The Relevant Rules

[Fixit]

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d802456c2&template=with-video&confirm=true


1. Page 105 of the Game Operations manual says: "No video recording devices of any kind are permitted to be in use in the coaches' booth, on the field, or in the locker room during the game." It later says: "All video shooting locations must be enclosed on all sides with a roof overhead."

2. And, a memo from Ray Anderson, NFL head of football operations, to head coaches and GMs on Sept. 6, 2006 said: "Video taping 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."

Interpret those however, but it's pretty clear that the Pats are not being investigated for "cheating."

 

[naclone]

this isn't what was just read on weei though which was much more detailed than this and ended with the phrase "in order to give the team an unfair advantage in the game being played."

 

[Fixit]

this isn't what was just read on weei though which was much more detailed than this and ended with the phrase "in order to give the team an unfair advantage in the game being played."

Oooooh, then let's find that one!

 

[naclone]

we're trying!

one thing is for sure, Bob Kraft has some VERY expensive lawyers parsing every single word in every single document the league has.

 

[BelichickFan]

This is the thing, these aren't in the Rulebook, one's in the "Game Operations Manual" and another is a memo. How they play with the rulebook and how one overrides the other with regard to conflicts, who the hell knows.

 

[Patriot_in_NY]

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d802456c2&template=with-video&confirm=true


1. Page 105 of the Game Operations manual says: "No video recording devices of any kind are permitted to be in use in the coaches' booth, on the field, or in the locker room during the game." It later says: "All video shooting locations must be enclosed on all sides with a roof overhead."

2. And, a memo from Ray Anderson, NFL head of football operations, to head coaches and GMs on Sept. 6, 2006 said: "Video taping 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."

Interpret those however, but it's pretty clear that the Pats are not being investigated for "cheating."

From what I understand, the guy was busted headed to the Locker room (so this was certainly an orchestrated sting). STILL, that said......... All BB has to say is "hey, I was taping for after game analysis for later use, can I help it if the camera guy had to take a wiz. Thats not my problem........NOW, GO POUND SAND."


He may still get smacked a bit, but the penatly has to go WAAAAAAAY down, perhaps even just a 5 or a 6 and a fine.

 

[Patriot_in_NY]

Oooooh, then let's find that one!

It was the memo that was sent out.

 

[ddell1]

From what I understand, the guy was busted headed to the Locker room (so this was certainly an orchestrated sting). STILL, that said......... All BB has to say is "hey, I was taping for after game analysis for later use, can I help it if the camera guy had to take a wiz. Thats not my problem........NOW, GO POUND SAND."


He may still get smacked a bit, but the penatly has to go WAAAAAAAY down, perhaps even just a 5 or a 6 and a fine.

I thought it was reported he was busted on the sideline in the first quarter. I would think if he was headed to the locker room that would have been at least at half time.

 

[Fixit]

This is the thing, these aren't in the Rulebook, one's in the "Game Operations Manual" and another is a memo. How they play with the rulebook and how one overrides the other with regard to conflicts, who the hell knows.

From what I've read, there's nothing in the rulebook regarding video cameras.

In other news, that debunked photo is on touchdown.org, and they're claiming it as their own.

 

[Patriot_in_NY]

I thought it was reported he was busted on the sideline in the first quarter. I would think if he was headed to the locker room that would have been at least at half time.

Perhaps that was part of the "drama", I understand it occured in the tunnel headed in to the locker room. I could be wrong.

So much crap out there.

 

[PonyExpress]

Just to follow up... these rules are contradictory and leave a wide margin for interpretation. First they say you cannot have video IN USE during a game; then they go on to say that, if you do, you must have it ENCLOSED. So how are we to interpret this? IN USE must mean in use for in-game competitive advantage.

Then it goes on to say you cannot use video to capture signals accessible to the coaching staff during a game; but it doesn't say you can't tape them for later use, after the game.

This is exactly what BB is arguing: he used video not for in-game competitive use, but for later research. Seems legit, and a genuine loophole.

 

[LoveDemPats]

Just to follow up... these rules are contradictory and leave a wide margin for interpretation. First they say you cannot have video IN USE during a game; then they go on to say that, if you do, you must have it ENCLOSED. So how are we to interpret this? IN USE must mean in use for in-game competitive advantage.

Then it goes on to say you cannot use video to capture signals accessible to the coaching staff during a game; but it doesn't say you can't tape them for later use, after the game.

This is exactly what BB is arguing: he used video not for in-game competitive use, but for later research. Seems legit, and a genuine loophole.

I hope so much that you are correct man. It would be one of the most hilarious things to see. To watch all these fools run away enmass.

Many people will still say, "well, they were cheating as far as I'm concerned."

 

[Patriot_in_NY]

Just to follow up... these rules are contradictory and leave a wide margin for interpretation. First they say you cannot have video IN USE during a game; then they go on to say that, if you do, you must have it ENCLOSED. So how are we to interpret this? IN USE must mean in use for in-game competitive advantage.

Then it goes on to say you cannot use video to capture signals accessible to the coaching staff during a game; but it doesn't say you can't tape them for later use, after the game.

This is exactly what BB is arguing: he used video not for in-game competitive use, but for later research. Seems legit, and a genuine loophole.

Zackly.... :rocker:

 

[AzPatsFan]

On the first days after the story broke, it was difficult to see what Belichick was referring to in his discussion with Goodell regarding "interpretation of the rules"...

It appeared he was caught, red handed.

Now I'm not sure, at all. As time has gone on, I think he and the Patriots, have a perfectly valid Defense, and a loophole that any lawyer could drive a car or maybe an armored division through.

It does not even appear that the 'prima facie' evidence we have, in fact constitutes even a technical violation, unless the information was used in that specific game. From news reports the camera and tape was seized 8 minutes into the game from a non coach, who by background would not likely know a weak zone rotation from a man to man alignment. So unless he had a up link in real time, there was no advantage gained in this game.

Mediots at work.

BB follows the letter of the law, and laughs last and best. Plus if he was actually trying to force the installation of defensive radios as they voted to allow last year, this action pushes that forward.

Every team they play henceforth, will be looking over the shoulders, for the invisible leprechaun helpers...

 

[naclone]

Now I'm not sure, at all. As time has gone on, I think he and the Patriots, have a perfectly valid Defense, and a loophole that any lawyer could drive a car or maybe an armored division through.

well, the league has lawyers too don't forget.

 

[richpats]

Many people will still say, "well, they were cheating as far as I'm concerned."

And either way that's going to be what people remember. Nobody remembers the retraction, just the headline. It makes sense for people to reason that the Pats cheated and that's how their improbable dynasty came to be.

 

[upstater1]

well, the league has lawyers too don't forget.

Yeah but the league's lawyers are irrelevant. This isn't going to court. The Patriots lawyers and staff will come up with a defense, and Judge Goodell will preside. No need for NFL lawyers at all here, unless the NFL thinks the Patriots are going to contest this, which wouldn't happen in a million years.

 

[DaBruinz]

I started a thread regarding the Picture that Ursa put up and, in light of what one interpretation of the rule is, I find it kinda funny that someone hadn't mentoned this before.

The guy that Ursa mentioned is a Jets employee. A Jets employee, on the sidelines, with a video camera. Wouldn't it be funny if this blew up in Mangini's face for ALSO having unapproved video equipment on his sideline.. Regardless of whether they actually taped the Pats....

 

[naclone]

Yeah but the league's lawyers are irrelevant. This isn't going to court. The Patriots lawyers and staff will come up with a defense, and Judge Goodell will preside. No need for NFL lawyers at all here, unless the NFL thinks the Patriots are going to contest this, which wouldn't happen in a million years.

Right, I'm just saying that they've been through all these rules and bylaws so the potential for loopholes that big probably isn't that great.

 

[Patriot_in_NY]

Yeah but the league's lawyers are irrelevant. This isn't going to court. The Patriots lawyers and staff will come up with a defense, and Judge Goodell will preside. No need for NFL lawyers at all here, unless the NFL thinks the Patriots are going to contest this, which wouldn't happen in a million years.

Bullcrap......... If they take a 1 and suspend BB for 6 games or something goofy like that. Then they absolutely contest it.