Irvin Press Conference Live - 3/14/2023

[Smashin222]

And she made a bad call and it's her fault and her boss was trying to tell her she was making a bad call she was supposed to be doing her job not fraternizing with the customers and he made that perfectly clear.

She had every chance to say hi and cut it short but she chose to carry it on.

Just because she made a bad call in continuing a conversation does not mean she wasn't sexually harassed during that conversation. Women make calculations to accept crappy treatment from dudes in the hopes that the encounter will end without having to get into a direct confrontation.

Again, your complete lack of perspective is pretty telling. I sincerely hope you have women in your life who can talk to you about this stuff.

edit: I apparently can't post on this thread any more because of my language choices. Pretty ironic ofc. Apologies to anyone offended by my use of four letter words.

 

[Reid1boys]

It's so sad to see fellow Cowboys fans coping so much over something they should have 0 investment in.

The actual fight is between Irvin and the NFL but nobody wants to talk about the fact that it was the NFL that asked the hotel to contact them if any misconduct occurred, the NFL conducted the investigation and the NFL chose to remove him from their coverage.

I'd be interested to see the # of women who read her body language as "grand ol time" I'd bet the number is pretty low.

the interest in this is not ecause it is Irvin alon. This is a social issue that could hit anyone. The interest, for me, is a legal/civil proceeding interest in how the lawyers are going to play this thing otu.

I like Mike, but my life isnt changing one bit whether this ends good or bad for him.

 

[Reid1boys]

Just because she made a bad call in continuing a conversation does not mean she wasn't sexually harassed during that conversation. Women make calculations to accept crappy treatment from dudes in the hopes that the encounter will end without having to get into a direct confrontation.

Again, your complete lack of perspective is pretty telling. I sincerely hope you have women in your life who can talk to you about this stuff.

If He said to her.... wheeeew weeeeeee, baby you are fine, fine ,fine. How would you like to come to my room and let the playmaker show you how I make love. And she said no, no, no, IM sorry but Im at work. He then said nothing else to her and she walked away, he then slaps himself 3 times outside of her view and says to someone else.... man that is one fine lady. Id like to hit that.

That would NOT be sexual harassment.

 

[CowboyFrog]

The accuser in this instance is actually Irvin. He has the burden of proof in court.

Nobody claimed an assault took place. It's insane that has to be repeated so many times.

This is not a criminal case where the prosecution must prove its case, this is a civil lawsuit for basically slander of character to his work, which Marriott has in fact already admitted to doing. The question is was it justified or not, so yes Marriott will also have to prove it was and most likley (if MI's lawyers are worth anything) will have to prove it was done in a manner according to policy and can show track record of it in all its hotels. Are they removing all customers who employees have said this about and then what is said about contacting an employer?

 

[Vtwin]

Some might be obligated to make a report to their employer if a guest has promised to find them and harass them again later in the week....

Or did you forget about that part?

If it was even said, it was an in the moment comment made by a buzzed up playboy in a setting in which absolutely nothing could have happened that the woman didn't want to happen. We don't even know if her words/actions led Irvin to feel emboldened to say that.

If I was Irvin's buddy I'd tell him, "hey man, you shouldn't say things like that to someone you don't know well enough".

If I was that woman I would have laughed, made a joke and walked away chuckling.

 

[Reid1boys]

Not what was stated. The other person said as she was disappearing behind the pillar she was looking in Mike's direction. She made an arc to enter the bar so at one point of course her head would be facing him but she continues her arc towards the bar and never breaks the arc to look in Mike's direction indicating she's alluring him or about to talk to him. Otherwise she would motion to him when she was facing him during that arc, correct? Instead she keeps going.

The slaps were in line with Marriott's description. They say the slaps happen with another employee there and after the woman had walked away and he said "She bad. She bad. I want to hit that." The audio you can't hear, did the physical part happen including another employee being there? The should be be fired thing is another topic. We're talking (and you were talking) about what the video would show. Did it show what Marriott claimed? Below is the link to their PDF claim. Page 4.

https://www.fox4news.com/news/michael-irvin-super-bowl-misconduct-allegation

Negative. Had she "Kept going," as you say, she would have reappeared in the video on the other side of the pillar. It would have taken 2, maybe 3 etps max to be seen again in the video had she kept moving. She clearly stops behind that pillar and waits.

 

[CouchCoach]

yep..... again, convince any REASONABLE person from watching the video that
1) He was harassing her
2) He actually made a threat to her.

Her actions play a part in determining what his actions would or would not be construed as.

Her actions if this was happening away from her job might be different but she is on the staff of that hotel and job 1 is keeping the clientele happy and no drama for the guests.

If she felt he was inebriated and she knew he was a guest then taking action like turning and walking away or something even more in his face might have escalated a situation with an intoxicated guest. She could have gotten in trouble for not "handling" it properly and professionally. Ever watched ariline gate agents when being berated by some passenger? Think they like to stand there and take it?

Then we know nothing about this woman like her position, tenure, problem employee or not, etc.

You can bet Irvin's lawyer is going to drill down on her relationship with management, particularly that manager. That is best path to give her motive for lying about Irvin, get the heat off herself.

 

[Vtwin]

When you present 2 views and ask which is more plausible, you are saying both are plausible but asking which one is MORE plausible. Your answer after having to ask a second time because you avoided the first ask is "neither." So who is MORE likely to be dodging what the evidence of the tape shows? Thanks for playing. Lol.

What on earth are you talking about?

I presented two scenarios and asked this "It is entirely plausible that she did stop, turn and engage. Is it not?" How on earth are you getting that I asked which one was more plausible?

I clearly stated that each scenario was plausible. I never stated one was more plausible over the other. Here you are though, going on about something I never said. It's comical that I brought that up in direct response to your assertion that Irvin clearly approached her and that the witness reports that she approached him were wrong. You simply can't tell this from the video, for the reason I pointed out. Maybe that is why you're trying to beat around the bush. lol

And by the way the question "which one is more plausible" does not carry the assertion that one actually is more plausible than the other. The answer could very well be "neither".

But that is irrelevant since I never asked that to begin with.

You should stop playing and get real. You seem to be in way over your head.

This is fun!

 

[Vtwin]

And those questions are?

I'll ask them again when the horses come around and down the front stretch again.

 

[Vtwin]

The accuser in this instance is actually Irvin. He has the burden of proof in court.

Nobody claimed an assault took place. It's insane that has to be repeated so many times.

Irvin was the first to be accused, tried and hung in Marriots kangaroo court.

 

[Vtwin]

the interest in this is not ecause it is Irvin alon. This is a social issue that could hit anyone. The interest, for me, is a legal/civil proceeding interest in how the lawyers are going to play this thing otu.

I like Mike, but my life isnt changing one bit whether this ends good or bad for him.

Bingo

 

[Reid1boys]

By the way, is it just me, or are all the national sports shows staying away from this subject? Ive seen nobody discussing that video since it was released? Are the MEN all too afraid to discuss this for fear of saying something that wil also get them fired?

 

[khiladi]

You need verbal recordings. If not, anything can be assumed or made up from either party.

No you don’t as far as a hotel is concerned. This is not a LEGAL court case. This is a hotel investigating the situation and reporting it to his employer, who decided they want Irvin removed from their hotel, as the hotel employee was uncomfortable with what she considered sexual harassment.

It is Irvin who decided to sue for 100 million after saying on air that he was drunk and had no clue he even talked with anybody.

There is no sexual assault or the hotel and the lady going to the police to charge Irvin with anything.

Again, it’s Irvin and the lawyer saying “look
At us”…

 

[CouchCoach]

If it was even said, it was an in the moment comment made by a buzzed up playboy in a setting in which absolutely nothing could have happened that the woman didn't want to happen. We don't even know if her words/actions led Irvin to feel emboldened to say that.

If I was Irvin's buddy I'd tell him, "hey man, you shouldn't say things like that to someone you don't know well enough".

If I was that woman I would have laughed, made a joke and walked away chuckling.

Some women might do that and you not being a woman does not count.

Since we don't know her position we do not know if her reporting it was personal or she felt if Irvin would do that, what else is he capable of and she doesn't know him, according to him he told her to look him up on Google. And said he'd be back.

What if he did that to another female guest and it got out it wasn't the first time in that hotel? Think they are liable not addressing that when they could have?

While this is not sexual assault, could Irvin have been pegged as a sexual predator because that was a predatory thing to say to a stranger. That isn't come up to my room for a drink.

I've seen some guys say "well, the woman has the choice to walk away" but why should any woman have to make that choice? If he said that, that is not a come on line, that is the pure definition of sexual harassment.

And just how many women do you know that are OK with a total stranger putting their hands of them within 1.5 minutes of the conversation starting? You think that's OK? Go ahead and try that a few times but have a good dentist.

 

[CouchCoach]

I'll ask them again when the horses come around and down the front stretch again.

Love horse racing analogies.

 

[khiladi]

The accuser in this instance is actually Irvin. He has the burden of proof in court.

Nobody claimed an assault took place. It's insane that has to be repeated so many times.

It’s bizarre those defending Irvin can’t comprehend this basic fact.

Irvin is the accuser here, as he is suing the hotel for 100 million in defamation.

Notice how he’s not suing his employer the NFL Network who made the decision to take him off the air on Sb weekend.

All the hotel did at max possibly is got him out of the hotel to another one, which Irvin’s employee was probably paying for with a high per diem anyways. The hotel apparently didn’t even ask Irvin to find another hotel, his employer told him to get another one.

 

[MarcusRock]

Negative. Had she "Kept going," as you say, she would have reappeared in the video on the other side of the pillar. It would have taken 2, maybe 3 etps max to be seen again in the video had she kept moving. She clearly stops behind that pillar and waits.

Kept going as in continued her arc before she disappeared behind the pillar. She doesn't reappear because it is much more likely that Mike called to her. Even her body language as she reappears is a "yes, can I help you?" posture. That's her job, actually. You don't do that if YOU call out. You'd be the one trying to shake his hand and saying you're a big fan, etc. right? That is much more likely than she waited and went, "Hey Mike Irvin" like that witness stated whom I've basically disqualified in this very thread with my Scooby detective skills because she didn't know who he was by Marriott's account and basically by Mike's own admission yesterday. But it's Mike offering the introduction.

You edited out my question about the slaps which YOU made a big deal about. Here it is again:

The slaps were in line with Marriott's description. They say the slaps happen with another employee there and after the woman had walked away and he said "She bad. She bad. I want to hit that." The audio you can't hear, did the physical part happen including another employee being there? The should be be fired thing is another topic. We're talking (and you were talking) about what the video would show. Did it show what Marriott claimed? Below is the link to their PDF claim. Page 4.

https://www.fox4news.com/news/michael-irvin-super-bowl-misconduct-allegation

 

[CouchCoach]

By the way, is it just me, or are all the national sports shows staying away from this subject? Ive seen nobody discussing that video since it was released? Are the MEN all too afraid to discuss this for fear of saying something that wil also get them fired?

More they don't know what to say so ignore it and let TMZ run with it. I am sure some of those guys are friends of Irvin's so they can't take up for him because other than being sent home, what has happened to him? Still has his job as far as we know and didn't lose any money and he's not a good endorsement candidate.

And Irvin isn't part of the NFL as far as they're concerned, he's broadcasting.

 

[Blackrain]

Just because she made a bad call in continuing a conversation does not mean she wasn't sexually harassed during that conversation. Women make calculations to accept crappy treatment from dudes in the hopes that the encounter will end without having to get into a direct confrontation.

Again, your complete lack of perspective is pretty telling. I sincerely hope you have women in your life who can talk to you about this stuff.

edit: I apparently can't post on this thread any more because of my language choices. Pretty ironic ofc. Apologies to anyone offended by my use of four letter words.

First off there was no confrontation both parties look like they ended it with a handshake and they were happy as clams.

You're the one with the complete lack of perspective she was supposed to be at work doing her job her boss was beckoning her to do so she chose to flirt with a celebrity against his wishes.

You don't know what she could have said that could have escalated the situation.

And yes I have women in my life that are much smarter than that if someone was disrespecting them and impeding them from doing their job they would have called security that was only a few steps away which she could have done if Michael was inappropriate or disrespecting her and she did not do it.

I'm sorry if someone said what he was supposed to have said to her it doesn't take days to process that that was inappropriate and she should have called security immediately

 

[khiladi]

Some women might do that and you not being a woman does not count.

Since we don't know her position we do not know if her reporting it was personal or she felt if Irvin would do that, what else is he capable of and she doesn't know him, according to him he told her to look him up on Google. And said he'd be back.

What if he did that to another female guest and it got out it wasn't the first time in that hotel? Think they are liable not addressing that when they could have?

While this is not sexual assault, could Irvin have been pegged as a sexual predator because that was a predatory thing to say to a stranger. That isn't come up to my room for a drink.

I've seen some guys say "well, the woman has the choice to walk away" but why should any woman have to make that choice? If he said that, that is not a come on line, that is the pure definition of sexual harassment.

And just how many women do you know that are OK with a total stranger putting their hands of them within 1.5 minutes of the conversation starting? You think that's OK? Go ahead and try that a few times but have a good dentist.

His defenders also don’t get the fact that the hotel defines their own policy and they reserve the right to make a judgment call to remove the guest. It’s not a legally binding court case.