I made the exact same argument as you, below, earlier today, wondering what everybody’s seeing in the new video that didn’t just confirm what we were all assuming happened after we saw the first video. The “best” response anybody could give me was “yeah, but now you actually see the act as it happens, and it gets everybody’s emotions involved!” Which to me indicates that (due to the new “emotional” component) the new video should *especially* not be used to consider any new/changed punishment. Not that I’m disputing the need to get the guy out of the game…I would’ve suspended him for the year based on the first video alone. I just can’t see what “new evidence” we get with the new release that warrants a change in punishment that wasn’t dished out in the first place.
Doug Fields Tampa, FL From: tvornottv@googlegroups.com [mailto:tvornottv@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of PGage Sent: Monday, September 08, 2014 9:48 PM To: tvornottv@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [TV orNotTV] More NFL BS: "New" Policy on Domestic Violence Changes Nothing I have not had a chance to read in depth the reactions to the release of the elevator video of Ray Rice punching his girlfriend, but what I have read has left me confused. What about that video is being cited as new evidence that justifies the NFL and the Ravens so profoundly changing their initial judgements? We knew he had punched her in the elevator, we knew that she was unconscious when the doors open, and that he callously dragged her half way out of the elevator. We knew they were the only two people in the elevator. It has always been certain that he punched her in the face/head and that this led to her losing consciousness. We knew it was vicious and ugly and unjustifiable, no matter how much Roger Godell and Stephen A Smith alluded to hypothetical provocations by the girlfriend. This is what the somewhat antiseptic term "domestic violence" means - a man who is almost always bigger and stronger viciously and violently hitting, punching, kicking a woman. Of course Rice should have been more seriously punished in the first place (despite the reports, this is no more a real life time ban than the NFL's "new and improved guidelines" call for; if Rice is so inclined, and maintains a clean legal record, he will be able to apply for reinstatement in 2 or 3 years), but nothing that happened this morning changed anything. Deadspin notes the double talk we have been getting about this from jump street. The NFL spin at first was that if only the public had seen the elevator video, we would understand why they gave Rice such a lenient penalty - implying strongly that the girlfriend had started it and Rice was only defending himself. Now the NFL claims it never saw that video, and now that they have they are shocked, shocked to see that Ray Rice punched his girlfriend into unconsciousness. Bull Shit. http://deadspin.com/someone-is-lying-about-whether-the-nfl-saw-the-ray-rice-1631901404 On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 9:27 AM, PGage <pga...@gmail.com> wrote: NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell issued a memo yesterday announcing that players found to have committed acts of physical violence will: "Effective immediately...be subject to a suspension without pay of six games for a first offense, with consideration given to mitigating factors, as well as a longer suspension when circumstances warrant." A second offense would trigger an indefinite suspension of at least a year, although a player could apply for reinstatement. The Los Angeles Times describes this as "the strictest mandatory punishment for first-time domestic violence offenders" (http://www.latimes.com/sports/nfl/la-sp-nfl-domestic-violence-20140829-story.html) an evaluation that seems to have quickly become the consensus among the sports media. This evaluation is not just inaccurate, it is the complete opposite of the truth. Nothing has changed. I was at the Giants game yesterday afternoon, and heard about this when I got home. At first I was impressed, but there were a few terms in the actual language that raised a red flag. This morning I spent some time looking for any analysis in the media that shared my suspicions, and found it (of course, why did I not start there) at Deadspin: http://deadspin.com/so-whats-actually-new-about-the-nfls-new-domestic-viole-1628098179. Here are some of the main points: 1. While it sounds like this new policy means a first domestic violence offense will result in a mandatory 6 game suspension, that is a (no doubt intended) misunderstanding. The suspension will be determined by "mitigating factors". This of course was the first red flag term that got my attention, since it was the phrase that got Stephen A suspended for a week. It is also what Goodell used to justify his 2 week suspension for Rice. Included among these mitigating factors was the fact that the legal system decided not to convict Rice of a crime (this it self a willful distortion of what is going on with a Diversion Program), and the victim's change of heart regarding pressing charges, especially her comments at a meeting held with her, Goodell, her now-husband and a few other men. Mitigating factors would still allow the Commissioner to give a 1 or 2 game suspension (the average for all suspensions for domestic violence in the history of the NFL apparently has been 1.5 games - see http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/nfl-domestic-violence-policy-suspensions/?utm_source=digg <http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/nfl-domestic-violence-policy-suspensions/?utm_source=digg&utm_medium=email> &utm_medium=email), or, I suppose, 0 games if those factor are super-mitigating. 2. While it is being widely reported that a second incident will result in a lifetime ban, this is not true. It is an indefinite suspension, from which the player can appeal for reinstatement after a year, a reinstatement which is frequently granted, assuming intervening good behavior. So, what the new, "stiffer" policy really amounts to is that for a first offense the Commissioner can give a suspension between 1 and 6 games (or longer if circumstances warrant), and at least a one year suspension for a second offense. This is, quite literally, no different from the status quo. Goodell already had it within his power (the contract gives him almost absolute power to discipline personal transgressions not related to drug use) to give Rice a 6 game suspension, and chose 2 games specifically because of those mitigating factors. And, if Rice were to beat up his wife a second time, I doubt anyone things he would have gotten less than a one season suspension even without this "new" policy. I guess the policy does establish a new baseline of 6 games as the de facto punishment for a "standard" incidence of physical assault (whatever that is). This may increase the average penalty going forward from 1.5 games to closer to something like 3 games, once all mitigation is factored in. But what I think this policy is really does is provide Goodell with an ex post facto justification for his decision in the Rice case. This is a PR document, pure and simple, designed to make the public think the NFL has a new, get tough policy on domestic violence. As Deadpin notes, it seems to have been successful. The question to ask Goodell though is this: If the current policy (which specifically states it is not retroactive) had been in force a month ago, would Rice have received a different penalty? I don't know if anyone will get a chance to ask Goodell that question, or if he would answer it honestly, but the real answer is almost certainly, no. . -- -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to tvornottv@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tvornottv-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
