One critique in the gamers would be that the National football league has not presented evidence there really would be a Saints bounty program (the union does not believe Anthony Hargrove's declaration constituted the bounty program been around, exactly that he was told to deny it were available).
The union also does not believe commissioner Roger Goodell has got the jurisdiction to suspend the gamers to begin with.
Regarding the first critique, the NY Occasions reviews the National football league has stated it's lots of evidence as well as demonstrated some towards the NFLPA before suspending Vilma for any year, Hargrove for eight games, Will Cruz for four games and Scott Fujita for 3.
The league may also have evidence public following the gamers appeals are heard, although the National football league will make sure mask the identity of their sources. However the league also will not release a lot of the “raw evidence” since it is worried that gamers could identify a number of individuals sources.
“If people had not been prepared to come forward around the reliance of some commitment of discretion, we were not sure about this,” one league official told the newspaper.
Not remarkably, Vilma's attorney, Peter Ginsberg, wants what they are called of those who the National football league questioned throughout its Bounty-gate analysis.
“It's important because Jonathan is fighting on two fronts -- he's fighting legally and also to get his status back,” Ginsberg stated. “It's vital that you get evidence or what Roger Goodell states is evidence.”
But you need to question that even when the National football league does produce evidence, will that fulfill the affected gamers as well as their lawyers? If their headgear aren't overturned or reduced, I am speculating no.