Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop
No, I was trying to ask you how you explain what Berman did? Earlier, you said that the fact that he ruled for Brady on the law doesn't mean that he saw it Brady's way on the facts. But then you suggested that he didn't really care about the legal analysis -- that he was otherwise looking for a reason to rule for Brady. But if it wasn't the facts and it wasn't the law, what was it?
|
This is absolutely incorrect. I said he wanted to overturn Goodell's decision. You incorrectly read into it what you wanted to hear, because that's what you do. Hell, you apparently can't even tell you're doing it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I read the decision close enough to see the scarequotes. I still can't tell what, if anything, you read.
|
You are completely full of shit. You interpreted it in a way that suits your world view and you can hear nothing else.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop
You have all these neat rhetorical tricks to avoid ever saying anything about what Berman actually said. Berman was just looking for a way to rule for Brady.
|
This is an absolute lie. You get so pissy if people don't want to discuss something on your limited terms and myopic reading. I am currently having a discussion about the exact same topic with someone who can reasonably go back and forth on the points.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop
The legal points are technicalities. I'm biased. I'm cherry-picking.
|
Only when it applies. Berman discussed more than just the fact that the Player Policies are what should apply when discussing notice. You isolated that part of the decision and have acted like that's all there is to it.
And you are
absolutely biased. We've talked about a lot of what has gone on with the Patriots and you really have only considered one side, whether it be Spygate or Deflategate. As far as you're concerned this is a
complete snowjob because everyone is jealous of the Patriots and Brady, and Goodell is an egotistical asshole (that last part I give you credit for). Hell, you are so far up Belichick's ass that you can't admit that handing the ball off to the most dominant back in a situation tailormade for him was a mistake. You think Belichick tricked the Seahawks into passing and worked the clock to make it the only choice. I have never, ever seen you admit that the Patriots may have done something wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop
It's like watching an lesson in how to get through a law school class without having done the homework.
|
You keep saying this. I read the opinion. But because you're such a pompous asshole with all this on point experience, you seem to think that everyone should bow down to your reading of the opinion. That's not how it works, especially when you're wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop
If it works for you, go with it. But Burger and I were discussing the same portion of the decision. (Go back to where I quoted, "First offenses will result in fines." The next sentence has the $5,512 number Burger has mentioned a couple of times.)
|
Yes, but Burger has the ability to go beyond that specific portion of the decision to discuss the other portions the judge addressed. You do not.
I like to argue. I throw insults and take them. No big deal. I consider them emphasis. You like to post links. When someone questions your
own thoughts, you can't take it and you throw a fit and talk about your experience or how carefully you read something as some sort of implication that you're the smartest guy you know. It doesn't help your argument.
TM
