So, bring me up to speed on this, because I'm not an antitrust lawyer: in what way does destroying videotapes establish a trust, or violate the provisions of the NFL anti-trust exemption? So, when I give the 5-cent version of a subparagraph to explain the part you asked about, you become an Anti-Trust Attorney??? You obviously know more than you let on, so read the subparts for yourself. It will explain how this applies and yes, sports does matter. When the Sherman Anti-Trust Act was passed, granted it was for monopolies like telephone and cable corporations. But, the NFL (a multi-billion dollar industry) asked for and was granted this status. Therefore, they are subject to all parts of the law, not just the ones we wish to play with. I know you are a smart person as I have read your previous threads. But, this is about the legal system and destroying the evidence is a violation of that law - period. And as for the comment by Venicemenace, you did the same thing, pull a tiny excerpt out of a four-six page story. And you say mine was an exaggeration. The guy is obviously worried about many issues: family in New England, 401K, Legalities of being sued just to name a few. He gave a good analogy about nothing to gain, but everything to loose. Would you want immunity and legal expenses to cover you and an 8-month old baby and your wife? Read or post the entire article, not the parts that can make you sound as though you are certain this is a money motive. It's obvious this thread is going nowhere fast. You can say politics has no place in sports, but I don't want my kids taking steroids. MLB didn't clean it up, so Congress had no choice. Too many kids die each year. Should we leave it to the billionaires to do the right thing? Wait until you have kids playing sports and they start to ask you the questions. As for Matt Walsh, I really couldn't give a rat's about him. I am certain he will get a subpoena now. Only time will tell how this whole thing ends. But, I doubt you will hear the end of it soon. I am out of here...... good luck
but I don't want my kids taking steroids. MLB didn't clean it up, so Congress had no choice. I'm pretty sure that MLB has absolutely NOTHING to do with your kids taking steroids. They don't tell them to use them, they don't sell them to your kids and they don't finance anyone else's business that tells them or sells them, either. Should we leave it to the billionaires to do the right thing? Wait until you have kids playing sports and they start to ask you the questions. Why do the "billionaires" have to do something? Why can parents do something? The easiest thing to do when kids start asking questions is to be informed and to answer them. Why is this so hard for you to understand? It's like watching people freak out about video games and children, or the internet and children, or television and children. Why can't people just take responsibility for raising their own children without crying for government help?
You seem to misunderstand the comments I wrote. I DID take action with my kids, and I have kept my sons informed and off steroids. But, being into sports puts them in discussions with other athletes that are cheating. Then they bring home questions like, "Do they really cause your testicles to look like raisins?", or "I was told you can do them for 6 months and quit and you won't have any problems". I have to refute those ideas and explain that it isn't the truth. So, I take full responsibility for my actions with my kids. But, to say this problem doesn't exist in society is pure denial. It would be nice if parents did a better job of policing their children and the use of drugs, but it isn't reality. My point is this. It has been a problem for years and MLB trainers (according to the Mitchell Report) would even warn players that were about to be tested. I am saying that if you leave it to the owners to police themselves, they want homeruns and no-hitters. It sells tickets. It would be nice if parents did control this, but like anything (alcohol or cigarettes as an example), you tell them not to and they do it behind your back. Peer pressure is much more powerful than adult pressures at the age of experimentation. I'm not into the subliminal messages or blaming violence on TV for childhood aggression. But, for the sake of the topic at hand - MLB proves they didn't do anything about it. You have a novel idea, but it doesn't work. I have been at schools and had to call a parent because their kid had drugs on them. When the parents come to the school and smell of pot - what do you do? You have given too much credit for the parents of today to think they are doing the right things.
So, when I give the 5-cent version of a subparagraph to explain the part you asked about, you become an Anti-Trust Attorney??? You obviously know more than you let on, so read the subparts for yourself. It will explain how this applies and yes, sports does matter. When the Sherman Anti-Trust Act was passed, granted it was for monopolies like telephone and cable corporations. But, the NFL (a multi-billion dollar industry) asked for and was granted this status. Therefore, they are subject to all parts of the law, not just the ones we wish to play with. I know you are a smart person as I have read your previous threads. But, this is about the legal system and destroying the evidence is a violation of that law - period. Mickster -- the antitrust exemption applies to professional sports in that the ability to keep out competitors (by limiting the number of teams), the ability of the league to negotiate TV rights on a league-wide basis, and certain other "collusive" actions are exempted from antitrust laws that would otherwise prohibit them. The antitrust law here would not apply specifically to the destruction of the videotapes, as there is no provision of the antitrust law that specifically covers competition within an approved monopoly. As yerfatma said above, the antitrust law here applies in the sense that this is a club for Congress to use against professional sports leagues when the Congress wants to make a point. You can say politics has no place in sports, but I don't want my kids taking steroids. MLB didn't clean it up, so Congress had no choice. Too many kids die each year. Should we leave it to the billionaires to do the right thing? Wait until you have kids playing sports and they start to ask you the questions. This argument would make more sense if there was really some sort of steroid epidemic or if steroid use had not been decreasing before Congress got involved in trying to regulate MLB's PED policies. But studies suggest otherwise. (It's particularly interesting to me that Sweden, which doesn't have the scourge of roided up MLB players corrupting America's youth, has a very similar rate of PED use among adolescents as the U.S.) The "for the children" argument is attractive for selling papers and grandstanding on TV, but it just doesn't seem to hold water when you consider the facts. If anything, any "steroid epidemic" in American youth should be examined in the context of the primacy of sports in American culture, the "professionalization" of youth sports, and the competitive and other pressures placed on adolescents by parents, coaches and others in contemporary American sporting culture.
Yeah, lbb wasn't being disingenuous, your explanation is just off-base. Anti-trust applies to monopolies in an industry, e.g., no other football leagues, not the individual members of the monopoly.
It is clear that none of those who have posted here are experts on anti-trust law as it applies to sports. Maybe there is an anti-trust lawyer reading this that can clear it up for the laymen? It seems to me a Senior Member of the Judiciary Committee would know if it was a possible violation of the anti-trust law or not.
I don't know whether the new information is true or not, or if the congressional hearing are warranted or not, but I've got to question the timing of this whole event. Why come out the Friday before the Superbowl unless you intention is to effect the outcome of the game?
I don't think it is intended to effect the outcome of the game nor do I think it will. I believe the timing is to get the attention of the commissioner.
I think that they would get the attention of the commissioner regardless of whether or not they announced their intentions right before the Super Bowl. The timing of this is completely unneccesary.
Seriously. This announcement would have just as much - in fact, even more - impact after the Superbowl. Announcing it before the game is just bizarre.
It seems to me a Senior Member of the Judiciary Committee would know if it was a possible violation of the anti-trust law or not. The league has an anti-trust exemption, which means it isn't subjected to anti-trust laws. But the issue here has nothing to do with that. Specter's using the exemption as justification for Congressional oversight.
The Honorable Mr. Specter seems to be upset that his name has not been in the news for several months now. His colleagues in the Senate, Clinton, Edwards, McCain, Obama, and Thompson, as well as a few stray Governors, have hogged all of the headlines. What a shame, Senator Specter. I guess you had to come up with some tenuous connection between video tapes and anti-trust law to see if somehow you could rewrite the ending of Super Bowl XXXIX. Please stop wasting valuable Senate time and resources (read "my tax money") and concentrate on pending legislation. In short, get a life!
Conspiracy Theory: Who stands to benefit from this? Well, FOX does. There is a writer's strike going on. They have limited new programing. The ratings were already looking to be high, but by making this an event of national importance, Specter assured higher rating for FOX sports reports and for the event itself. FOX and their sponsors make a bunch of money at a time when they especially need it. A senator that they've been friendly to gets an assurance of more support from them in the future. Break out the tin foil hat!
The whole reason Specter is involved is because of his on going fight with Comcast Cable. IF any of you really did any research, you would know where this whole thing started.
