Plagiarist borges whining again: "Where were Feinberg and AFL-CIO for Rice & Peterson?"

Where was Feinberg’s “concerns” and the AFL-CIO’s “outrage” when Ray Rice’s rights, including the one protecting him against double jeopardy, were trampled on? Crickets.


Where was Feinberg’s “concerns” and the AFL-CIO’s “outrage” when Adrian Peterson was being hit with a penalty that didn’t exist at the time in which he applied corporal punishment to his son in ways many felt outrageous but not yet in violation of the NFL’s domestic abuse policy because they didn’t have one? Crickets.


Borges: Phony Deflategate outrage smacks of hypocrisy




I don't know ron maybe because Brady didn't physically assault someone smaller than him

PAH LEEZ don't tell me Borges is playing the race card!

It's irrelevant to Brady's case

Douchebag

interesting......sounds like he's plagiarizing Stephen A Smith these days

Borges is a 'vomit-smelling sleaze'

Ron, perhaps the difference is that Rice and Peterson won their cases and have not been overturned on appeal. Brady only got official Feinberg/AFL support when he was ridiculously overturned and then faced an uphill battle to get a rehearing.

There's also the fact Brady didn't assault a woman or child, or anyone, or even actually do anything wrong.

There's zero race element here.

JMC00 said:

Where was Feinberg’s “concerns” and the AFL-CIO’s “outrage” when Ray Rice’s rights, including the one protecting him against double jeopardy, were trampled on? Crickets.


Where was Feinberg’s “concerns” and the AFL-CIO’s “outrage” when Adrian Peterson was being hit with a penalty that didn’t exist at the time in which he applied corporal punishment to his son in ways many felt outrageous but not yet in violation of the NFL’s domestic abuse policy because they didn’t have one? Crickets.

Click to expand...

Those guys each won all of their court cases (so far). The Brady ruling is the first one where a player actually lost and the first one where an actual real life court ruled that Article 46 means the Commissioner can do whatever he pleases.

So that's a key difference which would explain a reason for getting involved.

EDIT: I made this post before seeing Ross12's. He beat me to the punch and said the exact same thing.

Borges wants to be that guy who keeps Brady from the HOF

Wrong Borges

Ross12 said:

Ron, perhaps the difference is that Rice and Peterson won their cases and have not been overturned on appeal. Brady only got official Feinberg/AFL support when he was ridiculously overturned and then faced an uphill battle to get a rehearing.

There's also the fact Brady didn't assault a woman or child, or anyone, or even actually do anything wrong.

There's zero race element here.

Click to expand...

The hypocrisy is with the NFL Front Office. They had no problem when the Rice punishment was overturned on appeal:

The NFL issued a statement Friday: "We respect Judge Jones's decision to reinstate Ray Rice from his indefinite suspension for violating the league's Personal Conduct Policy in an incident of domestic violence.

They did not keep fighting like they are with TB.

Speaking of irrelevant........

The plagiarist outdid himself with this piece. I can't stand Ronbo, although I have always begrudgingly acknowledged his writing skills. A child could poke dozens of holes in his argument. I sense our boy has gone from smugly confident that Brady had no shot to worrying more than a little that this may not be quite over. It's very pleasurable watching this weasel squirm...

Borges is still alive? I hadn't heard anything about him in so long that I assumed that he passed away years ago.

They probably didn't want to go on record defending a child abuser and wife beater. But for the capital offense of maybe (but scientifically almost certainly not) telling someone to deflate a football, I imagine they had no such concerns. Also because they kinda won their cases anyway so no further input is needed at this time. This isn't ****ing rocket science.

XLIX said:

Those guys each won all of their court cases (so far). The Brady ruling is the first one where a player actually lost and the first one where an actual real life court ruled that Article 46 means the Commissioner can do whatever he pleases.

So that's a key difference which would explain a reason for getting involved.

EDIT: I made this post before seeing Ross12's. He beat me to the punch and said the exact same thing.

Click to expand...

Arbitration clauses in labor contracts are on trial not Tom Brady. The AFL/CIO pointed out that the
union members do not lose their right to an unbiased and fair hearing when they agree to arbitration.
Feinberg pointed out that Goodell was a biased and unfair arbitrator who violated the basic rules of
arbitration to the advantage of management. Every labor union in the country is affected by this case.

Borges...I've heard that name.

Doesn't he write for the Herald? I wouldn't know as I haven't paid a dime for their paper, clicked on their web page or cared what any of their "journalists" have to say since the days of Tomass.

This should really be his signature every time he writes stupid pieces concerning Patriots/Brady/etc.

Borges has literally been wrong about everything Patriots related for 16 years. He's a hater with an agenda and he has zero credibility.

I'm still waiting for the big Patriots collapse he has been predicting since they hired Belichick.

Goodell didn't serve as arbitrator of his own discipline on Rice or Peterson if I remember correctly. THAT'S the issue at hand. THAT'S why the AFL-CIO, et al, are writing amicus briefs. If Goodell hadn't served as arbitrator for Brady, this would have been over ages ago because Brady would have won. But he did, which flies in the face of "fairness", and is high profile enough that it could, no, WOULD, have massive ramifications for all unionized workers with collective bargaining deal with arbitrators to settle disputes.

One word for Borges: Prozac.

A blatant and obvious click bait article. Loser

AtomicDawg said:

If Goodell hadn't served as arbitrator for Brady, this would have been over ages ago because Brady would have won. .

Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that truly neutral arbiter would settle for a fine for an equipment violation for Brady since that's what's in the rule book. Brady wouldn't get off scott free but he wouldn't be suspended for a quarter of the season, that's for sure.