Chomps
Well-known member
- Mar 18, 2019
- 2,323
- 0
Getty Images
One of the primary arguments made on behalf of Browns defensive end Myles Garrett in opposition to his indefinite suspension flowed from the idea that the labor deal doesn’t permit an indefinite suspension for on-field misconduct. While that argument didn’t work before hearing officer James Thrash, it has hit the bull’s-eye as to plenty of Browns fans looking for something/anything when defending him.
The only problem is that there’s no basis in the CBA for the notion that an indefinite suspension is prohibited.
Article 46 sets forth the terms and conditions of discipline imposed by the league. It contains no language that would limit the ability of the league to fashion the punishment that was imposed on Garrett.
This likely won’t stop those who are determined to defend the indefensible. To the extent anyone is wondering, however, whether the CBA supports the argument that an indefinite suspension isn’t allowed, it is.
Garrett will miss the rest of the 2019 season. In the offseason, he’ll be required to meet with the Commissioner before a decision is made regarding further discipline or a Week One reinstatement for 2020.