Baseball Antitrust Law

1052 Words 5 Pages
Throughout the history of baseball, the baseball players and their owners have found themselves in many disputes over money and working conditions. For instance, at the beginning of 1876 baseball players found themselves at the beginning of what could be considered a monopoly; where the owner’s controlled baseball for a quarter of a century (Baseball, 2010). This was due to William Hulbert and other owner’s creation of the reserve clause. As a result of this clause, baseball player’s salaries were kept low, and they were unable to leave their team unless their owner traded them. If a player did not abide by this legally binding clause they would more than likely be blacklisted from baseball forever.
However, at the beginning of the nineteen seventies things started to change in baseball as players, such as Curt Flood tried to make a stand against the reverse clause. Unfortunately for Curt Flood, fear of losing their jobs kept many players from taking a stand with him. As a result, Flood lost his case against the reverse clause and Supreme Court ruled that baseball “was still exempt from antitrust laws” (Baseball, 2010).
Despite Flood losing his case, it gained national attention and showed that fans like baseball players were against the reverse clause (Baseball, 2010). Owners fearful of what
…show more content…
The owners found a way to control these players and use them for profit; the players did not have much say in their lives or the money they should have earned. Nonetheless, with the reverse clause players could not move freely every time their contract was up which kept many players on the same team and area. These constant players, in my opinion, kept fans coming back and attached to the team. Whereas if they were free agents they could choose the highest bidder and move from team to team (no

Related Documents