08-26-2014, 09:38 AM
|
#1
|
Guru
Join Date: May 2001
Location: sport
Posts: 39,425
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by spreedom
Any time a woman is abused by a man, the conversation starts and ends with how big of a piece of shit he is. I take no other factors into consideration, least of which being "she's partially at fault for 'instigating' the confrontation".
|
Taking no other factors into account doesn't make you right. It makes you incapable of making an informed decision.
|
|
|
08-28-2014, 05:17 PM
|
#2
|
Golden Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,715
|
Smith Apologists, Advocates of Domestic Violence, Other Misogynists React Predictably
Goodell promises to b-slap wife beaters.
Quote:
Roger Goodell Admits He Was Wrong and Alters N.F.L. Policy on Domestic Violence
By KEN BELSONAUG. 28, 2014
In a rare mea culpa, N.F.L. Commissioner Roger Goodell said Thursday that he had mishandled the Ray Rice case, in which the Baltimore Ravens running back was suspended for two games after being accused of assaulting his fiancée.
The suspension, announced late last month, to an instant and furious uproar from women’s groups, organizations supporting victims of domestic violence, and league players who felt the penalty was too light and inconsistent with punishments for other offenses.
“My disciplinary decision led the public to question our sincerity, our commitment and whether we understood the toll that domestic violence inflicts on so many families,” Goodell said in a statement. “I take responsibility both for the decision and for ensuring that our actions in the future properly reflect our values. I didn’t get it right. Simply put, we have to do better. And we will.”
Goodell said that effective immediately any N.F.L. employee — not only a player — who is found to have engaged in assault, battery, domestic violence or sexual assault that involved physical force will be suspended without pay for six games for a first offense. Second-time offenders will be banished from the league for at least one year.
Goodell said that second-time offenders can petition to be reinstated after one year, but “there will be no presumption or assurance that the petition will be granted.”
The about face by the most powerful executive in American sports was stunning in its earnestness and clarity. The commissioner wrote frequently in the first person and admitted that he had lost sight not only of seriousness of domestic violence, but the league’s role as a leader in the sports world. Coming a month after the suspension of Rice, Goodell’s decision appeared considered, not rushed.
But it also one of the few times during his eight-year tenure that Goodell has publicly admitted to making such a mistake. Since becoming commissioner in 2006, he has grappled with one crisis after another, from players using guns to spying by teams to bullying and the use of homophobic and racist language by players. He has rarely backpedaled on his decisions even in the face of withering criticism.
Perhaps most significantly, Goodell has equivocated on the issue of concussions and their impact on the health of players. For years, Goodell and the league dismissed mounting evidence about the dangers of repeated head hits, including in front of members of Congress.
The league has since changed rules and pledged tens of millions of dollars to study the impact of concussions, but the commissioner has never acknowledged the league’s past role in trying to sidestep the issue.
That evasion may cost the league dearly. Frustration over the league’s stance led nearly 5,000 retired players to sue the N.F.L. and Riddell, a helmet manufacturer, for hiding from them the dangers of concussions. A federal judge has preliminarily approved a landmark 65-year settlement that would award millions of dollars to players with severe neurological disorders, and spend tens of millions more to monitor other players.
Unlike concussions, which have an impact on the game and the finances of the N.F.L., the league’s stance on domestic violence is not purely a pocketbook issue. The league has spent years courting female fans by, among other things, having its players wear pink cleats to raise awareness of breast cancer. Goodell also announced his new policy a week before the start of the regular season and ahead of a three-day weekend, when many people are on vacation.
But in his 2,000-word letter, Goodell said that his decision was based as much on the obligation of the league to be held to a higher standard than other sports leagues and institutions.
“Much of the criticism stemmed from a fundamental recognition that the N.F.L. is a leader, that we do stand for important values, and that we can project those values in ways that have a positive impact beyond professional football,” he wrote.
Groups that criticized Goodell for being insensitive to the issue of domestic abuse took him at his word and applauded him for reversing course.
“This decision by N.F.L. Commissioner Roger Goodell to change the league’s policy on how it disciplines players who beat their wives and girlfriends is a big win, not just for women, but for all N.F.L. players, staff and fans,” said Becky Bond, the political director of Credo, a women’s rights group.
The N.F.L. Players Association, which has often been at loggerheads with the commissioner over his penalties for players, did not endorse Goodell’s tougher stance. In a statement, the union said only that it was informed of the N.F.L.'s decision and that “if we believe that players’ due process rights are infringed upon during the course of discipline, we will assert and defend our members’ rights.”
While other leagues employ an independent arbitrator to hear player appeals, the N.F.L. is essentially the judge and jury in disciplinary cases not covered by the collective bargaining agreement. This led many commentators to compare Rice’s two-game suspension for knocking out his fiancée in an elevator to the four-game suspensions handed out for players who violated the league’s drug policy.
On Wednesday, the league upheld its one-year suspension of Cleveland Browns wide receiver Josh Gordon for violating its substance-abuse policy. Afterward, Gordon criticized the league for not exercising “better discretion and judgment in my case.”
Still, Gordon’s penalty was based on guidelines agreed on between the league and players union, not the commissioner. Goodell’s decision to more severely penalize those who commit domestic violence, on the other hand, has set a precedent.
“This is very rare,” said Marc Ganis, a consultant to several teams. “Goodell’s admission of having erred on something this important to society is very rare and speaks volumes about the confidence the N.F.L. has to admit its mistake.”
|
|
|
|
08-01-2014, 11:43 PM
|
#3
|
Diamond Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 5,501
|
I've never heard about the Kiranjit Ahluwalia story till now. How disturbing that a woman can take the time out to research how to make napalm, prepare the mixture, pour it on him and then set the man on fire while asleep. And she really only served three years and three months for such a heinous crime? Now I'm really starting to see how things work. Somehow men are always held accountable for wrongdoings against women (As they should) but yet women somehow are allowed to bypass being held accountable for their wrongdoings against men. Where are the thought police when women are literally getting away with murder against men? Where is the outrage then? Equality my ass, some of these people went special treatment. Shit like that story makes me a very bitter young man.
Last edited by LSMF; 08-01-2014 at 11:43 PM.
|
|
|
08-02-2014, 12:20 AM
|
#4
|
Moderator
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: 41.21.1
Posts: 36,143
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by LSMF
I've never heard about the Kiranjit Ahluwalia story till now. How disturbing that a woman can take the time out to research how to make napalm, prepare the mixture, pour it on him and then set the man on fire while asleep. And she really only served three years and three months for such a heinous crime? Now I'm really starting to see how things work. Somehow men are always held accountable for wrongdoings against women (As they should) but yet women somehow are allowed to bypass being held accountable for their wrongdoings against men. Where are the thought police when women are literally getting away with murder against men? Where is the outrage then? Equality my ass, some of these people went special treatment. Shit like that story makes me a very bitter young man.
|
Yeah, "equality" is all about looking past what's between somebody's legs and treating all people, well, equally.
That's why I don't think the "scantily-clad woman getting raped" metaphor that Jthig mentioned above necessarily equates to a situation where a woman happened to hit a man... Rape is a completely predatory act, but when one person hits another person, it triggers a primal defense mechanism. So saying: "women who dress provocatively had it coming" isn't exactly the same thing as saying "if you hit somebody, you might get hit back."
Now I'm not saying that's what SAS was getting at, and I can tell you just by looking at the size difference between Rice and his girlfriend that hitting her and dragging her by her hair was NOT a measured response to her slapping him - but any person who enacts violence on another person might have an ass kicking coming their way. The instinct of self-preservation can be an unpredictable thing - that's why non-violence tends to be the safest course conflict resolution... Maybe he doesn't hit her if she doesn't hit him first? (although I can't really say that for certain - Ray Rice's violence could have been a completely predatory act, I didn't witness the circumstances...)
__________________
These days being a fan is a competition to see who can be the most upset when
your team loses. That proves you love winning more. That's how it works.
|
|
|
08-02-2014, 07:24 AM
|
#5
|
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 383
|
A female hits a guy, we as a society turn our heads, when a male hits a female, we hear all from the National Organization For Women, "the guy should do jail time", " he is a women beater", "he is a animal", its a total unfair response from us as a society when a female is a victim compared to when a male is a victim. We were taught as little kids to keep our hands to ourselves, that goes to both males and females. Females should not be going around putting their hands on anyone, and the same goes for guys. We have to be fair
|
|
|
08-02-2014, 08:25 AM
|
#6
|
Lazy Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Lazytown
Posts: 18,721
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by jay3189
A female hits a guy, we as a society turn our heads, when a male hits a female, we hear all from the National Organization For Women, "the guy should do jail time", " he is a women beater", "he is a animal", its a total unfair response from us as a society when a female is a victim compared to when a male is a victim. We were taught as little kids to keep our hands to ourselves, that goes to both males and females. Females should not be going around putting their hands on anyone, and the same goes for guys. We have to be fair
|
I agree with some of this. People do tend to discount legitimate domestic abouse when it's a woman abusing a man. But you're focusing on the tiny, tiny minority in domestic abuse situations. And I guess I don't really understand why.
|
|
|
08-02-2014, 05:11 PM
|
#7
|
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 383
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by jthig32
I agree with some of this. People do tend to discount legitimate domestic abouse when it's a woman abusing a man. But you're focusing on the tiny, tiny minority in domestic abuse situations. And I guess I don't really understand why.
|
It's not a tiny minority. Just look how the news react to situations like that. We just live in a double standard society, which is really annoying. When it comes to physical abuse, females get the benefit of the doubt, just like a guy can have sex with 5 girls in one week, and he will be considered a "player", if a female does the same exact thing, she is a hoe, slut, smut, etc.
|
|
|
08-02-2014, 05:19 PM
|
#8
|
Guru
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 23,105
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by jay3189
It's not a tiny minority. Just look how the news react to situations like that. We just live in a double standard society, which is really annoying. When it comes to physical abuse, females get the benefit of the doubt, just like a guy can have sex with 5 girls in one week, and he will be considered a "player", if a female does the same exact thing, she is a hoe, slut, smut, etc.
|
It is a tiny minority. The overwhelming majority of domestic abuse is the man abusing the woman. I don't think it's right for any woman to abuse a man in any way, but that is very abnormal.
And the news reacts to a situation like this because Ray Rice more or less got a slap on the wrist for doing something heinous.
__________________
"Cream of the crop gon' rise to the top." -Jaden Hardy
|
|
|
08-02-2014, 06:35 PM
|
#9
|
Moderator
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: 41.21.1
Posts: 36,143
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DevinHarriswillstart
And the news reacts to a situation like this because Ray Rice more or less got a slap on the wrist for doing something heinous.
|
Yeah, I think the real debate here is why Rice gets a 2-game suspension for domestic abuse when Gordon could be facing a 1-year suspension for pot. Especially when we're talking about a league whose #1 sponsor is the BEER industry (although that might explain it all right there...)
__________________
These days being a fan is a competition to see who can be the most upset when
your team loses. That proves you love winning more. That's how it works.
|
|
|
08-02-2014, 07:31 PM
|
#10
|
Diamond Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Hudson, WI
Posts: 3,938
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DevinHarriswillstart
It is a tiny minority. The overwhelming majority of domestic abuse is the man abusing the woman. I don't think it's right for any woman to abuse a man in any way, but that is very abnormal.
And the news reacts to a situation like this because Ray Rice more or less got a slap on the wrist for doing something heinous.
|
Yup. According to a recent report by the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, 85% of domestic abuse victims are women. I'd say that would qualify men as a tiny minority in this case.
|
|
|
08-02-2014, 08:19 AM
|
#11
|
Lazy Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Lazytown
Posts: 18,721
|
Quote:
That's why I don't think the "scantily-clad woman getting raped" metaphor that Jthig mentioned above necessarily equates to a situation where a woman happened to hit a man... Rape is a completely predatory act, but when one person hits another person, it triggers a primal defense mechanism. So saying: "women who dress provocatively had it coming" isn't exactly the same thing as saying "if you hit somebody, you might get hit back."
|
I completely agree that a woman attacking a man changes the conversation on domestic violence, to a certain extent. But there's two things I wont to point out, and you touched on one of them yourself:
1. Smith didn't say "don't attack first". He said don't provoke. And that's just way too generic a statement. That can be interpreted so many ways that's it's pointless and insulting to even say.
2. As you pointed out, we have to put some context around these situations. If a woman that is outsized by that much slaps a man, it's tantamount to spitting on him, or pushing him. Or maybe yelling at him. Sure, technically it's assault, but he's not in danger. He doesn't feel threatened. He got pissed. That's all. It'd be no different than if my 13 year old daughter slapped me and I punched her lights out. If I did that, would we be talking about provocation?
There's nothing she could have done to justifiably provoke what happened. Which is why I think the rape scenario fits as a comparison. You say hitting someone produces a primal response. And seeing a scantily clad woman in a compromised state doesn't in some people? And there's nothing predatory about what Rice did, when he followed up the punch by dragging her by her hair? Plenty of people claim situational causes with rape, that they didn't plan for it to happen. They claim to have been seduced and/or teased and then asked to stop. They got caught up in the moment. And people absolutely try to explain it away by focusing on the victim. Same thing is happening here.
Last edited by jthig32; 08-02-2014 at 08:22 AM.
|
|
|
08-02-2014, 10:11 AM
|
#12
|
Moderator
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: 41.21.1
Posts: 36,143
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by jthig32
I completely agree that a woman attacking a man changes the conversation on domestic violence, to a certain extent. But there's two things I wont to point out, and you touched on one of them yourself:
1. Smith didn't say "don't attack first". He said don't provoke. And that's just way too generic a statement. That can be interpreted so many ways that's it's pointless and insulting to even say.
2. As you pointed out, we have to put some context around these situations. If a woman that is outsized by that much slaps a man, it's tantamount to spitting on him, or pushing him. Or maybe yelling at him. Sure, technically it's assault, but he's not in danger. He doesn't feel threatened. He got pissed. That's all. It'd be no different than if my 13 year old daughter slapped me and I punched her lights out. If I did that, would we be talking about provocation?
There's nothing she could have done to justifiably provoke what happened. Which is why I think the rape scenario fits as a comparison. You say hitting someone produces a primal response. And seeing a scantily clad woman in a compromised state doesn't in some people? And there's nothing predatory about what Rice did, when he followed up the punch by dragging her by her hair? Plenty of people claim situational causes with rape, that they didn't plan for it to happen. They claim to have been seduced and/or teased and then asked to stop. They got caught up in the moment. And people absolutely try to explain it away by focusing on the victim. Same thing is happening here.
|
Yeah, I don't necessarily disagree with you on these points, but I think there are several different issues being discussed at once and confused in the overlap:
1) Ray Rice - what he did was inexcusable. It's not like his girlfriend was holding a knife to his throat and he hit her out of self defense. Everybody, including Stephen A Smith, agrees on that.
2) Stephen A Smith - what he said was vague, which is why people have attributed their own meanings to his words... Everything from "she had it coming" to "Rice had the right to defend himself." The big problem here is that Smith totally bombed at communicating his idea, which left people to fill in the blanks. He started out talking about the Rice case, specifically, but by the time he tossed out the word "provocation" he was addressing women as a whole. It's one thing if someone reacts to violence with violence - it's quite another if someone reacts to a verbal jab with violence. What, exactly, was he referring to?
3) Gender equality - the idea that no man should ever hit a woman under ANY circumstances just because he's a man... Which is really more of a tangent that people like myself are going on, but an overlooked issue in what is still a male-dominated society. The idea that a man should take abuse from a woman just because he's a man is ludicrous. Of course, I don't think self-defense applies in the case of Ray Rice, but it does fall under the generic umbrella of SAS's statement about "provocation."
So, like most problems in the world, Stephen A Smith's issue stems from bad communication. I can't really attack or defend the guy because I'm not 100% certain what he was trying to say. His words were clear, but the meaning could be construed in all sorts of ways, given the context... All I can really say for sure is that if you're going to tackle a sensitive issue like this publicly, then you better communicate your idea clearly. He didn't, and that's why ESPN suspended him for a week.
__________________
These days being a fan is a competition to see who can be the most upset when
your team loses. That proves you love winning more. That's how it works.
Last edited by Underdog; 08-02-2014 at 04:33 PM.
Reason: typo
|
|
|
08-04-2014, 09:49 AM
|
#13
|
Guru
Join Date: May 2001
Location: sport
Posts: 39,425
|
I don't think 15% would qualify as a tiny minority.. I suppose it depends on your definition of "tiny".
|
|
|
08-04-2014, 01:22 PM
|
#15
|
Diamond Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 5,501
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DirkFTW
|
Pretty enraging video, tbh.
__________________
Monta Ellis is an All-Star.
|
|
|
08-07-2014, 04:49 PM
|
#16
|
Inactive.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 42,599
|
|
|
|
08-07-2014, 06:33 PM
|
#17
|
Diamond Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Hudson, WI
Posts: 3,938
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricaLubarsky
|
Yeah, that's really stupid. This was innocuous and not even really that funny... seems like a conflict of interest by ESPN, trying to maintain a good relationship with an NBA player as opposed to protecting the very harmless opinions of one of their "personalities".
|
|
|
08-08-2014, 10:05 PM
|
#18
|
Diamond Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,214
|
The reason people have such a skewed perspective on domestic violence is that they take complex relationship issues and whittle them down into oversimplified soundbyte narratives like "the man was abusing the woman" or "the woman was abusing the man". Most domestic violence is actually reciprocal rather than unidirectional, and the public usually only sees the tail end of the breakdown.
Perhaps the most interesting quote from the above article is the following:
Quote:
As in many studies of IPV (intimate partner violence), the OYS found that much IPV is bidirectional (meaning both are violent), and in unidirectional abusive relationships, the women were more likely to be abusive than the men.
The study found that a young woman's IPV was just as predictive of her male partner's future IPV as the man's own past IPV. In other words, whereas we often think of men as the only abusers and also as serial abusers, the OYS found that a woman's violence against her man was as predictive of his violence to her as his own history of violence.
|
Evidently, an individual tends to carry violence from relationship to relationship, bidirectional DV is more common than unidirectional, and DV is more often than not initiated by women. But this initiation often does not appear in statistics because it is not reported. Instead, the relationship problems prolong and escalate behind closed doors for a long time until eventually someone gets hurt. This is usually the woman due to the size difference. Clearly the buildup doesn't excuse the extent of the final incident, but it's still important to move away from the "he was beating her for no reason" paradigm.
An explanation is not an excuse; however, these findings do sound particularly relevant to the original incident talked about in this thread.
And although these findings go against conventional wisdom about DV, it should still make some sense. After all, society unanimously condemns male-on-female violence, but feels relatively ambivalent about female-on-male violence, and often glorifies it.
The saddest part is that these findings about DV are not new, they have simply been suppressed all these years. Erin Pizzey, the woman who started the battered women's shelter movement in England in the '70s, did not offer many resources for men simply because she could not get the funding. By the time she finished her book Prone to Violence on the cycle of violence and the true nature of DV, feminists had already decided on hijacking the narrative and falsifying statistics, turning it into the hypersensitive unilateral myth that we hear today. Pizzey received death threats and bomb threats until she finally fled the country, likely because she was merely an expert with a dissenting view.
Last edited by Dirkadirkastan; 08-08-2014 at 10:15 PM.
|
|
|
08-09-2014, 01:50 PM
|
#19
|
Diamond Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Bee Cave, Texas
Posts: 3,240
|
I am proud of the guys in this forum for debating this topic so well.
|
|
|
08-13-2014, 03:05 PM
|
#20
|
The Preacha
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: The Rock
Posts: 36,066
|
really enjoyed what UD brought to this hot topic conversation. I pretty much "ditto" everything he said.
__________________
ok, we've talked about the problem of evil, and the extent of the atonement's application, but my real question to you is, "Could Jesus dunk?"
|
|
|
09-08-2014, 09:55 PM
|
#21
|
Moderator
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: 41.21.1
Posts: 36,143
|
__________________
These days being a fan is a competition to see who can be the most upset when
your team loses. That proves you love winning more. That's how it works.
Last edited by Underdog; 09-08-2014 at 09:55 PM.
|
|
|
09-09-2014, 07:55 AM
|
#22
|
Guru
Join Date: May 2001
Location: sport
Posts: 39,425
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Underdog
|
Well what?
|
|
|
09-10-2014, 05:50 PM
|
#23
|
Diamond Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,249
|
Seems like the serious discussion has ended so...
Someone's gotta be reaching out to Galifianakis about a new Hangover script.
...too soon?
__________________
Is this ghost ball??
|
|
|
09-10-2014, 11:06 PM
|
#24
|
Moderator
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: 41.21.1
Posts: 36,143
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Murphy3
Well what?
|
Well... That was ugly.
Well... Ray Rice certainly is a bitch.
Well... I have no idea why she'd marry him after that.
Well... I can definitely see why the Ravens voided Rice's contract.
Well... This doesn't really have anything to do with SAS, but Rice doesn't have his own thread so I put a link to the video here.
Well... Satisfied?
__________________
These days being a fan is a competition to see who can be the most upset when
your team loses. That proves you love winning more. That's how it works.
Last edited by Underdog; 09-10-2014 at 11:06 PM.
|
|
|
09-11-2014, 11:40 PM
|
#25
|
Diamond Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,249
|
The more Goodell tries to explain things, the worse he looks...
__________________
Is this ghost ball??
|
|
|
09-12-2014, 08:04 PM
|
#26
|
Guru
Join Date: May 2001
Location: sport
Posts: 39,425
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Underdog
Well... That was ugly.
Well... Ray Rice certainly is a bitch.
Well... I have no idea why she'd marry him after that.
Well... I can definitely see why the Ravens voided Rice's contract.
Well... This doesn't really have anything to do with SAS, but Rice doesn't have his own thread so I put a link to the video here.
Well... Satisfied?
|
We already knew that Rice hit her.. really, nothing all that new. What it does bring into light is the hypocrisy involved with the suspension. So, the NFL knew that he punched her and gave him 2 games.. the public throws a fit after the video comes out and it's changed to an indefinite suspension? I have a strong feeling that this will not hold up when Rice appeals. Now, do I believe he deserved longer than 2 games? Absolutely. But I don't think the flip flopping of RG will fly when this is appealed.
|
|
|
09-12-2014, 08:33 PM
|
#27
|
Diamond Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Hudson, WI
Posts: 3,938
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Murphy3
We already knew that Rice hit her.. really, nothing all that new. What it does bring into light is the hypocrisy involved with the suspension. So, the NFL knew that he punched her and gave him 2 games.. the public throws a fit after the video comes out and it's changed to an indefinite suspension? I have a strong feeling that this will not hold up when Rice appeals. Now, do I believe he deserved longer than 2 games? Absolutely. But I don't think the flip flopping of RG will fly when this is appealed.
|
He was (justifiably) cut by the Ravens, and no team is going to touch him for a long time... possibly never again. He can appeal all he wants.
|
|
|
09-08-2014, 10:47 PM
|
#28
|
Diamond Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 5,501
|
Wow that dude really is a POS. However, I still stand by original argument that nothing Stephen A. Smith said was wrong and he should NOT have been suspended.
Last edited by LSMF; 09-08-2014 at 11:37 PM.
|
|
|
09-12-2014, 01:53 PM
|
#29
|
Member
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oak Cliff
Posts: 545
|
Do we think Goodell goes down over this?
Romo has to be happy to have such a big story taking the spotlight off his week 1 game.
|
|
|
09-13-2014, 08:38 AM
|
#30
|
Diamond Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,249
|
Dude... Dallas could soon sign both Ray Rice and Adrian Peterson! With that backfield, teams would have to respect our fearsome run game, put 8 or more in the box every play, and then Romo can comfortably check out of every run!
__________________
Is this ghost ball??
|
|
|
09-14-2014, 09:39 AM
|
#31
|
Guru
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 40,410
|
Was he ever charged and convicted of anything? If not it's kinda weird that you lose your livelihood over a non crime.
__________________
"Yankees fans who say “flags fly forever’’ are right, you never lose that. It reinforces all the good things about being a fan. ... It’s black and white. You (the Mavs) won a title. That’s it and no one can say s--- about it.’’
|
|
|
09-14-2014, 09:53 AM
|
#32
|
Guru
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 23,105
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by dude1394
Was he ever charged and convicted of anything? If not it's kinda weird that you lose your livelihood over a non crime.
|
He was charged with aggravated assault and got a 12 month pretrial intervention program since he had no priors.
__________________
"Cream of the crop gon' rise to the top." -Jaden Hardy
|
|
|
09-14-2014, 10:16 AM
|
#33
|
Moderator
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: 41.21.1
Posts: 36,143
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by dude1394
Was he ever charged and convicted of anything? If not it's kinda weird that you lose your livelihood over a non crime.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DevinHarriswillstart
He was charged with aggravated assault and got a 12 month pretrial intervention program since he had no priors.
|
Well, I guess Ray Rice won't be able to play the victim card...
It doesn't take a crime for one to lose their job. An employer can terminate employment for whatever reasons they see fit, just as long as it doesn't violate any civil liberties... And last I checked, beating up a woman isn't a right that we have in this country.
__________________
These days being a fan is a competition to see who can be the most upset when
your team loses. That proves you love winning more. That's how it works.
Last edited by Underdog; 09-14-2014 at 02:22 PM.
|
|
|
09-14-2014, 05:25 PM
|
#34
|
Diamond Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Hudson, WI
Posts: 3,938
|
The pre-trial intervention program that the prosecutor accepted in lieu of a trial and possible prison/jail time is a ridiculous sweetheart deal that less than 1% of defendants are granted.
The dude's made millions of dollars in his career... I won't shed any tears if he never plays in the NFL again. I hope he doesn't.
|
|
|
09-15-2014, 04:49 PM
|
#35
|
Golden Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,818
|
any opinion on Adrian Peterson? It seems like he's saying a lot of the right things. i guess that he's reprimanded and made to go through some counseling, etc. maybe pay some fines. Doubt there's jail time or any long term issues otherwise.
opens a big can of worms with regards to how to parent/discipline children. obviously a lot of taking sides there. hope his son doesn't have any long term issues with regards to the media circus...
|
|
|
09-16-2014, 11:35 AM
|
#36
|
Diamond Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,249
|
Come on AP
Time to get a new jersey
The NFC East is weak
Won't you come to Dallas
__________________
Is this ghost ball??
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:38 PM.
|