View Single Post
12-14-2012, 07:09 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,849
vCash: 500
So what I can gather from this, the league is arguing two things.

1. The PA is collectively plotting to disclaim for the sole purpose of gaining leverage in negotiations - this would seem to protect the league in regards to the legality of the lockout.

2. The league is arguing that contracts signed under a CBA are not enforceable outside of the union that it was negotiated under

Now, I don't see how either prevents the players from filing antitrust claims, however, if the league makes a strong enough case regarding the legality of the contracts, wouldn't that negate the players antitrust claims?

Did the NBA argue the legality of the contracts as well? Whether they did or not doesn't make a difference since it never got that far but should be interesting to see how it unfolds because I've been asking this question about the legality of contracts if the PA were to dissolve but there doesn't seem to be any definitive answers out there.

Now we're left to see if one or both sides are bluffing or willing to fight until the death, lol.

Ari91 is offline