Comments on: USL Files First of What Could Be Many Lawsuits

By: CoconutMonkey

CoconutMonkey — Sat, 12 Dec 2009 03:15:01 +0000

Yeah, I’m not a lawyer either -although sometimes I think I am- I don’t really think that FBL v NL is very relevant here either. Especially because these court cases aren’t really about that. But a few people mentioned anti-trust/monopoly with regards to the NASL’s sanctioning. So I figured it might have some bearing on that. I didn’t know the courts declined to use it with other sports though. Very interesting indeed!

PS. The bylaws section didn’t look nearly that crazy when I pasted it! I swear!

PPS. SaganTosu finished a respectable 5th this year! Only 10pts away from promotion!

By: Little Birdy

Little Birdy — Sat, 12 Dec 2009 00:57:50 +0000

Manny Lagos OUT as Thunder Pres. That must signify the end of the organization. I’ll miss them.

By: Steve Knudson

Steve Knudson — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 17:07:17 +0000

CoconutMonkey,

The USSF bylaws section is interesting. I’m not sure though that the FBL v NL court case is relevant. I am not a lawyer, but from what I have heard that case is specific to baseball, and the courts have declined to apply that precedent to other professional sports. At least, that’s what I’ve heard on ESPN a couple of times during labor disputes in other sports.

By: Brian Quarstad

Brian Quarstad — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 13:43:40 +0000

CoconutMonkey, very interesting. Thanks for the work in digging that up.

By: Soccer Boy

Soccer Boy — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 04:45:32 +0000

Andy, with teams leaving or getting kicked out of the USL, they really do not have much of a league left–other than USL-2, PDL, etc. If I was one of the teams getting sued, I would leave to becuase they ain’t going to be anyone to play. You have to have 8 teams, right?

By: CoconutMonkey

CoconutMonkey — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 03:06:21 +0000

I’m actually not so informed on whether or not the TOA clubs broke their contracts or have unsettled debts with the USL. But regarding the lawsuits, I think these things might be a factor.

From the USSF Bylaws:

Section 1. No Organization Member, official, league, club, team, player, coach,
administrator or referee may invoke the aid of the courts in the United States or of a State
without first exhausting all available remedies within the appropriate soccer organization, and as
provided within the Federation. This bylaw does not apply to the commencement of an
arbitration proceeding under these bylaws or the USOC Constitution and Bylaws or the
enforcement of a decision rendered in such a proceeding.
34
Section 2. For a violation of this bylaw, the offending party shall be subject to
suspension and fines, and shall be liable to the Federation for all expenses incurred by the
Federation and its officers in defending each court action, including but not limited to the
following:
(1) court costs.
(2) attorney’s fees.
(3) reasonable compensation for time spent by Federation officials and employees in
responding to and defending against allegations in the action, including responses
to discovery and court appearances.
(4) travel expenses.
(5) expenses for holding special National Council meetings necessitated by the court
http://www.ussoccer.com/About/Governance/Bylaws.aspx

And this: Federal Baseball Club v. National League
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Baseball_Club_v._National_League

By: ERic

ERic — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 00:04:46 +0000

Former USL Fan: “Find another way to settle your debts!”

Um, I’m just a little bit confused here. If they can’t settle it by negotiation, the courts are pretty much their only option. Is there some other way that you know of?

By: FORMER USL FAN

FORMER USL FAN — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 23:55:52 +0000

The USL is bad for the future of American soccer. They owe money and want decent American entrepreneurs to foot the bill. It is wrong to use our court system as coersion against the institution of new ideas. The USSF has every right to dismiss the USL. The USL has not listened to the TOA or its fans. Thats just bad business. The USL doesn’t care about US soccer. They don’t respect the USSF as a governing body for soccer in America. I got news for you USL, the USSF represents American Soccer and American Soccer no longer wants the USL.

Find another way to settle your debts!

By: Steve Knudson

Steve Knudson — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 23:41:32 +0000

Correct, a league does not require FIFA or USSF sanction to operate.

It does, however, if you wish to recruit top-quality talent. If FIFA or USSF make it known that those who play for teams in an unsanctioned league are ineligible for selection to national team duty, you won’t get top players from other nations, like the USL-1 has done for some time. If NASL (or USL-1) play without FIFA/USSF sanction, it may still be entertaining soccer and worthy of support, but the quality of the players (and hence the play) will be lower than USL-1 was last year. If that’s not a problem for you, then go for it. Also, as I mentioned above, playing without sanctioning invalidates you for participation in tournaments such as the champions league and U.S. open cup. Again, if that’s not an issue for you, then go for it.

Personally, if I’m going to support and follow a professional team, I want one that can compete at those higher levels.

By: Zlatan

Zlatan — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 22:26:02 +0000

A FIFA sanction is not required to run a soccer league, nor is USSF’s. A league could be created without any regard for either of these organizations.