MLBPA leader Tony Clark issues a statement in response Rob Manfred saying that he could not punish players because of the union.
This article spells out the non-controversy controversy. Basically, Manfred said the union wanted full immunity, while the union said they did not need it because, “they never believed player penalties were legal.”
I take this as a win for Manfred, because if you take the MLBPA statement as what really happened, Manfred followed the rules. The players who are calling him weak for not disciplining the cheaters need to realize that under the current agreement Manfred could not do so. If he had, the union would have stopped him, and all the players who are complaining now would have fallen in line behind the MLBPA.
I’m sure Manfred could have done more back in 2017. He could have gone to the union and said, “This is serious, can we work out a deal to discipline players?” That was a lack of foresight on his part. The union has been willing to modify the CBA to prevent cheating in the past. Tony Clark could have done more. Unions are often talked about as brotherhoods, and brothers are not supposed to cheat each other. Clark could have issued stern warnings about this in 2017, threatening union expulsion.
The result is:
- Players could not be punished, with or without immunity. Now that they have immunity, there is no going back.
- Players are taking out their frustrations on the commissioner, even though he followed the rules in this case.
- The commissioner is fighting back politically.
- The MLBPA is fighting back politically.
- The MLBPA is going into the new collective bargaining agreement with an issue on the table they really don’t need. The time and effort to put in penalties for electronic cheating takes away from the more important economic issues facing the players.
This just changes the time at which the commissioner botched things. It’s completely obvious that a rule against stealing signs should be communicated to the players. If they didn’t announce it to the players, that’s a screw up in 2017 rather than a screw up in 2020, but it’s no less a screw up.
This is a red herring. Manfred had said the biggest reason for granting immunity is they had no case without the players cooperation. Nobody would talk. The only evidence was what the players admitted.
Clarke has always been MLB’s lap dog. He sold out Arod, gave in to new drug penalties and expanded testing, agreed to penalties for domestic abuse w/o agreeing to penalties or specifying the evidence required to punish players . All of this outside CBA with players getting nothing back. He would have submitted to Manfred, but Manfred had no case w/o immunity beyond opponent grumbling and suspicions
The players get what they deserve sticking with him.
Besides, Manfred does not want to suspend good players who are providing their team/league value. They are the product. Suspending guys who are overpaid, or to help the team financially, or scapegoating players who are not that valuable is fine. Astros are one of the few teams who draw fans on the road, gutting them and turning them into another 100 loss team is not good business, especially as they would need yo do the same to Boston and maybe NY
Manfred cant admit this so he muddies the water. Those who drink his cool aid go along.
Tony C and Manfred make a great fake wrestling match. Which is the heel and which is the face is a matter of preference. I turn the channel.