Jump to content


Booster 2019-20
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Bobref last won the day on February 16

Bobref had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

792 Excellent

About Bobref

  • Rank
    750 Post Club

Personal Information

  • School
  • Affiliation

Recent Profile Visitors

1,441 profile views
  1. I’m not saying they shouldn’t try. After all, that’s what trials are for. But even this limited study did not involve severely ill patients. Just saying don’t get your hopes up yet, because it’s unproven. And there is no logical justification for employing widespread use of a treatment that has not been proved to patients who are not severely ill.
  2. Here is the most important language in the story: “it was posted at medRxiv, an online server for medical articles, before undergoing peer review by other researchers.”(emphasis supplied) One of the key principles of scientific research is that results aren’t valid unless they can be reproduced in other trials. Until then, any conclusions are premature.
  3. To be honest, this issue is better handled by @JustRules, since he is much more familiar with the umpire position than I. Umpires are often involved in this call.
  4. Who would have ever thought that the wishbone and the full house would be described as “exciting “ and “a refresher?”
  5. I always enjoy seeing my two primary pursuits - litigation and sports - collide. This interesting article appeared in the recent issue of The Business Suit, the publication of the Commercial Litigation Section of the Defense Research Institute. Did you bet on fantasy baseball in 2017? Do you bet on any professional sports? You’ll definitely want to read this. If You Ain’t Cheating, You Ain’t Trying The Intersection of Fantasy Sports and Pitch Sign Stealing By Gregory Farkas Daily fantasy sports generated over $355 mil- lion in revenue in 2019. Given the size of the industry, it is not surprising that it has gener- ated litigation. Recently, such litigation has spilled over to professional sports franchises and leagues, as DraftKings fantasy baseball participants sued the Houston Astros, Boston Red Sox, and Major League Baseball over baseball’s sign-stealing scandal. In January, Major League Baseball fined the Astros $5 million, took away its first-round draft picks through 2021, and suspended the team’s general manager and field manager for using cameras to steal their opponents’ pitch signs during the 2017 season. Infamously, the stolen pitch signs were then sent to batters by banging on a trash can. The Red Sox were also caught using smart watches to send signals to their dugout in 2017 and are awaiting discipline from Major League Baseball. In Olson v, Major League Baseball, No. 1:20-cv-00632 (S.D.N.Y.) the plaintiffs, a group of DraftKings daily fantasy baseball participants, are pursuing a putative class action against the Astros, Red Sox, and Major League Baseball alleging claims for unfair and deceptive practices under state consumer protection statutes, unjust enrichment, and negligence. The suit contends that the pitch sign stealing undermined the plaintiffs’ daily fantasy wagers. It stresses the close relationship between Major League Baseball and DraftKings. Major League Baseball was the first professional sports league to partner with DraftKings in 2013, including ballpark and online promotions. Major League Baseball also acquired an equity interest in DraftKings that it later sold. The plaintiffs claim that the financial relationship between Major League Baseball and DraftKings created a duty to DraftKings participants to ensure that all games were played fairly. Major League Baseball, the Astros, and the Red Sox have predictably challenged both the existence of such a duty and the plaintiffs’ ability to prove that the cheating caused them financial damages. But the defendants also are relying on another argument that might seem to be foul to sports fans. The defendants contend that everyone is aware that professional athletes cheat, and therefore the plaintiffs could not have been deceived into participating in DraftKings. In making this argument, the defendants noted that clubs were publicly disciplined for electronic sign-stealing violations during the 2017 regular season. The defendants also rely on precedent from another infamous cheating incident, the New England Patriots Spygate scandal, where a disgruntled New York Jets season ticket holder (and one can question whether there is any other kind) sued the Patriots, their coach, and the NFL. The Third Circuit affirmed dismissal of the claims, finding that sports fans understand that “players often commit intentional rule infractions in order to obtain an advantage over the course of the game.” Mayer v. Belichick, 605 F.3d 223, 236 (3d Cir. 2010). The plaintiffs in Olson face an uphill climb to prove that they were directly damaged by the sign-stealing scandal and that Major League Baseball and the teams involved owed them any legal duty. However, with the popularity of daily fantasy sports and a 2018 United States Supreme Court decision paving the way for states to legalize sports gambling, the likelihood of on the field cheating leading to off the field litigation is likely to increase. The Business Suit | Volume 24, Issue 110 Commercial Litigation Committee http://dri.org/docs/default-source/webdocs/newsletters/2019/the-businesssuit_volume_24_issue_1.pdf?sfvrsn=2
  6. I saw that one live and it was unbelievable! Love the officials’ garb. Note that the R is wearing an adjustable band cap in a state championship game. And the line judge was tragically late to the goal line on the TD.
  7. As I thought more about it, I believe the play was actually wiped out by offsetting penalties ... one of which was Zachery grabbing the receiver’s facemask with his free hand as he was coming down with the ball in his other.
  8. We’re in the High School Forum ... but I still have my VHS copy of that game.
  9. Because, in theory, some amount of additional debt could end up being the lesser of two evils, given the extraordinary circumstances. I’d have to see the thinking behind the stimulus to have an informed opinion. That’s why shortcut thinking like “more debt = bad” is just intellectually lazy.
  10. I’m gonna need a little more in-depth than that. That sounds more like opinion than analysis.
  11. Is there an economic case to be made for the stimulus? Or is it just an obvious attempt to “buy” votes in advance of November?
  • Create New...