3. I think it is good to see the Patriots back in the fold with the NFL owners and coaches. At the meetings, New England owner Bob Kraft got a nice hand when he talked about the league being a partnership, and he'd never want to do anything the rest of the owners would view as something unsportsmanlike or unfair.
I give Bill Belichick credit for showing up and facing the music of the press and his peers and issuing an explanation (not an apology, but an explanation) following Kraft's speech, claiming again that he misinterpreted the rule that a team could not videotape anything on the field during games. He claimed he thought he was allowed to tape opposing defensive signals as long as nothing from the tapes was used in that game.
"I interpreted it as you couldn't use it during the game, that current game, which was never done. I've never done that. Whatever was used was used for the future,'' Belichick told reporters. And he said his interpretation of the rule didn't change after NFL vice president Ray Anderson sent a memo to all teams reiterating the no-videotaping rule in September 2006. He said when he saw the Anderson memo, "I should have called the league and asked for a clarification of it. But when I did re-read that rule, I still interpreted it, obviously incorrectly, that as long as it wasn't used in that game, that it was OK."
Not to beat a dead controversy, but I don't buy Belichick's explanation. Never will. Let me point out the exact wording in the Anderson memo: "Videotaping 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.''
How is it possible that one of the smartest men in his field -- in any field, really -- could possibly misinterpret Anderson's crystal-clear words?
