Peter on Kraft/BB's explanations

[SVN]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...6/labor/2.html

3. I think it is good to see the Patriots back in the fold with the NFL owners and coaches. At the meetings, New England owner Bob Kraft got a nice hand when he talked about the league being a partnership, and he'd never want to do anything the rest of the owners would view as something unsportsmanlike or unfair.

I give Bill Belichick credit for showing up and facing the music of the press and his peers and issuing an explanation (not an apology, but an explanation) following Kraft's speech, claiming again that he misinterpreted the rule that a team could not videotape anything on the field during games. He claimed he thought he was allowed to tape opposing defensive signals as long as nothing from the tapes was used in that game.

"I interpreted it as you couldn't use it during the game, that current game, which was never done. I've never done that. Whatever was used was used for the future,'' Belichick told reporters. And he said his interpretation of the rule didn't change after NFL vice president Ray Anderson sent a memo to all teams reiterating the no-videotaping rule in September 2006. He said when he saw the Anderson memo, "I should have called the league and asked for a clarification of it. But when I did re-read that rule, I still interpreted it, obviously incorrectly, that as long as it wasn't used in that game, that it was OK."

Not to beat a dead controversy, but I don't buy Belichick's explanation. Never will. Let me point out the exact wording in the Anderson memo: "Videotaping of any type, including but not limited to taping of an opponent's offensive or defensive signals, is prohibited on the sidelines, in the coaches' booth, in the locker room, or at any other locations accessible to club staff members during the game.''

How is it possible that one of the smartest men in his field -- in any field, really -- could possibly misinterpret Anderson's crystal-clear words?

[flasox27]

King is persona non grata at Foxboro. Hopefully he can figure out the meaning of that.

[PonyExpress]

Why wouldn't he say that? Polian is the ventriloquist moving his lips.

[signbabybrady]

hey king go FU** yourself.

Someone as smart as you should have known there was no way for them to translate these tapes into something they could use for the current game but that didn't stop you from asking if this had anything to do with the Patriots percieved ability to make halftime adjustments better than most.

Why is it a head coach can't make one mistake interpreting rules but someone who is supposed to be a football expert can make as many mistakes as you have through the years covering this sport and still call themselves an expert.

King, you have lost touch with reality and you no longer give good insight to the game which you should have more insight to than almost anyother member of the media because you have had behind the scenes access for so long. But somehow you have managed to seem dumber and dumber ever year you cover the sport. Most people get smarter the longer they are around something.

[KontradictioN]

Anybody find it interesting that, before this Spygate saga, journalists such as Mr. King here were looking for any excuse to point the finger at the Patriots for something they did wrong. What was it we were accused of but then exonerated on before Spygate? Was it tampering? I think so, but my memory is rusty.

[Fixit]

Originally Posted by SVN

Not to beat a dead controversy, but I don't buy Belichick's explanation. Never will. Let me point out the exact wording in the Anderson memo: "Videotaping of any type, including but not limited to taping of an opponent's offensive or defensive signals, is prohibited on the sidelines, in the coaches' booth, in the locker room, or at any other locations accessible to club staff members during the game.''

How is it possible that one of the smartest men in his field -- in any field, really -- could possibly misinterpret Anderson's crystal-clear words?

Please. The league said it was okay that Mangini taped from a location which violates that very memo because they got permission from the home team.

Not too long ago, Mangini himself said the difference between Spygate and what he did was that the Pats didn't get permission:

What separated “Spygate" from the normal practice of shooting from both end zones is that, according to Mangini, the Patriots never sought permission.

“I don't know what (Belichick) does in other games, (but) he didn't make the request in our game," Mangini said.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/12132007...ts__256096.htm

The rule isn't as hard and fast as the peabrained automatons like King seem to think. I'm of a mind to send him that article and watch him backpedal.

[BelichickFan]

Originally Posted by Fixit

Please. The league said it was okay that Mangini taped from a location which violates that very memo because they got permission from the home team.

Not too long ago, Mangini himself said the difference between Spygate and what he did was that the Pats didn't get permission:

And the Patriots denied ever giving permission. If it's SUCH a big deal you would think the permission would be required to be in writing

[KontradictioN]

Originally Posted by Fixit

Please. The league said it was okay that Mangini taped from a location which violates that very memo because they got permission from the home team.

Not too long ago, Mangini himself said the difference between Spygate and what he did was that the Pats didn't get permission:

What separated “Spygate" from the normal practice of shooting from both end zones is that, according to Mangini, the Patriots never sought permission.

“I don't know what (Belichick) does in other games, (but) he didn't make the request in our game," Mangini said.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/12132007...ts__256096.htm

The rule isn't as hard and fast as the peabrained automatons like King seem to think. I'm of a mind to send him that article and watch him backpedal.

I'm of a mind to gather the international press in one building for an "awards banquet". You know what else would be in that building? 2,000 pounds of C-4.

[apple strudel]

So very smart people can't make mistakes? Well, they do, all the time. This is unreasonable speculation totally without evidence and it is wholly irresponsible. It's the op-ed methodology of smearing somebody.

"That writer? I think he must be a communist because he's way too smart and talks about things I don't understand. That activist? Well, look at the clothes he wears, he must be wrong."

There are countless other examples of this type of journalism that is totally without evidence or reason, is endemic to today's journalism, and is the brother of the yellow journalism of the late 19th century. It should never get past an editor, and, when it does, we should realize that something's up.

[Koma]

So, King "never will" understand or accept Belichick's explanation for videotaping from the sidelines.

On the other hand, he completely accepts Jeff Fisher's denial that there was any sort of "agreement" during the Colts-Titans season finale.

Why not cast a skeptical eye on both situations, Pete?