“I don’t see how four games is comparable to using steroids and a masking agent”, he asked.
Advertisement
Nash’s response: “The amount of discipline would be based on the sound judgment of the commissioner”.
Goodell said in late July that he had concluded Brady conspired with two Patriots equipment employees who handled game balls to deflate balls prior to the start of January’s AFC championship game.
Goodell suspended Brady for the first four games of the regular season due to his alleged involvement in the Deflategate scandal, but the NFL Players Association is looking to get the ruling overturned. Both the NFL and the players’ union filed to have the suspension ruled on in federal court. Berman has reportedly summoned both Brady and Goodell to appear.
Berman also used carefully-worded questions and made direct statements during his opening remarks to show the benefits of a resolution. He then warned the league’s legal professionals in that there’s precedent for judges to toss out penalties issued by arbitrators.
Whether Brady plays, or Judge Berman upholds his four-game Deflategate suspension, may remain uncertain until the week prior to the game.
As Nash and his team left court, a reporter asked: “So, how do you think it went?”
After watching Berman in action, Goodell might have called a timeout, huddled with Brady and come up with the settlement that eluded them when they were together with the lawyers on Tuesday.
Wednesday’s hearing lasted about two hours and 15 minutes. Berman said that Goodell’s refusal to allow questioning of Pash raised question about “some basic procedures for fairness” in the process of suspending Brady.
The judge also said he would meet with the lawyers privately on Wednesday to continue discussing a potential resolution.
Jeffrey Kessler led the charge for Tom Brady and the NFLPA in the courtroom on Wednesday.
Advertisement
According to one of those people, the settlement talks have been focused on which part of parts of the Wells report, if any, both the union and league can accept, rather than on potential compromises over a suspension or fine. He repeated that “arbitration must be fair”, and doesn’t view it as such in this matter.
