Mar 25, 2013, 5:01 PM EST
Major League Baseball filed the lawsuit against Biogenesis on Friday. My view is that it’s a ridiculous, meritless claim asserted solely for the purposes of obtaining documents, not vindicating any actual legal rights.
My view of that is that is based on a legal analysis of the claim, the lack of a damages case and my understanding of the nature of the Joint Drug Agreement which baseball says Biogenesis interfered with. But sometimes analogies work way better. I like this one from a Roger Abrams in this Reuters analysis of the suit:
Roger Abrams, a sports law professor at Northeastern University in Boston, used the example of player contracts that call for the player to hit specific weight targets in spring training.
“Does that mean you can sue McDonald’s for selling Big Macs to this guy?” he said.
Hey, at least a team could hope to recover something from McDonalds if they were successful.
In other news, when the Miami New Times story first came out a couple of months ago, Mike Lupica and a host of other sportswriters hastily wrote angry columns saying that, boy oh boy, if only Major League Baseball could get people under oath this thing would be blown wide open. Since Friday, however, I’ve been unable to find any columns or commentary from the usual suspects lauding Major League Baseball for its lawsuit.
What’s up guys? Wasn’t this what you wanted? Or were you just being angry then and hadn’t yet thought out the end game?
- Robinson Cano agrees to $240 million deal with Mariners (260)
- Yankees agree to seven-year, $153M contract with free agent outfielder Jacoby Ellsbury (160)
- Report: Mariners willing to offer Robinson Cano a 10-year, $240 million deal (143)
- Report: Yankees have agreed to a three-year deal with Carlos Beltran (125)
- Brett Gardner is drawing “significant” trade interest (111)