* The Dodgers ownership mess gets messier and messier. If you’re a law student looking for a note topic, I’m pretty sure you could have a field day writing about the Dodgers situation, the powers of the MLB commissioner, and the relationship between a league and bankruptcy and divorce courts.
A remarkable event occurred during the 6th inning of the Phillies Marlins game Saturday (which Howard Wasserman also blogged about yesterday). With Ryan Howard on first, Hunter Pence hit a long drive to the fence in right field. As Brian Peterson attempted to make the catch, two South Florida University students who happened to be Phillies fans (who else would be at a Marlins game?) reached over the fence and appeared to touch the glove of the outfielder. As the ball fell to the ground, Pence ended up on second and Howard on third. Out came Manager Jack McKeon to argue fan interference which, if called on the field, could negate the double and return Howard to first. Umpire Joe West and his crew listened then retreated to view the replay. When they returned, West ruled Pence out. Phillies skipper Charlie Manuel then came out to argue and was promptly tossed.
Jen, Lily, and I went to Sunday’s game between the Phillies and Marlins, which turned into a game that shows why lawyers love baseball so much. In the top of the sixth and a man on first, the Phillies’ Hunter Spence hit a drive to deep right that Marlins rightfielder Bryan Petersen could not pull in against the wall; Spence ended up on second with a double. The Marlins claimed fan interference (a Phillies fan reached his red Phillies hat over the fence and it looks like the hat hit Petersen’s glove as he was leaping to make the catch). The umps went to replay, deciding that the fan had interfered and calling Pence out. Phillies manager Charlie Manuel argued the call and was ejected (watching the video, it almost looks as if he asked the crew chief to run him). The Phillies played the game under protest (the link has the video–MLB.com does not allow blogs to embed video), which the Marlins won on a bases-loaded walk in the fourteenth inning (we didn’t last that long).
A fellow law professor raises the following issue: What are the legal (especially First Amendment) implications of recent attempts by some schools (including, apparently, the University of North Carolina) to ban student-athletes from using Twitter and other social media? Can the schools do it? Should they do it? What arguments could student-athletes make in response and would they work?
I’m looking forward to being a panelist on this upcoming panel on NBA and NFL labor issues hosted by the Boston Chapter of Women in Sports and Events. If you would like to attend the Wednesday September 21 event, which will be held in the Boston office of Nixon Peabody (100 Summer Street) between 6:30 and 8:30 p.m and which is open to those interested in sports law, please e-mail info@wiseinboston.com.
Dan LeBatard of the Miami Herald is not a lawyer. But I often complain that when the mainstream media tries to talk about law, they invariably get it wrong. Today, LeBatard tried to urge patience as allegations swirl around UM’s football team, with some genuinely incoherent comments about law.
I have a couple of new SI columns. Yesterday I wrote about the first class action lawsuit brought by retired NFL players against the league for concussions and related neurological problems; on Thursday I wrote about the impact of minor leaguer Mike Jacobs becoming the first player in pro baseball, basketball, hockey or football to test positive for Human Growth Hormone. Here are the links:
