Discussion in 'Drama Zone' started by zekecowboy, Aug 12, 2017 at 11:19 AM.
Did anyone just hear that? I yawned!
Did it sound like a purr?
Under what ospices?
Don't know what you mean. The NFL long ago was issued an anti trust exemption. It's a widely known fact.
Under what reasoning do they qualify for that?
Back in the early 60's there was a court case that determined that the teams getting together and negotiating tv rights as a whole violated anti trust laws so congress passed a law in 1961 giving them an anti trust exemption saying that teams in a league are not truly competitors but are essentially partners.
The NFL does not have a broad anti-trust exemption. Only MLB has that, which stems from an odd Supreme Court decision in the '20s that ruled that MLB is not interstate commerce. No other sports league enjoys that status.
The Sports Broadcasting Act in 1961 exempted the NFL and other sports leagues from anti-trust for the purposes of negotiating broadcasting rights, but that's not relevant here.
Anti-trust issues don't apply here because the players are unionized, and collective bargaining agreements can in fact violate anti-trust rules. So, a player can be banned from the entire NFL if and only if the collective bargaining agreement allows for it.
BTW. Adam Jones had a PD and 1 Punt Return for 2yds in Thursday's Bengals game.
Take Jerry with him.
There is certainly an element of that.
Amen. Its the pathetic sissified times we are suffering through.
So, what are they going to this guy, who now plays for the Bengals.
Better to kill 1000 innocent men than let 1 murderer go free, right?
Nice..yea white people never do anything bad.
Your guess is as good as mine. There is no consistency with what the NFL does.
The famous quote that better 1000 guilty go free rather than one innocent man be jailed always made me Very angry.
Because what about the past and future victims of that 1000 guilty. According to this they do not matter. I want to say to those that spout that garbage
"So if one of that thousand molests your son or rapes your daughter or kills your wife or husband its OK with you since you made a stand on principle?"
One question I have:
- The first time offense of DV results in a 6-game suspension
- Second time = Lifetime ban
Got it. Clear cut.
But the NFL has suspended him for "Conduct detrimental to the league". It's the work around for saying "He was never charged/convicted, but we felt he did it and are punishing him in the catch-all, grey area of the rules".
So if he actually gets charged/convicted of DV next time (for the first time) and they actually suspend him for DV...will that be his first or second offense to the letter of their rules? It sounds like it'll be his first, true DV offense to me. Am I thinking too much like a lawyer in that the verbiage means something? The grey-area can work for and against you.
Aria, get in here and convince me that he'll surely be banned for life with the next offense and that I'm a bad person for asking this question.
Haha, no issue here bud, good, legitimate question and I'm curious what the answer is as well. As dumb as Zeke is, I'm not "too" worried he'll get suspended permanently. The NFL is obviously changing their ways but to get thrown out I would imagine it would have to take A LOT.
Then again, the NFL pretty much does what they want to and I also figured Zeke would have kept out of trouble after these allegations so nothing would surprise me.