- Thread starter
- #1
redskinsfan
Well-Known Member
- 2,955
- 192
- 63
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2015
- Location
- Southern California
- Hoopla Cash
- $ 1,000.00
- Fav. Team #1
- Fav. Team #2
- Fav. Team #3
Judge Berman's decision overturning Brady's suspension can be viewed here: http://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/cases/show.php?db=special&id=484
Berman vacated Goodell's ruling on a number of grounds, not the least of which was the fact that, as I noted yesterday, the "generally aware" standard used as the basis for the four-game suspension was not one contained in the CBA itself. Because it was not, Brady could not have violated a rule he had never been aware of. Berman also held that the NFL couldn't use the Competitive Integrity Policy to ban Brady because that only applied to League executives, not players.
While Brady was aware of and subject to policies regulating equipment and uniforms, that wasn't a proper basis for any suspension because any first time offense could only in a fine. The League's view that Brady violated the CBA's provisions relating "conduct detrimental" to the game could not also support the discipline the league meted out against him. According to Berman, it wasn't entirely clear whether what Brady was at all detrimental. Berman distinguished the suspensions given to Adrian Peterson and Ray Rice pursuant to the "conduct detrimental" clause, explaining that in those two matters, there was actually a League investigation and finding that their actions violated the separate League policy prohibiting domestic abuse and violence.
Berman also justified overturning Goodell's decision on grounds that the arbitral process itself was unfair. In particular, he noted that Goodell refused the NFLPA's request to call Jeff Pash, one of the co-authors of the Wells report and and to seek production of certain documents in Wells' investigatory files. Goodell's refusal to do so deprived the NFLPA and Brady due process in their prosecuting their case with respect to the four-game suspension.
Berman vacated Goodell's ruling on a number of grounds, not the least of which was the fact that, as I noted yesterday, the "generally aware" standard used as the basis for the four-game suspension was not one contained in the CBA itself. Because it was not, Brady could not have violated a rule he had never been aware of. Berman also held that the NFL couldn't use the Competitive Integrity Policy to ban Brady because that only applied to League executives, not players.
While Brady was aware of and subject to policies regulating equipment and uniforms, that wasn't a proper basis for any suspension because any first time offense could only in a fine. The League's view that Brady violated the CBA's provisions relating "conduct detrimental" to the game could not also support the discipline the league meted out against him. According to Berman, it wasn't entirely clear whether what Brady was at all detrimental. Berman distinguished the suspensions given to Adrian Peterson and Ray Rice pursuant to the "conduct detrimental" clause, explaining that in those two matters, there was actually a League investigation and finding that their actions violated the separate League policy prohibiting domestic abuse and violence.
Berman also justified overturning Goodell's decision on grounds that the arbitral process itself was unfair. In particular, he noted that Goodell refused the NFLPA's request to call Jeff Pash, one of the co-authors of the Wells report and and to seek production of certain documents in Wells' investigatory files. Goodell's refusal to do so deprived the NFLPA and Brady due process in their prosecuting their case with respect to the four-game suspension.
