SkippyX Posted June 22, 2022 Share Posted June 22, 2022 Just now, Daniel said: Let's keep away from personal attacks. But FYI, logic is generally one of those things that does occasionally come up in law school, Mr. Ad hominem. Well aware of what it is. I also know way, way more about legal procedure than you, so you may want to check yourself. You think the Peyton Manning anecdote compared to Watson is a strong argument? You rest your pathetic case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted June 22, 2022 Share Posted June 22, 2022 1 minute ago, SkippyX said: You think the Peyton Manning anecdote compared to Watson is a strong argument? You rest your pathetic case. It is. Both involve rich athletes accused of sexual misconduct. Both settled. One had multiple other accusers come out after, and the other didn't. You've speculated that this is a money motive. You seem to think people didn't want money before the pandemic for some bizarre reason, the rest of your argument is too confusing to understand. Something about senior citizens, I guess. But the fact that you keep relying on personal attacks while you defend a rapist is pretty telling of the strength of your argument. It also says a whole lot about you. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkippyX Posted June 22, 2022 Share Posted June 22, 2022 Being a lawyer does not mean you get bonus points on a pathetic argument. There are over 1.3 million lawyers in the US. Are they all omniscient or just you? Did you have a hot take on the Central Park 5 or the Duke Lacrosse team? Have you ever been wrong before? Your argument that you know all the logic while failing basic logic is still a logic fail, sorry I would think you would value Watson getting his day in court. The 4 Seasons Total Landscaping guy is a lawyer too. Maybe its too subtle for such daunting legal minds but the argument is not about Watson's innocence. Its that you have no clue like the rest of us so stop pretending you do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkippyX Posted June 22, 2022 Share Posted June 22, 2022 6 minutes ago, Daniel said: It is. Both involve rich athletes accused of sexual misconduct. Both settled. One had multiple other accusers come out after, and the other didn't. You've speculated that this is a money motive. You seem to think people didn't want money before the pandemic for some bizarre reason, the rest of your argument is too confusing to understand. Something about senior citizens, I guess. But the fact that you keep relying on personal attacks while you defend a rapist is pretty telling of the strength of your argument. It also says a whole lot about you. Someone asked what possible conceivable reason could these paragons of truth possibly have to come forward other than the truth. I suggested that humans like money as a possibility that for some reason did not occur to such legal experts. Its the logic of the lynch mob, Guilt before innocence. Not just that but there is no concept of his innocence that you could even imagine? Like he can't be 1 in a million innocent because its not possible. No group of humans has ever lied for money before so its not going to start today! That's a pathetic argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LETSGOBROWNIES Posted June 22, 2022 Share Posted June 22, 2022 Hot damn, we’ve escalated to using bold font 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragnarok Posted June 22, 2022 Share Posted June 22, 2022 31 minutes ago, SkippyX said: Logic 101 Calvin Ridley violated the basic rule of NFL integrity in betting on his sport. They have 100% clear and obvious proof of this. He literally has nothing to do with anyone else who is not gambling on NFL games. Not steroids, not sexual assault, not hitting your kid, not DUI, nothing. He can throw as many useless fits as he wants. Its not relevant. It would be quite logical to argue that the punishment of a year long suspension does not fit the crime of a $1,500 bet on a game where he did not play/had no ability to influence the result in light of a year long suspension for 24 counts of sexual assault. That's a very basic/logical sentencing argument. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkippyX Posted June 22, 2022 Share Posted June 22, 2022 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Ragnarok said: It would be quite logical to argue that the punishment of a year long suspension does not fit the crime of a $1,500 bet on a game where he did not play in/had no ability to influence the result in light of a year long suspension for 24 counts of sexual assault. That's a very basic/logical sentencing argument. Ever heard of Pete Rose? Alex Karras? Paul Hornig? Professional Sports is built on gambling. If their integrity is called into question it could fall apart. Therefore there is a zero tolerance policy in all the major sports leagues. Its got nothing to do with the legal system or society in general. its a serious violation of league rules. You may care about dollar amounts. The NFL does not. Did the NFLPA even fight this? If not its because they all knew the rules. Ridley is a 100% guilty player who got a just punishment. Edited June 22, 2022 by SkippyX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronjon1990 Posted June 22, 2022 Share Posted June 22, 2022 (edited) 9 minutes ago, Ragnarok said: It would be quite logical to argue that the punishment of a year long suspension does not fit the crime of a $1,500 bet on a game where he did not play in/had no ability to influence the result in light of a year long suspension for 24 counts of sexual assault. That's a very basic/logical sentencing argument. I've got my 🍿 ready and I'm about to throw $1500 down on Team ET's Brain Trust if this keeps going. I highly doubt he'd issue me a year long ban for doing so Edited June 22, 2022 by ronjon1990 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkippyX Posted June 22, 2022 Share Posted June 22, 2022 https://nflcommunications.com/Documents/2018 Policies/2018 Gambling Policy - FINAL.pdf 7. VIOLATIONS Apparent or alleged violations of this Policy by NFL Personnel will continue to be decided by the Commissioner or his designee on a case-by-case basis. Violations of this Policy constitute conduct detrimental to the League and will subject the involved Club and/or person(s) to appropriate disciplinary action by the Commissioner. Such disciplinary action may include, without limitation, severe penalties, up to and including a fine, termination of employment and/or banishment from the NFL for life. Ridley agreed to this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragnarok Posted June 22, 2022 Share Posted June 22, 2022 1 minute ago, SkippyX said: Ever heard of Pete Rose? Alex Karras? Paul Hornig? Professional Sports is built on gambling. If their integrity is called into question it could fall apart. Therefore there is a zero tolerance policy in all the major sports leagues. Its got nothing to do with the legal system or society in general. its a serious violation of league rules. You may care about dollar amounts. The NFL does not. Did the NFLPA even fight this? If not its because they all knew the rules. Ridley is a 100% guilty player who got a just punishment. Guilt is not the sole determining factor as to the viability of the punishment. Under your argument, if you are guilty, then any punishment is justified. You have to look at the crime, surrounding facts, mitigating circumstances, situation, etc. That's why there is a sentencing hearing after a determination of guilt in court. I'm not even saying it wasn't a just punishment. Rather that there is a very valid question as to the fairness of that punishment when compared to worse offenses. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkippyX Posted June 22, 2022 Share Posted June 22, 2022 (edited) Karras got a year Hornig got a year Schlichter got a year Am I missing anyone? Has any NFL player ever got less than a year for gambling? There is no court and there is not bad publicity value judgement calculus required. Its gambling with zero tolerance. You are free to have an opinion on it but they have been consistent. Edited June 22, 2022 by SkippyX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LETSGOBROWNIES Posted June 22, 2022 Share Posted June 22, 2022 Just now, Ragnarok said: Guilt is not the sole determining factor as to the viability of the punishment. Under your argument, if you are guilty, then any punishment is justified. You have to look at the crime, surrounding facts, mitigating circumstances, situation, etc. That's why there is a sentencing hearing after a determination of guilt in court. you might wanna calibrate your expectations to the crowd you’re dealing with here hoss lol 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tk3 Posted June 22, 2022 Share Posted June 22, 2022 "Gambling is explicitly against the rules, while sexual misconduct is not explicitly against the rules" -SkippyX, paraphrased 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkippyX Posted June 22, 2022 Share Posted June 22, 2022 1 minute ago, Tk3 said: "Gambling is explicitly against the rules, while sexual misconduct is not explicitly against the rules" -SkippyX, paraphrased The league is not the criminal justice system. They are a business that tries to maximize profits. Players who threaten the integrity of betting are instantly taken out for a year. (please correct me on this if you have other cases I am missing) I am not arguing my personal feelings on this, just telling you how they have treated gambling. I don't get to make the NFL rules. (FYI: I don't care if the NFL gives Watson 8 games or 3 years and if its reduced to 4 games or 1 year It still has nothing to do with Calvin Ridley.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkippyX Posted June 22, 2022 Share Posted June 22, 2022 (edited) They let players play Fantasy Football now as long as the prize pool is relatively small (its in the link) I think they nuked Tony Romo's Fantasy Football Convention about 5 years back. Does anyone recall that better than I do? Note: this is a link to the company suing the NFL after it was canceled. ]https://www.nola.com/sports/saints/article_0ec55a6e-8a8b-57e5-90e9-f0dfbf788929.html Edited June 22, 2022 by SkippyX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts