Court Discards Players’ Appeal on NFL’s Free Agency Clause : Football: The players association had argued that requiring compensation to teams that lose free agents is a violation of antitrust laws.

Key limitations on free agency in the National Football League survived a Supreme Court challenge today.

The court, over two dissenting votes, let stand a ruling that the NFL restrictions on a player’s switch to another team do not violate federal antitrust law.

Justices Byron R. White and Harry A. Blackmun voted to hear arguments in the case, but four votes are needed to grant such review.

The case stemmed from the 24-day strike in 1987 by the players. The walkout ended without a new contract, and the owners continued to enforce the restrictions on free agency in the expired contract.

Under the restrictions, a team can retain a veteran free-agent player by exercising its right of “first refusal” and matching a competing club’s offer.

If the team declines to match the offer, the new club must compensate the team with additional draft choices.

The NFL has a separate provision, known as Plan B, in which teams protect 37 players and permit the rest to become free agents.

The National Football League Players Assn. filed a federal lawsuit in 1987, accusing the league and team owners of violating antitrust law by enforcing the first refusal-compensation system after the expiration of the 1982 contract.

A federal judge in Minneapolis initially ruled for the players, ordering that a trial be held on whether the owners violated the antitrust laws.

But the U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the league and ruled that the owners were exempt from the antitrust laws under the 1982 agreement.

Justice Department official Kenneth Starr backed the players in asking the Supreme Court to hear the case.

The Supreme Court simply rejected the appeal without any explanation or comment.

The 8th Circuit Court’s decision was hailed by the owners as a major victory that would spur the players to return to the bargaining table.

The players association responded by decertifying itself as the players bargaining agent, a move designed to nullify the 1982 contract and revive the antitrust suit. Nine current and former union officials substituted themselves for the association in filing the appeal acted on today.

The players association still has legal challenges to the NFL, including a suit by New York Jets running back Freeman McNeil.

“While we are disappointed that the Supreme Court has decided not to consider this issue, the decision does not affect any antitrust claims the players have for the period after the NFLPA’s abandonment of its collective bargaining status,” said association Executive Director Gene Upshaw. “We are highly confident that the players will prevail in those claims.”

NFL spokesman Joe Browne said, “The Supreme Court’s ruling is positive for the league but not an unexpected development. It confirms that the NFLPA’s lengthy course of litigation--rather than negotiation--will only prolong the time before a new collective bargaining agreement is reached.”