NORTHERN IRELAND DEFEATS SPAIN 3-2

Since 1982 NTH IRELAND has´nt won SPAIN, tonight that allchanged with a 3-2 Nth Ireland victory in the Euro Championshipsqualifier in BelfastThe star was Irishmen, HEALY who scored a HAT TRICK .Spain added Cesc, A.Lopez & Xavi to its last team, & gaveit a more offensive look, but that failed to impress.Scorers were:Nth Ireland - Healy 19´, 64´, 79´Spain - Xavi 14´, Villa 52´Serious hiccup for

The Ethics of Dogging It in Little League

UCLA Law Professor Eugene Volokh picks up on the Ethics Scoreboard's problem concerning a curious event at last month's Little League World Series. Here's the scenario:

On August 11 in Bristol, Conn., a Little League team from Colchester, Vt., only had to retire its Portsmouth, N.H. opposition in the top of the sixth inning (Little League games are six innings rather than nine) to win the game 9-8 and move on to the New England regional championship game.

But there was a problem. The Vermont team had made its third out in its half of the fifth inning before player Adam Bentley got to the plate. The Little League has a strict rule that requires every player to bat at least once a game, and the penalty for violating it is forfeit. Vermont's coach Denis Place realized, to his horror, that even though his team had the lead entering the last inning the only way it could avoid losing by forfeit was for Bentley to get an at bat. For that to happen, the New Hampshire team would have to tie the score or take the lead, requiring the teams to play the last half of the sixth inning.

Place held a meeting of his players at the pitcher's mound and instructed them to let New Hampshire score a run. The plan: walk the first batter, and ensure that he made it home with the assistance of wild pitches and intentional errors so the game would be deadlocked at 9-9. Then, hopefully, win the game in the bottom of the sixth inning, with Adam Bentley getting his mandated turn at the plate.

Not so fast. The New Hampshire team's coach, Mark McCauley figured out what was happening and ordered his players not to score. So after a walk and two wild pitches allowed a New Hampshire runner to reach third base, the player refused to advance to the plate despite another wild pitch and a fielding error. McCauley also told his players to strike out intentionally, preserving Vermont's lead but guaranteeing a successful New Hampshire protest that, under the rules, would require that New Hampshire win by forfeit.

This obviously led to a ridiculous spectacle: one team trying to give up a run while the other team was trying to make outs and avoid scoring. The perplexed umpires understandably chose to end the debacle by ejecting Place and his pitcher from the game. Vermont won 9-8 ... and then New Hampshire was awarded the victory by forfeit, because Adam Bentley never got his turn at bat. The New Hampshire team advanced to the next round.

The Question: Whose conduct was unethical? Professor Volokh's take:

the Vermont coach didn't behave unethically (though obviously he did behave negligently by not playing Bentley earlier). I also tend to agree with the Scoreboard that the New Hampshire coach did behave unethically, but I'm considerably less confident about that judgment.

Something oddly similar actually happened to me, and effectively ended my Little League career. My team, the Manoa Orioles, was up against its arch rival, the Nuuanu Dodgers (Manoa and Nuuanu are neighboring valleys on the island of Oahu, and there's some understandable tension). In any event, the regular season series was split, and we faced the Dodgers in the first round of the playoff. My Orioles were crushing the Dodgers, such that the umps invoked the "Mercy Rule" and called the game after five innings (we were winning by something like 17 to 3). We had a team party and went to bed believing we would be moving on to the next round. But, as it turned out, one of our players (thankfully, not me), had not played the minimum two innings. A parent from the other team noticed while reviewing the scorecard, filed a complaint the next day, and we were awarded a loss by forfeit (the Dodgers then advanced to the next round of the playoffs).

At the time, it was certainly hard to accept that result -- I imagine the Vermont players in the Little League World Series felt similarly robbed. As an Oriole, I wanted at least a chance to replay the game -- and that might have been the fair solution to the New Hampshire-Vermont debacle described above.

With time, however, I've come to rethink a bit my feelings about my own experience. Little league rules requiring each player to come to bat, or play a certain number of innings, are there for a reason. Professor Volokh's assertion that the Vermont coach was merely "negligent" for letting one of his players miss the minimum number of at-bats strikes me as inadequate. Instead, I would argue that the Vermont coach was unethical for not giving that player a chance at bat. Of course one wants to win, but the point of Little League is also to give every player a chance to shine, and to develop skills and experience. It's unethical to keep a player -- even a "scrub" -- on the bench just to eke out a win. Even if the omission could be said to be an "accident," it was likely the result of an improper fixation on winning and an inadequate attention to the smaller, less potent kid sitting on the bench. In my opinion, at the Little League level, it's better for a team to lose with everyone getting to bat than to win relying only on its strongest players.

NFL Predictions

With the NFL season officially kicking off Thursday, I figured now was a good time to post my predictions for the order of finish in each division, as well as my playoffs picks and Super Bowl winner. So without further ado:

AFC

East
New England Patriots
Miami Dolphins
New York Jets
Buffalo Bills

North
Cincinnati Bengals
*Pittsburgh Steelers
Baltimore Ravens
Cleveland Browns

South
Indianapolis Colts
Jacksonville Jaguars
Houston Texans
Tennessee Titans

West
Denver Broncos
*San Diego Chargers
Kansas City Chiefs
Oakland Raiders


NFC

East
New York Giants
*Dallas Cowboys
Philadelphia Eagles
Washington Redskins

North
Chicago Bears
Minnesota Vikings
Detroit Lions
GB Packers

South
Tampa Bay Buccaneers
*Carolina Panthers
Atlanta Falcons
New Orleans Saints

West
Seattle Seahawks
Arizona Cardinals
St. Louis Rams
San Francisco 49ers

* denotes Wildcard


AFC Playoffs
Bengals over Chargers
Patriots over Steelers

Colts over Patriots
Bengals over Broncos

Colts over Bengals

NFC Playoffs
Bucs over Panthers
Cowboys over Bears

Giants over Bucs
Seahawks over Cowboys

Giants over Seahawks


SUPER BOWL
Colts - 27
Giants - 17

Ok, so the boring pick at least as far as the Super Bowl winner is concerned, but I like the Indianapolis Colts to be your Super Bowl champs, beating the New York Giants. Obviously there's the concern for some people about Peyton Manning never winning the big game, or Edge being gone, but I think Indy will be just fine. The defense should be improving even more, and they still have the most dangerous offense in football. Which is why they're my pick as the Super Bowl champs.

Figuring out Jeffrey Kessler's Litigation Strategy for Deion Branch

Check out this curious statement in an afternoon posting by Michael Felger of the Boston Herald and ESPN Radio:

Furthermore, [Deion Branch's attorney Jeffrey] Kessler revealed today that if Branch loses both grievances, he will then seek damages against the Patriots for extra compensation this year. Kessler said Branch will seek to be paid the difference between what the Pats are scheduled to pay him this season (just over $1 million, minus fines) and the first-year money being offered by Seattle and the New York Jets.

If Branch loses both of his grievances against the Patriots, what grounds would he then have to sue the Patriots or seek arbitration against the Patriots for this alleged "extra compensation"? I could understand such an attempt if he wins his greivance, but if he loses? What contractual or other legally-cognizable obligation would the Patriots have in that instance? Or is Kessler--a hugely successful sports litigator--referring to a third greivance that would be filed if Branch loses the first two? Or has the NFLPA simply decided to make this some kind of test case?

New Sports Law Scholarship

New this week:

Roger I. Abrams, Alcohol, drugs and the National Pastime, 8 UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA JOURNAL OF LABOR & EMPLOYMENT LAW 861 (2006)

Paul A. Fortenberry and Brian E. Hoffman, Illegal muscle--a comparative analysis of proposed steroid legislation and the policies in professional sports’ CBAs that led to the steroid controversy, 5 VIRGINIA SPORTS AND ENTERTAINMENT LAW JOURNAL 121 (2006)

Michael A. McCann, The reckless pursuit of dominion: a situational analysis of the NBA and diminishing player autonomy, 8 UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA JOURNAL OF LABOR & EMPLOYMENT LAW 819 (2006)

Ryan Connolly, Note, Balancing the Justices in anti-doping law: the need to ensure fair athletic competition through effective anti-doping programs vs. the protection of rights of accused athletes, 5 VIRGINIA SPORTS AND ENTERTAINMENT LAW JOURNAL 161 (2006)

Matthew G. Massari, Note, When fantasy meets reality: the clash between on-line fantasy sports providers and intellectual property rights, 19 HARVARD JOURNAL OF LAW AND TECHNOLOGY 443 (2006)

Jessica J. Penkal, Comment, When legislative regulation strikes out: proving a products liability case against metal baseball bat manufacturers, 67 MONTANA LAW REVIEW 315 (2006)

Ryan Schaffer, A piece of the rock (or the Rockets): the viability of widespread public offerings of professional sports franchises, 5 VIRGINIA SPORTS AND ENTERTAINMENT LAW JOURNAL 201 (2006)

Matt Williams, Note, Making encouraged expression impercep-tible: the Family Movie Act of 2005 is inconsistent with the purpose of American copyright, 5 VIRGINIA SPORTS AND ENTERTAINMENT LAW JOURNAL 233 (2006)

FSU beats Miami 13-10

First off, it's really good to have college football back. What better way is there to spend weekend afternoons than to spend them watching college football. I wasn't able to watch a lot on Saturday, though it doesn't look like I missed a whole lot. However, I did get to see FSU/Miami, and it was about what I expected (though I thought Miami would win going into the game). Here are all of my jumbled thoughts:

- I don't mind all of the other rule changes, but I really don't like the clock starting on the change of possession. I understand they want to speed the game up, but I at least wish they would do away with it in the 4th quarter.

- This game looked a lot like last year, where FSU won 10-7. If Miami had just made a long drive at the end of the game that ended with a botched FG attempt, I would have thought I was watching a replay.

- FSU's defense was just everywhere. The linebackers were fast, the secondary was excellent, and the line put constant pressure on Wright. This is the defense that lost 4 first-rounders in the Draft last year? Really? Wow, they're extremely impressive once again. Miami managed 3 rushing yards.

- Miami's D was pretty darn good as well. Aside from a couple good FSU catches, the secondary was excellent in coverage. If you thought FSU holding Miami to 3 rushing yards was good, well, Miami held FSU to 2 rushing yards. If I was playing a nintendo game on the easiest level, I'm not sure I could hold the opponent to 2 rushing yards.

- While I'm on the subject, I'm with Todd Blackledge, I don't understand why a sack counts as negative rushing yards. Just seems kinda stupid to me. Let me also state for the record that I think Blackledge is excellent as a color man. Let me also state for the record that Lou Holtz should not be anywhere near a TV camera. The man is approaching senility quickly.

- Sam Shields, you need to catch the ball. Great pass by Wright on that 2nd to last drive, and I think that effectively killed any shot the Canes had at winning the game. On the other hand, Darnell Jenkins and Lance Leggett were very solid for the Canes. All-American TE Greg Olsen was a non-factor for the Canes.

- It's clear why EDSBS is the best college football blog throughout the land: Excellent live blog of the second half with a nice overview of most of the things that went on.

- All in all, it's clear that these are two of the top defenses in the NCAA. Both are fast, can get to the QB, and cause turnovers when the other teams make a mistake. FSU will certainly be in the top 10 next poll (probably released by the time you read this), and Miami shouldn't fall much further than 15 or so IMO. I'm not sure FSU has the offense to be able to contend for a national title, but the defense is certainly in place.

Excellent football game all-around, and a great way to end the first weekend of college football of the year!

Celebrating Labor Day: Is Wall Street or Norma Rae Winning?

Labor Day is often associated with rest and relaxation. And what better way to rest and relax than to check out a review of recent labor law postings. Paul Secunda and Richard Bales over at Labor Prof Blog have an extensive and engaging post today that does just that. They are hosting the 73rd Edition of the Blawg Review, and what better day for a couple of labor and employment law profesors to host it than on Labor Day.

Interestingly, for each post they discuss--and the postings are from a wide-array of blogs--they declare whether mangement ("Wall Street") or labor ("Norma Rae") won. For instance, they examine our Deion Branch post below and declare the winner to be Wall Street, in this case the New England Patriots (and they do so despite Colin's impressive efforts in the comments section). Be sure to check out Paul and Richard's post, it's both informative and entertaining.