Mr. WEO Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 There's no reason to believe that he was doing anything other than trying to defend his friend. Seeing as how, you know, his friend was on the floor and under the cop. And actually Shady admitted to throwing a punch, but it not landing. He might be lying, but here's no way to tell from the video and neither of his hands were injured, so there's no proof he connected. And as we've seen during games, throwing punches, even if they land, don't get you suspended. And how would he conclude that? Only the cops were injured. McCoy said he was trying to remove the cop's hand from his friend's neck...with a swing of his fist, perhaps.
26CornerBlitz Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 Only the cops were injured. McCoy said he was trying to remove the cop's hand from his friend's neck...with a swing of his fist, perhaps. Where is that statement?
Mr. WEO Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 (edited) Where is that statement? "In a video clip of the incident, McCoy appears to be throwing a punch that may have missed its target. McCoy's story is he was attempting to pull Butler's hands off Porter's neck but was unsuccessful." http://www.bigtrial.net/2016/02/why-shady-may-walk.html Edited April 6, 2016 by Mr. WEO
26CornerBlitz Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 "In a video clip of the incident, McCoy appears to be throwing a punch that may have missed its target. McCoy's story is he was attempting to pull Butler's hands off Porter's neck but was unsuccessful." http://www.bigtrial.net/2016/02/why-shady-may-walk.html Complete hearsay with nothing on the record from McCoy.
Doc Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 Only the cops were injured. McCoy said he was trying to remove the cop's hand from his friend's neck...with a swing of his fist, perhaps. Was the cop (Shady definitely had nothing to do with the other cop's injuries) assaulting his friend injured before or after Shady took the swing that may or may not have landed? What's that, you don't know? How do you think Rog will be able to know for sure? That's right, he can't. Hence he can't do a thing. Again, sorry.
thebandit27 Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 Was the cop (Shady definitely had nothing to do with the other cop's injuries) assaulting his friend injured before or after Shady took the swing that may or may not have landed? What's that, you don't know? How do you think Rog will be able to know for sure? That's right, he can't. Hence he can't do a thing. Again, sorry. Doc, I like you; you're a good poster. That said, I need to understand why you think the above is accurate? The Personal Conduct Policy is clear on these matters: https://nfllabor.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/personal-conduct-policy.pdf Starting here: "It is not enough simply to avoid being found guilty of a crime. Instead, as an employee of the NFL or a member club, you are held to a higher standard and expected to conduct yourself in a way that is responsible, promotes the values upon which the League is based, and is lawful. Persons who fail to live up to this standard of conduct are guilty of conduct detrimental and subject to discipline, even where the conduct itself does not result in conviction of a crime." ^This is where we can be 100% sure that McCoy doesn't need to be arrested to face discipline. Moving on we get to these two bullet points: • Conduct that imposes inherent danger to the safety and well being of another person; and • Conduct that undermines or puts at risk the integrity and reputation of the NFL, NFL clubs, or NFL players. No question that throwing a punch imposes danger to the safety and well-being of another person, and the second statement is the catch-all that gives Rog the ability to interject his own opinion into the equation. Now, none of that means that Shady will definitely be suspended, but the idea that Rog can't touch him is simply incorrect.
Mr. WEO Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 (edited) Complete hearsay with nothing on the record from McCoy. You think someone made up that claim by McCoy? This was an article describing how McCoy could walk. Was the cop (Shady definitely had nothing to do with the other cop's injuries) assaulting his friend injured before or after Shady took the swing that may or may not have landed? What's that, you don't know? How do you think Rog will be able to know for sure? That's right, he can't. Hence he can't do a thing. Again, sorry. He doesn't have to. Just like he didn't have to know for sure what happened in the Big Ben Bathroom. Edited April 6, 2016 by Mr. WEO
26CornerBlitz Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 Doc, I like you; you're a good poster. That said, I need to understand why you think the above is accurate? The Personal Conduct Policy is clear on these matters: https://nfllabor.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/personal-conduct-policy.pdf Starting here: "It is not enough simply to avoid being found guilty of a crime. Instead, as an employee of the NFL or a member club, you are held to a higher standard and expected to conduct yourself in a way that is responsible, promotes the values upon which the League is based, and is lawful. Persons who fail to live up to this standard of conduct are guilty of conduct detrimental and subject to discipline, even where the conduct itself does not result in conviction of a crime." ^This is where we can be 100% sure that McCoy doesn't need to be arrested to face discipline. Moving on we get to these two bullet points: • Conduct that imposes inherent danger to the safety and well being of another person; and • Conduct that undermines or puts at risk the integrity and reputation of the NFL, NFL clubs, or NFL players. No question that throwing a punch imposes danger to the safety and well-being of another person, and the second statement is the catch-all that gives Rog the ability to interject his own opinion into the equation. Now, none of that means that Shady will definitely be suspended, but the idea that Rog can't touch him is simply incorrect. Protecting your friend against bodily harm is both reasonable and legal per the Philadelphia DA and in no way violates the NFL's personal conduct policy.
eball Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 Protecting your friend against bodily harm is both reasonable and legal per the Philadelphia DA and in no way violates the NFL's personal conduct policy. Yep, and that's the basis for my belief Shady will face no league discipline. It's pretty clear the DA found the cops' group to be the aggressors.
thebandit27 Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 Protecting your friend against bodily harm is both reasonable and legal per the Philadelphia DA and in no way violates the NFL's personal conduct policy. Legal doesn't matter as per the Policy. As to whether or not it violates the Policy, that's solely up to the discretion of the Commissioner. All I'm saying is that if he looks at the video, and sees Shady running into the fray to throw a punch (which is definitely what happened), then there's undoubtedly an avenue for him to conclude that Shady participated in "Conduct that imposes inherent danger to the safety and well being of another person". As I said, that's no guarantee that he'll be suspended, since there's always the possibility that he meets with Shady, listens to his side of the story, and thinks he was acting reasonably. We do, however, need to make room for the idea that Rog may decide that he doesn't agree that Shady's actions were reasonable, and recognize that he's totally within his power to impose discipline.
Doc Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 You think someone made up that claim by McCoy? This was an article describing how McCoy could walk. He doesn't have to. Just like he didn't have to know for sure what happened in the Big Ben Bathroom. Who cares how he tried to get the cop from choking his friend? And Big Ben had been accused of sexually assaulted several women and settled with them out of court, before finally suspending him. Huge difference that is obvious to most. Protecting your friend against bodily harm is both reasonable and legal per the Philadelphia DA and in no way violates the NFL's personal conduct policy. Yep. I can't imagine the ****-storm Rog would unleash if he started suspending players for helping people who are being assaulted. And like I said, if Wolfe isn't in danger of being suspended, neither is Shady. Yep, and that's the basis for my belief Shady will face no league discipline. It's pretty clear the DA found the cops' group to be the aggressors. Yep, otherwise Shady and/or his friends would have been charged. He didn't come out and say it because he didn't want to have to charge the PO(s) for starting it.
thebandit27 Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 Yep, and that's the basis for my belief Shady will face no league discipline. It's pretty clear the DA found the cops' group to be the aggressors. Please don't confuse my position on this: I'm not saying that I think he should face discipline; I'm saying that the Policy exposes him to it based on the video evidence.
Doc Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 Legal doesn't matter as per the Policy. As to whether or not it violates the Policy, that's solely up to the discretion of the Commissioner. All I'm saying is that if he looks at the video, and sees Shady running into the fray to throw a punch (which is definitely what happened), then there's undoubtedly an avenue for him to conclude that Shady participated in "Conduct that imposes inherent danger to the safety and well being of another person". As I said, that's no guarantee that he'll be suspended, since there's always the possibility that he meets with Shady, listens to his side of the story, and thinks he was acting reasonably. We do, however, need to make room for the idea that Rog may decide that he doesn't agree that Shady's actions were reasonable, and recognize that he's totally within his power to impose discipline. I'd say Shady has as much of a chance of being suspended as Derek Wolfe does. If we're using the "conduct that imposes inherent danger to the safety and well being of another person" clause of the PCP.
eball Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 Please don't confuse my position on this: I'm not saying that I think he should face discipline; I'm saying that the Policy exposes him to it based on the video evidence. Not putting any words in your mouth. The video evidence only exposes Shady to discipline if viewed in a vacuum, which Goodell can't afford to do.
26CornerBlitz Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 Legal doesn't matter as per the Policy. As to whether or not it violates the Policy, that's solely up to the discretion of the Commissioner. All I'm saying is that if he looks at the video, and sees Shady running into the fray to throw a punch (which is definitely what happened), then there's undoubtedly an avenue for him to conclude that Shady participated in "Conduct that imposes inherent danger to the safety and well being of another person". As I said, that's no guarantee that he'll be suspended, since there's always the possibility that he meets with Shady, listens to his side of the story, and thinks he was acting reasonably. We do, however, need to make room for the idea that Rog may decide that he doesn't agree that Shady's actions were reasonable, and recognize that he's totally within his power to impose discipline. So Goodell will be concerned about the welfare of an aggressor who precipitated a melee inside of a venue and then continued to agitate outside after it was over? Doesn't make any sense to me. Goodell can do that if he so chooses, but he will lose on NFLPA appeal because there are no reasonable grounds to suspend in this case.
Jauronimo Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 Not putting any words in your mouth. The video evidence only exposes Shady to discipline if viewed in a vacuum, which Goodell can't afford to do. Why not? After 5 years of highly inconsistent, haphazard, reactionary discipline, why do you think Goodell can't afford to f@#$ another one up?
thebandit27 Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 I'd say Shady has as much of a chance of being suspended as Derek Wolfe does. If we're using the "conduct that imposes inherent danger to the safety and well being of another person" clause of the PCP. That could very well be the case Doc...I'm not going to write off the possibility yet. I mean, by the strict letter of the policy it's possible. Not putting any words in your mouth. The video evidence only exposes Shady to discipline if viewed in a vacuum, which Goodell can't afford to do. If we're talking about a sensible person, yes, I agree. Rog hasn't exactly established himself as sensible in these matters. So Goodell will be concerned about the welfare of an aggressor who precipitated a melee inside of a venue and then continued to agitate outside after it was over? Doesn't make any sense to me. Goodell can do that if he so chooses, but he will lose on NFLPA appeal because there are no reasonable grounds to suspend in this case. Concerned? Maybe; maybe not. I'm trying to read the Policy in a strictly literal sense here; my literal interpretation is that throwing a punch endangers another person. I do agree that Shady would stand a good chance at winning on appeal
Doc Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 Why not? After 5 years of highly inconsistent, haphazard, reactionary discipline, why do you think Goodell can't afford to f@#$ another one up? Why do you think there is talk about him giving up sole authority over player discipline? That could very well be the case Doc...I'm not going to write off the possibility yet. I mean, by the strict letter of the policy it's possible. The league already said that Wolfe won't face suspension. I don't see how they could do it in one case and not another and have it stand.
eball Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 If we're talking about a sensible person, yes, I agree. Rog hasn't exactly established himself as sensible in these matters. Goodell has gotten his ass kicked enough recently that you'd think he will tread carefully.
26CornerBlitz Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 That could very well be the case Doc...I'm not going to write off the possibility yet. I mean, by the strict letter of the policy it's possible. If we're talking about a sensible person, yes, I agree. Rog hasn't exactly established himself as sensible in these matters. Concerned? Maybe; maybe not. I'm trying to read the Policy in a strictly literal sense here; my literal interpretation is that throwing a punch endangers another person. I do agree that Shady would stand a good chance at winning on appeal I don't think you should look at the policy in a vacuum. The context and/or circumstances matter quite a bit and in this particular case there should be no suspension.
Recommended Posts