Well, say this for the Supreme Court of the United States: when they make a lawless decision, they at least have to make it public. Since Frederic Horowitz’s decision isn’t made public, I suppose we don’t know to an absolute certainty that the hearing didn’t uncover evidence that transcends its facial indefensibility.
But as I’ve said before, the full-season suspension of A-Rod is almost certainly an outrage. Let’s assume arguendo that MLB had sufficient evidence that Rodriguez used PEDs. The collective bargaining agreement specifies a punishment for that: 50 games. The full-season suspension of Rodriguez would seem to be based on one or both of these factors:
- Rodriguez was guilty of “multiple offenses.” Given that virtually nobody who fails a drug test only used PEDs once, this is ridiculous, and would essentially render the specified punishments meaningless.
- Rodriguez obstructing an investigation he was under no contractual obligation to comply with merits a punishment more than twice the underlying offense.
I’m not sure which of these arguments is more absurd, but they’re certainly both absurd. Wendy Thurm has more.
You would think that the MLBPA would react strongly to the commissioner having been given arbitrary powers that violate at least the spirit of the collective bargaining agreement. But things are likely to get worse before they get better.