Technically the players voted to end the strike if the courts supported the unfair labor practices complaint.
fehr didn't end the 95 strike. the courts decided it for him. put an injuction on the owners.
both sides are at fault here. i think that's pretty obvious by now.
But if you reread my post you'll see I never claimed Fehr ended the strike. I said he's negotiated two CBA's after that without any work stoppage. There has been labor peace in baseball ever since the 95 strike.
Bettman on the other hand has never negotiated a CBA without locking the players out. Three CBA negotiations. Three lockouts. More lost games than any of the other major sports. He's not the only one at fault, but I think that track record is pretty damning.
I'm not claiming Fehr is innocent, but painting a bigger picture of Fehr's role in CBA negotiations beyond the 95 strike that everyone keeps referring to.
When they do finally agree on a CBA, the most important part will be the date it expires so we know when Bettman will lock players out again and can plan accordingly.
Remember how we talked about there not being any point in discussing this with each other and not replying ?
Negotiating labor peace in the past does not excuse the gamesmanship that Fehr is demonstrating now. I think it is a no-brainer that Bettman should be fired, but the behavior of the league in these negotiations cannot be excused. Showing up late for meetings, not willing to bargain while last season was ongoing, and so on. The list just keeps going on and on.
I think that's still the best choice.
- Johnz96 likes this