On what grounds though? It sounds like everything was done in accordance with the cba. I suppose he could argue there’s collusion, but I think it’s more likely that all teams together agreed that he’s not worth it.
MLB suspends Trevor Bauer for 2 years with no pay
- Thread starter ThePrideofShiner
- Start date
No grounds and this is just one case of many. Without knowing how much this particular case factored into MLB's actions, tough to say what, if any, leverage this latest turn gives Bauer.
I haven't paid attention to Bauer since all this went down, so I have no opinion on his level of guilt, how much (if any) consensual agreement was had between he and the women...or anything, really.
I am curious, though, if you actually mean this. I know I'm morally corrupt. I can accept that about myself. If someone helps my team win, as long as they are held accountable while with the team (ie. cut if they do this shit while on the roster), I dont really care. Like, if Bauer strikes someone out, I'm cool with cheering, "Hey! Assholeface gets the K!" or whatever.
I think Tyreek Hill is reprehensible, and I think that within the next 15 years, he ends up doing horrid shit to his wife or kids that we find out about. I still don't think Dolphins fans should write off the team for signing him despite knowing his history.
I'm not saying you're full of shit or anything. I'm genuinely curious if the actions by people you don't know (Bauer, ownership, etc) is enough to remove something you enjoy out of your life.
Right. MLB has the right to apply punishment outside the criminal justice system. As long as they did their due diligence with a good faith effort, tough shit for Bauer.
Not to tie everything to deflategate, but similar idea. When Brady took the league to court, the system ridiculed the leagues decision to suspend Brady, but acknowledged the league had the right to do it.
A couple points of clarification, in response to this video some people circulated a copy of the lawsuit's decision on Bauer's attempt to dismiss her claims based on the protective order being denied. That was rightly rejected, and the judge noted it was rejected primarily because the first judge didn't believe Bauer was a danger to this woman going forward. It did not make any determination about the past events.
The civil lawsuit decision recited the facts in her counterclaim against him, in which she contends his conduct of punching her was to her lower body, so not necessarily the face. He also was performing sex acts that she contends she had not consented to before hand, but also says he stopped when she awoke and protested.
At its core, it remains unclear on what standard of conduct the MLB suspension was based. It seems the civil and criminal cases worked out "as they should." The complaint is that MLB suspended him for two years (knocked down to 1 year). Without knowing the facts, it could be that they relied on other facts not known. Or it could be Deflate Gate 2 (though I think MLB CBA probably didn't give the commissioner the power to both charge and then decide the violation). F Roger Goddel.
The civil lawsuit decision recited the facts in her counterclaim against him, in which she contends his conduct of punching her was to her lower body, so not necessarily the face. He also was performing sex acts that she contends she had not consented to before hand, but also says he stopped when she awoke and protested.
At its core, it remains unclear on what standard of conduct the MLB suspension was based. It seems the civil and criminal cases worked out "as they should." The complaint is that MLB suspended him for two years (knocked down to 1 year). Without knowing the facts, it could be that they relied on other facts not known. Or it could be Deflate Gate 2 (though I think MLB CBA probably didn't give the commissioner the power to both charge and then decide the violation). F Roger Goddel.
No, it’s not. It’s been awhile since I read the MLB CBA, but I’m damned near certain that it has a mandatory arbitration clause, he already had the longest suspension (despite being reduced) in history upheld by the arbitrator, and he is very unlikely to have any claim against MLB here (the time to appeal the suspension to federal district court has almost surely elapsed as well). More to the point, his settlement yesterday changes absolutely nothing as to whether he would have a claim against MLB, or the strength thereof.
In fact, I’d caution everyone against believing that yesterday’s settlement means anything at all regarding the merits of the underlying issues, beyond mere confirmation that cases that turn on intimate, one on one consent, are very difficult to prove, especially when the alleged victim is not beyond reproach.
Last edited:
You most likely root for assholes you are probably just not aware of it. It depends on what your level of asshole is, but the majority of these guys are making multi multi millions of dollars and are pampered with first class stuff at every level. There is a certain entitlement that comes with that. Drugs, booze, women, and other vices are just part of the operation for some of them. Plenty are assholes, it’s just covered.
Wait... supposing they are and KNOWING they are, are different things entirely?
Full disclosure: I saw David Ortiz jaywalking once. I gave it a pass. Perhaps that makes me a hypocrite.
Bauer has three other women accusing him of sexual assault. I'm incredibly confident he is a total piece of shit, and I'd rather see the Sox lose 120 games a year for the rest of my lifetime then ever having him put on a Red Sox uniform.
I am not generally a fan of mostly content free "+1" type posts, but you and I have differing opinions often enough I feel compelled to come in here and say - completely and wholeheartedly agree, +1!
I just want to add that I’m glad to have SoSH as a news source on topics where I have admittedly not paid much attention.
I did not closely follow the allegations against Bauer when it first came to light and he was suspended. After seeing Bauer’s video yesterday, I found both Twitter and Reddit MLB threads (cesspools, yes) to be an overwhelming chorus of posts that Bauer had been completely vindicated and that he’s the real victim in this situation. Fuck that guy.
I think everyone agrees that anyone who finds enjoyment in physically harming other people is a POS. Speaking for myself, that type of behavior might not be illegal if consensual but it feels like you will eventually get what you deserve. Bauer is fortunate he has the financial means to defend himself and it appears his accuser had plans to capitalize. End of day, Bauer’s life has been ruined. And he earned it.
In what way has Bauer’s life been “ruined”?
Both these things can be true:
— Bauer is a violent misogynist deserving of his MLB suspension.
— Hill is a conniving extortionist.
Or a sex worker. Or someone looking for a sugar daddy. Or someone who cares about her sexual partners’ income and assumed proclivity to buy her things. I’m not saying that you are suggesting that extortion is the only possible explanation for her texting and other behaviors, but I do want to note that there are additional possible explanations as well, even if the behaviors themselves render her a nearly impossible to use complaining victim in a criminal case or a likely loser in a civil one.
Last edited:
I guess where I’m really confused is that Bauer never denied initially that he engaged in the violent sex acts, only that it was consensual, right? So now, what is he actually saying? That the video proves they never happened?
I think he's trying to say she set him up.
I don't think that text in any way makes that a fact, though. It could just as easily (and more likely, IMO) have been a gloating text to her friends that she was getting ready to have sex with a star pitcher.
Did you see the video from the next morning she shot while he was sleeping next to her in bed? She’s smiling, without any sign of trauma, clearly celebrating that she got him to have sex with her. It’s the video she appears to have sent to her friend after she said she’d “get” him. This after she was texting this friend about trying to extort money from Bauer.
Then she made the claim, publicly, that he sexually assaulted her.
Unreal.
Apparently she and her lawyer recently came and asked him to settle without any monetary damages to her once they realized he had gotten his hands on her texts and that video during discovery.
She knew she was done for.
This is the kind of shit that makes it hard for victims of actual sexual abuse to be heard and seen the way they deserve to be heard and seen. She’s a trash human.
Last edited:
I'll use Aroldis Chapman as an example. If the Sox acquired him, I'd have a hard time getting excited about every game he closed. He sucks as a human, and also quit on his team(Yanks 2022).
Known actions absolutely impact enjoyment of a game I watch every day. I thank God 2004 didn't have any of the 2023 Curt Schilling stuff to think about.
I think it's weird to be able to compartmentalize stuff like this.
I'll do it in the opposite direction as well. Players all the time give us reason to root for them which are entirely based on personal and emotional investment in their character. You want to root for someone who volunteers their time to help the community, stays late and early to talk to kids, has a brand of being a good person. It's hard to root for someone who is basically the opposite. Like, I desperately want the Yankees to win a world series but also would love German to suck while we do it.
Personally, I was done with the Pats after it was revealed how truly awful AB was until they cut him. Admittedly, the turnaround wasn't very long so I didn't really have to have my resolve tested.
Due to the nature of the NFL, I had said I was done after TB/BB rode off into the sunset, but I'm still watching Pats games (I've never watched a ton of non-Pats games anyhow) when I'm around. So I am a hypocrite; I certainly don't judge anyone else's viewing habits.
Due to the nature of the NFL, I had said I was done after TB/BB rode off into the sunset, but I'm still watching Pats games (I've never watched a ton of non-Pats games anyhow) when I'm around. So I am a hypocrite; I certainly don't judge anyone else's viewing habits.
This goes to the issue of the role of the person and how much you'd have to watch. You can sort of plot that with how obnoxious or revolting the behavior/personality is. For example, the Sox had a spot-starter earlier this year who had tweeted some controversial things [neutral characterization for public thread purposes]. There was fan backlash and that person was released. . .but they were only a spot-starter and, well, stuff like that is going to happen with any organization. You move on.
It would be a completely different order of magnitude to have Trevor Bauer giving the team 30+ starts on the national stage with "BOSTON" on his chest. I wouldn't want to be publicly seen in a Sox cap while that was happening.
Are consensual erotic asphyxiation and anal sex “violent sex acts” or “rough sex?” (Does it make a difference?). That’s what he admitted to. He’s not now saying it never happened.
This point, apparently, can't be repeated enough. Even though this one case appears sketchy, Bauer's not all of a sudden an innocent ent victim here
Everyone has their limits. For the record, I’m in the same boat. I love the Red Sox and have for most of my life at this point but I’m done with them if that piece of shit ever wears the team’s uniform. He’s proven time and again how much of a human skid mark he is and I want him nowhere near the Sox.
Well if you’re going to extort someone, might as well extort someone who deserves it.
I think the same standard applies in that everyone has their limits. Some browns fans have walked away after Watson but others have stayed. I’ll still watch Tom Cruise’s movies but I’m not going to pay to see anything with Johnny Depp in it. I fully cop to any potential hypocrisy in that statement. Sometimes I’m willing to separate art from artist, other times I can’t.
Most of us don't wear Picasso shirts and hats, nor, were he alive, would we be actively rooting for him in real time as he works on his next painting. Nor will we potentially throw him a parade and say, "This guy is everything Boston is about."
That's the real difference - active participation. I can look at the works of flawed humans from our past and take the good with the bad. Because that's how humans are. I'm sure Dante and Chaucer and Dickens and Chaplin had their issues.
However, it's entirely different proposition to actively support a loathsome person, to place myself in a position where I am (structurally) hoping for their success, and implicitly funding them.
YMMV on this. But it's a pretty easy differentiation.
Obviously, every one has their own standards, but team sports seem different to me than art or even individual athletes because of the notion the team represents the city and its people. Michael Jackson wasn’t wearing BOSTON across his chest when he recorded or performed, and I don’t root for artists/actors the way I do sports teams.
Oooh cross streams with Rovine, who said it better.
It's not just people form our past. I used Picasso as an example just to show this is nothing new (though plenty of people today do pay $$ to see his works). Most people, myself included, have music from domestic offenders, ones that are alive today, in our music libraries. It's on the radio all the time. Today. And that's fine -- everyone has a different standard. If OJ were 23 when that all went down and was found not guilty, I would not want him on a team that I was rooting for. But I do think athletes are held to standard here that virtually nobody else has to meet.
We all draw the line differently. Not defending Bauer, but I think men who beat their wives/girlfriends in anger are worse than men who cross quasi-consensual lines when engaging in otherwise consensual rough sex. And probably more common than we’d like to know.
To add onto this, I find myself doing this within certain artists' scope. I doubt I'll ever pay to watch another Casey Affleck movie, for example. And from his catalogue of movies many have fallen completely off my watch list...that said for personal reasons that I dont need to go into I will probably watch "Manchester by the Sea" once a year for a long time to come. And bits of "Good Will Hunting" are on in the background all the f*cking time. Those movies tap into something for me on an emotional level that are somewhat unparalleled and I can't find substitutions for. To bring this around to Bauer, there are many many many other pitchers they could sign to not force me to try to root for him.
That said, I fully realize some of my stance is fully hypocritical, and thus I'm not trying to claim some moral high ground and/or judge others for their fandom. Finally...thank you for putting this out there so bluntly, and dare I say, simply.
We've had this conversation regarding Michael Jackson and Chick-Fil-A and pretty much every facet of life.
I might be fully ignorant, but isn’t Cruise way worse than Depp?
I would never root for Bauer. I would root for the Sox still, but never for him. That said, that’s entirely because I think what he did was unconsensual. I don’t think morally you can consent to anything when you’re passed out (i know legally you cannot). This may be a topic for a different thread (I don’t even know what forum it would be it) but if everything had consent and was desired by both parties, then my opinion is who are we to judge. I simply don’t think that’s what happened, I think Bauer abused women without consent to do what he did
Last edited:
To elaborate further so I’m not misunderstood, I don’t think any mentally healthy person would consent to what Bauer did to these women. There are tons of things I may think are weird but if it’s consensual, I won’t judge. I just can’t fathom that the damage he did was consensual. Nobody wants that, and if they do, they aren’t of sound mind
The conversation took a hard turn toward how many posters would never root for the Sox again if they signed Bauer. Is there some indication that the team is at all interested in him?
I very clearly said I was not talking about Bauer. An allegation should not be enough to ruin a person's life. One of the women falls between dishonest and despicably criminal. I mean where does somebody who conspires to create a false allegation to get money fall on the moral spectrum? There is something wrong when a lie can ruin a reputation by itself before it is investigated.