Background

Phase 2 wantlist hit cleared. The April 22, 2020 Red Sox decision is the doctrinal successor to the January 13, 2020 Astros decision and the substantive successor to the September 15, 2017 Red Sox/Yankees Apple Watch statement — all three are now in the archive under commissioner-decisions/. The decision distinguishes the Red Sox 2018 conduct from the Astros 2017 conduct on two grounds: (1) scope (Watkins's conduct was episodic and isolated, only relevant in runner-on-second situations representing ~19.7% of plate appearances); (2) hierarchy of knowledge (Watkins acted alone, with most players, the manager, the coaching staff, and the front office unaware). The Cora discipline ambiguity: this decision finds Cora did not know of Watkins's 2018 conduct, but Cora was separately suspended through the 2020 Postseason in the January 13, 2020 Astros decision for his 2017 Astros bench-coach role. Manfred declined to impose additional Red Sox-related discipline on Cora here. Doctrinal note on the March 2018 Joe Torre memorandum: the Red Sox decision quotes the Torre memo at length but the underlying memorandum itself is not in this archive — that's a candidate Phase 4 acquisition target (likely available via court filings or the Astros / Red Sox litigation discovery records). Adjacent later document: this decision references the 2017 Red Sox/Yankees Apple Watch statement (in archive) and the September 2017 fine of the Red Sox for using a smartwatch — together with the March 2018 Torre memo, those are the three foundational documents establishing the bright-line 'no electronic equipment for sign-stealing' rule that Watkins's 2018 conduct violated and that this decision enforces. Structural single-source caveat per CLAUDE.md: MLB-issued disciplinary documents face a structural two-source problem (MLB is sole publisher; CDN PDF and MLB.com news page are co-owned mirrors). The Astros decision precedent in this archive is held at needs_review for the same reason; this decision follows that precedent.

Key provisions

• Discipline (Watkins): 'Watkins is suspended without pay for the 2020 season and 2020 Postseason and prohibited from serving as a replay room operator for the 2021 season and 2021 Postseason.'
• Discipline (Red Sox club): 'I have determined that the Red Sox shall forfeit their second round selection in the 2020 First-Year Player Draft.'
• No player discipline: 'No other Red Sox personnel will be disciplined. Although the Commissioner's Office agreed not to discipline players who were truthful in their interviews, based on the findings of the investigation, this is not a case in which I would have otherwise considered imposing discipline on players.'
• Cora finding: 'I do not find that then-Manager Alex Cora, the Red Sox coaching staff, the Red Sox front office, or most of the players on the 2018 Red Sox knew or should have known that Watkins was utilizing in-game video to update the information that he had learned from his pregame analysis. Communication of these violations was episodic and isolated to Watkins and a limited number of Red Sox players only.'
• Limited-scope finding: 'Unlike the Houston Astros' 2017 conduct, in which players communicated to the batter from the dugout area in real time the precise type of pitch about to be thrown, Watkins's conduct, by its very nature, was far more limited in scope and impact. The information was only relevant when the Red Sox had a runner on second base (which was 19.7% of plate appearances league-wide in 2018), and Watkins communicated sign sequences in a manner that indicated that he had decoded them from the in-game feed in only a small percentage of those occurrences.'
• Front-office compliance finding: 'I find that the Red Sox front office consistently communicated MLB's sign-stealing rules to non-player staff and made commendable efforts toward instilling a culture of compliance in their organization.'

Notable provisions

I find that J.T. Watkins, the Red Sox video replay system operator, on at least some occasions during the 2018 regular season, utilized the game feeds in the replay room, in violation of MLB regulations, to revise sign sequence information that he had permissibly provided to players prior to the game.— Decision and Findings of the Commissioner in the Red Sox Investigation, Apr. 22, 2020, at 1 (Executive Summary)

On January 7, 2020, The Athletic reporters Ken Rosenthal and Evan Drellich published an article alleging that the 2018 Boston Red Sox engaged in a sign-stealing method that violated MLB's rules. Specifically, the article alleged that a Red Sox staff member in the video replay review room ('replay room') provided information about the opposing catcher's current sign sequence to a Red Sox player, who would relay the information in person to the dugout, where someone would use gestures to signal the sign sequence to the runner on second base, who in turn would decipher the catcher's sign and use body movement to signal the coming pitch type to the batter. The article implied, but did not explicitly state, that the replay room staff member was deciphering signs from the video replay system, which was (and is) a violation of MLB rules.— Decision and Findings of the Commissioner in the Red Sox Investigation, Apr. 22, 2020, at 2 (Overview of the Investigation)

I instructed the Department of Investigations ('DOI') to investigate the matter with the same degree of thoroughness and urgency as the Houston Astros matter. The DOI interviewed 65 witnesses, including 34 current and former Red Sox players.— Decision and Findings of the Commissioner in the Red Sox Investigation, Apr. 22, 2020, at 2

In March 2018, however, my office clarified in a memorandum sent to all Clubs by then-Chief Baseball Officer Joe Torre that 'electronic equipment, including game feeds in the Club replay room and/or video room, may never be used during a game for the purpose of stealing the opposing team's signs.'— Decision and Findings of the Commissioner in the Red Sox Investigation, Apr. 22, 2020, at 2

Further context

Manfred Red Sox / Watkins Sign-Stealing Decision (Apr 22, 2020)

The 15-page Decision and Findings of the Commissioner in the Red Sox Investigation — the doctrinal successor to the January 13, 2020 Astros decision. Disciplines J.T. Watkins (Red Sox 2018 video replay system operator) and the Red Sox club; explicitly clears Manager Alex Cora and most of the 2018 roster of knowledge of Watkins's conduct. Phase 2 wantlist hit cleared.

The discipline imposed

• J.T. Watkins: suspended without pay for the 2020 season and 2020 Postseason; prohibited from serving as a replay room operator for 2021 season and 2021 Postseason.
• Boston Red Sox (club): forfeiture of second-round selection in the 2020 First-Year Player Draft.
• Alex Cora: no additional Red Sox-related discipline. Cora was separately suspended through the 2020 Postseason in the January 13, 2020 Astros decision (in archive) for his 2017 Astros bench-coach role.
• No other Red Sox personnel disciplined for this conduct.

How this differs from the Astros decision

Three distinguishing findings:

1. Scope: Watkins's conduct was limited to runner-on-second-base situations (~19.7% of plate appearances league-wide in 2018) and even within those situations only "a small percentage" involved decoded-from-in-game-feed sign sequences.
2. Hierarchy of knowledge: Watkins acted alone. Cora, the coaching staff, the front office, and most of the players were not found to know of the 2018 in-game decoding.
3. Front-office compliance posture: the Red Sox front office made "commendable efforts toward instilling a culture of compliance," an explicit finding not present in the Astros decision.

These three findings explain why the Red Sox discipline was substantially lighter than the Astros' (a single replay operator suspended + one draft pick, vs. the Astros' GM and manager suspended + $5M fine + four draft picks).

Verification status

needs_review — primary-publisher PDF from MLB's CDN on file. Same structural two-source problem as the Astros decision: MLB is the sole publisher and the MLB.com news page is a co-owned mirror, not an independent confirmation source. Wayback snapshot capture pending.

Related documents in the archive

• 2020-01-13_decision_manfred-astros-sign-stealing.md — the doctrinal predecessor; this decision builds on its rule-interpretation framework.
• 2017-09-15_statement_manfred-red-sox-yankees-apple-watch.md — the underlying bright-line "electronic-device" rule that Watkins's 2018 conduct violated.
• ../antitrust-and-courts/1978-04-07_caselaw_finley-v-kuhn.md — the foundational federal appellate ruling on Commissioner's best-interests authority.

Related documents

Related documents

Manfred Astros sign-stealing decision (Jan 13, 2020), Manfred Red Sox / Yankees Apple Watch statement (Sep 15, 2017), Finley v. Kuhn

Source provenance

• Primary source
• MLB.com news page hosting the decision text