We learned yesterday that Cowboys running back Ezekiel Elliott had been granted a temporary restraining order against the NFL. The player’s six-game suspension is now on hold, and he’ll be allowed to play the upcoming season as the case is resolved. Ultimately, the judge found that Elliott “did not receive a fundamentally fair hearing, necessitating the Court grant the request.”
An NFL spokesman released a statement following the decision (via NFL.com’s Mike Garafolo on Twitter):
“We strongly believe that the investigation and evidence supported the Commissioner’s decision and that the process was meticulous and fair throughout. We will review the decision in greater detail and discuss next steps with counsel, both in the district court and federal court of appeals.”
Meanwhile, the NFLPA released a statement, citing the league office’s lack of integrity (via Charean Williams of ProFootballTalk.com):
“Commissioner discipline will continue to be a distraction from our game for one reason: because NFL owners have refused to collectively bargain a fair and transparent process that exists in other sports. This ‘imposed’ system remains problematic for players and the game, but as the honest and honorable testimony of a few NFL employees recently revealed, it also demonstrates the continued lack of integrity within their own League office.”
Let’s take a look at some other reactions regarding the Elliott decision…
- There were several factors that went into Judge Amos L. Mazzant III’s decision, writes Mike Florio of ProFootballTalk.com. For starters, the judge had concerns about the credibility of Tiffany Thompson, and he believed Elliott’s team should have been allowed to cross-examine her. Furthermore, the question marks surrounding “the opinions and conclusions of NFL Director of Investigations Kia Roberts” should have resulted in testimony from commissioner Roger Goodell, which did not happen. Finally, the judge cited “[f]undamental unfairness” that had plagued the case since the beginning.
- Florio also points out a footnote in the ruling, noting that Judge Mazzant could still dismiss the entire case based on the fact that it was filed prematurely. The NFL is still required to file essential paperwork, and the judge could subsequently decide to “punt” the case in “deference to the lawsuit the NFL filed in New York.” In this case, Elliott would once again be forced to get an injunction so he can continue to play. However, Florio believes this is unlikely, as the judge will presumably keep “control of the case in order to ensure that the case is processed with the benefit of his conclusion.”
- Elliott’s attorneys released a statement following the decision (via ESPN’s Adam Schefter on Twitter): “We just learned of the Honorable Amos Mazzant’s decision to grant Mr. Elliott’s request for a preliminary injunction staying the NFL’s six-game suspension. We are very pleased that Mr. Elliott will finally be given the opportunity to have an impartial decision-maker carefully examine the NFL’s misconduct. This is just the beginning of the unveiling of the NFL’s mishandling as it relates to Mr. Elliott’s suspension. As the Court noted, the question of whether Mr. Elliott received a fundamentally fair hearing answered… “he did not”. We agree.”
Funny how none of the other sports have to defend all of their player discipline in federal court. I don’t get it. Does the NFL have no legal team? Geez.
I don’t get it. It’s not like there aren’t all kinds of examples of how to investigate and discipline players/employees out there. You just have to do it right.
Just out of curiosity how is this different than the Brady suspension? The best they got there was enough circumstantial to lead to “more likely than not he knew something” and that was enough for a suspension. I know they aren’t the same exact cases, I guess I just don’t see a major fundamental difference here. I’m not trying to justify what the Pats did either, there’s no doubt in my mind they did it, but I don’t think that there was enough to prove that Brady was responsible for it to warrant a 4 game suspension if all they could get was “more likely than not.”
Preponderance of evidence is all you need in civil court, and that’s basically 50.0001% certainty.
Ah ok. That’s what I thought but I couldn’t remember. Thanks.
I did not know a judge could interfere with an NFL decision.
It’s just because the NFL sucks at discipline. If they follow a consistent and fair process nobody can interfere with it. If they don’t, they lose lawsuits.
Argh
At the end of the day Brady rested for 4 games and went on to win a Super Bowl so it worked out pretty good for him. He backed off at the end because his mother got cancer and he also did not want to distract the team.
With Elliot we are talking about domestic abuse. Significantly different situation and Jerry Jones is all over this one. It will be interesting to see how Goodell and the NFL respond but since he just got a new deal for $150M, life is pretty good for the Commissioner.
Funny how things works when you play for the cowboys. Jerry Jones paid a pretty penny to keep Zek playing. Wow is all I can say
Dumbass !!! Now….u get to play early gms n all u have done is delay ur punishment…..it’s coming ! Instead of get it over with, behind u, allow it to linger n miss “real” gms down the stretch when ur tm really needs u…..maybe even have to miss play-off gms. AND u r pissin off the brand, NFL, u r makin urself a huge target for them to continue to have u under the microscope…..n w/ur obvious pattern of poor behavior n bad decision making skills….I fear this type of moronic criminal drama will be annual event. Let’s Go Whoever Is Playing Boys !!!!
Dumbass? You don’t even know how to write!
Ur the dumass
No! I am the dumass! by