In response to
"Agreed."
by
Spawn
|
I get why you're so angry. I would be too if it was my team that lost in that circumstance. But you're getting outraged over things that should have
Posted by
pmb (aka pmb)
May 13 '15, 11:50
|
little bearing on the ruling. First, while it's quite likely that he's inflated the balls in the past in similar ways, we don't have evidence of that so it can't be assumed. Second, there's no evidence that team knew about it (Bellichek was exonerated), so the fact that their owner denied it and wanted an apology means nothing. The lack of compliance with the investigator from all I've read was actually fairly minor. They didn't make guy in charge of the balls immediately available for a second interview (he'd already been interviewed once), though they ultimately did interview him again. Same with the phone. It took longer than they wanted but ultimately complied. These are minor annoyances, not obstruction. They didn't pay off or intimidate any witness. They didn't destroy any evidence. It really doesn't add up to that much.
|
Responses:
|