The Other Side of the Story: Riot Trying To Avoid The Regulation of E-Sports?

The more I read of this situation in League of Legends, the more I become alarmed by it.

I apologize in advance, this is going to be very dry and VERY LONG. For reference, you may wish to reacquaint with the competitive ruling banning Renegades and Dragon Knights, for starters. There is a point in all of this, and, if you don't want to read all the legal mumbo-jumbo, you can go directly to the end of the post and find it.

Let's update to the time of writing: The deadline for the forced sale of LCS team Impulse and Challenger Series team Dragon Knights has passed, with no word from Riot Games as to whether the banned ownership groups have found buyers for either. Impulse has been on the market three or so times in the last year or so, without success. Dragon Knights' ownership groups have been in trouble with Riot Games at least twice in the last 12 months.

There will almost certainly be another article, and probably later today, when Riot Games will probably announce if a buyer has been found for either, or what contingency measures will be invoked. It appears, if the latter, the options are two: Full seizure of the teams, the old owners get nothing – or disqualification and dissolution of the teams, leaving nine teams in the LCS and five Challenger teams. There had been at least one fan discussion of bringing back the one team relegated from the LCS to make ten, but that's illegal under the new ownership of that team, since that ownership now also has a team promoted to the LCS, and no one can own two teams at the same level.

Anyhow, I did quite a bit of thinking since I posted the last article, and I am becoming more and more convinced that Riot Games has fumbled the ball seriously enough that one has to question their motivations and whether they are actually attempting to hide something.

This is not necessarily true with the specific May 8, 2016 expulsions. I'm speaking more in general, and this involves the criminal nature of a number of the parties banned from the sport, and what would happen if they were brought to justice.

Let me state this up front: I believe that all of the banned owners (the Shims, Christopher Mykles, Chris Badawi, and the (now former) owners of Team Impulse) should be arrested for criminal offenses outlined in the May 8 competitive rulings, as well as sued for civil torts.

Since the North American LCS is played in California and Riot Games is run out of Santa Monica, CA, I would assume that, deep in the rulebook, the jurisdiction involved is California law. If someone who knows of the situation can correct me, I will accept such correction.

As such, I will outline the cases for arrest (and lawsuit) of all five parties.

Let's begin with a murky one which applies to both the Dragon Knights and Renegades situations. In both cases, the owner of the team was previously suspended for tampering with other teams' players under contract. In both cases, it appears as if there were efforts to subvert the banishments (by the new Renegades owner laying conditions that the old owner would return, and by apparent actions by the banned owner of Dragon Knights in the new ruling – otherwise, a resuspension would result in a double-jeopardy claim).

It would appear Riot Games could have a criminal case against both Chris Badawi (and possibly Chris Shim), similar to practicing without a license or some form of corporate “trespassing”. I am not clear on the exact California statute involved (there are several possibilities).

A much easier (civil) case against the Shims, Badawi, and Mykles comes from the falsification of documentation regarding their situations between the two teams. The California Civil Code, Section 1770, deals with “unfair methods of (business) competition”.

From the Legislative site of the State of California, relevant sections:

1770.  (a) The following unfair methods of competition and unfair or
deceptive acts or practices undertaken by any person in a
transaction intended to result or which results in the sale or lease
of goods or services to any consumer are unlawful:
(3) Misrepresenting the affiliation, connection, or association
with, or certification by, another.

This could apply to Mykles with respect to Badawi, since he is ruled to have attempted to deliberately misrepresent the lack of affiliation between the two, with respect to the illegal agreement to give Badawi half of Renegades the moment his suspension ended.

This could also apply to Mykles, Badawi, and the Shims, regarding the obfuscation of the relationship between Renegades and Dragon Knights.

This ALSO could apply to the owners of Team Impulse, regarding the lack of required contractual paperwork, and the misrepresentation to Riot Games that contracts actually existed.

(14) Representing that a transaction confers or involves rights,
remedies, or obligations which it does not have or involve, or which
are prohibited by law.

This could apply to the Mykles-Badawi ownership situation as well, since the transaction could not confer the ownership rights to Badawi at any point while he was banned, even if the actual transaction took place afterward.

Under California law, these are all civil torts. In my honest opinion, the nature of these torts should have been sufficient to dissolve the teams outright, but Riot, once again to protect the uninvolved players, attempted to keep the teams together.

However, it would appear Mykles actually did some of this during the vetting process in which he was allowed to take ownership of Renegades, and Riot ruled that Renegades would not have been accepted into the LCS had they known. This would mean that Mykles could be subject to several forms of criminal grand theft (because of the value of an LCS franchise believed to be upwards of a million dollars or more!) under California law, because he misled Riot Games and would never have received the team (and it's monetary value) if he had properly represented his situation.

A much more immediately serious criminal situation comes under the “failure to maintain a safe environment for all players” charge. Take this from someone who knows: That's a harassment/stalking claim.

California has one of the most stringent stalking laws in the country, owing to the number of celebrities living therein, California Penal Code 646.9, reading in part:

(a) Any person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows or willfully and maliciously harasses another person and who makes a credible threat with the intent to place that person in reasonable fear for his or her safety, or the safety of his or her immediate family is guilty of the crime of stalking, punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one year, or by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment, or by imprisonment in the state prison.

This is true for any action by any person against any member of Renegades, but this is especially true for any party in the Renegades' employ who did so with the transgender player, Maria Creveling. In fact, any such party would not only be guilty under California state law 646.9, but also the Unruh Civil Rights Act, which specifically prohibits actions against a person's sex, which:

"Sex" also includes, but is not limited to, a person's gender. "Gender" means
sex, and includes a person's gender identity and gender expression.
"Gender expression" means a person's gender-related appearance and
behavior whether or not stereotypically associated with the person's
assigned sex at birth.

AND federal charges under the Federal Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VII, as related in this EEOC brief:

The EEOC has held that discrimination against an individual because that person is transgender (also known as gender identity discrimination) is discrimination because of sex and therefore is covered under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. See Macy v. Department of Justice, EEOC Appeal No. 0120120821 (April 20, 2012), http://www.eeoc.gov/decisions/0120120821%20Macy%20v%20DOJ%20ATF.txt. The Commission has also held that discrimination against an individual because of that person's sexual orientation is discrimination because of sex and therefore prohibited under Title VII. See David Baldwin v. Dep't of Transportation, EEOC Appeal No. 120133080 (July 15, 2015), http://www.eeoc.gov/decisions/0120133080.pdf.

So any party, and it appears by the ruling Badawi may have been one, who took any action to make a player on Renegades feel unsafe, is guilty under California stalking and harassment law – and, if it's Creveling, has both State and Federal Civil Rights charges against them as well!

Now to Mykles in this regard. It is clear that he is already guilty of conspiracy with respect to any direct act to give Badawi half-ownership of the team – the penalty under California Law being the same penalty that Badawi would receive for taking part in ownership of the team while banned. (Whatever that law might be.)

The “safe environment” harassment/stalking charges are far more serious, and I would assert that, one some level, Mykles is criminally culpable in this regard. He could, obviously, be a direct actor, having directly committed the acts. This is unknown.

At barest of minimum, his illegal association with Badawi, if Badawi took part (which is similarly unknown, but, as stated above, appears to be the case given the nature of the statement of the competitive ruling), could be considered to have aided and abetted in any of the above actions, which would be considered, at minimum, misdemeanor accessory in the state of California under Penal Code Section 31, one year in jail, $5,000 fine maximum.

If Mykles actually consulted with Badawi and agreed to such actions, that makes it conspiracy, with the same penalty for Mykles which Badawi would receive under Penal Code 646.9, as well as the Unruh Act and possible Federal charges as applicable if the actions were against Creveling.

How ANYONE, in the face of this knowledge, can allow Christopher Mykles to have anything to do with broadcasting League of Legends, or anything else, is beyond me.

And then, as I stated before, there is one new wrinkle: Should e-sports be considered sports, it is clear that such sports constitute “interstate commerce” under Federal law. This would mean that sports bribery laws would apply.

From the Cornell University Law School, US Code Title 18, Part I, Chapter 11, Section 224:

(a) Whoever carries into effect, attempts to carry into effect, or conspires with any other person to carry into effect any scheme in commerce to influence, in any way, by bribery any sporting contest, with knowledge that the purpose of such scheme is to influence by bribery that contest, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.

This would appear, should e-sports qualify (and the only question would be if it is considered “sport” under Federal Law), to be cause for investigation of:

• The trade between Dragon Knights and Renegades
• Their subsequent monetary and amenity relationships thereafter
• and their subsequent Promotion Match in the Promotion Playoffs, won by Renegades 3-0.

The obfuscation of the relationship between the two teams, in and of itself, could be considered a scheme or artifice to influence the Spring Split, on top of any direct involvement between the two sides in their above-mentioned match.

So that should take care of Mykles, Badawi, and the Shims.

Let's also go to the Team Impulse decision, and their unnamed owners.

All of the torts under Civil Code Section 1770 apply, as well as the following issues regarding the pay situation, according to the California Department of Industrial Relations:

• Any of the employees of Team Impulse could've filed a Wage Claim with the CDIR for the money they were owed, both in the 2015 Summer Split and the 2016 Spring Split, as well as additional damages.
• Any member of the team could see a record of their wages at any time, and, if the ownership failed to provide such information within 21 days of the request, the player could sue for $750 per violation.
• It is, in fact, a criminal misdemeanor to fail to pay in good funds as agreed upon. It appears that the ownership tried to skirt this law by paying only the minimum wage, and nowhere close to the agreed-upon minimum compensation as agreed to with Riot Games.

So there's criminal charges and civil torts there too – as well as the falsification of documentation, etc.

--

If you lasted this long, thank you. There's a point to all of this.

I have now spent the better part of two blog posts reaming the Hell out of a corrupt bunch of criminal e-sports owners here in the United States.

Now Riot Games gets it.

I have laid out serious criminal and civil actions which should have been taken against Chris Shim, Sean Shim, Christopher Mykles, Chris Badawi, and the unnamed former ownership interests of Team Impulse.

I can only think of one scenario, given the magnitude of these charges and game penalties, why Riot Games has not gone to the authorities with this information, especially the “failure to provide a safe environment for players” charges:

Riot Games knows that if the authorities find out the extent of corruption in e-sports (with these rulings as evidence), they will attempt to legislate and regulate them, and Riot Games may not like the results of such regulation and legislation.

Too bad. Riot Games has a responsibility as a California business to ensure the laws of the state are upheld. If Riot Games is unwilling to see handcuffs on these people, it is an indication they have no desire to do so, and, hence, no right to do business in California or anywhere else.

I want handcuffs, I want them now, and I believe the good of e-sports DEMANDS them.

And E-Sports continues to go up in flames...

This is an American story this time.

High-level American League of Legends was rocked ten days ago when Riot Games (the Chinese-owned creators of the video game League of Legends and the sanctioning body for professional play thereof) threw three high-level ownership groups out of the sport entirely, giving bans from one year to life for varying offenses.  The three ownership groups were given until midnight Pacific time tonight (May 18) to sell and relinquish their rights to professional League of Legends to groups Riot would accept.  As of the writing of this article, six hours before the deadline, only one has succeeded.

This is almost unheard of, especially in one of the higher-profile "major leagues" of the e-sport.

When you get right down to the meat and potatoes of the situation, though, the implications are far, far more disturbing than simply seeing the people thrown out.

First, a very quick primer:  Sixteen teams make up the top two tiers of League of Legends in North America.  The top ten teams form the North American League Championship Series, the NA LCS for short.  The next six teams form the North American Challenger Series, the NA CS.

At the end of each of two "splits" in a yearly season (which culminates in a World Championship in October for the top teams in the top leagues all over the world -- this year to be held in the US.  The group stage for 16 teams will be held in San Francisco, the quarterfinals in Chicago, the semifinals at Madison Square Garden, and the Grand Final October 29 at the Staples Center for a seven-figure prize and The Summoner's Cup), the bottom teams of the LCS face the top teams of the CS in a promotion-relegation series while the top teams of the LCS play in the playoffs for advancement to said World Championship or progress thereto.

The three teams expelled by Riot Games were all involved in this promotion-relegation scenario.  The two teams which fell into this scenario from the LCS, but survived to remain in the LCS for the summer, Renegades and Team Impulse, both have been expelled.  One of the teams from the CS who failed to gain promotion, Team Dragon Knights, was also tossed.

Riot, to protect uninvolved players (these offenses are ruled to have been completely organizational and by people at the organizational level, so the players should be given every opportunity to retain their positions in professional League) did not announce what exactly would happen if one or more of the spots went unsold.

In short, the North American professional League of Legends scene is completely compromised.

How'd we get here?

Let's start with what could invoke an unannounced "contingency plan" should they not sell their top-level spot in the next six hours (as of when I write this):  Team Impulse.  The schedule for the summer split, released today, has a "TBD" spot where Impulse is. 

Their offenses effectively indicate the owner had no interest in fielding a professional team, nor taking care of them.

• This ownership group was a successor, buying the spot and the team from Chinese outfit LMQ, who moved to North America to attempt to capitalize on the far weaker North American professional scene.  Some of the offenses indicate that they may have predated the sale from LMQ as well.
• Riot Games did an audit of the major teams to ensure that all the rules and regulations would be followed.  One of them, Rule 3.2, indicates that the team must have actual contracts with all of their players.  Impulse only provided "summary sheets" and lied on those sheets that full contracts existed.
• This leads to the major beef, a violation of Rule 2.2.  Each player for a League team must be compensated at least $12,500, by rule of Riot Games. This was, apparently, not done for members of Renegades, with one claiming that, after March, the team was paid only about minimum wage.  The ownership had already failed to pay the players as agreed for the entire 2015 summer split, and Riot Games had to step in on that one.  Making one have to ask the question why the banhammer wasn't thrown in the 2015-16 offseason.
• Adding to the suspicion was word that, about three weeks before the bans went into place, the ownership of Impulse was attempting to sell the spot for the team, which would represent the third or so attempt to sell the team and divest out of professional League of Legends.

For these offenses:

• The team was expelled from the NA LCS and broken up.  The ownership interest was given until May 18 at midnight Pacific to divest.  Unless there's something I have not read, it appears they won't.
• The team was also fined $20,000 from it's final payment for the spring split by Riot.
• There is apparently no direct penalty to the owners of the team, whomever they may be.

And that's the SANE situation.

Here's the other situation, regarding the other two teams, a complex arrangement between them, and, frankly, some things I think should result in numerous criminal charges.

Renegades (NA LCS) and Team Dragon Knights (NA CS).

• The first charge was a team ownership issue.  Christopher Mykles, an owner of Renegades, at least in part, was found to have had an arrangement with Chris Badawi that, as of the end of 2016, he would have half ownership of the team.
• This presents a massive illegality:  Badawi was banned from such a position for tampering in June of 2015, after he approached two players under contract to another team.  For this offense, he was banned from any such position (or any such agreement to a position, which Riot declares the same thing) until, at minimum, January 1, 2017.  In fact, Mykles, who is a prominent broadcaster of international League matches (and I'll get to that in a bit!), had to become the owner of the team to prevent disqualification under Badawi's FIRST suspension.
• The second charge was a "Player Safety" charge, and left very murky under the ruling to protect the players involved.  Badawi apparently had significant contact with the team, even while banned from his tampering offense.  Moreover, during this contact, he attempted to breach contracts and payment agreements and was accused of creating an unsafe environment for players on Renegades.
• It's this last charge that may, on top of everything else, be most damning.  Maria "Revelia" Creveling of Renegades was not only the first female player to make it to the major leagues of League of Legends, she was also the first professional League transgender player as well.  (Link provided to indicate this is known information in the e-sports community.)
• She played six matches in the 2016 spring split, but departed the team on March 8, and it is now believed/rumored that bigoted mistreatment of Creveling by Badawi and possibly other parties in Renegades was the cause, and the reference made to player safety in the eventual ruling.
• The third charge may even add additional criminality to the issue, and involves NA CS team The Dragon Knights.  A very mysterious and suspicious trade was made between Renegades and Dragon Knights just before Creveling left the squad -- and it was a trade that many felt was meant to stack Renegades at the expense of the Challenger team.  This prompted Riot to ask many questions of the two teams regarding independence...
• ... which Riot ruled were answered either incompletely or falsely, to hide the relationship between the two teams.  There was also an apparent arrangement that Renegades would continue to house and pay the two members traded to Dragon Knights, another illegality.

For this:

• Chris Badawi is the first person, to my knowledge, in the history of League of Legends to receive a permanent life ban from the sport, in all capacities.  And I don't think this is nearly enough.  He may well have committed criminal offenses simply by his association during his banishment, he probably has committed criminal offenses through his administrative misconduct during his banishment (the contracts and payment agreement breaches), and he certainly has committed criminal offenses if what is rumored having done to Creveling was done, especially by Badawi.  In any event, he needs to be put in handcuffs.  Now.
• Both ownership groups were given until May 18 at midnight PDT to sell their interests and divest, similarly to Impulse.  As of writing, the Renegades spot has been approved sold to Team EnVyUs, who has signed a number of the Renegades.  This was almost-certainly a condition of the sale, however Creveling is not one of them.  She has not reemerged anywhere on the professional scene.  Dragon Knights is not sold as of writing.
• This is not the first rodeo for the ownership of Team Dragon Knights.  Chris Shim was actually already banned from any official position with any team for 2016 and had to sell his stake in Dragon Knights so they could stay in the Challenger Series (about the same penalty Badawi had, and for the same reason (tampering)).  As a result of the further offenses, Chris and (I assume) his brother Sean are both banned from League of Legends entirely until, at minimum, January 1, 2019.  Why is Chris Shim not given the same life ban Badawi got?  Riot claims "possibility of reform", I don't see it.
• Christopher Mykles has the most puzzling of situations, so it has to be explained carefully, and I'll explain why it's bullshit.  Mykles is officially banned one year (start of this summer split to start of next summer split) "from holding any ownership or Riot-recognized position (including GM, team coach or team analyst) with any team in a Riot-sanctioned league."  The banishment specifically does NOT cover his broadcasting work on Korean League tournaments and matches.  And if you believe that's a valid decision, I've got a bridge to sell you somewhere in the Sahara Desert.  I've always held the position that a banned entity has no place representing the game or sport in which he or she is banned in any broadcasting/representative capacity.  Mykles is one of the most well-known casters in the world of League of Legends.  I have no dispute of this.  This is why he needed to have been held in a higher standard than other players and owners -- and, factually, should be permanently fired from any broadcasting position of a Riot-sanctioned league, even after his ban ends.  Any match, tournament, or league he broadcasts is lessened by his presence -- just as any broadcast, podcast, etc. on a game that involves a banned player is similarly lessened.  Riot punted to Mykles' direct employers at OGN in Korea, and no word has been made yet as to his status for the Korean summer split.  That decision should've been Riot's, and as the sanctioning body for the Korean game as well.  Riot had cover to do it, because all one has to state is that a Riot-sanctioned competition broadcaster is, by definition, a "Riot-recognized position".  Do the right thing, OGN -- FIRE HIS ASS!

And two more complications I will give that indicate Riot went nowhere near far enough, and how compromised the professional situation may be now...

1. Will someone explain to me why Mykles is not thrown out of the e-sport for life for associating with Badawi in the first place?  It takes two to tango!  I have to think, at this point, his fame as a broadcaster is the only reason he may even be allowed to remain in the sport in any capacity at all!!!  We're already clear you fouled this up by not life-banning at least one of the Shims as well, but there you go...
2. And this has been accentuated by a story largely buried under the radar (but Brian Tuohy picked it up!!!) ...

Apparently the NGCB doesn't realize that even #esports has had its share of match fixing problems overseas as well. https://t.co/yIRc7JpJ9C

— Brian Tuohy (@TheFixIsInTuohy) May 16, 2016

Two days ago, sports-law expert Darren Heitner reported that, in light of Las Vegas casinos beginning to want to capitalize on e-sports (both on gambling and as e-sports destinations), the head of the Nevada Gaming Control Board has posited nothing in the current law on sportsbooks would make it illegal to gamble on e-sports.

Meaning:  E-sports, at least with respect to the head of the NGCB, IS "sports"!

OK, follow me on this one, because there's another wrinkle to this Renegades-Dragon Knights fiasco.

As I said before, part of the issue was questions on the independence of the two teams, including and up to illegal comingling of funds and of other player amenities.

This is important to the declaration of "Is e-sports 'sports'?" because of a very real fact:  The two teams actually played a promotion match in the 2016 spring-to-summer split promotion.  After last-placed LCS team Dignitas was relegated by third-place CS team Dragon Knights (for which Dignitas was eventually bought out by Apex Gaming, who won promotion later in the tournament to the LCS -- so Apex now has a team in each bracket), Dragon Knights faced Renegades in a match in which the winner would remain/promote to the LCS -- the loser would have to play another match to determine whether they went up or down.

Renegades won, Dragon Knights lost twice.

Now go back to the "independence of teams" issue I raised above, and ask yourself a very real question:

If e-sports is "sports", would this not represent a possible/probable case of Sports Bribery under US Federal law?

Riot, you got more work to do, and it may be "more" more than you think!!!

And while we're talking about the Olympics, an answer on the Russia debacle...

Kinda left this one alone because it had to do with the Homophobe-lympics in Sochi, and I felt it might have infringed on the boycott I was asked to (and agreed to) do.

But word has come out that we may have another answer as to how Russia got to the top of the medal count in those farcical games:  A state-sponsored drug-testing evasion program...  And a documentary is being filmed on it by Bryan Fogel.

About a week ago, reports came out (this one on Gawker site Gizmodo) in the New York Times (paywall, but you are allowed ten free articles per month -- just be careful) stating that Russia had a systematic program of doping and drug-test evasion to inflate it's medal count and win as many medals as possible for Vladimir Putin and his goals of world domination and LGBT dehumanization (and if any idiot wants to claim the latter was not part of the equation -- especially after the USOC tweaked Putin on it with some of the delegation decisions -- I'd like to have a word with you).

According to the article:

• At least 15 medal-winning athletes were involved, including a number of the largest-scale Russian superstars of the Sochi Games.
• Fourteen members of the cross-country skiing team were involved.  Russia won five medals in the event, including a gold medal at 50 kilometers and three silvers (one in the same event, one in a 4x10km relay, and a team sprint event) and a bronze (they swept the 50km event).
• "Two veteran bobsledders who won two golds" are also implicated in the article.  It would appear that the article speaks of Russian double-gold medal winners Alexandr Zubkov and Alexey Voyovoda, who won gold medals in both the two-man event (together) and the four-man event (with Dmitry Trunenkov and Alexey Negodaylo).  Russia swept the gold medals in men's bobsled.
• If we do not implicate the other two bobsledders, this would leave at least a half a dozen unknown medalists among the 33 medals and 15 golds won by the Russians in Sochi.  Two of the three men who swept the 50 km cross-country event were also in the relay (and one of them was in the team sprint), so that would make eight. (Ten if you include the other two of the four-man bobsled.)
• The article proclaims a sophisticated, dark-of-night plot that exchanged dirty samples collected from Russian athletes (up to about 100 of them, it is estimated!) with earlier-collected clean samples.  The group carrying this out also knew how to tamper the collection bottles and not have the tampering be detected.
• One bit of American propaganda I have to call out here:  "None of the athletes were caught doping. More important, Russia won the most medals of the Games, easily surpassing its main rival, the United States, and undermining the integrity of one of the world’s most prestigious sporting events."  Now, that might well be true -- and I might well have covered it with far more precision and depth had the whole LGBT thing not turned me off to the entire competition, but the only difference between Russia and the United States is that, at least to what we know of, the USA doesn't do this at the GOVERNMENTAL level.  This was Vladimir Putin making a statement here.

And the statement continued once the World Anti-Doping Association put the entire Russian sports program on notice:

• The insider, a Dr. Grigory Rodchenkov, fled for his life to Los Angeles.  The only WADA accusation he denies is extorting money from athletes.  Rodchenkov received the Order of Friendship for his work, a prestigious medal given in Russia for advancing the Russian Federation in the eyes of it's people.
• Two anti-doping cohorts of Dr. Rodchenkov died within weeks of each other after the report was released.
• In fact, Rodchenkov claims that WADA is wrong on the other way in one important respect.  The WADA report, centering on track and field and resulting in Russian track's expulsion from the Olympic Games, stated hundreds of samples were destroyed.  Rodchenkov claims THOUSANDS from pretty much every meaningful Olympic sport.  The decision to finalize the ban for Russian track and field will be made within the next few weeks.

You really need to read this extensive article, if you can.  The allegations here would basically implode the entire Olympic movement -- not only in Russia, but worldwide.

CANCEL THE RIO GAMES.  They are not clean, and cannot be cleanly run.  Period.

•  

Yep, Manfred wants war on the basepaths and with the umpires...

He botched this so completely, it's not even funny.

• Odor got eight games for the punch.  To which many baseball historians and other people supporting the new rule have to ask:  How much more does he take until he gets carted off?
• Bautista, for his entire involvement:  One game.  ONE.  Toronto has apparently had a number of problems with the new rule, and Joey Bats is definitely becoming one of the hotter heads in the league.  You might as well have declared his late slide legal and not interference, while you were at it!  For starting it with the second hard slide into Odor, ten would've been more a good start.
• Jesse Chavez of the Blue Jays got three games for throwing at Prince Fielder after the warnings.  Given what had happened the inning previously, probably not enough, but fairly standard.
• Elvis Andrus got suspended one game for charging out during the fight.
• Toronto manager John Gibbons (3) and Toronto first-base coach Tim Leiper (1) were both suspended for failure to leave the field after being ejected.  Both were ejected in the THIRD INNING and came out for the fight in the eighth.

In the NHL, that's at least TEN GAMES.  And that's where I would've started the bidding for Bautista and both Gibbons and Leiper.

And, by MLB rules, that can be a fucking forfeit.

Are you motherfuckers out of your mind over there in New York?  Seriously??  The fight's bad enough, but this "return to the field after getting ejected to further involve yourself when you should already be out of the dugout and in the clubhouse" shit is getting old and it's getting old FAST.

That's at least three (and that doesn't count Bryce Harper) in the last ten days.

Cancel the goddamned Rio Olympics. Now.

Don't get to talk too much Olympics, especially about the Homophobe-lympics farce in Sochi, but a comment made recently regarding the Rio Games, scheduled for this summer, finally has put me over the side on whether these Games need to take place.

There's been little secret that many Rio venues are cesspools of germs and the like, impossible to clean up in time for the Rio Games.  (The canoeing venue -- and I'd assume most of the other open-water venues -- are prime discussion targets.)

And now we enter the Zika virus.  Zika is a virus transmitted by mosquitoes which appears to be exploding all over the world.  A Major League Baseball series scheduled for Puerto Rico was scrubbed because of concerns over the virus in Puerto Rico.

It appears to have the most impact in pregnant women, leading to birth defects.  Rarely, it can lead to death, according to the World Health Organization.

Brazil is one major hotbed of concern with respect to Zika. 

So much so that Rivaldo, one of the major recent soccer stars to come out of Brazil, has asked the world to stay away from Rio de Janeiro and the Games.

From CNN, Rivaldo points out Brazil is getting uglier with social unrest, citing a death of a 17 year-old.

More ominously, when asked about the Rio Games, Rivaldo did not mince words (The Guardian):

“I advise everyone with plans to visit Brazil for the Olympics in Rio — to stay home. You’ll be putting your life at risk here. This is without even speaking about the state of public hospitals and all the Brazilian political mess. Only God can change the situation in our Brazil.”

Call it off.  The whole nationalistic circle-jerk.

Call it off, and call it off now.

With the cauldron of events which seem to be circulating in the world, you are inviting a body count if you insist on continuing these Games. 

Manfred, you better get control of your sport...

... and you better damn well do it now.

We had probably the largest-scale base-brawl in many a year on Sunday in Texas when Texas and Toronto wrapped up their season meetings with each other.

This was after last year's situation where bat flips and all sorts of "unwritten rule" bullshit culminated in at least two Blue Jays attempting to take out Ranger second baseman Roughned Odor.

Jose Bautista was the second (in the eighth inning, after he got hit by a pitch), and got literally posterized when Odor, who had enough of his (and the Blue Jays') shit, connected with the cleanest punch in the history of basebrawls.  It was a miracle Bautista wasn't knocked completely the fuck out.

Suspensions are forthcoming today from the league offices.

But I want to raise two issues from this game, pointed right at the Blue Jays, showing how sick and tired I am that the umpires, in the interest of the money-making enterprise of professional sports, do not have the power that is stated in the rule book to end a game that is clearly out of hand.

John Gibbons was tossed in the third inning for balls and strikes.  Tim Leiper, the first-base coach, was tossed earlier in that same third inning.  The bench coach was also tossed when, in retaliation for the fight, Prince Fielder got hit in the leg intentionally to start the bottom of the eighth inning.

I said the same thing after some of Kansas City shenanigans against Oakland.  You start getting through three coaches and three players...  At some point, the umpires just have to throw up the hands and award the game to the other team.  It's about the only weapon they have left after a game has gotten so completely out of control...

But it's something I've now seen twice in the last ten days.  Boston manager John Farrell was ejected for balls and strikes the pitch before David Ortiz got ejected after striking out -- I made a post on this with the understanding that, especially under the rules of baseball, the only reason the umpire would not do the forced ejection on Ortiz was to call him out on strikes and fix the outcome of the game.

As I said then, Farrell had not left the field or the dugout by his ejection -- which could be interpreted as a forfeiture offense in the Rules of Baseball.  Farrell was not even suspended for that act.  Nor were the umpires who should not have let the game continue until it was clear he was gone.  Nor was Ortiz for his ranting -- and many felt Farrell saved Ortiz from a lengthy ban.  (PS:  Strictly personally speaking, I'm sick and tired of the "Did he bump the ump?" being a suspension situation.   Start the bidding at one game when the thumb goes up and go from there.  Bump the ump?  Start it at ten.)

We had another one with the debacle in Texas.  Gibbons came out during the brawl in the eighth inning after being tossed in the third.  That's been reported to the league.

Rob Manfred, get control of your fucking league.  Seriously.

We're going to get a loud message (and myself and a friend of mine who's a baseball historian believes it's not going to be one we like!!!) as to how you want your league run.

Especially with the new rule and everything that happened, I want multiple double-digit suspensions against Blue Jays here.  Bautista definitely, probably Gibbons too. 

I'm sick and tired of the ultimate penalty being taken out of the arsenal (except in extreme cases like Disco Demolition Night or Ball Night gone amok) simply because of the money nature of the game.

You've got some problem children that are going to make this one long, hot summer, Rob Manfred, if you don't get these guys in check.  NOW.

PS:  I'm also looking at you, Perennial Umpire Problem Bryce Harper.  That little expletive you threw after the game you got tossed in, if I were umpiring, would've gotten a call to the league wondering if I could eject you from the next game (since he was already ejected from that game -- but that game had ended before the tirade at the umpire).  He was suspended one game and served it.

When arrogance can turn to a fixed game....

(Blogger's Note:  I am having a lot of trouble with the new Penn State shit.  I don't know when I am going to be able to put a post together which might not get the police involved at my home.  I have a lot of trouble digesting this and not wanting to see the university closed and buildings burnt to the ground as a testament as to how much that community has invested in supporting pedophilia.  (Whether it wishes to admit such or not...)  I'll try to put something together -- I have a first draft that I'm starting up.  We'll see when - OR IF - I post it.)

On a much, MUCH lighter note:

There are some people who have some explaining to do to Rob Manfred and Joe Torre realsoonnow.

It's the seemingly-weekly series between the Boston Red Sox and New York Yankees.

9th inning, bases loaded, two out for Boston, down a run at 3-2.

David Ortiz, "Big Papi" is at the plate, with three balls and one strike on him.

A wicked slider that didn't appear to be close by the time the pitch made the glove was called strike two.

Ortiz went ballistic.

Under the rules in Major League Baseball, umpire Ron Kulpa should've tossed Ortiz then and there.  Manager John Farrell did come out to try to "save" Ortiz, and took the thumb himself.

Keep this in mind.

I can think of only one reason that Kulpa did not eject Ortiz:  That, as long as the final pitch was within a time zone of the strike zone, it was going to be strike three.

That pitch was well low, Ortiz checks up, punched out.  Strike three, two out, Yankees eventually win 3-2.  The second replay showed Ortiz checked up.

Ortiz is still steaming, but at least gets back to the dugout.  Then he starts venting, and gets tossed.

We don't see this very often, but Ortiz came back out and he looked like he wanted blood.  Yes, he stopped short, but there comes a point where being that angry and having to be wrestled off needs to be actionable -- even if you are David Ortiz.

That said, he shouldn't be the only party banned from at least today's game.  One manager and at least one umpire if not two...

John Farrell never left the dugout until after Ortiz' ejection.  Farrell was still in the dugout for strike three, and was part of the SECOND argument as Ortiz was being restrained.

Under the Rules of Baseball, though the relevant Rule (7.03(6), as in this .PDF from MLB) only refers to an ejected PLAYER, it would appear that Farrell has committed no less than a forfeiture offense.  As such, he should be suspended, starting immediately.

But I can think of at least one umpire, if not two, who should go with him, for not applying that rule and forcing Farrell to leave before another pitch is thrown.

Kulpa should be suspended, so should his crew chief if it's somebody else.  Kulpa tossed Farrell on the 3-1 pitch, and the game should not have resumed with him in the dugout.

So there needs to be some immediate action on this one, boys.