The league argued to Robinson that Watson’s situation is unprecedented, given the numerous accusers. Either way, while Robinson was neutral, the person presiding over the appeal will be associated with the NFL. Goodell can preside over the appeal or delegate that responsibility to another person. An appeal hearing will be scheduled within 10 days. Watson now has two business days to file a response. Per Article 46 of the CBA, the NFL had three days to appeal. Suspensions only cost the player the applicable proportion of base salary, meaning Watson will lose about $345,000-a fraction of a percent of his massive contract. His $230 million contract with the Browns is structured to include a $45 million signing bonus and 2022 base salary of “only” $1.04 million. Watson also faces a relatively inconsequential financial penalty. Watson will also miss far fewer games than Atlanta Falcons wide receiver Calvin Ridley, who has been suspended at least through the 2022 season for betting on NFL games. Robinson concluded that Watson engaged in “predatory behavior” that she found “egregious.” Yet Watson will be suspended only two more games than Tom Brady, who seven years ago was accused of a comparatively trivial offense, tampering with football equipment. Although not charged with a crime and not found civilly liable by any court, the former Houston Texans QB has been accused by multiple massage therapists of assault. The length of Watson’s suspension has faced sharp criticism that it seems too light. “It is inherently unjust to change the penalties for such conduct after the fact,” Robinson wrote. The player is not made aware that if he commits misconduct, he could face a suspension that lasts at least one year and only ends when the league says so. The problem with retroactive application is that it violates the legal principle of notice. Robinson stressed that even if the commissioner enjoys substantial discretion in defining misconduct and in determining a penalty, the league cannot engineer a new policy in real time and then retroactively apply it (that is, apply it to Watson for misconduct that already occurred).
She concluded that the league sought a penalty that was unsupported by previous conduct matters and is not contemplated in the CBA. Robinson agreed with the NFL that Watson engaged in conduct detrimental but disagreed about the penalty.
0 kommentar(er)
