About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

76 Va. L. Rev. 1409 (1990)
Limits on the Discretionary Powers of Professional Sports Commissioners: A Historical and Legal Analysis of Issues Raised by the Pete Rose Controversy

handle is hein.journals/valr76 and id is 1419 raw text is: LIMITS ON THE DISCRETIONARY POWERS OF PROFESSIONAL SPORTS COMMISSIONERS: A HISTORICAL AND LEGAL ANALYSIS OF ISSUES RAISED BY THE PETE ROSE CONTROVERSY Just keep in mind that regardless of the verdict of juries, baseball is entirely competent to protect itself against the crooks both inside and outside the game. -Judge Kenesaw Mountain Landis First Commissioner of Baseball1 INTRODUCTION Baseball fans and American society as a whole watched closely as the scandal involving Cincinnati Reds Manager Pete Rose unfolded during the summer of 1989. The standoff between Rose and then Commissioner of Baseball A. Bartlett Giamatti sparked particular interest among members of the legal community. Legal scholars and students alike debated the question of whether Rose should be protected from judgment by an allegedly biased Giamatti, or whether Giamatti should have free rein to exercise his discipli- nary discretion. This debate over the scope of the commissioner's power resurfaced in the summer of 1990 when Commissioner of Baseball Fay Vin- cent severely disciplined New York Yankees owner George Steinbrenner over his relationship with Howard Spira, a self-described gambler.2 While most observers probably had an opinion as to what the law should be in both the Rose and the Steinbrenner cases, the legal community remained per- plexed as to what the law actually was regarding the scope of professional sports commissioners' powers. Questions involving the scope and limitations of sports commissioner power did not originate with the Rose controversy. In fact, commissioner J. Spink, Judge Landis and Twenty-Five Years of Baseball 84 (1947). 2 On July 30, 1990, Vincent and Steinbrenner reached an agreement which, though not requiring Steinbrenner to sell his entire interest in the team, did require that he give up, permanently, his day-to-day management of the Yankees and not enter Yankee Stadium without written permission. In effect, the agreement treated Steinbrenner as if he had been placed on the permanent ineligible list. Wash. Post, July 31, 1990, at Al, col. 1. The agreement punished Steinbrenner for having paid $40,000 to Howard Spira, a gambler, for information Steinbrenner planned to use in a dispute against Dave Winfield, a former Yankee player. Id. Vincent's reliance on baseball's best interests clause as a basis for his action is a recent illustration of the vast scope of the commissioner's power-power that this Note will examine at length. 1409

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most