PromoTheRobot Posted September 3, 2015 Share Posted September 3, 2015 Dareus should appeal today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 3, 2015 Share Posted September 3, 2015 @RapSheet: The 3 main points Berman made in nullifying the suspension: 1. No notice of discipline; 2. No testimony from Pash; 3. No access to files. Â That's nonsense. That does effectively make cheating legal - if you can go outside the rules but not be disciplined because there's no specific penalty defined for it beforehand, that's saying "Hey, cheating's okay!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted September 3, 2015 Share Posted September 3, 2015 (edited) I think the only person more excited by this news than Brady is Tim Graham. Edited September 3, 2015 by LABillzFan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted September 3, 2015 Share Posted September 3, 2015 @RapSheet: The 3 main points Berman made in nullifying the suspension: 1. No notice of discipline; 2. No testimony from Pash; 3. No access to files. Read: Technicalities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Avenger Posted September 3, 2015 Share Posted September 3, 2015 Cossack is one of the best legal minds around. He basically said the CBA gave Goodell leeway with punishment, Berman just said, basically, that's not fair. Regardless of the process, the bungling, and whatever else the NFL may have done, it appears all was within the CBA's language. So this ruling appears to suggest that this and many other collectively bargained agreements that allow punishment to be meted out by management, even when there is no guidelines for the punishment are unfair and the power granted isn't fair. Seems like a major win for those with CBAs in any industry. We'll see what the appeal says. Â My understanding was that the judge had to rule on whether the CBA allowed the process/punishment that was given, not whether it was fair. The players agreed to the CBA and they were thinking much more about money than anything else at the time it was put in place - the disciplinary powers of the league were an afterthought. I just don't understand how a judge steps in and essentials says, "yeah, the players agreed to this system and the powers given to the commissioner, but it's not really fair and I don't like the way Brady was treated". The question should be about whether the league had the power to do what it did under the CBA or not, not whether the agreed upon system was inherently fair. It that sense I think it's a pretty dangerous ruling - you don't have to be bound by a CBA if it is later ruled unfair, even if you agreed to it initially. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Poojer Posted September 3, 2015 Share Posted September 3, 2015 Neither is driving 56 in a 55, but you can still get punished for it. Â Having not read the CBA or the opinion I can't comment on the legal aspect, but I think the outcome is just for 2 reasons:1. "More likely than not" is a bull **** standard for imposing penalties.2. Underinflating footballs isn't that big of a deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloHokie13 Posted September 3, 2015 Share Posted September 3, 2015 Neither is driving 56 in a 55, but you can still get punished for it. Â And you would argue equipment calibration in court and the charges would be dropped Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted September 3, 2015 Share Posted September 3, 2015 @RapSheet: The 3 main points Berman made in nullifying the suspension: 1. No notice of discipline; 2. No testimony from Pash; 3. No access to files. a few points that were very well discussed in the big thread. Read: Technicalities. agreed. but i would underscore that those arent small points, which is what some might read in the word technicalities. it was major flubs by the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 3, 2015 Share Posted September 3, 2015 a few points that were very well discussed in the big thread. Â agreed. but i would underscore that those arent small points, which is what some might read in the word technicalities. it was major flubs by the league. Â They're technicalities, because they don't speak to the central fact of the case that Brady CHEATED. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Avenger Posted September 3, 2015 Share Posted September 3, 2015 Â That's nonsense. That does effectively make cheating legal - if you can go outside the rules but not be disciplined because there's no specific penalty defined for it beforehand, that's saying "Hey, cheating's okay!" Â Exactly! I guess unless an action is specifically called out as an infraction with a predefined penalty it's OK - so giving material aid to ISIS, unless expressly forbidden and with a proscribed penalty is OK - anything goes! Â I understand this is how criminal law works (here in MA last summer they caught a guy taking pictures up women's skirts but had to let him go because there was no statute against it - fastest I've ever seen a new law hit the books afterwards), but this is an agreed upon CBA, not criminal law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
die hard bills fan Posted September 3, 2015 Share Posted September 3, 2015 Unbelievable. The "judge" has basically said you can cheat and get away with it in the eye's of the law if you just deny, deny, deny and your lawyers find loopholes to get you off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingRex Posted September 3, 2015 Share Posted September 3, 2015 Yes, they can. The question is will they, and how long will that process take? According to ESPN, the NFL has already decided they will appeal this ruling to a higher court. However, there are two factors which heavily impact this decision:  1. The finding by Judge Berman for Brady now puts the burden directly on the NFL to not only prove to the appellate court that their agreement in the CBA gives Goodell authority to be the judge, jury, and executioner in these cases even if the NFL is denying due process  2. This is a substantive victory for Brady but NOT for the Pats who already have publicly accepted a million dollar fine and loss of draft picks for allowing game balls to be deflated for competitive advantage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BackInDaDay Posted September 3, 2015 Share Posted September 3, 2015 Pretty sure this is the way Goodell wanted it. He looks like he tried his damnedest to punish New England while knowing it was too off-the-wall to ever come across as legit in a court of law. Â bingo.. this appears to have been a carefully crafted process to succeed in the court of popular opinion, yet fail in actual court. Â the only advise coming from our D to Tom, is to be careful what you ask for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaninATL Posted September 3, 2015 Share Posted September 3, 2015 AP: Dareus to administer deflategate punishment week 2. Â absolute beatdown Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dib Posted September 3, 2015 Share Posted September 3, 2015 Bend over NFL. Â tail wagging the dog again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luxy312 Posted September 3, 2015 Share Posted September 3, 2015 The two salient points made by the judge are as follows: Tom Brady didn't know he could be suspended for under inflating footballs. Tom Brady's people were not permitted access to talk to the report writer. By this logic, I think Marcel Dareus should IMMEDIATELY file with the NFL to have his suspension vacated. He didn't know he could be suspended for racing/driving like an idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaninATL Posted September 3, 2015 Share Posted September 3, 2015 Unbelievable. The "judge" has basically said you can cheat and get away with it in the eye's of the law if you just deny, deny, deny and your lawyers find loopholes to get you off. Â that's not it at all. your assessment is a gross oversimplification. It has to do with zero precedent and due process considerations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJasper Probincrux III Posted September 3, 2015 Share Posted September 3, 2015 So, how long is the NFL going to pretend that they are upset that their meal ticket is playing? All of this is going exactly the way they want it to. They want to be SEEN as being tough on crime but they actually want the players on the field. What better way to do that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hot Buffalo Wings Posted September 3, 2015 Share Posted September 3, 2015 Does this mean the ball boys get their jobs back? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJasper Probincrux III Posted September 3, 2015 Share Posted September 3, 2015 And FWIW, the next set of CBA negotiations are going to be a mess Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts