THE TIME. But the arbiters in this case, decided to go the route of questioning the chain of custody and said he should not be suspended. He’s not innocent…he’s just not suspend-able in the eyes of 2 out of 3 arbiters.

        The initial reaction from all the Braun lovers was to tell those people who said Braun cheated to eat crow. To them, I said and will continue to say screw you. Because this decision is NOT proof that Braun didn’t take a banned substance. It only proves that the arbiters felt the sample did not follow the proper chain of custody. You can’t tell me he is CLEAN anymore than I can tell you he is DIRTY. There should and always will be a question about Braun from now until his career is over. Why? Because he got off on a TECHNICALITY…and, this is for Craig…THAT AIN’T NO BULL!!!!!

      • phillyphreak - Feb 24, 2012 at 12:32 PM

        The problem, though, is that you seem to believe that there couldn’t have been more that was argued or that it may be a little bit more complex than what’s being reported now. You’ve already made up your mind on the issue- therefore you pick what fits your beliefs. That’s “fine”, but it’s not keeping an open mind really.

        It’s also not as if last season was the only season Braun was ever good. He had some really damn good seasons before last year. So are you going to apply the “he must have always been cheating” stance? Because that wouldn’t fit with the other drug tests he’s reportedly passed.

      • phillyphreak - Feb 24, 2012 at 12:47 PM

        Chris, I think the problem with that thinking is that you’ve already made up your mind. And it doesn’t seem that any kind of evidence that emerges, no matter how substantial, will change your mind. this is based off of limited reports that are out there now. No report has the full story of what went on in the hearing. To make informed judgments we (both sides) need that. But the key is keeping an open mind.

        And suppose it was only a chain thing and he did test positive (for realz). How does that change your mind about him, particularly because he has had good seasons in the past, while reportedly passing previous tests. Are you going to say “oh those must have been wrong?”

    • phillyphreak - Feb 24, 2012 at 12:08 PM

      How do you and Drew know what he decided? How do you and Drew know what the arguments were? You don’t.

      The problem with this is that no one knows what the arbiter heard, what was presented and how he decided. Everything else is pure speculation until we see (if we get to see it) his written ruling.

      • Chris Fiorentino - Feb 24, 2012 at 12:23 PM

        We are debating the speculation…isn’t that what it is all about? If you don’t want to do that, then just stay on the sidelines and enjoy 😀

    • phillyphreak - Feb 24, 2012 at 12:17 PM

      FYI just had discussion on other post with Drew. I’m now under the impression that’s not his firm stance.

  9. gendisarray - Feb 24, 2012 at 11:37 AM

    Major League Baseball’s only shot at vacating the arbitration ruling is the “manifest disregard for the law” grounds. Seeing as how arbitrators are not required to explain or justify their decision without their consent, I’d say calling that play a hail mary is being generous.

  10. - Feb 24, 2012 at 11:40 AM

    If I were MLB I’d just take my black eye and walk away from this fight.

    drunkenhooliganism mentioned it, and the thought occured to me after reading abother thread. Can Braun and the Union sue MLB for the leak in the first place?

    Also, If I’m a business partner with MLB and arbitration is the agreed upon outlet for a greivence….I might have to rethink my dealings with them, or at least look at having some contracts re-worked.

    Futhermore the actions of MLB in the form of the leak, and not following their own protocol have the potential to set drug testing in MLB back for several years. Just let it go.

    • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Feb 24, 2012 at 11:43 AM

      Doubt it, for one it’s almost 99.999% positive that the leaker will never be found out, due to shield laws. Never mind the fact is extremely hard for public figures to sue and win in court, assuming it’s a libel claim.

  11. chiadam - Feb 24, 2012 at 11:46 AM

    MLB should just go the other way and hand out steroids in spring training. They did ride steroids back to relevance after the 1994 season was drug behind a shed and executed. They allowed mutants like Sammy Sosa, Barry Bonds and Mark McGwire to forever destroy the two most important records in baseball (career HR and single season HR). They enabled the problem for years. Then they pretend to care after fans got tired of it. Well, now the sports is about as legitimate as track or cycling, so why try putting the toothpaste back in the tube?

  12. sabathiawouldbegoodattheeighthtoo - Feb 24, 2012 at 11:53 AM

    Congress loves this crap. They will probably launch a full investigation.

    • jimbo1949 - Feb 24, 2012 at 3:58 PM

      Ah yes, as the ship of state sails down the alimentary canal the inmates of the asylum get to rearrange the deck chairs and rub up against the boys of summer. IF they can find the time, in between prostituting themselves for campaign cash and baby-kissing their way to re-election.

  13. bravojawja - Feb 24, 2012 at 11:54 AM

    So MLB is going to run to Daddy because Mommy told them “no,” is that it? Hate to break it to you, kiddo, but Daddy and Mommy are in cahoots.

  14. sasquash20 - Feb 24, 2012 at 12:10 PM

    How does a buisness that has the resources that MLB have, totally come up lame in this whole process? The guy had the sample in his fridge? Clearly that shouldn’t be allowed, and clearly that shouldn’t even have a chance to happen. You honestly believe that they couldn’t have known that Fedex was closed at whatever time? The whole thing seems very unprofessional. I don’t know what to think about Braun. Did he or didn’t he take something? And the main problem is baseball has such a history of being a complete joke when it comes to outing its own players. Decades of looking the other way doesn’t help. Once again the integrity of baseball is comprimised. They can’t even follow the guide lines that they helped put in place. What a joke!

    • Chris Fiorentino - Feb 24, 2012 at 12:28 PM

      “Did he or didn’t he take something?”

      Exactly. Either side is a perfectly valid side to be on. The only side that is wrong is the one that TELLS the other side that what they are thinking is wrong. Because like you ask…”Did he or didn’t he take something?”

      In the list of bad guys in this entire fiasco, MLB is definitely the #1 villain. That’s why they need to cut their losses and get ready for the season. They screwed up and a guy may have gotten away with cheating. Nothing can be done about it now.

      Play Ball!!!!

    • tuftsb - Feb 24, 2012 at 12:34 PM

      To quote Danrizzle from earlier:

      “Unless it turns out that the third (neutral) arbitrator was somehow improperly influenced by Braun or the MLBPA, then MLB should suck it up and honor its agreement”

      So an arbitrator rules that written protocols weren’t followed and MLB decides to not honor the CBA and written protocols regarding acceptance of binding arbitration. Priceless!

      I wonder if MLB knows that opens up a can of womrs whereby a player that loses a salary arbritration hearing runs to federal court and challenges the reamining components of MLB’s antitrust exemption and monopoly?

      • danesei - Feb 26, 2012 at 7:53 PM

        Removing the anti-trust exemption for MLB hurts the MLBPA as much as it would hurt the owners. The best players are able to negotiate 8-figure annual salaries because of MLB control of MiLB, not in spite of it.

      • danesei - Feb 26, 2012 at 8:03 PM

        I suppose I should clarify my comment a bit:

        The anti-trust exemption exists because MLB games occur intrastate. This is why MLB does not produce its own apparel. If it did, there would be violation of anti-trust laws.

        Now, the reason that I said the MLBPA stands to lose as much (and possibly more) than MLB owners would is simple:

        The MLBPA represents all players. You cannot participate in MLB/MiLB without agreeing to the CBA. This isn’t optional. This is why there are “posting rules” for some Asian nations and not others. This is why certain players are allowed to sign as free agents from Latino nations, and other players are bound by First Year draft requirements.

        If the Supreme Court overturned the Anti-trust exemption (which would actually be somewhat pointless now), that would benefit the largest clubs with the largest fan bases. The Yankees would exclusively own the rights to Yankees/Red Sox/Cubs/Dodgers/Mariners/Nationals/etc apparel. The league would contract and there would be more players fighting over less dollars. Additionally, it’s unlikely that the Mark Cubans of the world would effectively create a competing body that would be able to support the void of dollars flowing into player pockets.

        Yes, the superstars would be able to command much larger contracts (imagine Pujols getting direct royalties – not just endorsement money – whenever his name were used on apparel), but the lesser players would be sent to the minors or, worse, out of work entirely.

      • danesei - Feb 26, 2012 at 9:18 PM

        I gave this a bit more thought… if the antitrust exemption were removed, the reserve clause would be rendered irrelevant. As such, MiLB would no longer exist in its current form.

        If MLB teams couldn’t shove players into MiLB to hold onto them, you’d have a LOT of out of work MLBPA members.

        At this point, I’m certain that MLBPA members get hurt more by MLB losing the antitrust exemption than the owners do.

  15. cshearing - Feb 24, 2012 at 12:16 PM

    How weird it is that this is happening on the commissioner’s very own team. Huge awkwardness between Braun & Selig, at the very least.

  16. nategearhart - Feb 24, 2012 at 12:27 PM

    MLB: “We will never rest until we prove once-and-for-all that our part-time courier did NOT make an honest mistake, and that our reigning MVP is in fact a lying cheater! Our credibility depends on it!”

  17. heyblueyoustink - Feb 24, 2012 at 12:30 PM

    Shades of OJ….just because you’re not guilty, doesn’t mean you’re innocent.

  18. aaronmoreno - Feb 24, 2012 at 12:33 PM

    MLB will rage at the world because they have to. The leak made them look stupid after they lost the first PUBLIC appeal. But Spring Training will start soon, people will calm down, MLB will make “procedural” changes so this doesn’t happen again, and no one will go to federal court.

  19. phillyphreak - Feb 24, 2012 at 12:35 PM

    @Chris The problem, though, is that you seem to believe that there couldn’t have been more that was argued or that it may be a little bit more complex than what’s being reported now. You’ve already made up your mind on the issue- therefore you pick what fits your beliefs. That’s “fine”, but it’s not keeping an open mind really.

    It’s also not as if last season was the only season Braun was ever good. He had some really damn good seasons before last year. So are you going to apply the “he must have always been cheating” stance? Because that wouldn’t fit with the other drug tests he’s reportedly passed.

  20. rooney24 - Feb 24, 2012 at 1:35 PM

    As much as I have disagreed with some of Craig’s other stuff on this issue, I need to fully agree on this one. If you agreed to arbitration, you have to know that it might not go your way. But, by agreeing to arbitration, you are agreeing to live with the ruling. Like it or not, let it go MLB. If you don’t like it, learn from it and change your procedures for future testing.

  21. Tick - Feb 24, 2012 at 2:03 PM

    So, MLB cosistently breaks it’s confidentiality agreement, does nothing to address and stop “leaks”, botches their own rules on testing and sample handling, then feels they can throw a hissy fit and sue when they can’t follow their own rules? If anyone has a basis for a suit, it’s Braun.

    Seems to me that MLB is trying to make up for the years of turning a blind eye by now throwing every player they can to the wolves for as trail by public opinion. Not sure why they feel this makes them look like the good guys.

  22. gowhitten - Feb 24, 2012 at 2:27 PM

    Who cares? Baseball is just entertainment. Would you quit going to movies just one of the actors used pot or coke? I think not.

  23. gowhitten - Feb 24, 2012 at 2:46 PM

    Who cares? Baseball is just entertainment. Would you quit going to movies just because one of the actors used pot or coke? I think not.

  24. bdawk20 - Feb 24, 2012 at 4:04 PM

    What about the reports that the test collector followed the CBA protocol when shipping the specimen? Yeah, he put it in the fridge, but that is what the CBA says he is supposed to do if he is unable to ship it immediately.

    Now, was the fridge secure? I don’t know – which is why we need the report to come out. Furthermore, he may have known that this was the only way he could get the case overturned, so rather than argue facts, he argued the rules which is the one thing he CAN prove in this case.

    A lot of unknowns here.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. C. Correa (2551)
  2. G. Stanton (2505)
  3. H. Ramirez (2484)
  4. G. Springer (2482)
  5. B. Crawford (2300)
  1. M. Teixeira (2281)
  2. H. Pence (2211)
  3. J. Baez (2203)
  4. J. Hamilton (2161)
  5. Y. Puig (2105)