I guess you don't read very well, either.
"Cheating" at football is sneaking an extra player onto the field, moving the ball an extra foot or two forward of the line of scrimmage, etc., etc. What the Patriots did does not, in any way, rise to this level, and again---again---did not effect, in any way, the game as played on the field. You cling to the words "cheat" and "cheated" as though they were life preservers; conflate if you want, but all the Patriots did was break a procedural rule that had absolutely no bearing at all on the game of football.
In other words, you're a moonbat.
Yeah, I know, I know.... and it's just about sex, can we move on?!
From Peter King of SI...
Now onto your questions.
• STOP CALLING THE PATRIOTS "CHEATERS.'' From Mark Jantzen, of Boston: "The Patriots clearly violated a league rule and were punished for it. But the continued use of the term 'cheat' is something I simply don't get. Does that mean an offensive lineman who is flagged for holding cheated?''
There's more.
• STOP CALLING THE PATRIOTS "CHEATERS'' II. From Rich, of Memphis: "Why do you continue the fraud of labeling the illegal taping by the Patriots as 'cheating' when you or the rest of the media never use that term to refer to salary-cap violations, early contact of free agents or other rule infractions? Seems like a term that is both hyperbolic and unnecessary, used in a rather lazy manner to provoke. I thought that perhaps someone of your experience would see through the charade."
I got a dozen or so similar emails, and they stun me. The Patriots violated a clearly written statute in the NFL policy manual, apparently consistently (if not weekly) over a seven-year period. And after the policy was re-emphasized in a crystal-clear, well-publicized memo from the league to all teams in September 2006, the Patriots continued to videotape opposing teams' coaching signals. They were caught. If that isn't cheating, what is? Bill Belichick was given the harshest sanction ever given to a coach in the history of the NFL. What exactly should I call it?
Now, as for all the other "everybody does it'' rules violations: When teams get caught cheating and are sanctioned by the league for said violations, we in the media will report that. I have no problem with calling teams found guilty of competitive offenses cheaters. Yes, an offensive lineman who gets called for holding cheated, in the literal sense of the word. He got caught and penalized 15 yards. Yes, we in the media have called other league infractions "cheating.'' When the 49ers were docked a draft choice for illegal contact with Chicago linebacker Lance Briggs, columnist Ray Ratto of the San Francisco Chronicle wrote a column headlined: "If you're going to cheat, do it right.
Do other teams cheat? Yes. But it's like pass-interference in the NFL. It's only cheating if you're caught, or if you're flagged. Maybe you think that's fair, and maybe you think it isn't. But that's the way the world works.
The inference of your letter is that we in the media are picking on the Patriots, which is something I've heard a lot; believe me, I've been attacked quite a bit about it. I don't see it that way, but I understand from Patriots supporters that they want this whole episode to be over. In my opinion, it was never going to be over until Matt Walsh came clean with what he knew, or at least what he alleged. And who knows? It may not be over now. I've never believed Belichick's explanation that he "misinterpreted" a rule that the rest of the league seemed to know.