Naugy Nugget
Rookie
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2011
- Messages
- 32
- Reaction score
- 0
It was legal to film defensive signals. The only violation was the spot it was done from. It is ILLOGICAL to assume filming the same thing from a different spot, has any impact on a game.
Ask Reiss > Patriots Mailbag > Spygate Q&A says:
Q: I've heard that it's not against the NFL rules to tape opponents signals but it was the point on the field from where the Patriots taped the signals that was the problem. Is that correct, and if so do you know where in the rule book that is stated?
Jack, Texas
A: Jack, taping signals of opposing coaches, regardless of location, is against the rules. The NFL clarified that in the September of 2006 memo from Ray Anderson, although from a technical standpoint, the league should probably now be writing that into the Constitution & Bylaws.
And the Final Ruling says:
Bill Belichick has been fined $500,000 by the NFL. That is the maximum amount under the NFL Constitution and By-Laws for violating league policy last Sunday on the use of equipment to videotape an opposing team's offensive or defensive signals.
No mention of it being about location, just about taping signals, period.
In a full interview, Belichick said:
"Even though I felt there was a gray area in the rule and I misinterpreted the rule, that was my mistake and we've been penalized for it. I apologize to everybody that is involved - the league, the other teams, the fans, our team, for the amount of conversation and dialogue that it's caused.
"I misinterpreted the rule. The commissioner made his ruling and we've been penalized for it and tried to move on."
Again, no mention of it being about location.
It's not LOGICAL for Bill to not offer up this defense if he thought it was significant.
Bottom line: the Pats were caught out, they owned up to it, they paid the penalties, life moved on.
The Saints should be doing the same, and an apology from Williams is not enough. We should have heard from the owner by now.
The Saints rules violations clearly did impact the game in which they occurred and of course rewarded the injury of players, so they should be more heavily punished.
I agree and I seriously cannot believe this. The punishment came down quick on us for spygate and was done by the commissionner ONLY. Now for something far worse, he's going to consult the owners about it?? This can't be serious. Obviously the punishment will be softened with the owner's meeting.
I agree. Why does the commish feel he can/should wait, when he didn't feel he could/should wait when Belichick and the Pats are involved?