Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeRedskin
Generically, you are correct that arbiters are people who hear disagreements to provide a resolution short of seeking a judicial rememdy. There are several kinds of arbitors but mostly they are either contractual or court appointed. If contractual (as here), their authority is spelled out in the contract (the current CBA). If court appointed, their authority is that given them by the court.
In this case, the arbitor's authority comes solely and expressly from the current CBA for which the parties are the NFL and the NFLPA. I may be wrong but I believe the individual clubs are only a party to the CBA under the umbrella of the NFL.
While he may look beyond the current CBA to get all the facts, his ability to force any remedy is limited to determining that there was a violation of the current CBA.
|
Well since the issue happened prior to the current CBA, under your reasoning, the Arbiture has not authority since the issue happened under the old CBA. I would think the Arbitrator looks at the CBA no matter if it was the old CBA or new CBA to see if there were any violations of it.
I agree with you he is under the unbrella of the NFL but if the punishement is in regards to the old CBA I think he can hear it no different if he has to see if someone failed to follow the new CBA. Although there was a CBA for 2010 as many have stated there was no CAP. It's hard to get into trouble for something that was not there or in place legally in writing.
Also the warning not specific to what the Redskins and Cowboys had done and the league didn't like the fact the two teams found a loop hole. Too bad. Make a rule/law have all the owners and NFLPA sign off on it so it won't happen again and move on. Don't punish the two teams cause you don't like what they did even if it was legal.