09-01-2009, 08:00 PM
<!--quoteo(post=61052:date=Sep 1 2009, 07:58 PM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Sep 1 2009, 07:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=61050:date=Sep 1 2009, 06:56 PM:name=Kid)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kid @ Sep 1 2009, 06:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->The CBA is online. It's 241 pages so I'm not going to read it but I virtually guarantee you that the CBA has language which controls how a contract may be voided.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Without reading it, common sense would seem to dictate that if you give an athlete a contract, assuming they are 30 and they are actually several years older, that would be enough to void the contract. Of course, common sense doesn't always win.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I added to my post after you quoted it. You're right. Like I said, absent the CBA, they would certainly have a basis to void the contract. But if, by contract (i.e. the CBA), they limit the bases through which a contract can be voided, that limitation is enforceable.
Without reading it, common sense would seem to dictate that if you give an athlete a contract, assuming they are 30 and they are actually several years older, that would be enough to void the contract. Of course, common sense doesn't always win.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I added to my post after you quoted it. You're right. Like I said, absent the CBA, they would certainly have a basis to void the contract. But if, by contract (i.e. the CBA), they limit the bases through which a contract can be voided, that limitation is enforceable.
This is not some silly theory that's unsupported and deserves being mocked by photos of Xena. ![[Image: ITgoyeg.png]](http://i.imgur.com/ITgoyeg.png)