hit and marshawn Posted July 28, 2008 Posted July 28, 2008 Thought this might be the case but glad to hear it made official. Per ESPN.com http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3508156
Quester74 Posted July 28, 2008 Posted July 28, 2008 Linky! http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3508156
Quester74 Posted July 28, 2008 Posted July 28, 2008 Whoops.. see someone beat me to it, down below.. although, not the most informative title for the thread.
LabattBlue Posted July 28, 2008 Posted July 28, 2008 Glad this has been clarified. Now all the players know that a hit-n-run is okay by NFL standards.
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted July 28, 2008 Posted July 28, 2008 Thought this might be the case but glad to hear it made official. Per ESPN.comhttp://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3508156 IMHO I never expected any different from the NFL. Lynch proved again how easy it is that just another jock who got away with a crime both you and I would have been definately punished for.
ricojes Posted July 28, 2008 Posted July 28, 2008 espn is blocked here at work, but I am assuming it's a no punishment for ML link. Pretty much as expected as there were no criminal charges, the league does not have any disciplinary policy for traffic violations.
eball Posted July 28, 2008 Posted July 28, 2008 Hate to be one of those "I told you so" kind of guys, but...
VOR Posted July 28, 2008 Posted July 28, 2008 Goodell would have set a dangerous precedent by suspending a guy for not seeing, and hitting, someone, and getting a traffic violation, which isn't a crime. Unless any evidence comes to light that he was drinking that night, which amazingly so far hasn't happened despite more than a few people claiming that he "obviously" was drunk/impaired, it was a complete accident. Hopefully we can move on...until the civil case happens or there's a settlement.
KD in CA Posted July 28, 2008 Posted July 28, 2008 Must be some bitterly disappointed fans in here today. btw....all of you who have been suspended from your job as a result of misdemeanor transgressions outside of work, feel free to speak up.
stuckincincy Posted July 28, 2008 Posted July 28, 2008 I seldom agonize over the problems that millionaires may have.
Ramius Posted July 28, 2008 Posted July 28, 2008 No surprise. Goodell comes down hard on repeat offenders that obviously haven't learned their lesson and keep casting a bad light on the league. Outside of Buffalo, this was simply a minor blip on the radar.
Lori Posted July 28, 2008 Posted July 28, 2008 Goodell would have set a dangerous precedent by suspending a guy for not seeing, and hitting, someone, and getting a traffic violation, which isn't a crime. Unless any evidence comes to light that he was drinking that night, which amazingly so far hasn't happened despite more than a few people claiming that he "obviously" was drunk/impaired, it was a complete accident. Hopefully we can move on...until the civil case happens or there's a settlement. I'll be honest -- Goodell's "do the right thing" mantra at Chautauqua had me hedging my bets on a (short) suspension. Still figured the odds were in his favor, but I wasn't quite as sure as I had been. As you point out, though, his situation is markedly different than the guys who are actually being convicted and getting jail time. That said, I still think his lawyer let him take an unneccessary P.R. hit by dragging things out for a month. Just my opinion.
Fingon Posted July 28, 2008 Posted July 28, 2008 Goodell said a traffic violation is not a violation of the personal conduct policy.
ricojes Posted July 28, 2008 Posted July 28, 2008 Goodell said a traffic violation is not a violation of the personal conduct policy. Exactly! That's what I stated earlier. It's not that Goodell was lenient or forgiving because he was a first time offender, there was absolutely nothing he could do as ML did not break the personal conduct policy.
Lori Posted July 28, 2008 Posted July 28, 2008 Exactly! That's what I stated earlier. It's not that Goodell was lenient or forgiving because he was a first time offender, there was absolutely nothing he could do as ML did not break the personal conduct policy. Not true. Goodell is the one who decides whether or not a player violates the Personal Conduct Policy. From the 2008 version: 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. Where the NFL is concerned, Goodell IS the law.
yall Posted July 28, 2008 Posted July 28, 2008 Goodell would have set a dangerous precedent by suspending a guy for not seeing, and hitting, someone, and getting a traffic violation, which isn't a crime. Unless any evidence comes to light that he was drinking that night, which amazingly so far hasn't happened despite more than a few people claiming that he "obviously" was drunk/impaired, it was a complete accident. Hopefully we can move on...until the civil case happens or there's a settlement. Where are these people who claim he was drunk or impaired? I never actually saw that.
Fingon Posted July 28, 2008 Posted July 28, 2008 Where are these people who claim he was drunk or impaired? I never actually saw that. elegantelliot something.
VOR Posted July 28, 2008 Posted July 28, 2008 That said, I still think his lawyer let him take an unneccessary P.R. hit by dragging things out for a month. Just my opinion. It wasn't his lawyer; it was the DA who was unwilling to deal initially.
VOR Posted July 28, 2008 Posted July 28, 2008 elegantelliot something. Not to mention AKC and Dwight Drane.
Recommended Posts