The definitive piece of evidence from Wells exonerating Patriots

Okay, I have pieced various things together from the report, and a number of you have provided insight and details that were most helpful. But this is IT--the final piece of evidence that shows that Wells screwed up on the question of which gauged was used, which thereby should have led to findings of deflation rates completely in keeping with natural causes. THIS is the evidence to trot out with all future inquirers to seal the deal; many have alluded to the gist of this, but as far as I know, this is the first time someone has cited the specific info needed from the report itself (I could be wrong about that).

Now, A refresher (old hat to many--please bear with me): As most of you know, two gauges were used to measure the balls at halftime, and one was shown to be unnaturally high by .3-.45 PSI. The refs believe this was the gauge they used to measure pre-game (meaning that a 12.5 measurement would have really been 12.0-12.2), in which case rather than 8 of the 11 balls being under what they could be at halftime due to natural deflation (11.32-11.52, p. 113 of Wells), only 2 would be (see PSI readings p. 8), AND these would be within .2 of what was acceptable (which can be accounted for through various other deflationary factors mentioned in the appendices, which can reduce PSI up to an additional .3). So, as you know, THE key question is which gauge was really used pre-game?

Now, some of you helped clear this up for me: the reason Wells believe the refs were wrong about which gauge they used (they thought they used the higher one) was that the Pats gauge was found to be normal, and the Pats said they gave the refs the ball after the ball attendants had checked them at 12.5-12.6. So, since the refs also got to 12.5 ish, they assumed the Pats' gauge was aligned with theirs, and thus, given that the pats gauge was correct, the refs must have also used the correct lower gauge, instead of the artificially high one.

In addition, Wells reported that by the time the refs measured them, they could not have been artificially high from pre game ball prep (which they found could increase PSI by .7--p. 120) because the effects of prepping wear off after 15-30 minutes, and the refs did not check the balls until much longer than this after the attendants turned them in --1 hour 15 minutes according to p. 120.

NOW, here is THE oversight that seals the deal: if you go to page 49-50, Jastremski (attendant) said he rubbed each ball for 7-15 minutes, and THEN SET THE PSI AT 12.6 BEFORE MOVING ON TO THE NEXT BALL.!!!!What this means is that the pats checked each ball right after it was rubbed. Thus, a 12.6 reading would be up to .7 high due to the gloving process, meaning the balls would have actually been closer to 11.9 after the effects of the gloving wore off!

Given that the effects of gloving wore off by the time the refs measured, this means that if they measured at 12.5, they would have gotten a measurement that was actually up to .7 too high. This would be evidence that in fact the high gauge WAS the one used, just as they remembered!!! Some of you have raised this possibility, but now we have specific information from the report indicating this. The key is that the Pats tested the PSI for each ball right after the gloving, which raises the PSI!

Now, we all know that ar the very least, the league should have acknowledged that the evidence for tampering would not be there if they assumed the high gauge was used by the rfs, and then they could have tried to explain why it was not this guage. Bt now we have something further in the opposite direction. We have CLEAR CUT evidence, cited in the reprt itself, that establishes that the refs must have used the higher gauge. If this has been realized, everything else falls into place.

NO objective person can argue with it. THIS is definitive. I know a lot of haters have dismissed everything else, but this gives report-specific data which cannot be argued with. It shows ref gauge readings were up to .7 too high, showing that they used the higher gauge, showing that all the halftime readings were within acceptable range. None of the highly open to interpretation texts, etc. etc. etc. matter if the pSI favors the Patriots. And now it is 100% clear cut that the evidence indicates this. The end, end of discussion, over and out.

Thank you for your time.

not only has that been all hashed thru, but I linked you to a post mentioning that 8 months ago in your other thread.
you're breaking news on a yr old story that probably already has 10k posts devoted to it.

also, it's all entirely irrelevant.

Hi--like I said, perhaps it has been said before. Obviously, I wasn't able to read everything, but what I never specifically saw before was the actual reference (including page number, etc.) where this was spelled out--just an awareness that the gloving could have raised it, depending upon when the pats measured the PSI. In any case, I'm still having to discuss this with Pats detractors, so I figure it could still be useful to someone else like myself who hadn't seen it detailed already. (And with all of the new posts concerning pSI issues, I didn't think the age of the original issue should matter all that much).

do you understand what kind of a difference 1/3rd of a psi is?

I showed this to a friend who is a Steelers fan (I know, I know...)

His response was that Jastremski rubbing the footballs prior was simply proof that the Patriots did indeed have a conspiratorial scheme: to him it showed that the Pats were taking an under inflated football, temporarily artificially brought it to a higher PSI, knowing it would quickly fall to a lower level.


With the small sample size of one, this information failed miserably in the endeavor to prove a hater wrong with his misconceptions.

Look, I don't disagree with you that the variables are so immeasurable that the sorts of differences were are talking about are not significant enough to establish the "more probable than not" of anything. BUT, Patriot haters will be impressed by this data, and if they are open to listening at all, will want data specific rebuttals.

I did find a thread from may 13ff that dealt with the point that the PSI measured immediately after the gloving (p. 3 and 4 of the thread). Maybe there were other threads (tons to read at the time). But even there there wasn't a specific page number from the report, etc. (though once again, maybe it was mentioned somewhere by someone). But I'm betting that other folks are having to re-hash this again with detractors just like I am, so at the very least, some refresher of specific data should be helpful. I had connected a lot of dots before, but not this specific detail with proof.

Peace.

jmt57 said:

I showed this to a friend who is a Steelers fan (I know, I know...)

His response was that Jastremski rubbing the footballs prior was simply proof that the Patriots did indeed have a conspiratorial scheme: to him it showed that the Pats were taking an under inflated football, temporarily artificially brought it to a higher PSI, knowing it would quickly fall to a lower level.


With the small sample size of one, this information failed miserably in the endeavor to prove a hater wrong with his misconceptions.

Click to expand...

I agree some haters will hate no matter what, but I have moved some people from "I KNOW they did it" to "Hmm, maybe they didn't do it, but I still hate them." But 'll take that.

To your Steelers friend, I'd say simply, nothing in the rule precludes getting to PSI "artificially" by gloving (plus, it is by no means clear that anyone had any idea how PSI was affected by temp, glovng, etc. etc. before all of this was tested). In addition, nothing obliges, I don't think, teams to give the refs the ball at 12.5 or above. They could give them to them at 1.0. It is on the refs to check them, etc. As far as I know (unless someone can cite a rule to the contrary) the only thing forbidden is tampering with the balls after the refs deal with them. That was one of the whole stupid points about the "deflator" nickname nonsense--attendants are expected to deflate, inflate, whatever during the week of prep, up to the tme they deliver them to the refs. Admission that they deflate is only scandalous if it is clear cut they do it after final ref inspection.

do you think it's common practice for the refs to gauge all these balls before each game?

eom said:

do you think it's common practice for the refs to gauge all these balls before each game?

Click to expand...

Probably not, especially back then (but now we have new info of course that makes us wonder if they really changed anything ths year). On the other hand, we know one ball from the Fall 2014 Jets game was at 16 (per texts), so assuming the attendants checked the ball at 12.5 and gave it to them, they might have checked and then seen it was a tad low, and put an arbitrary amount of air in without rechecking.

eom said:

do you understand what kind of a difference 1/3rd of a psi is?

Click to expand...

Yeah, about a third.

Off The Grid said:

Yeah, about a third.

Click to expand...

33%
Actually if you use the data from the intercepted ball that also proves they used that gauge, there's two ways to prove it but wells overlooked them on purpose.

cmasspatsfan said:

33%
Actually if you use the data from the intercepted ball that also proves they used that gauge, there's two ways to prove it but wells overlooked them on purpose.

Click to expand...

Actually, 33% isn't exactly a Third.

It didn't matter what Jaskremski did to the balls or what pressure he set them. It's up to the officials to set the ball pressure. Jaz could have given them totally flat balls and if the ref said they were good, then they would be good.

nobody cares about the footballs

if they did, they wouldnt let cam newton hand them out to kids after td scores...

the whole thing is a sham.

cmasspatsfan said:

33%
Actually if you use the data from the intercepted ball that also proves they used that gauge, there's two ways to prove it but wells overlooked them on purpose.

Click to expand...

dude, they didn't use any ****ing gauge

There's not really any question about Jaskremski's Balls...is there??

Guy played 23 Years...through all sorts of Pain.

C'mon, now.