Thread: NFL fines Cameron Heyward for honoring his father Ironhead, who died from cancer

Originally Posted by BroncoJoe

Personally, I don't see a problem with it, but I do know that players will push the limits. I understand why they allow zero deviations from the dress code.

You don't see a problem with it because you're not a twit. The desires of the players are currently reasonable. Rules can be written for accommodation. If the rules are written well, and the NFL has the resources to easily do so, the rules stay at the reasonable level. This then means the players who are being unreasonable, or those that push the limits, get fined.

Originally Posted by BroncoJoe

Personally, I don't see a problem with it, but I do know that players will push the limits. I understand why they allow zero deviations from the dress code.

It really annoys me when players don't wear the same socks, last year talib wrote ask white with no blue cuff and it was driving me crazy.

#institutionalized
#uniform
#straightlineswinwars

Originally Posted by BroncoJoe

Personally, I don't see a problem with it, but I do know that players will push the limits. I understand why they allow zero deviations from the dress code.

I'd like to say the NFL should look the other way but if they do we will quickly move beyond this type of honoring and religious messaging to endorsements and other far tackier violations.

I understand why they have a zero tolerance policy even though it results in some bad PR on occasion.

Originally Posted by King87

You don't see a problem with it because you're not a twit. The desires of the players are currently reasonable. Rules can be written for accommodation. If the rules are written well, and the NFL has the resources to easily do so, the rules stay at the reasonable level. This then means the players who are being unreasonable, or those that push the limits, get fined.

I agree that the league probably should put in a rule that exceptions can be granted pending league approval for things like honoring fallen family members. But as the rules currently are written, he has to be fined for it. I would think as a future lawyer you would understand the NFL going by the letter of their law.

To say they are simply punishing him for honoring his dad is a hot take IMO.

Originally Posted by BroncoWave

I agree that the league probably should put in a rule that exceptions can be granted pending league approval for things like honoring fallen family members. But as the rules currently are written, he has to be fined for it. I would think as a future lawyer you would understand the NFL going by the letter of their law.

To say they are simply punishing him for honoring his dad is a hot take IMO.

As a future lawyer I am also interested in better adaptations of the law, better laws, better writings of the law, and a proactive approach towards all of the aforementioned principles that I hold. Furthermore, the choice of going by the letter of the law is just as much of a choice as any other principle of the law. This would be a textualist approach. When an incident is so minute and inconsequential the enforcement of the law, or the rule, borders on abuse.

Originally Posted by King87

As a future lawyer I am also interested in better adaptations of the law, better laws, better writings of the law, and a proactive approach towards all of the aforementioned principles that I hold. Furthermore, the choice of going by the letter of the law is just as much of a choice as any other principle of the law. This would be a textualist approach. When an incident is so minute and inconsequential the enforcement of the law, or the rule, borders on abuse.

Eh, I don't thinks this comes anywhere close to the level of "abuse".

Originally Posted by BroncoWave

Eh, I don't thinks this comes anywhere close to the level of "abuse".

It's not right to punish a man who is showing love to his family in such a small manner. The irony of the situation is that almost no one would have noticed had the NFL not come out and fined him.

Originally Posted by King87

It's not right to punish a man who is showing love to his family in such a small manner. The irony of the situation is that almost no one would have noticed had the NFL not come out and fined him.

That much is true.

Originally Posted by King87

It's not right to punish a man who is showing love to his family in such a small manner. The irony of the situation is that almost no one would have noticed had the NFL not come out and fined him.

That's not really the point though. 99% of uniform violations probably aren't noticed by the public. But with the rules as they currently are, a fine was in order. There is so much gray area for stuff like this you almost have to allow all of it or none of it. I think FAR more controversy would arise if they judged things on a case-by-case basis then a player rose a stink because they approved it for one guy but not for him.

Originally Posted by BroncoWave

That's not really the point though. 99% of uniform violations probably aren't noticed by the public. But with the rules as they currently are, a fine was in order. There is so much gray area for stuff like this you almost have to allow all of it or none of it. I think FAR more controversy would arise if they judged things on a case-by-case basis then a player rose a stink because they approved it for one guy but not for him.

It is the point. Enforcing the rules is a choice. What you choose to enforce is a means of policy and when you do it is as well. Prosecutor's choose all the time these sorts of things.

Originally Posted by King87

It's not right to punish a man who is showing love to his family in such a small manner. The irony of the situation is that almost no one would have noticed had the NFL not come out and fined him.

He has every right to show it in other ways. Just not at his place of employment.

I am a fence sitter on this subject, but I do understand the NFL's stance of zero tolerance.

EDIT: I also understand it from the players' perspective. It's a no-win argument.

Originally Posted by BroncoJoe

He has every right to show it in other ways. Just not at his place of employment.

I am a fence sitter on this subject, but I do understand the NFL's stance of zero tolerance.

EDIT: I also understand it from the players' perspective. It's a no-win argument.

He does not have the right to show it at the employment area of his life. I understand that. I am not going to argue it's a right.

I do not understand the zero tolerance policy as there are better means of solving the problem, but it presupposes that the NFL cares.

I side with the players. I'm not really outraged though. This sort of thing makes for a good discussion, and is relevant as a microcosm or example of competing legal principles. I dig it, haha.

Originally Posted by King87

He does not have the right to show it at the employment area of his life. I understand that. I am not going to argue it's a right.

I do not understand the zero tolerance policy as there are better means of solving the problem, but it presupposes that the NFL cares.

I side with the players. I'm not really outraged though. This sort of thing makes for a good discussion, and is relevant as a microcosm or example of competing legal principles. I dig it, haha.

Nerd!

I kind of like it when King High Five's me. It's a compliment, but not sure why. It's along the lines of Dread, ~G-Money and/or Davii giving me a High Five.

Originally Posted by BroncoJoe

I kind of like it when King High Five's me. It's a compliment, but not sure why. It's along the lines of Dread, ~G-Money and/or Davii giving me a High Five.

They are of a higher caliber than I.