Skip to content

Alex Rodriguez’s 211-game suspension is crazy and should be reduced

Aug 5, 2013, 4:25 PM EDT

The MLBPA’s official statement on the suspensions of the Biogenesis players is something I can totally agree with: the 50-game suspensions make sense given that all involved were first time drug offenders who agreed, when they chose not to appeal, that MLB had the goods on them. But Alex Rodriguez‘s 211-game suspension is crazy and it should be reduced.

It’s crazy for a number of reasons.

One simple argument is that A-Rod is receiving discipline for the first time under the Joint Drug Agreement (JDA). The JDA calls for suspensions of 50 games, 100 games or life. A strict constructionist of the JDA could very easily say that A-Rod, as a first offender, should get 50 games, full stop.  Now, I’m not naive. I don’t think that argument will necessarily work. Indeed, the head of the union himself said, for some reason, that the 50-100-life rubric does not apply to Biogenesis cases. I’m not sure why he’d admit that, but I do feel like if that argument had any weight it would have been made a lot more forcefully before now. Still: it’s not an argument I’d abandon if I was A-Rod’s lawyer.

MORE: A-Rod on appeal:’I’m fighting for my life’

A more compelling argument: 211 games is the most arbitrary number imaginable, and arbitrators of employer-employee agreements tend not to like arbitrariness.

The Joint Drug Agreement employs a unit of measurement for drug discipline: games. MLB may make an impassioned and persuasive case that Alex Rodriguez was a horrible wrongdoer, but they clearly chose this discipline based on how long they wanted to see him gone — this season and all of next — and simply calculated how many games that covered. In this sense it was entirely arbitrary and made little effort to match up the severity of the acts with the severity of the punishment. If it happened last week he’d get 217 games? If it happened next week he’d get 205? For the same conduct? It speaks to an unreasonable standard of discipline, even if it happens to go after unreasonably bad behavior.

Let’s talk about that behavior. A-Rod’s Biogenesis case has been the subject of countless leaks over the past several months, and most of those leaks have spoken non-specifically of awful, awful things. We don’t know how awful. Maybe it’s really, really bad! Obstruction of the investigation. Maybe some sort of luring of other players to Tony Bosch’s clinic. We really don’t know.  But we do know that for 211 games to stick, those acts have to be more than four times worse than some other player’s drug use, right? That’s how MLB got to its arbitrary number, right?

MORE: Rodriguez goes 1-for-4 in first game back with Yanks

I don’t know what MLB’s evidence is, but I do know this much: the historic pattern of A-Rod coverage has been to take what he actually did, multiply it by about a million times in terms of severity and report it as the worst thing that ever happened.  Puffing up A-Rod’s evil works with tabloid readers, talk radio callers and the “A-Rod is the devil” folks, but it’s unlikely to work well with an arbitrator. So if that pattern is happening once again, it may be a much closer case than many are portraying.

None of that means Alex Rodriguez didn’t do anything wrong. None of that means that Alex Rodriguez will succeed on his appeal. But from where I’m sitting, Major League Baseball’s 211-game suspension looks hard to defend, and it’s hard to blame Rodriguez for going after it on appeal.

152 Comments (Feed for Comments)
  1. banpeds - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:28 PM

    it will stick and its right. Stop defending soemone who has cheated for the last 13 years.

    • apkyletexas - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:41 PM

      No – it will be reduced to 100, and Bud will look like the defiant hero he always imagined himself.

      • florida727 - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:57 PM

        Buck Fud Selig. Arrogant jerk off that never should be in a position of authority. This @$$clown couldn’t effectively run the local Little League without p*ssing off parents into not showing up for games.

        Hey Bud, let me know when the suspension is lifted. That’s when I’ll spend some of MY hard-earned money on baseball. (BTW, I’m NOT a Yankees or A-Rod fan, but thanks to Bud, I might consider becoming one. Worst commissioner in all of sports; and considering that list would include Bettman, that’s saying something.)

      • ilovegspot - Aug 5, 2013 at 5:02 PM

        Aroid took a picture of himself kissing a mirror. Ban him for life on that,alone let alone cheating his entire career starting in high school.

    • fanofevilempire - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:51 PM

      BIG news reported by espn, A-Rod took a private car with a driver to park and not the team bus, Bud Selig considering suspending him for additional 40 games, stay tune, TJ Quinn will
      have multiple conflicting reports.

    • adenzeno - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:51 PM

      He is not defending Arod per se, he is pointing out the arbitrary nature of the suspension and the lack of due process.I am NOT at all and Arod fan, but the test of law is that it is applied equally and fairly to the most unpalatable and unsavory of defendants.

    • fanofevilempire - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:56 PM

      Craig, if you want to see the evidence call espn and ask for TJ Quinn he said MLB has substantial evidence and he has seen it. I can’t wait until the arbitrator hears this amazing
      point and many others. By the time next season rolls around Alex will begin serving his
      50 game suspension, because that is what he deserves.

      • knicksmets - Aug 5, 2013 at 5:10 PM

        Shouldn’t it be 100 games because he was already caught doing steroids once

      • nbjays - Aug 5, 2013 at 5:44 PM

        Yes he was, back in 2003 when there were no penalties or punishment for a failed test. Those didn’t come about until 2004.

      • fanofevilempire - Aug 5, 2013 at 5:50 PM

        Alex never tested positive for anything, he said he took Bolo, that his cousin gave him.

      • nbjays - Aug 5, 2013 at 6:51 PM

        Then why was his name on the list of 104 major leaguers who tested positive during the survey testing of 2003?

    • bigharold - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:56 PM

      It won’t stick because of one annoying fact, .. the JDA. The very thing that gives MLB the authority to render sanctions also is pretty clear about the length and nature of those sanctions. And, like it or not, A-Rod is a first offender.

      Regardless of how one fells about A-Rod, .. the JDA and CBA are contract law and, as Criag pointed out, that is what the arbitrator will go by,. Not public opinion And, pointing that out doesn’t mean Craig is defending anybody.

      If, .. and that’s a big if considering all the bluster from MLB over the last two weeks was in the end BS, .. the evidence is there A-Rod gets 50 games. If it’s nearly as bad as MLB is saying through their propaganda partners at the Daily News and Post he’ll get 100 games at most.

      • bigharold - Aug 5, 2013 at 5:10 PM

        “How do you know?”

        I just stated my reasoning, .. didn’t you read it? If you think I’m wrong, .. how do you know?

        What is your reasoning?

      • fanofevilempire - Aug 5, 2013 at 5:55 PM

        Don’t bother, it appears that people don’t care that there are rules that apply under these agreements, some people may want to hang Alex just because they want that. I’m fed up with all this now, I hope Alex can do some damage with his bat so things can quiet down and all the crazy people can go away.

    • eatitfanboy - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:57 PM

      How do you know?

    • cur68 - Aug 5, 2013 at 5:02 PM

      There simply isn’t any past history to make this stick: no precedence at all. So far, this seems an arbitrary sentence based on what could easily construed as spite. Absent any real facts about what Alex Rodriguez did, of course. If it comes to light that he cheated worse than Ryan Braun (failed test, smeared a tester, lied his ass off, got caught paying for PEDs from Biogenesis) then SOME version of what Braun got is appropriate. But if it turns out Braun did WORSE and is getting off EASIER….logic fail.

    • jfk69 - Aug 6, 2013 at 6:14 AM

      Buds math…Hmmmm..162 games plus 162 games…Hey wait . How many games are left next Monday if I issue the suspension at 12 PM
      Damn..I hate this new math

  2. allmyteamsareterrible - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:30 PM

    Funny because the suspension seems spot on to me. Admits to taking steroids in 2009. Gets caught taking steroids again in 2013. Tries to conceal this fact and obstruct the investigation to save his ass. Sounds about right to me. I actually wish they would have banned him for life because I am sick of reading about him and seeing him. Bye A-Rod. You will not be missed…

    • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:36 PM

      Admits to taking steroids in 2009.

      No, he didn’t. He admitted in ’09 that he took steroids when he was with the Rangers. You know, before it was against MLB’s rules.

      • allmyteamsareterrible - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:43 PM

        My statement meant that, in 2009, that he admitted taking steroids. Not that he admitted to taking steroids in 2009. Although I can understand the misunderstanding, I didn’t do a very good job of distinguishing that.

      • thesportsjudge - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:49 PM

        So steroids were legal before?

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:58 PM

        So steroids were legal before?

        Not against the rules != legal. It means there’s no punishment for taking them.

      • dan1111 - Aug 6, 2013 at 5:50 AM

        Actually, this is incorrect. Steroids were banned in baseball well before 2003. It didn’t mean much, because there was no testing and no standard penalties in place, but it was still “against the rules”.

        However, never has anyone admitting steroid use pre-2003 been considered a first offense under the current policy.

  3. DelawarePhilliesFan - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:31 PM

    BREAKING NEWS: Sun Rises in East, Craig believes PED user is victim

    • unclemosesgreen - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:33 PM

      That’s not fair DPF – CC has that tag unfairly. I would bet a lot of money that A-Rod’s suspension gets reduced on appeal – I’m thinking 150 games.

      • DelawarePhilliesFan - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:43 PM

        Well, least time I disputed you on a number, Craig cut and pasted both our comments when your number was right. So I’m not going there again…..

        I understand what he is saying here – but at the same time, it’s pretty hard to ignore that Craig goes on and on….and on and on…..and then on and on some more with angles that these guys had a raw deal, or some writer was mean to them.

      • unclemosesgreen - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:56 PM

        Ha – that’s funny. I’d bet more on this than Lohse (a guy in my Roto league insists on calling him “Lousy” hee hee.)

        Everyone else got 50 games and it’s hard to see how he’s not being singled out here, that’s all.

        Craig argues against MLB’s conduct moreso than he argues for the players.
        I also

      • DelawarePhilliesFan - Aug 5, 2013 at 5:06 PM

        He argues against a lot of behavior, not just MLB, and the common thread is that a PED user is the one wronged by the behavior.

      • bigharold - Aug 5, 2013 at 5:07 PM

        “… with angles that these guys had a raw deal, or some writer was mean to them.”

        What’s being pointed out is not that “these guys” got a raw deal but that MLB handled this poorly. If you have an agreement, the CBA in general and JDA specifically you have to adhere to it. The very thing that gives MLB the authority sanction “these guy” also states what those sanctions will be. If you enter into a contract you can’t use the parts you like and ignore the ones you don’t. Also, you can’t break the rules to enforce them.

    • anxovies - Aug 5, 2013 at 5:08 PM

      Actually, Craig is using his brain rather than the deep-seated self-loathing that clouds reason and compels people to say outrageous things about a guy they have never met based solely upon rumor and speculation in the media. ARod is probably no better or worse as a person than any other ballplayer but he had the good/bad fortune to land a couple of huge contracts that made him a media target. Some people, including some on this thread, tend to be weak minded an gullible, believing the worst that is said about him and use him as a target for their own self-hate. These are the same people who get their opinions from Nancy Grace and Dr. Phil and never bother to develop their own.

      • DelawarePhilliesFan - Aug 5, 2013 at 5:11 PM

        “deep-seated self loathing” “weak minded and gullible”?

        wow – good thing you didn’t go over the top in your assements

  4. churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:31 PM

    A more compelling argument: 211 games is the most arbitrary number imaginable, and arbitrators of employer-employee agreements tend not to like arbitrariness.

    Craig, others have mentioned that during salary arbitration, the arbiter has the choice of the team’s or the player’s figure (aka he can’t make up a number he feels is right). Do we know how it works within the JDA? Is the choice 211 games or 50 for Arod, or could he put forth his own punishment?

    • Kevin S. - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:53 PM

      No, it’s not like salary arbitration. The arbitrator is free to determine whatever suspension he feels is appropriate (although I don’t believe he can revise it upwards).

      • mybrunoblog - Aug 5, 2013 at 5:18 PM

        It all feels to me like a text book criminal prosecution. The Prosecuter or DA will charge the suspect with every posssible charge they can. Then, everyone tries to make a deal to avoid trial. Now in Arod case he is rolling the dice and going to trial. Probably a smart tactical move by Arods attorneys because I doubt the punishment will be increased. Arod is taking a shot that it will be reduced or remain the same. My gut tells me the arbitrator reduces the suspension to 150 or 100 games. Time will tell.

      • DelawarePhilliesFan - Aug 5, 2013 at 5:21 PM

        I am sure you are correct – though it would be hilarious if he came back with “F this! It’s 500 games!”

        well, hilarious to me

    • daveitsgood - Aug 5, 2013 at 5:06 PM

      Clearly a ploy to land a sponsorship deal with Steel Reserve. There’s an untapped resource of tall boy and 40oz drinkers that baseball has not been able to reach and this is their time and their moment.

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Aug 5, 2013 at 7:21 PM

        4 years of college saving money on Steel Reserve 211. Two 40s for $3 was a great price. Tasted like shit, but got the desired effect.

  5. Ben - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:31 PM


    • jrbdmb - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:40 PM

      Well said.

    • nbjays - Aug 5, 2013 at 5:47 PM

      13arod? Is that you? If it is, you are being stupied again.

    • jwbiii - Aug 5, 2013 at 6:34 PM

      Do you work the the Post or the Daily News?

  6. jayscarpa - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:32 PM

    First, you do not know how many games he’s been suspended under the JDA and how many under the Basic Agreement. Second, you do not know what he did (or did not) do. We can assume all we want but we know nada.

    Until those facts are known having an opinion about too little/too much is completely uninformed and worth the pixels they are written with.

    • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:59 PM

      If he was suspended under the CBA he’s not allowed to play. Other articles on this site have mentioned that MLB is only suspending him under the JDA.

      • jayscarpa - Aug 5, 2013 at 5:15 PM

        Not according to the MLB statement:
        “Rodriguez’s discipline under the Joint Drug Prevention and Treatment Program is based on his use and possession of numerous forms of prohibited performance-enhancing substances, including Testosterone and human Growth Hormone, over the course of multiple years. Rodriguez’s discipline under the Basic Agreement is for attempting to cover-up his violations of the Program by engaging in a course of conduct intended to obstruct and frustrate the Office of the Commissioner’s investigation.”

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Aug 5, 2013 at 7:22 PM

        Yeah I missed that part. Apparently Herr Selig is “letting him play” during his suspension even though he could refuse under the CBA.

  7. deathmonkey41 - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:33 PM

    The thing is- if Alex wins and gets that knocked down to 50 games to be in line with the rest of the suspensions, Selig is going to look like a bigger clown than he did after that sham Mitchell Investigation

    • El Bravo - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:47 PM

      Correctomundo. This better not get reduced to that or no one will plea agree ever again. I expect a reduction to 100 or 150 games.

  8. MattJanik - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:33 PM

    I would pay actual money to see Alex Rodriguez hit a home run in his first AB tonight and circle the bases with both middle fingers up.

    MLB has succeeded, in this instance, of making Alex Rodriguez a sympathetic figure to reasonably-minded people. Alex. Rodriguez. Think about that for a minute…

  9. hwentworth - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:33 PM

    The bottomline is this: as arbitrary as the number seems, it’s not on us to decide the length (or the validity of the length) of the suspension the league chose.

    Besides, 211 is three games FEWER than the rest of this season and all of next.

    So he’s got that going for him. Which is nice.

    • cubanxsenators - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:44 PM

      Because it takes effect 3 days from now (theoretically).

      What I want to know is: Is it really a 211-game suspension? In the official releases I see from MLB, the ban is temporal — i.e. through the remainder of this season and all of next. The number of games will depend on how long the appeals take.

      Which would really mean (if I’ve got good info & I may not) that Bud issued an unspecific suspension of some number of games. Which is more arbitrary than an arbitrary but specific number.

      • gothapotamus90210 - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:58 PM

        I’m scratching my head as to why they didn’t say for the remainder of the 2013 season and all of the 2014 season. He was going to appeal if it was 211 or 212 games.

        There has to be some tactical reason: perhaps they thought he wouldn’t appeal and wanted to delay his HoF voting by one year by ensuring he played this season. I still don’t know why’d they’d care, no way he’s making the Hall of Fame, but there has to be a strong reason to let him play this year.

      • hwentworth - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:58 PM

        So the 211 could in theory stretch into the 2015 season? Interesting.

  10. allmyteamsareterrible - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:33 PM

    Oh and let me help you out with the 211 game suspension. The suspension becomes effective on Thursday. That leaves 49 games this season. 49+162=211. There ya go. My bill is in the mail.

    • eatitfanboy - Aug 5, 2013 at 5:05 PM

      That would be more helpful if the writer hadn’t already pointed out that the point of the suspension was to get rid of him for the rest of this year and all of next.

  11. Loren - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:35 PM

    If MLB had just suspended him for 212 games instead on 211 it could have argued that it was a non-arbitrary 50 games for the drug use plus a full season for whatever other crimes against baseball were committed.

  12. smorrow66 - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:36 PM

    I agree, the 211 number is arbitrary when compared to the others. To make it legal and correct, just suspend him for life.

    Im all for due process and its important that we all get to appeal, but it rubs me wrong that A-Spare gets to keep playing and keep collecting, while the others accept the punishment, no pay and their teams suffer.

    I admit Im a Ranger homer, but I bet Tiger fans feel the same about Peralta. Just seems crazy that A-Spare keeps playing and we lose key players.

    • gunpowderjones - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:45 PM

      Would you rather your guy get 212 games so he appeals it and gets to keep playing?

    • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Aug 5, 2013 at 5:00 PM

      Nothing is stopping those other players from appealing and getting paid. This isn’t a situation where Arod isn’t going to get suspended at all. It’s how long he should be suspended.

  13. rathipon - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:37 PM

    MLB’s Press Release accused him of use and possession of PED’s. As such, there is no basis for “Just Cause” jurisdiction under Paragraph 7(G) of the JDA. Paragraph 7(G) specifically excludes violations that are covered in 7(A) through 7(F). Discipline for use and possession is exclusively covered in 7(A) with the 50/100/lifetime ban scheme. As a first offense, if MLB can prove use or possession, then per the JDA A-Rod should receive a 50 game ban.

    If they were accusing him of facilitating the sale or distribution of PED’s, then the “Just Cause” provision of 7(G) could apply, but there is absolutely no indication, at least from MLB’s Press Release, that they are accusing him of that. Facilitating the sale or distribution is a violation contained within paragraph 2 of the JDA which is not dealt with in 7(A) through 7(F). Paragraph 2 contains the complete list of potential violations of the Agreement.

    The Press Release also accused A-Rod of “engaging in a course of conduct intended to obstruct and frustrate the Office of the Commissioner’s investigation”. As far as I know, the JDA does not include obstruction of an MLB investigation as a violation of the Agreement. Paragraph 2 says nothing at all about obstruction. Accordingly, it would not be appropriate to discipline him for any such obstruction under the JDA. So I’m not sure how that is even punishable given that MLB is limiting itself to the JDA.

    I’m not an A-Rod apologist, but if this arbitrator is fair the suspension should be knocked down to 50 games. That’s from a legal perspective, not a moral one, but this is now a legal matter.

    • ilovegspot - Aug 5, 2013 at 5:00 PM

      Braun excepted more than 50 game suspension on what is technically his first offense.

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Aug 5, 2013 at 5:02 PM

        And that has nothing to do with what rathipon wrote. If an Arbiter rules that Arod should have been suspended for 50 games as a first time user, that doesn’t mean he and MLB couldn’t have reached an agreement on 100 games. Negotations don’t have to follow the JDA/CBA, but an arbiters decision will.

  14. stephenh2oman - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:38 PM

    I’d rather all the penalties were more explicitly established in advance (it’s still not clear to me if these suspensions count as first strikes against all the offenders?), but if you’re the MLB I think the case you’re trying to make is that you have proof of his using on at least three separate occasions (plus some obstruction), in which case a 211-game could actually be considered lenient.

    And your point about Weiner saying that Selig has the authority to suspend a player for “five or 500 games” is an important one. That in itself shows they agree Bud has the authority to pick an arbitrary number of any length.

    • tedwmoore - Aug 5, 2013 at 7:23 PM

      You assume that MLB does not have evidence that other players also used PES obtained from Biogenesis on multiple occasions. Or purchased/possessed on more than one occasion. This is another reason I feel that the length of A-Rod’s suspension is arbitrary: MLB points to multiple instances of his buying/possessing/using as justification for the amplified suspension, rather than considering his relationship with Biogenesis as one on-going violation of the JDA; yet other players were seemingly forgiven for their ongoing relationships and disciplined as though that relationship was one instance of violating the JDA.

      • dschrode2013 - Aug 6, 2013 at 8:20 AM

        If his more lengthy suspension is due to what he has done to subvert being investigated for and/or discovered to be using PED’s then why was not the same logic used to lengthen Melky Cabrera’s suspension? He, or someone associated with him, created a fake website “intended to obstruct and frustrate the Office of the Commissioner’s investigation”.

  15. bh192012 - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:40 PM

    To the first part of your article, I’d guess Ryan Braun sunk that argument by taking more than 50 games.

    211 equals 50 games + 1 year (minus 1 game… maybe because they didn’t announce on Friday.) That’s my guess at least. 50 for the 1st time, and 1 year for the mystery stuff we don’t have evidence for yet.

    • jrbdmb - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:47 PM

      Braun took the 65 games now because he knew if he appealed (whatever the original penalty was) he was still probably going to get stuck with 50 games that would likely have spilled over into the 2014 season. He accepted a few more games now to make sure hew would start 2014 in the clear.

      I suspect most of the others suspended today used the same rationale to accept the penalties now rather than fight and possibly be suspended for the start of the 2014 season.

  16. mrpinkca - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:40 PM

    I agree. How Bud expects to win an appeal is beyond me (though on second thought, firing the arbitrator who let Braun off might make him believe the next arbitrator will be more open to his view of the JDA or CBA or what ever Bud’s using to get this number).

    The most I can see him reasonably getting is 100 games for a second offense. I suppose up to 150, depending on how the arbitrator views Rodriguez trying to buy the incriminating evidence.

  17. datcrazybok - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:41 PM

    I don’t blame him for appealing. But I, personally, hope I never have to see him play baseball again.

    • clemente2 - Aug 5, 2013 at 5:05 PM

      He is starting tonight. Close your eyes.

    • jwbiii - Aug 5, 2013 at 6:56 PM

      You are more than welcome not to watch Yankees games.

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Aug 5, 2013 at 7:23 PM

        As a yankee fan, I’ve been doing more than my fair share of that this year. Holy dog this team has been awful.

  18. kevinleaptrot - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:42 PM

    Can’t help but think that on some level Selig is attempting to help the Yankees with their payroll issues. They’re trying to get under $189,000,000 (I think that’s the number) for one season so they can stop paying the outrageous luxury taxes that they’ve paid in the past. It getting ARod off of the payroll for one year doesn’t get them there, then it gets them withing hailing distance. The Yankees win again!

  19. randygnyc - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:43 PM

    I’m of 2 minds on this. I don’t like how Bud has been arbitrary in doling out Arod’s punishment. It sets a bad precedent as he acts beyond the scope of a collectively bargained agreement. It will most certainly strain the annual review of the JDA and will complicate future labor negotiations.

    On the other hand, it is Arod, who I’ve grown to despise for the compulsive cheating he’s engaged n for most of his career. I’d like to see him gone from the game, but only done in compliance of due process.

    Nevertheless, the silver lining here is that AROD will be suspended for 2014 in its entirety. Regardless of his appeal or if his suspension is reduced. This will be paramount for the Yankees because 2014 is the key year in which the Yankees must get below the $189 million dollar payroll figure. So, that’s the blessing in disguise.

  20. phinfan527 - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:44 PM

    This will never end in Baseball. Other drugs will be found that can’t be detected. Lance Armstrong probably drove ARoid to the clinic. The almighty $$ will always win out with certain players over playing clean. Just human greed.

  21. stevequinn - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:49 PM

    It’s his second time caught. Banned for life would be more appropriate.

    • nbjays - Aug 5, 2013 at 5:51 PM

      Not really, as there was no penalty in place for failing a test the first time. Nice try, though.

  22. vstar1us - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:50 PM

    Math, minus mat is still a dip stick! Her should have taken the Braun road fess up and only get 65 games. I can’t wait till Braun is gone from the Brew Crew they will be a better team. The Brew Crew is the best minor league team in the MLB. But they are my team, go Brew Crew…..

    • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Aug 5, 2013 at 5:03 PM

      There was zero chance MLB was going to offer Arod 65 games.

  23. El Bravo - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:50 PM

    It’s too long sure, but not “crazy” by any stretch. What I don’t like about it is that the longer he is out the more money the Yankees save. No one wants that. No one. [shush Yankees fans, you’re biased]

    • Kevin S. - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:57 PM

      This Yankee fan doesn’t want that at all.

  24. andyreidisfat - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:55 PM

    This just in ….. Arod kills person, Craig’s blamed media for making arod crazy

  25. buffal0sportsfan - Aug 5, 2013 at 4:57 PM

    Yeah 211 is insane!!!! Make it 210.

Leave Comment

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

Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. D. Wright (3072)
  2. J. Fernandez (2526)
  3. Y. Cespedes (2436)
  4. D. Span (2436)
  5. G. Stanton (2427)
  1. F. Rodney (2152)
  2. Y. Puig (2144)
  3. M. Teixeira (2094)
  4. G. Springer (2002)
  5. H. Olivera (1957)