Curt Flood Defended

Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005
From: Richard Zitrin
Subject: Re: Curt Flood, pioneer

Bill Deane writes, in part:
"Flood was indeed a courageous, principled man, who basically lost his livelihood because of his challenge of baseball's reserve clause. But he lost his challenge, so how did his actions save others from suffering as he did? Three decades have blurred history. Many people know that the Flood case happened in the early 1970s, and that the advent of free agency happened in the mid-1970s, and they assume that there was some connection. If there was, I fail to see it.”

I'm a bit incredulous that someone as knowledgeable as Bill would marginalize Flood's taking his case to the US Supreme Court, complete with a celebrity lawyer and former justice, Arthur Goldberg. The case made headlines. It got everyone thinking about the unfairness of the reserve clause. It created a synergy for change. Saying Flood's actions had no effect on others is like saying Rosa Parks didn't do anyone any good because she was thrown out of her seat on the bus and, thereby, lost.

Richard Zitrin Adjunct Professor of Law, UC Hastings
Adjunct Professor of Law, Univ. of San Francisco
c/o Zitrin & Mastromonaco, LLP
One Ferry Building, Suite 202
San Francisco, CA 94111

(Source: SABR-L Digest)