Sports Law Blog
All things legal relating
to the sports world...
Friday, December 30, 2016
Conduct Detrimental: The Sports Law Podcast
As 2016 winds down, I want to call your attention to a new sports law podcast created by co-hosts Daniel Wallach and Daniel Werly--Conduct Detrimental. Noted sports lawyers, Wallach is a well known contributor here at The Sports Law Blog and Werly is a friend of the SLB and the man behind The White Bronco, another wonderful blog discussing current sports law issues.
“Conduct Detrimental: The Sports Law Podcast” is the creation of the two Dans, who address the latest legal controversies on and off the field. I encourage you to join the two Dans for a hard-hitting look at the legal battles that are shaping professional and collegiate sports. From Deflategate to daily fantasy sports, this first-of-a-kind podcast breaks down the latest court cases and features exclusive interviews with an array of industry-leading guests.
Full disclosure, I was a recent guest on this podcast as Dan, Dan, and I discussed the collision between amateurism and commercialism in college sports. Other recent podcasts include the NFL’s handling of domestic violence cases, Deflategate (of course), and the Derrick Rose civil trial. Recent guests have also included Diana Moskovitz, A.J. Perez, and Julia Marsh . Upcoming episodes will feature sports law stalwarts: Tulane Law School and our own Gabe Feldman, Paul Anderson from Marquette Law School, and Ian Gunn, another fellow Tulane Law School alum and contributor at Sports Esquires--yet another sports law blog.
The bottom line is that I encourage you to download Conduct Detrimental podcasts either at iTunes or The White Bronco. For information on future episodes, follow Conduct Detrimental on Twitter at @ConductPod.
Enjoy the podcasts and Happy New Year to all!
Sunday, December 04, 2016
Question for NFL fans (especially those with officiating experience)
I am a week late to this question about the end of last week's Ravens-Bengals game. Quick reminder: The Ravens lined up to punt from their own 22, with 11 seconds left. The punter took the snap and danced around with the ball, while his teammates committed multiple, blatant holds. The punter finally step out of bounds in the back of the end zone for a safety after time expired. The officials called the holding fouls and awarded the Bengals two points on the safety, but declared the game over, invoking the rule that a half cannot be extended on an offensive hold.
Here's my question: Rule 4, § 8, art. 2(g), on extending a half after time expires, states "if a safety results from a foul during the last play of a half, the score counts. A safety kick is made if requested by the receives."
So why wasn't that rule invoked to give the Bengals a chance at a free kick (which, trailing by 5, they would have had to return for a touchdown to win). Why wasn't that rule applicable here?