Moderator: Cueball
BSmack wrote:There has to be some portion of his contract that Giambi has breached. Or was I dreaming when he admitted to using steroids?
Breaking the law violates any kind of morals clause in a contract. Giambi has admitted to using steroids. Therefore, any decent lawyer should be able to find a way to invalidate his contract.1tnacU wrote:You heard what you wanted to hear. Find me a quote where he admitted to anything beyond a "mistake".BSmack wrote:There has to be some portion of his contract that Giambi has breached. Or was I dreaming when he admitted to using steroids?
Add'ly, I highly doubt such language (use of steroids) exists in his contract. It's not as if he crashed his crotchrocket.
1tnacU wrote:Shoalzie wrote:I heard about him not wanting to be sent down but with Martinez playing the way he is, Giambi is out of a job.
I understand that. But do you think Giambi cares? It's all about the Benjamins. If dude agrees to be sent down he loses money. If he sits or gets released, he still gets paid.
are you of this fucking EARTH? Have you been living under a rock? Seriously dude, get some fucking air and read a newspaper.1tnacU wrote:That's great. Provide me with a link to that stipulation in Giambi's contract that you're so obviously privy to.BSmack wrote:Breaking the law violates any kind of morals clause in a contract.
Again, link?BSmack wrote:Giambi has admitted to using steroids.
You are in no position to demand anything.1tnacU wrote:That is not a LINK to federal grand jury testimony, is it? Did you actually register to provide me with the info I'm demanding? Bawahahahaha... Dance you Mercury Free Press bitch, dance!!
You didn't provide me with a copy of Giambi's contract either.
1tnacU wrote:Uh..... no. I'm bumping this thread because you threw the Yankees under the bus 30 games into the season:The Assassin wrote:Brown wins one game,and you're lookin for a cookie. :roll:
I know you post a boatload of stupid shit and it's hard to keep track of it all. Don't worry though... I got your back.The Assassin wrote:This team isnt going anywhere.
How'd your boy do yesterday? Uh... yeah. 10 hits, 2 walks, 6 runs in 5 innings. That sounds more like the D-Lowe I've seen for the last two years... Expect a 4 pt something ERA, a 1.4 something WHIP, and about 14 wins by season's end.
To be fair, I saw A-Rod hit a 2 hun HR into the pool at Bank One Ballpark in 1998 that powered the Ms to a win over the DBacks.The Assassin wrote:
And guess what? I'm STILL throwing them under the bus.
I never said my Dodgers were gonna win the World Series. Yet myopic Yankee already thinks they are there. Funny thing happened on the way to October. Giambi finally exposed as a fraud, the next time ARod gets a clutch hit,will be the first time. Randy Johnson isn't the same Randy Johnson that dominated in the late 90s to 2003. Face it once again Steinbrenner bought the big name instead of the right fit. Letting that bum Jon Leiber go was a good move huh? :roll: Yanks win a few games and suddenly all is well? Bullshit. Hope you taped the 2000 World Series,because thats the last time you'll see a championship in awhile.
BSmack wrote:To be fair, I saw A-Rod hit a 2 hun HR into the pool at Bank One Ballpark in 1998 that powered the Ms to a win over the DBacks.The Assassin wrote:
And guess what? I'm STILL throwing them under the bus.
I never said my Dodgers were gonna win the World Series. Yet myopic Yankee already thinks they are there. Funny thing happened on the way to October. Giambi finally exposed as a fraud, the next time ARod gets a clutch hit,will be the first time. Randy Johnson isn't the same Randy Johnson that dominated in the late 90s to 2003. Face it once again Steinbrenner bought the big name instead of the right fit. Letting that bum Jon Leiber go was a good move huh? :roll: Yanks win a few games and suddenly all is well? Bullshit. Hope you taped the 2000 World Series,because thats the last time you'll see a championship in awhile.
So there.
Then who IS your team !tnucU??1tnacU wrote:"Teams don't like to invoke those clauses," said Gary Roberts, director of Tulane University's Sports Law program. "The only effort at that in my modern memory was shot down on a fairly technical procedural basis."
Good point you brought up about the morals clause. Because its use is SO PREVELENT and it's so pertinent do this discussion. Spree tries KILLING someone and they still couldn't invoke it. That's the ONLY TIME a morals clause WAS EVER TRIED. AND IT FAILED!!! Giambi tries to better himself as a ballplayer and you think they'd use THAT CLAUSE against him?? Are you insane? It's been a joy watching you flail about in this thread, you fucking idiot.
Oh and AssAssin... I'm not a Yankees fan. LINK please to where ever that was brought up. You and BeSmacked are two peas in a pod.
VVVVVVVVVThe Assassin wrote:Then who IS your team !tnucU??1tnacU wrote:"Teams don't like to invoke those clauses," said Gary Roberts, director of Tulane University's Sports Law program. "The only effort at that in my modern memory was shot down on a fairly technical procedural basis."
Good point you brought up about the morals clause. Because its use is SO PREVELENT and it's so pertinent do this discussion. Spree tries KILLING someone and they still couldn't invoke it. That's the ONLY TIME a morals clause WAS EVER TRIED. AND IT FAILED!!! Giambi tries to better himself as a ballplayer and you think they'd use THAT CLAUSE against him?? Are you insane? It's been a joy watching you flail about in this thread, you fucking idiot.
Oh and AssAssin... I'm not a Yankees fan. LINK please to where ever that was brought up. You and BeSmacked are two peas in a pod.
Hold on one cotton pickin minute!!!Adelpiero wrote:VVVVVVVVVThe Assassin wrote:Then who IS your team !tnucU??1tnacU wrote:"Teams don't like to invoke those clauses," said Gary Roberts, director of Tulane University's Sports Law program. "The only effort at that in my modern memory was shot down on a fairly technical procedural basis."
Good point you brought up about the morals clause. Because its use is SO PREVELENT and it's so pertinent do this discussion. Spree tries KILLING someone and they still couldn't invoke it. That's the ONLY TIME a morals clause WAS EVER TRIED. AND IT FAILED!!! Giambi tries to better himself as a ballplayer and you think they'd use THAT CLAUSE against him?? Are you insane? It's been a joy watching you flail about in this thread, you fucking idiot.
Oh and AssAssin... I'm not a Yankees fan. LINK please to where ever that was brought up. You and BeSmacked are two peas in a pod.
I try not to limit my takes to just my team. Ohhhh... that and also I feel I have the intelligence to discuss a wide range of topics. You obviously... do not.The Assassin wrote:Then why in the hell are you so up in arms over my declaration of Yankee decline?
You're damn straight they would use it against Giambi. That is, if they could without exposing all the other steroid freaks in NY and MLB. The Rockies also terminated Denny Neagle's deal after he got caught trolling for hos. They settled out of court with him and saved a few million dollars on one of the worst contracts ever signed.1tnacU wrote:"Teams don't like to invoke those clauses," said Gary Roberts, director of Tulane University's Sports Law program. "The only effort at that in my modern memory was shot down on a fairly technical procedural basis."
Good point you brought up about the morals clause. Because its use is SO PREVELENT and it's so pertinent do this discussion. Spree tries KILLING someone and they still couldn't invoke it. That's the ONLY TIME a morals clause WAS EVER TRIED. AND IT FAILED!!! Giambi tries to better himself as a ballplayer and you think they'd use THAT CLAUSE against him?? Are you insane? It's been a joy watching you flail about in this thread, you fucking idiot.
Bitch, please. This sounded like a done deal to me:BSmack wrote: BTW: I never said the Yank WOULD use a moral clause against Giambi, only that they would be within their rights to do so.
Or can Steinbrenner not afford a "decent" lawyer. After you're done chewing on them, why don't you tell me how those words taste. I bet they're a lot like your average post. Absolute shit.BSmack wrote:Breaking the law violates any kind of morals clause in a contract. Giambi has admitted to using steroids. Therefore, any decent lawyer should be able to find a way to invalidate his contract.
Only because you're an absolute moron. I'll highlight the word you missed.1tnacU wrote:Bitch, please. This sounded like a done deal to me:BSmack wrote: BTW: I never said the Yank WOULD use a moral clause against Giambi, only that they would be within their rights to do so.
Should does not equal will. On the other hand, we know for sure that 1tnacU=moron.BSmack wrote:Breaking the law violates any kind of morals clause in a contract. Giambi has admitted to using steroids. Therefore, any decent lawyer should be able to find a way to invalidate his contract.
Niiiiice semantics card.BSmack wrote:Any decent lawyer can nullify Giambi's contract. Which of course means, he won't, and oh btw -- we both know that the Yankees will never go this route, but I am still right, even though I can't prove I'm right, but if they did go that route, which they won't, you know and I know that I'm right. Ya see, because I said so, you know it, I know it, everyone knows it. Even though the only time in the history of sports this clause was invoked, the league got bawahahahaha'ed at. Not to mention... the instance, you know, the one I'm referring to, that player tried KILLING HIS COACH and the league still got bawahahahahaha'ed at. But again. I AM right, this is easily provable. But it won't be proven, and I'm right.
Crying semantics is always the last refuge of the stupid.1tnacU wrote:Niiiiice semantics card.
Keep ignoring the Neagle case. It can only hurt your argument. The players union now has agreed in principle that the clause CAN be enforced. For the first time in modern baseball, the player's union allowed a player contract to be reduced in value as a direct result of a player's off the field conduct.1tnacU wrote:And here I thought stupid = saying something is easily provable and then saying that it's incapable of being proven. Especially when the thing you're trying to prove has never been brought to fruition. In fact, the only time it was brought before a judge, it was bitchslapped even harder than you've been in this thread. Not to mention, that one case... it was a much more egregious offense than what you submitted.
You cannot break the law and then claim it was meant to "help the team". Furthermore, if Giambi roided up in Oakland, then he was inflating his value through fraudulent means. There's no WAY you can spin that as being in the best interests of the Yankees.Also... not to mention it could be easily argued that Giambi took steroids in the interest of furthering his career and thus helping the team, and you really think the team could "easily" invoke the morals clause then? I, of course, don't plan on proving the argument that I'm submitting, only that I think I'm right, and you therefore, are wrong. Sound familiar?
Exactly. Neagle has NOTHING to do with our debate. We're talking about Giambi and how "easily" the clause "could" have been invoked there. But wasn't. But if it was, it would have held up. 100% for sure. Focus, you fucking dipshit.BSmack wrote:Keep ignoring the Neagle case.
Sure, my take has a certain fallacy to it. But again, I don't have to prove it, do I? Did you read where I wrote:BSmack wrote:You cannot break the law and then claim it was meant to "help the team".
??1ntacU wrote:Sound familiar?
1tnacU wrote:The Assassin wrote:
.
Have the Yankees even lost since I bumped this thread? RACK ME.
1tnacU wrote:What the hell for?The Assassin wrote:Tony LaRussa and underachieving his team kicked our post-season asses last year. I'm gonna STFU now.
Of course you missed the point.Dinsdale wrote:I hate to be the one to break it to you, but entry to the Playoffs(you know, that thing that the Yanks have no chance at?) is based on overall record.
Teams actually play ALL of the other teams in their league. How many AL, or even NL teams racked up 10 straight so far?
Buy a clue, dork.
