MLS boss bullish on sports betting
On the surface, it might seem as if the Major League Soccer commissioner’s call last week for legal sports betting in the U.S. is just another note in the same tune we’ve heard before.
After all, Don Garber said this about sports betting at the SXSW event in an interview in Austin, Texas, per geekwire.com
“We have a project going on now to really dig in deeply and understand it,” Garber said. “I’ll be the third commissioner [NBA’s Adam Silver and MLB’s Rob Manfred] in and say I’m very open to understanding how we can get more engaged in this market in a way that I think if done properly, can be regulated and managed and controlled. I’ll join the chorus of saying it’s time to bring it out of the dark ages. We’re doing what we can to figure out how to manage that effectively.”
Just like Silver and Manfred?
Sort of, except for this: The NBA and MLB, along with the NHL, NFL, and NCAA, are the entities suing New Jersey - via the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act of 1992 passed by Congress - so far successfully preventing sports betting at state racetracks and Atlantic City casinos. PASPA is the law that let Nevada keep its extensive sports betting while allowing Delaware, Oregon, and Montana the option of reviving previous sports betting efforts made in earlier years (Delaware is the state that eventually pounced, which is why you can now go to more than 100 liquor stores, grocery stores, Buffalo Wild Wings, and other businesses and try NFL-only parlay-only betting legally there).
Here's the, well, kicker: the MLS is not a party to that suit.
This takes me back to an odd legal episode that played out in federal court in Trenton, NJ in October 2014. U.S. District Court Judge Michael Shipp was on the bench, we media types and outside attorneys were in the court, and a dozen or so attorneys were on a conference call as Shipp – brother of ex-Arizona Cardinals running back Marcel Shipp (because that’s how this multi-year saga rolls) – read his ruling from the bench.
Shipp then agreed to issue a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) to ensure that Monmouth Park couldn’t offer sports betting while the case was playing out in court.
There was only one question asked, I wrote that day:
“That was by Ron Riccio, the lawyer for the state Thoroughbred Horsemen’s Association. Riccio wondered if the TRO applied to all sports, or just to games involving the plaintiffs.
Just the plaintiffs, Shipp replied – and the confusion began.
In a press release issued later [that day], track operator Dennis Drazin said in part, “[T]he injunction only applies to the four leagues and the NCAA and still allows for betting on other sports such as golf, tennis, boxing, MMA fighting, NASCAR and soccer.”
Well, that was until an addendum was posted by the judge, Drazin told me later.
“That reads that ‘upon further consideration,’ the TRO applies to all sports,” Drazin said.
“It’s pretty clear that after he got off the bench, he thought more about this. It’s unusual to grant relief to parties that aren’t there – and didn’t ask for relief.”
Back to 2017: Fort Lauderdale-based sports law attorney Daniel Wallach, who has followed this case closely for years, tells me this: “The soccer commissioner can have legal sports betting on his sport anytime he desires. Any state sports betting law that includes soccer (but not the major sports) couldn't be challenged by the NBA, NFL, et al, no matter what Judge Shipp did in Christie II. It would be sort of a backdoor way to legalize sports betting — at least on some sports.”
Wallach points out that the “marijuana route” could be in play.
Picture the MLS cutting a deal with New Jersey to offer sports betting for their sport – while expressly continuing to ban bets on the “Big Five.” Wallach wonders if U.S. Attorney Jeff Sessions would be at all interested in intervening in a situation where the Legislature and the sports league are in sync. If there is no aggrieved party, is there a point to doing so?
One problem with this line of thinking: Silver favors federally-regulated sports betting and opposes the New Jersey model. Therefore, it appears that Garber is of the same mindset.
An interesting side note: In 2014, Drazin added that he estimated about 8 percent of total bets made are not on the “Big Five” who are involved in the suit.
By the way, most people would realize that PASPA carves out an exception for horse racing. Lesser-known are the two other exceptions: dog racing and jai alai.
More on these themes as well as Donald Trump's Presidency and its relevance here and here.