As of now the Yankees are in the process of trying to void A-Rods contract. However, it is currently now allowed for a team to deal any punishment for a steroid or HGH positive test and they are trying many different avenues to try and void his contract. I think this is ass backwards. If a player test positive for any performance enhancing drug his contract should be allowed to be voided.

A player who has tested positive during a contract could potentially have a massive drop off in performance, potentially leaving the team on the hook for a player they didn't actually pay for. A team also would not know if the player used this to his advantage during a contract year for a massive payday like Melky Cabrera attempted this past season. If he didn't test positive he would have cost a lot more for some team potentially leaving that team on the hook at some point in the contract. It is simply not smart to make a team pay the remainder of a contract a player fraudulently received. It also would deter a player from attempting during a current contract if they knew it could be voided.

To simplify if a player tests positive during any point of a contract a team has the option to void A contract. Does anyone else feel this way?

If PEDs helped make the difference in A-Rod's performance in 2009 that led to them winning everything, the Yankees shouldn't be complaining. But they are. They signed him to that ridiculous contract; fuck them if they try to weasel out of it.

There are generally revocation clauses for things like "moral issues" and the like... don't know if the Yanks can get this to fit under something like that or if they even put that clause into A-Rod's contract. But, I was thinking this was a standard clause in an MLB contract because I've seen it used before.

I would be surprised if Scott Boras let A-Rod sign a contract that allowed the Yankees to dispose of him on a whim if he should happen to underperform.

This article is a pretty good read on the subject. It also discusses the "moral issues" clause David alludes to.

Long story short, don't count on any team voiding contracts out of this deal.

One thing to note however, is that team's are not responsible for salary a player was due to earn while serving an MLB mandated suspension. (so if Cruz is suspended, we'll actually save $3m iirc).

I agree that it is pretty lame of the Yankees to try and weasel out of the contract this way.

That said, A-Fraud should have been banned from Baseball when he admitted to tipping pitches to the opposing team while playing 2nd base for the Rangers. His reasoning was that maybe they'd do it for him and help him pad his statistics.

There is in my mind no difference between what A-Fraud did and the Black Socks or Pete Rose were banned for doing.

The guy admitted to purposely and regularly working against his own team over a period of one or more seasons.

Slime does not begin to reach levels that low

I could care less about the yankees or Arod. That was just an example. It could apply to Cruz as well. Who is to say he hasn't been using HGH all this time. This would make his contracts earned during arbitration years are frauds as well. I don't see why a team shouldn't be able to void A contract for a positive ped test. Not just evidence he did or even being suspended without a positive test, but if he actually has a positive ped test.

I would think the team would then be burdened with proof that they didn't push the player into use of PEDs either directly or indirectly. And, as was mentioned in another thread, what's to keep an unscrupulous team from spiking something the player consumes then claiming to be "injured" by "his" malfeasance.

This would certainly be a Yankee strategy - you KNOW the stinebrothers would do whatever it took to win and, if a tool was no longer working, to get rid of said tool.