Info: NFL labor rule on "repeat violations on the same game day after having been corrected earlier"

I saw this referred to in the NFLPA's court document, so I checked it out. I found a document describing the NFL's rules for discipline against PLAYERS for equipment violations:

League discipline may also be imposed on players whose equipment, uniform, or On Field violations are detected during postgame review of video, who repeat violations on the same game day after having been corrected earlier, or who participate in the game despite not having corrected a violation when instructed to do so. First offenses will result in fines.

https://nfllabor.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/2011-league-discipline.pdf

Click to expand...

Okay, first of all, I didn't add that bold/italics, that was from the actual document, indicating that the authors of the document felt that it was very important.

Second of all, deflating footballs after they were corrected during inspection sounds exactly like a "repeat violation on the same game day after having been corrected earlier." So even if somehow Brady is guilty despite the lack of evidence, there is a rule, and Goodell broke it. In fact, it's just one of many rules he broke to impose unprecedented discipline on his least favorite organization.

I'm convinced that there is no way in hell this suspension holds up. At first I thought a defamation lawsuit had no chance of even being heard, but if more things keep coming out about how this was a blatant screw-job I'm starting to wonder...

Just a guess but wouldn't the NFL argue that the ball is not under the realm of equipment and that the general language of the cba would imply that equipment is generally things that the player wears ie; pads/wraps/braces etc.

It's a real grey area.

Well in a Goodell NFL, the rulebook is more like a guideline than anything else.

Like the legal age of drinking in Quebec, the NFL Laws under RG are more of a suggestion.

Weren't the vikings penalized for an equipment violation for heating footballs on the sidelines?

TommyBrady12 said:

Weren't the vikings penalized for an equipment violation for heating footballs on the sidelines?

Click to expand...

They just received a warning. For some reason it was deemed not trying to gain an advantage somehow .

TommyBrady12 said:

Weren't the vikings penalized for an equipment violation for heating footballs on the sidelines?

Click to expand...

I believe the nfl just told both teams to knock it off and no suspensions fines were handed out. Could be wrong though.

But see, no one was trying to deceive or gain a competitive advantage in that case. It's COMPLETELY different.

NJPatsfan26 said:

Well in a Goodell NFL, the rulebook is more like a guideline than anything else.

Click to expand...

More like a coloring book. Just fill in between the dotted lines with a nice magenta crayon.

TriplecHamp said:

Just a guess but wouldn't the NFL argue that the ball is not under the realm of equipment and that the general language of the cba would imply that equipment is generally things that the player wears ie; pads/wraps/braces etc.

It's a real grey area.

Click to expand...

wat

NSPF said:

I saw this referred to in the NFLPA's court document, so I checked it out. I found a document describing the NFL's rules for discipline against PLAYERS for equipment violations:



Okay, first of all, I didn't add that bold/italics, that was from the actual document, indicating that the authors of the document felt that it was very important.

Second of all, deflating footballs after they were corrected during inspection sounds exactly like a "repeat violation on the same game day after having been corrected earlier." So even if somehow Brady is guilty despite the lack of evidence, there is a rule, and Goodell broke it. In fact, it's just one of many rules he broke to impose unprecedented discipline on his least favorite organization.

I'm convinced that there is no way in hell this suspension holds up. At first I thought a defamation lawsuit had no chance of even being heard, but if more things keep coming out about how this was a blatant screw-job I'm starting to wonder...

Click to expand...

Good work! Can we send it to Kessler to add to his 15 page double spaced paper?

" ... players whose equipment, uniform, or On Field violations are detected during postgame review of video ..."
Sounds like the rule applies to a player's stuff or a players actions on the field.
Footballs are not part of a player's stuff are they?

eom said:

wat

Click to expand...

Where is the word ball mentioned? The NFL could argue in court that since it was grouped with uniform, equipment could be things like gloves, knee braces, sleeves etc. not a football.

This whole scandal (legally speaking) is based on a grey space between the CBA. Not everything in the CBA is explicitly stated, Goodell is arguing that he is allowed to make it up as he goes along because Brady did something that wasn't discussed in the CBA. Kessler and the NFLPA are arguing that he still has to follow the law and parts of contention in the CBA.

TriplecHamp said:

Where is the word ball mentioned? The NFL could argue in court that since it was grouped with uniform, equipment could be things like gloves, knee braces, sleeves etc. not a football.

Click to expand...

but where is the provision on ball violations? brady has to get notice....

TommyBrady12 said:

but where is the provision on ball violations? brady has to get notice....

Click to expand...

correct, the NFL is arguing they don't I guess. Legally they do but they're arguing that language in the CBA allows them to hand down unprecedented punishments. The NFL has had trouble arguing their interpretations of the CBA and law and I don't see this case as being anything different from that trend.

TriplecHamp said:

Where is the word ball mentioned? The NFL could argue in court that since it was grouped with uniform, equipment could be things like gloves, knee braces, sleeves etc. not a football.

This whole scandal (legally speaking) is based on a grey space between the CBA. Not everything in the CBA is explicitly stated, Goodell is arguing that he is allowed to make it up as he goes along because Brady did something that wasn't discussed in the CBA. Kessler and the NFLPA are arguing that he still has to follow the law and parts of contention in the CBA.

Click to expand...

The CBA also doesn't contemplate a player being railroaded. That doesn't mean it's allowed.

TriplecHamp said:

Just a guess but wouldn't the NFL argue that the ball is not under the realm of equipment and that the general language of the cba would imply that equipment is generally things that the player wears ie; pads/wraps/braces etc.

It's a real grey area.

Click to expand...

But the precedence was set in 2009 when the Jets tampered with their kicking ball. Right?

So whichever realm that football was put in it should apply here as well. IMO

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...patriotsincident-becomes-issue-in-brady-case/

TriplecHamp said:

Where is the word ball mentioned? The NFL could argue in court that since it was grouped with uniform, equipment could be things like gloves, knee braces, sleeves etc. not a football.

This whole scandal (legally speaking) is based on a grey space between the CBA. Not everything in the CBA is explicitly stated, Goodell is arguing that he is allowed to make it up as he goes along because Brady did something that wasn't discussed in the CBA. Kessler and the NFLPA are arguing that he still has to follow the law and parts of contention in the CBA.

Click to expand...

who is in charge of the footballs for the patriots?

football mgr or equipment mgr?