Sports Gambling Update
- Thread starter hawkeyealumni
- Start date
A
anon_0pi0cv8t1ggvb
Guest
I'm not loyal to any politicians. Hold any and all accountable that have broken laws. Hold them to higher standards than the average citizen in fact and certainly don't give them immunity or pardon them for crimes they've committed and been convicted of.
And.. Politics get brought up. Figures
Just help vodka out as he is woefully struggling with simple English.
Definition of "laws" from Webster's -
1
a(1)
: a binding custom or practice of a community : a rule of conduct or action prescribed (see prescribe sense 1a) or formally recognized as binding or enforced by a controlling authority
(2)
: the whole body of such customs, practices, or rules
Definition of "laws" from Webster's -
1
a(1)
: a binding custom or practice of a community : a rule of conduct or action prescribed (see prescribe sense 1a) or formally recognized as binding or enforced by a controlling authority
(2)
: the whole body of such customs, practices, or rules
Well some differences. Laws voted on by elected officials. Rules enacted by unelected administrators and not applied equally.
And would these rules infractions be invalidated like laws in a court since they were possibly discovered by illegal means…u know that fruit of the poisonous tree thing. Not to mention the innumerable other innocents who had their rights violated.
Whether elected officials or appointed officials, it doesn't matter. The NCAA has the right to set its own rules and to enforce them.
I don't think anyone is arguing otherwise. The unfortunate thing is that their right to due process was violated, and they were punished because of it. However that is very unlikely to (and probably shouldn't) be a consideration in the NCAA punishment for the rule breaking.
Those that violated the due process should pay whatever heavy penalty they deserve. Those that received criminal charges should have those dropped completely as well. That may bring about some sense of closure or justice to the whole situation, even if it doesn't overturn the NCAA punishment.
I agree with you completely. Others are arguing differently, not me.
But if an illegal search is done to get the evidence…..?
Not a perfect analogy, but they don't give illegal narcotics back to someone if there was an illegal search. As others noted, NCAA still knows they broke the rules. They could voluntarily decide to reduce punishment because this came to light through an illegal search, but I wouldn't hold your breath.
Please provide the articles/reporter names that did as you described, as well as the names of the sports writers at Tom's press conference. Happy to change my opinion of Tom's actions if the 'data' warrants it.
And the right to set arbitrary punishments, or to sweep them under the rug and not enforce them at all. The question is, "What if this was six starters on the Alabama or Michigan football team? Would they have lost a whole year of eligibility?" Money and power tend to sway NCAA decisions. What reactions would they have gotten if they declared the Michigan football team ineligible over the sign-stealing thing instead of letting Michigan fire a scapegoat and suspending the coach for three games? I'm guessing it would have been a firestorm in the media and public outcry.
I'm in total agreement that people who break rules should be punished, but let the punishment be meted out fairly for all.
A
anon_0pi0cv8t1ggvb
Guest
I think you're confusing me with another poster. I haven't said anything in regards to laws vs NCAA rules.
A
anon_0pi0cv8t1ggvb
Guest
Ironic. You're mixing me up with someone else. I'm not the person you've been discussing the semantics of laws vs rules with and NCAA enforcement. Woefully struggling with reading comprehension.
Do the reporters that attend Brands’ weekly press conference have the skills and knowledge to investigate why one/some wrestler(s) were allowed to skip the compliance training?
I hope you don't kiss your wife with that mouth.
Is this where someone says
‘No way he can as I already have her mouth occupied?’
****ing politics. If I want to learn something about politics I will gladly talk to someone who knows politics. Ain’t gonna happen on this forum.
Then all criminal charges there may be against these kids need to be dropped immediately regardless of guilt or innocence. Constitutional protections in the Bill of Rights are there for a reason and supercede guilt or innocence. The DCI and/or the agent(s) involved may face some sort of federal penalty as well, but I'm not certain about that.
However, the Constitution doesn't govern NCAA bylaws. If the NCAA knows there are violations, they can still punish the offenders. As someone else said, they may voluntarily choose to lessen or abandon the sanctions, but there is no Constitutional obligation to do so as there is with the criminal charges, so the kids are at the mercy of the NCAA in that regard.
Chief's pissed because some turd went rogue after our wrestlers with a targeted and prejudicial (if not illegal) "wiretap." I NEVER condone gambling, but I'm not going to support (en)trapping our college athletes who gambled on the Iowa women's basketball team during 2023 March Madness either. Doesn't everybody bet on March Madness at some point? I have (the office pool), and I don't gamble (much).
Maybe we should be more a little sympathetic with the anger, and a little less critical of the language. If that's the worst that you read here in the cesspool, then your either blind or can't read.
Last edited:
Who is the AG in Iowa?
She's a real piece of work
In her defense, she's never actually "tried" a case, so we should give her some slack for being incompetent and ignorant.
Never, ever? Or, just never as the actual AG? I can't believe you can get all the way to Attorney General without every going to trial in your entire career. If so, I would be really interested to see how many times that has happened across all states in the union...
We used to have an Attorney General in CA who didn’t spend too much time in the court room. Pamela Darris I think was her name.
I get that, relatively speaking. However, he literally said never. If that is truly the case, I just can't believe she got elected. I can at least see it if the AG was appointed, even then it is ridiculous, but agenda driven things don't surprise me nearly as much...
I’m of course being silly, but my point is those AG positions are political. One shouldn’t assume that the person in that office knows their way around a courtroom. Before she was “investigating the root causes of the migrant crisis” for the past 3 years, Mrs. Darris, as a SF area DA was reassigned from her position based on the fact she was caught having an affair with Willie Brown, the SF mayor at the time. He had her reassigned to various high paying committees that she got to sit on, which essentially acted as a resume builder for her. She was elected to the position of Attorney General despite having very little actual experience. My father was a Special Agent with the Dept of Justice at the time and she became his de facto boss. My old man served in Nan, did 26 years with the LAPD and then 10 years with the DOJ, he maintains that Mrs. Darris is the most clueless “boss” he’s ever had. It’s a position you would think would be reserved for the most qualified, but sadly few are selected on their merit. How’s that for long winded amiright?
