Fun read: Michael Hurley destroys Spygate article in NY Post

Patsfans.com has come a long way on this issue. It's good to see.

The lawsuit against the New York Post and five of its reporters (Laura Italiano, Brad Hamilton, Larry Celona, Cathy Burke, and Gary Buiso) for reporting that Dominique Strauss-Kahn's accuser worked as a prostitute has a distinctly humorous edge to it. If the reports published from July 2 through yesterday are untrue, as the Sofitel Hotel housekeeper claims, then they're woefully libelous. But in bringing the suit, lawyers Kenneth Thompson and Douglas Wigdor have unintentionally written one of the funnier legal complaints to come before the Bronx County civil court in a while. That's because this one is about the New York Post doing what it does best -- writing clever, trashy headlines

Click to expand...

Such quotes just come with the territory when you sue the New York Post. And if the nation's oldest continuously published paper hasn't sobered up by this time, it's not going to. But it is owned by Rupert Murdoch, who is very rich, so if there's a settlement or payoff to be made here, the plaintiff will likely get a sum that could make repeating such statements about her worth it.

Click to expand...

http://www.thewire.com/business/2011/07/its-hard-sue-new-york-post-straight-face/39596/

Gwedd said:

Again, the Patriots were never accused of breaking the NFL game rules. They were never accused by the NFL of cheating. What they were accused of is breaking a rule in the NFL Operations Manual which states (among many, many, other things) where cameras may be placed prior to, during, and after a game. They never broke a single game rule, did nothing that could, in any way, influence a game on that day.

Click to expand...

bresna said:

All the Patriots did was tape FROM THE WRONG LOCATION. They taped from the sidelines. They were supposed to tape from the booth.

It was NOT the use of a video camera that made it illegal, it was the location of that video camera.

Click to expand...

PatsWickedPissah said:

You beat me to it.
It really gets me wicked pissed to read time and again inaccurate reporting of the precise memo restriction that the Pats were accused of violating. Camera PLACEMENT violation. Not videotaping.

Click to expand...

People keep citing this fan-theory, but it's really just not true....

The Patriots were busted for videotaping signals. Not camera placement. Videotaping signals. I point this out because I vividly remember Mike Reiss confirming this when he went to the Matt Walsh/Goodell meeting (iirc) in early 2008 when he answered his fan mailbag. Fans were asking him about this fan-theory constantly (along with the fan-idea that taping signals wasn't illegal until Goodell wrote memos addressing it). Reiss made it pretty clear, from the league sources he talked to, and even quoted, that this fan-theory just wasn't true. What got the Pats in trouble was indeed about filming signals, not camera placement. And, if I remember the quote from Reiss correctly, the rule had been in place "since pretty much forever," or something like that. Really, our fans need to stop nitpicking this way, it's just so cheap and petty. Everyone knew/knows that filming signals is illegal. It really sucks when we talk about Spygate....and so many Pats fans try and dig up the "Camera placement" theory to try and de-bunk it. It's like our own fanbase is being just as obnoxious as all the Pats-haters who totally overblow the effect of spygate. There are quite a few ways to argue against Pats-haters who bring up spygate (Cowher and Jimmy Johnson's admissions to doing it, and the Scouts Inc article that articulates how the signal-taping process is really just about making the post-game film-breakdown a quicker process (i.e. not about getting an in-game advantage)...we don't need to dig up this silly little excuse that it was somehow just about "camera placement." Cmon.


BTW - Yes, technically it is illegal for a team to use a camera outside the league approved filming zone. But...all it takes is a simple pre-game approval to make it ok. For example, teams always make sure to shoot their All-22 footage from the sidelines AND from the endzone. Yet, That second camera is used by everyteam, for every game. The endzone camera simply needs to be approved before the game (and always is). So, with that being said, Let's pretend the Pats simply got caught shooting the normal All 22 endzone footage...but forgot to get a pass. Seriously, it would never amount to what Spygate was. Not even close. So, lets stop trying to pretend that Spygate was "really" just some simple mistake about location as opposed to signal-taping. It wasn't.

Shockt327 said:

People keep citing this fan-theory, but it's really just not true....

The Patriots were busted for videotaping signals. Not camera placement. Videotaping signals. I point this out because I vividly remember Mike Reiss confirming this when he went to the Matt Walsh/Goodell meeting (iirc) in early 2008 when he answered his fan mailbag. Fans were asking him about this fan-theory constantly (along with the fan-idea that taping signals wasn't illegal until Goodell wrote memos addressing it). Reiss made it pretty clear, from the league sources he talked to, and even quoted, that this fan-theory just wasn't true. What got the Pats in trouble was indeed about filming signals, not camera placement. And, if I remember the quote from Reiss correctly, the rule had been in place "since pretty much forever," or something like that. Really, our fans need to stop nitpicking this way, it's just so cheap and petty. Everyone knew/knows that filming signals is illegal. It really sucks when we talk about Spygate....and so many Pats fans try and dig up the "Camera placement" theory to try and de-bunk it. It's like our own fanbase is being just as obnoxious as all the Pats-haters who totally overblow the effect of spygate. There are quite a few ways to argue against Pats-haters who bring up spygate (Cowher and Jimmy Johnson's admissions to doing it, and the Scouts Inc article that articulates how the signal-taping process is really just about making the post-game film-breakdown a quicker process (i.e. not about getting an in-game advantage)...we don't need to dig up this silly little excuse that it was somehow just about "camera placement." Cmon.


BTW - Yes, technically it is illegal for a team to use a camera outside the league approved filming zone. But...all it takes is a simple pre-game approval to make it ok. For example, teams always make sure to shoot their All-22 footage from the sidelines AND from the endzone. Yet, That second camera is used by everyteam, for every game. The endzone camera simply needs to be approved before the game (and always is). So, with that being said, Let's pretend the Pats simply got caught shooting the normal All 22 endzone footage...but forgot to get a pass. Seriously, it would never amount to what Spygate was. Not even close. So, lets stop trying to pretend that Spygate was "really" just some simple mistake about location as opposed to signal-taping. It wasn't.

Click to expand...

You're wrong. Filming signals was not, and still is not, illegal.

The best one is, Pats couldn't win a superbowl without cheating, or haven't one won since they caught cheating. If it had such an effect, why did they not win the superbowl in 2002, 2005, or 2006. (Specifically 06). secondly, They were minutes away from winning 2 superbowls since then. I think this validates that this whole thing gave them a tiny advantage. (there certainly was an advantage... I don't care what anyone says, if there was no advantage, they would not have done it.)

I believe Kraft rightfully criticized Bill because any gain was minimal.
That said, there were specific allowances (e.g. end zones) and specific prohibitions (across from the opposing bench where the Pats videographer stood IN PLAIN SIGHT) on camera placement. There was no prohibition on filming signals per se.
If you watched football you'd see to this day that the OC and DC cover their mouths so that their dialog and signals cannot be read. Why bother if it's "illegal"?

fightingirish595 said:

The best one is, Pats couldn't win a superbowl without cheating, or haven't one won since they caught cheating. If it had such an effect, why did they not win the superbowl in 2002, 2005, or 2006. (Specifically 06). secondly, They were minutes away from winning 2 superbowls since then. I think this validates that this whole thing gave them a tiny advantage. (there certainly was an advantage... I don't care what anyone says, if there was no advantage, they would not have done it.)

Click to expand...

You want the Patriots' coaching staff to give up everything they do that creates an advantage, if they aren't sure that the other teams are doing the same thing?

Months after it happened, I was at a private event at the stadium and sat 15 feet in front of Jonathan Kraft while he explained his personal view of what happened. He said that BB interprets all rules to his advantage, (and that he should, as part of the job description). In this case, BB probably overreached in his interpretation (Kraft was chuckling a bit when he said this). And, the coach was genuinely puzzled by the intensity of concern about it coming from the Commissioner's office, given that the taping was hardly significant to anything competitive, and that this lack of concern showed up in BB's response to the Commissioner, which may have been misinterpreted a bit and led to the size of the punishment.

Deus Irae said:

You're wrong. Filming signals was not, and still is not, illegal.

Click to expand...

Article IX, Section 9.1(c)(14) of the NFL constitution and bylaws:

"Any use by any club at any time, from the start to the finish of any game in which such club is a participant, of any communications or information-gathering equipment, other than Polaroid-type cameras or field telephones, shall be prohibited, including without limitation videotape machines, telephone tapping, or bugging devices, or any other form of electronic devices that might aid a team during the playing of a game."

Yeah, this fan-rumor that illegal-filming is only ever addressed in the operations manual (and only deals with the the location of the camera, at that) is just not true. And you don't need the above bylaws quote to understand this either. Taping signals is illegal. Everyone knows it.

PatsWickedPissah said:

I believe Kraft rightfully criticized Bill because any gain was minimal.
That said, there were specific allowances (e.g. end zones) and specific prohibitions (across from the opposing bench where the Pats videographer stood IN PLAIN SIGHT) on camera placement. There was no prohibition on filming signals per se.
If you watched football you'd see to this day that the OC and DC cover their mouths so that their dialog and signals cannot be read. Why bother if it's "illegal"?

Click to expand...

Remember this one:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?id=3017423

Or this one:

http://www.secsportsfan.com/taping-is-legal-kiddies.html

betterthanthealternative said:

You want the Patriots' coaching staff to give up everything they do that creates an advantage, if they aren't sure that the other teams are doing the same thing?

Click to expand...

Thats a bit of a straw man. I never said anything close to that

Shockt327 said:

Article IX, Section 9.1(c)(14) of the NFL constitution and bylaws:

"Any use by any club at any time, from the start to the finish of any game in which such club is a participant, of any communications or information-gathering equipment, other than Polaroid-type cameras or field telephones, shall be prohibited, including without limitation videotape machines, telephone tapping, or bugging devices, or any other form of electronic devices that might aid a team during the playing of a game."

Yeah, this fan-rumor that illegal-filming is only ever addressed in the operations manual (and only deals with the the location of the camera, at that) is just not true. And you don't need the above bylaws quote to understand this either. Taping signals is illegal. Everyone knows it.

Click to expand...

Eye roll all you want. We went over this a million times, while it was front and center. You're just wrong. There were two issues to be looked at:

Camera location
"of a game"

Belichick was clearly wrong on camera location. He was arguably right on "of a game".

While I've always maintained that the whole thing could have been avoided with a simple phone call (BB could have asked for clarification of Goodell's memo), the issue is not what you're claiming.

Shockt327 said:

Article IX, Section 9.1(c)(14) of the NFL constitution and bylaws:

"Any use by any club at any time, from the start to the finish of any game in which such club is a participant, of any communications or information-gathering equipment, other than Polaroid-type cameras or field telephones, shall be prohibited, including without limitation videotape machines, telephone tapping, or bugging devices, or any other form of electronic devices that might aid a team during the playing of a game."

Yeah, this fan-rumor that illegal-filming is only ever addressed in the operations manual (and only deals with the the location of the camera, at that) is just not true. And you don't need the above bylaws quote to understand this either. Taping signals is illegal. Everyone knows it.

Click to expand...

Well, I can see YOU are convinced but ,of course, as every single one of you haters continues to ignore the Game Operations Manual from 2007, I'll just have to post it AGAIN (1000th time)

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/sports/20080511_NFL_DOCUMENTS.pdf

Page A105...SectionV. Part A...
"No video recording devices of any kind are permitted to be in use in the coaches booth, on the filed, or in the locker room during the game"

Now on to Page A106...Volume II, Game Operations-General
GAME OPERATIONS...GET IT??? IN GAME OPERATIONS!

-All video shooting locations must be enclosed on all sides with a roof overhead
SEE IT???? VIDEO?????? DO YOU SEE THAT??????

-Any doors entering the shooting locations within the public seating areas of the stadium are required to be lockable from both the inside and outside of the location to prevent unwarranted access

-All locations must supply adequate power for each team(at least two outlets per team)

-All locations must be installed with the required video printer lines from both the sideline and end zone shooting locations to the coaches booth and field. It is not required that wiring be installed for the opposite end zone position, but if the opposite end zone is wired for the home team it must also be wired for the visiting team.Home teams must provide visiting teams the same situational set up for printers that they have themselves(i.e. cover, placemnet behind the bench etc.)
SEE THE GIGANTIC PROBLEM YOU HAVE WITH YOUR INTERPRETATION YET?

-It is suggested that each location provide either countertop space or tables for both teams in the booth and a table on the field and coaches booth

THIS IS THE NFL IN GAME OPERATION MANUAL!!!!! THIS IS WHAT YOU PERSIST IN SAYING IS NOT TRUE!!!!

WHY???????????

Deus Irae said:

Eye roll all you want. We went over this a million times, while it was front and center. You're just wrong. There were two issues to be looked at:

Camera location
"of a game"

Belichick was clearly wrong on camera location. He was arguably right on "of a game".

While I've always maintained that the whole thing could have been avoided with a simple phone call (BB could have asked for clarification of Goodell's memo), the issue is not what you're claiming.

Click to expand...

1) My claim was against fans -- like the ones I quoted -- who like to say that Spygate was just about "camera location" and claim that there are no rules against videotaping signals. Such a claim is ridiculous. There are indeed rules against signal stealing. I just quoted it. So that fan-theory just bit the dust (and I swear it is the most commonly used defense too). Likewise, the fact that you admit that there were indeed "two issues" at hand backs up my criticism. Again, Fans, like the ones I quoted keep trying to claim that's it's just about the camera location and not signal stealing. So, your acceptance of how there *is* a rule that's directly related to spying (even if you think it's open to argument) backs up my point. It's always been about stealing signals, and there is a rule against it. A far cry from the claim that's just just about camera location.

2) In regards to the "of a game" argument. I totally get it. I have indeed heard it before. And if this kind of argument was being made in a courtroom lawsuit, or something, I might even agree. The wording of the rule is poor enough to dance around its intent. But, for what it's worth, I find it to be a shallow rebuttal when arging against those who question the Patriots because of Spygate. Spygate is being argued in a court of public opinion; I have doubt in making a convincing argument on such a technicality.

oh great, so you back public lynchings built on a foundation of mob mentality....krist, forget it, you're morally bankrupt...welcome to ignore.

http://www.trendingbuffalo.com/?powerpress_pinw=3269-podcast

I just got done listening to this......

I actually feel bad for this guy. He's got to have mental issues

The reason for confusion is taking Goodell at his word:

Goodell said Belichick told him he believed the taping was legal; Goodell said he did not concur.

"He said that's always been his interpretation since he's been the head coach," the commissioner said. "We are going to agree to disagree on the facts."

Click to expand...

http://www.boston.com/sports/articles/2008/02/14/patriots_taping_since_2000/?page=full

Goodell thus offered the opinion that such taping had always been illegal, when in fact no written policy was ever put in place until the famous Sept. 6, 2006 memo. Goodell lied. Pure and simple.

Shockt327 said:

1) My claim was against fans -- like the ones I quoted -- who like to say that Spygate was just about "camera location" and claim that there are no rules against videotaping signals. Such a claim is ridiculous. There are indeed rules against signal stealing. I just quoted it. So that fan-theory just bit the dust (and I swear it is the most commonly used defense too). Likewise, the fact that you admit that there were indeed "two issues" at hand backs up my criticism. Again, Fans, like the ones I quoted keep trying to claim that's it's just about the camera location and not signal stealing. So, your acceptance of how there *is* a rule that's directly related to spying (even if you think it's open to argument) backs up my point. It's always been about stealing signals, and there is a rule against it. A far cry from the claim that's just just about camera location.

2) In regards to the "of a game" argument. I totally get it. I have indeed heard it before. And if this kind of argument was being made in a courtroom lawsuit, or something, I might even agree. The wording of the rule is poor enough to dance around its intent. But, for what it's worth, I find it to be a shallow rebuttal when arging against those who question the Patriots because of Spygate. Spygate is being argued in a court of public opinion; I have doubt in making a convincing argument on such a technicality.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry you don't get the blatantly obvious. Joker even further spelled it out for you.

We broke this down from stem to stern. We had a website (webpage?) dedicated to this for a while.

You're wrong. It's really just that simple.

Shockt327 said:

Article IX, Section 9.1(c)(14) of the NFL constitution and bylaws:

"Any use by any club at any time, from the start to the finish of any game in which such club is a participant, of any communications or information-gathering equipment, other than Polaroid-type cameras or field telephones, shall be prohibited, including without limitation videotape machines, telephone tapping, or bugging devices, or any other form of electronic devices that might aid a team during the playing of a game."

Yeah, this fan-rumor that illegal-filming is only ever addressed in the operations manual (and only deals with the the location of the camera, at that) is just not true. And you don't need the above bylaws quote to understand this either. Taping signals is illegal. Everyone knows it.

Click to expand...

Umm.... I can see from your post that reading comprehension isn't one of your major skill sets.

This part should jump right out at you: "Any use by any club at any time, from the start to the finish of any game in which such club is a participant......." What that says is that you can't use anything but a polaroid or field telephone to relay the opponent's signals to your coaching staff DURING THE GAME IN WHICH THEY ARE COLLECTED. The Patriots never did that. They collected video of opponents signals (just like every other club does/did) for use in a data file of known signals, FOR FUTURE USE.

The Patriots never used this system in-game, and were never accused by the league of doing such a thing. The only people who have claimed such a thing are trolls from losing franchises, and reportards/mediots who are trying to hack their way to some sort of name recognition.

So, nice try, and thanks for playing. Better luck next time.

https://m.facebook.com/profile.php?v=timeline&filter=1&id=208141182645666&refid=17

I find it comical the way he tells the story in all his interviews. Like a ghost story to a 5 year old.

Priceless listening