Welcome to FTW Explains: a guide to catching up on and better understanding stuff going on in the world.
On the surface, it seems so simple for Major League Baseball, its players and its fans: everyone wants the sport back for an abbreviated season, even if it means no one in the stands.
But because there aren’t people packed into seats, it feels so much more complicated than that.
If you’re wondering why that’s the case, that’s what we’re here to discuss. Let’s break down why this has become a public fight and why it’s gotten contentious in recent days.
I want baseball back!
Everybody does! We miss sports. I understand.
So what’s the holdup here?
A lot of things, actually, but mainly, it’s about two things: health and money.
Health concerns make sense.
Exactly. Players are understandably scared of contracting COVID-19, and to tie in the money thing: If they are going to risk their health, they want to make sure they are paid well to do it.
So, again, what’s the holdup here?
Basically, this all stems back to a meeting MLB and the MLB Players’ Association had back in March, in the early days of coronavirus. In that initial meeting, according to reports from USA TODAY and the AP, the two sides sketched out a deal where players would be paid on a prorated rate for however many games there were this season.
But here’s the big problem: The deal was initially struck upon with the idea that fans would be in attendance.
You can’t possibly play baseball in front of fans right now, right?
Exactly. Back in March, it seemed reasonable to say that pro baseball would return when fans could come to the games. But now it looks like that could be a very long time before that happens.
As other pro sports leagues, including pro baseball leagues, have started up again playing in front of empty stadiums, however, it’s clear MLB wants to revisit this.
So why not just play in front of empty stadiums?
That’s where we’re headed, but the big issue right now is: Money.
Ah.
Yes. MLB owners say they’ve lost a ton with the season getting delayed, and stand to lose a lot more by playing in front of empty stadiums. They want to reduce players salaries to make the whole thing work financially.
Players, on the other hand, want to get paid … especially if they’re risking their health. Plus, the players argue, they already have an agreement with MLB. The one back in March.
Is there anything that could move the needle on these negotiations?
Possibly. The New York Post obtained an email from March 26 between MLB and MLB Players Association officials that the publication calls a “potential smoking gun” for these negotiations because the league mentions a “second negotiation” would be necessary if fans were barred from games.
Basically: MLB is saying that the MLBPA knew they could revisit the agreement if fans couldn’t attend games.
Have any players spoken out?
Plenty, most recently Tampa Bay Rays ace Blake Snell, who went off on a recent Twitch stream: “Bro, I’m risking my life. If I’m going to play, I should be at the money I signed to be getting paid.”
How will the players stay safe under the new MLB proposal then?
There are reported details about how the league will change all kinds of rules to protect the health and safety of players, from 10,000 weekly coronavirus tests on players, personnel and families to no high-fives, fist-bumps and hugs.
Make no mistake: Games, in whatever form they will take if this is all hammered out, are a health risk for those involved and beyond. These players could infect each other and potentially bring the virus home to their families.
But the league feels it can do it safely. Or at least as safely as a league can.
How complicated is the health portion of getting back to the diamond?
Extremely complex feels like an understatement. ESPN’s Jeff Passan detailed it in a lengthy piece that breaks down what daily life could be for a player, with starting the day by taking your temperature to getting rid of baseballs touched by multiple players, hand-washing every half-inning, grabbing a meal-to-go and heading back to your hotel room and nowhere else.
Will this be resolved?
That’s the question we can’t answer yet. But it would seem like this has the chance to get very ugly, similar to any league’s labor negotiations with a players union. And as Hall of Fame pitcher Tom Glavine told the Atlanta Journal Constitution, even if the players are right to fight for what they deserve, they may not come out looking good to the public:
“If it were to come down to an economic issue and that’s the reason baseball didn’t come back, you’re looking at a situation similar to the strike of ’94 and ’95 as far as fans are concerned,” he said.
“Even if players were 100% justified in what they were complaining about, they’re still going to look bad.”
[vertical-gallery id=906176]
[jwplayer VeZJskCw-q2aasYxh]