| "Deflate Gate" Brady to be suspended | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: May 8 2015, 05:41 PM (3,768 Views) | |
| Baldo | May 14 2015, 12:25 AM Post #16 |
|
NFLPA to use noted labor lawyer Kessler in appeal NEW YORK (AP) -- Noted labor attorney Jeffrey Kessler will aid in the players' union's planned appeal of Tom Brady's suspension. The New England Patriots quarterback was suspended by the NFL for the first four games of the 2015 season for his role in the deflating of footballs. He has until 5 p.m. EDT on Thursday to file the appeal. His lawyer, Don Yee, and the union have said they will appeal. Kessler has litigated some of the most famous sports antitrust cases, including working for a variety of player unions. He was instrumental in getting NFL free agency established and had a key role in helping end the league's lockout of the players in 2011...snipped http://sports.yahoo.com/news/nflpa-noted-labor-lawyer-kessler-appeal-153641310--nfl.html |
 |
 
|
| Baldo | May 14 2015, 12:27 PM Post #17 |
|
Patriots Criticize Wells Report in Lengthy Rebuttal The New England Patriots on Thursday released a lengthy rebuttal to the report on the possible deflation of footballs at the A.F.C. championship game, disputing many of its findings. “The conclusions of the Wells report are, at best, incomplete, incorrect and lack context,” it contends. The rebuttal says that “basic science fully explains the drop in psi of the Patriots footballs.” It defends the decision not to turn over Patriots quarterback Tom Brady’s cellphone and the locker room attendant Jim McNally’s removal of footballs from the officials’ room. It also suggests that a text mention of “deflator” referred to McNally’s efforts to lose weight. The rebuttal, titled, “Wells Report in Context,” is a nearly line-by-line response to the executive summary of the report, which was a result of an investigation by the lawyer Theodore V. Wells Jr. It questions numerous facts and conclusions in the report and offers alternative theories....snipped http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/15/sports/football/patriots-criticize-wells-report-in-lengthy-rebuttal.html NE Patriots Release - The Wells Report in Context The conclusions of the Wells Report are, at best, incomplete, incorrect and lack context. The Report dismisses the scientific explanation for the natural loss of psi of the Patriots footballs by inexplicably rejecting the Referee’s recollection of what gauge he used in his pregame inspection. Texts acknowledged to be attempts at humor and exaggeration are nevertheless interpreted as a plot to improperly deflate footballs, even though none of them refer to any such plot. There is no evidence that Tom Brady preferred footballs that were lower than 12.5 psi and no evidence anyone even thought that he did. All the extensive evidence which contradicts how the texts are interpreted by the investigators is simply dismissed as “not plausible.” Inconsistencies in logic and evidence are ignored. These points, and others, are addressed in greater detail in the following Annotations to the Executive Summary of the Wells Report by Daniel L. Goldberg, a senior partner in the Boston office of Morgan Lewis and who represented the Patriots and was present during all of the interviews of Patriots personnel conducted at Gillette Stadium. Our intention is to provide additional context for balance and consideration...snipped http://wellsreportcontext.com/ |
|
|
|
| MikeZPU | May 14 2015, 02:29 PM Post #18 |
|
Yes, I remember hearing about that: that the initial claims about the balls in the game vs The Colts were not true. So, I was quite surprised when I heard about the Wells Report last week. I had no clue that Deflate-Gate was still being investigated. |
|
|
|
| Baldo | May 14 2015, 11:08 PM Post #19 |
|
Roger Goodell to Hear Tom Brady's Deflategate Appeal: Latest Details, Reaction For months, NFL commissioner Roger Goodell has been putting an infrastructure in place to lessen the role he plays in player discipline. On Thursday, Goodell made a surprising move against that recent stance, appointing himself as the arbitrator for New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady's appeal of his four-game suspension. "Commissioner Goodell will hear the appeal of Tom Brady's suspension in accordance with the process agreed upon with the NFL Players Association in the 2011 collective bargaining agreement," the league said in a statement to Bleacher Report's Mike Freeman. Under the terms of the NFL's collective bargaining agreement, Goodell has the right to appoint the arbitrator for appeals of league-mandated discipline. He has appointed independent arbitrators in recent high-profile cases, most notably Barbara S. Jones and Harold Henderson, who presided over appeals from Ray Rice and Adrian Peterson, respectively. The NFLPA filed a formal appeal of Brady's suspension earlier Thursday. In a statement, it cited the NFL's "history of inconsistency and arbitrary decisions in disciplinary matters" and asked for a neutral arbitrator. ESPN's Andrew Brandt weighed in on the situation: "If Ted Wells and the NFL believe, as their public comments stated, that the evidence in their report is 'direct' and 'inculpatory,' then they should be confident enough to present their case before someone who is truly independent," the statement read. Goodell's decision to appoint himself will undoubtedly stoke even more ire in what's already become a contentious battle...snipped http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2465426-roger-goodell-to-hear-tom-bradys-deflategate-appeal-latest-details-reaction  In a related matter Torquemada announced he will lead the inquisition over his overuse of torture. He promised a fair & complete investigation before he declares himself innocent of all charges. Edited by Baldo, May 14 2015, 11:08 PM.
|
|
|
|
| sdsgo | May 15 2015, 11:48 AM Post #20 |
|
Professor MacKinnon’s Scientific Conclusion Roderick MacKinnon is a professer at The Rockefeller University. In 2003 he was awarded the Nobel Prize in chemistry. His other awards include the 2003 Louisa Gross Horwitz Prize, the 2001 Gairdner Foundation International Award, the 2001 Perl-UNC Neuroscience Prize, the 2000 Lewis S. Rosenstiel Award for Distinguished Work in Basic Medical Science and the 1999 Albert Lasker Basic Medical Research Award. Professor MacKinnon has no direct business or personal relationship with the Patriots. Professor MacKinnon was a founder of Flex Pharma, a biotechnology company developing treatments for neuromuscular disorders. Flex Pharma is a public company. Prior to the company going public, the investment arm of The Kraft Group made a passive investment in Flex Pharma as part of a large syndicated investor group. [ADDED FOR CLARITY 5/14/15 3:13pm] When news of the investigation became public, Professor MacKinnon offered his scientific expertise to the team. The Wells report concluded “within the range of likely game conditions and circumstances studied, they could identify no set of credible environmental or physical factors that completely accounts for the Patriots halftime measurements or for the additional loss in air pressure exhibited by the Patriots game balls, as compared to the loss in air pressure exhibited by the Colts game balls”. I do not agree with this conclusion. Let me explain why. The major uncertainty in the Wells Report scientific analysis lies in the pregame measurement of ball pressures: there were two gauges that differ by approximately 0.4 psi, it is not certain which was used in the pregame measurement, and the data were not recorded. If the pregame measurement of Patriots balls was made with the gauge that gives the higher number (high gauge) – as was the Official’s best recollection – then when you compare the Patriots ball pressures at halftime using the same gauge, you observe that the average Patriots ball pressure drop (1.0 psi) falls precisely in the range predicted by the Ideal Gas Law (1.0 to 1.2 psi) for the temperature differences the balls were thought to experience on game day. In more detail, 8 out of 11 Patriots balls fall within that predicted range, and the three with a larger drop (by 0.1, 0.3 and 0.4 psi) can be explained by measurement error (see below). Further, if the pregame measurements for Colts balls were made with the other (low) gauge then the Colts balls dropped 0.7 psi (only 4 Colts balls were measured at halftime). The smaller drop by 0.3 psi of the Colts balls can have a scientific explanation – they were measured at halftime after the 11 Patriots balls and thus had more time to warm up and increase pressure. Is it possible that the same Official could use one gauge for the Patriots and the other for the Colts measurements? Not only is this possible but it is exactly what happened at halftime. The Wells Report describes a detailed procedure in which each Official used one gauge to measure pressures of 11 Patriots balls first then 4 Colts balls. Only on subsequent data analysis did it become evident that the gauges were inadvertently switched in between measuring the team balls. It is very easy to understand how this could happen because the gauges look almost identical. This could also have occurred for the pregame measurements because the Official who made those measurements owned both gauges and brought them to the stadium. Imagine the Official has a bunch of balls from each of two teams that he has to measure and two gauges that are almost identical, so much so that they were interchanged during the rigid protocol of recording described for halftime. Why then did the Wells Report state that “Most of the individual Patriots measurements recorded at halftime, however, were lower than the range predicted by the Ideal Gas Law”? This statement assumes that the pregame measurements on Patriots balls were made with the low gauge. Why was this assumption made? The main argument as best I can follow goes like this. Science consultants for the Wells Report tested a lot of gauges and found that the low gauge was more similar to other gauges. Because the pregame measurements as recollected by the Official agreed with the pressures pre-set by each team with their own gauges, it seemed more likely that the low gauge was used. Here is my concern about that argument. The accuracy and precision of numbers recollected do not match that of data recorded. The recollected (i.e. not recorded) pressures for Patriots pregame measurements is “most of the Patriots footballs measured at 12.5 pounds per square inch-gauge (psig), though there may have been one or two that measured at 12.6 psig.” This means that the Patriots gauge and the Official’s pre-game gauge were right on (and similarly for the Colts gauge). This level of precision and accuracy in recollected numbers seems unlikely if you look at data that were actually recorded in writing. Let me give two examples. First, take the ball intercepted by the Colts. The pressure was measured three times on this same ball and the numbers are 11.35, 11.45 and 11.75 psi. As anyone can see, these values vary quite a bit. Second, the Ideal Gas Law predicts that pressure should systematically increase over time when the balls were brought from the cold field to the warm locker room at halftime, as pointed out in the Wells Report. However, I do not see this systematic change in the sequential measurements of 11 Patriots balls and 4 Colts balls. The pressure in each ball must increase as it warms, but the systematic trend within the data this would produce is apparently obscured by a large measurement error – the kind of measurement error you see in the example of the ball intercepted by the Colts, a case in which the pressure was measured three times. For these reasons I do not think the assumption that the low gauge was used for pregame measurement of Patriots balls is well supported. And as noted, it conflicts with the official’s own best recollection. In summary I believe the data available on ball pressures can be explained on the basis of physical law, without manipulation. The scientific analysis in the Wells Report was a good attempt to seek the truth, however, it was based on data that are simply insufficient. In experimental science to reach a meaningful conclusion we make measurements multiple times under well-defined physical conditions. This is how we deal with the error or ‘spread’ of measured values. In the pressure measurements physical conditions were not very well-defined and major uncertainties, such as which gauge was used in pre-game measurements, affect conclusions. Finally, the claim of a statistically significant difference in pressure drop between the two team balls regardless of which gauge was used did not account for the fact that the Colts balls were apparently measured at the end of halftime since the officials ran out of time and made only four measurements – in other words, the Colts balls were measured after the Patriots balls and had warmed up more. For the above reasons, the Wells Report conclusion that physical law cannot explain the pressures is incorrect. Roderick MacKinnon Professor, Nobel Laureate Chemistry I wonder what our Mikes have to say. 
Edited by sdsgo, May 15 2015, 12:26 PM.
|
|
|
| Baldo | May 15 2015, 04:11 PM Post #21 |
|
Next in deflate-gate circus: Goodell's kangaroo court about to get exposed Perhaps you have something better to do than follow the hourly machinations of the deflate-gate saga – at this point that would include elective root canal. This is actually where it may begin to have significant ramifications for the NFL and, most notably, commissioner Roger Goodell, who may be doubling down at a time when the best option could be to lay low. Here are some of the, um, highlights: The New England Patriots issued a lengthy rebuttal to Ted Wells' report on deflate-gate, findings that Goodell used to conclude that the team and quarterback Tom Brady broke rules involving the inflation levels of footballs in January's AFC title game. This lead to sanctions and a suspension. The Patriots offered some compelling counterarguments and context, and presented some new information. They don't really prove anything though. Their response was also filled with plenty of comedy, including the conclusion that it's just a coincidence that the guy accused of deflating the footballs, the one who previously referred to himself as "the deflator," called himself that not because he deflates footballs but solely in reference to various weight loss attempts. Hey, anything is possible, but the Pats might have wanted to quit while they were behind on that item. (This highlights the scandal's sole victors: billable hours. In this deal, the lawyers are the 2007 season Patriots, only if David Tyree didn't exist. Everyone has a lawyer now, even "the deflator." Brady may need to cut some to hit the 53-man roster. This whole thing is a multimillion dollar feeding frenzy and the attorneys are just getting started.) Another Patriots "context" attempt focused on when the deflator carried the game balls into a bathroom for 1:40. Wells' report concluded he used that time to deflate the footballs. The Patriots argue that Wells failed to "address whether [1:40] is consistent with the time that it takes a gentleman to enter a bathroom, relieve himself, wash his hands, and leave. In fact, it is." That's an actual quote. The answer, however, kind of depends on how much beer he drank at the tailgate. As for an official appeal of the sanctions, Brady's attorneys and the players' union understandably sought an independent judge. Goodell rejected that and deemed no one other than Roger Goodell to be the sufficient appellate authority. It was Goodell, of course, who "authorized" the initial four-game suspension of Brady. "We reached these decisions … ," Goodell said in a statement Monday. "We relied on … the thoroughness and independence of the Wells report." So Brady is going to appeal the thoroughness and independence of Wells' report to the same guy who just found it thorough and independent – not to mention commissioned it and paid for it originally. Good luck....snipped http://sports.yahoo.com/news/next-in-deflate-gate-circus--roger-goodell-s-kangaroo-court-190311127.html The NFL Executive Management is a JOKE! |
|
|
|
| Baldo | May 15 2015, 11:45 PM Post #22 |
|
 Goodell to be called as witness in Brady appeal Los Angeles (AFP) - NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell is a potential witness in New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady's appeal of a four-game ban, and shouldn't preside over the appeal, the NFL Players Association said Friday. The union filed an appeal on Brady's behalf on Thursday, when their demand for an independent arbitrator was quickly answered by the league with confirmation that Goodell himself would hear the case. If Goodell doesn't reconsider, "the NFLPA and Mr Brady will seek recusal and pursue all available relief to obtain an arbitrator who is not evidently partial," the union wrote in a letter to the league that it made public on Friday...snipped http://news.yahoo.com/goodell-called-witness-brady-appeal-223423442--nfl.html;_ylt=AwrXnCYShlZV00wAYADQtDMD;_ylu=X3oDMTByc3RzMXFjBGNvbG8DZ3ExBHBvcwM0BHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzcg-- I wonder what is going on with Goodell? He is an attorney and surely would have know it was a conflict for him to be a arbitrator |
|
|
|
| sdsgo | May 16 2015, 05:40 PM Post #23 |
|
Reference Professor MacKinnon’s Scientific Conclusions in my post above. This afternoon, I spent some time reviewing Exponent's report on their analysis of the deflation of the footballs. (It's a rainy day.) The relevant portion of the report titled "Pre-Game Gauge: Logo vs. Non-Logo" begins on page 44 of Appendix 1. (204 of 243 of the document posted below.) There's no doubt the contractor spent a great deal of time and effort on both their testing and report. Both sides agree that if the Logo gauge was used by Walt Anderson, as he recalled, then the drop in air pressure could be explained by natural causes. But then Exponent goes into a detailed discussion of why they believe the lower reading non-logo gauge was used and then describes the simulations used to support the conclusion. It's not unusual for people to recall something, but later the facts prove the recollection incorrect. This does not imply they did something wrong or tried to be deceptive. We're not machines, and frequently we get it wrong. The investigators developed a mathematical model to predict the change in pressure based on the input conditions described by Paul, Weiss. They then ran various scenarios to determine what conditions must be present to fit the predicted results to the measured data for each gauge. Finally, using statistical analysis to account for random variation, Exponent concluded the non-logo gauge provided the only reasonable fit. On the surface, this analysis supports the League's position that the balls were deliberately deflated. But I'm also reminded of the expression "measured with a micrometer and cut with an ax." As Professor MacKinnon points out, the accuracy of the result depends on the precision of the data. The conditions in the Gillette Stadium were far from ideal, but standing alone, MacKinnon's report does not appear to be a game changer. As for stopping at the restroom on the way to the field, I've found that to be a routine practice in similar situations. There are no bushes on sidelines. http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/05/06/read-ted-wells-deflategate-report/KVGF6avvFSwyxUilZwz92O/story.html |
|
|
|
| kbp | May 16 2015, 09:23 PM Post #24 |
|
What a waste of time! |
|
|
|
| sdsgo | May 21 2015, 11:32 AM Post #25 |
|
Roger Goodell confirmed why Tom Brady was right to not share texts By Frank Schwab 2 hours ago Shutdown Corner Story Link Roger Goodell didn't answer many questions directly on Wednesday, but in a roundabout way he answered a big one from deflate-gate. Why wouldn't Tom Brady give up his text messages and emails in Ted Wells' investigation? If you scoffed at the answer that it would set a bad precedent for other players, I want you to read Goodell's answer concerning the league's cooperation with the Mueller Report and consider again where Brady was coming from (bold emphasis on Goodell's answer added): Question: When there was an investigation on the league, there was an open book, “Here’s our stuff, you can look at it.” Now when Brady was asked to provide his stuff, maybe he resisted in giving some of his private communications. Did that have anything to do with the penalties that were imposed and maybe the sanctions that were done? Goodell: "Well, I think we were very clear in the letter, in Troy’s letter, that noncooperation was a factor in the discipline, absolutely. You point out in Director Muller’s investigation there was full cooperation, he had access to every text, every email, every bit of communication that I had and that everyone in our office had and there were no restrictions on that whatsoever. So, we do expect to have that in investigations. That’s an important part of it and when there isn’t full cooperation, that is certainly part of the discipline." The NFL Players Association should be up in arms about that answer Goodell said that he expects players like Brady, when investigated, to give access to "every text, every email, every bit of communication." Expects. And if you don't? "That's certainly part of the discipline." In other words, this business believes it has the right to punish an employee (in Brady's case costing him about $2 million in salary over the four-game suspension) if they do not turn over texts, emails and other communication from their personal phone or other devices. Even if you've answered every question an investigator has for you, as Brady did. Why does the NFL think this is OK? All NFL players should raise an eyebrow about this. If the NFL feels that not turning over personal texts and emails (there has been no indication in any of the reports that multi-millionaire Brady was texting from a Patriots-issued phone) is a punishable offense, where's the line? Does someone trying to get reinstated off a failed drug test need to turn over all texts so the league can see if they've discussed drugs with anyone else? Will an arrest prompt the league to search someone's home for evidence? All the time knowing that a refusal will "certainly be part of the discipline"? There's nothing i can find in the collective-bargaining agreement saying a player has to turn over private correspondence to the NFL. In Mueller's investigation, league employees turned over league-issued devices with no mention of personal devices in the report, which makes Goodell's comparison disingenuous. Also, Wells had all of Brady's texts to assistant equipment manager John Jastremski, from Jastremski's phone, and concluded he sent none to officials locker room attendant Jim McNally, so what texts do they think Brady has that will crack the case wide open? Pro Football Talk said the union concedes that players have to "reasonably cooperate" with the league in investigations, but that doesn't mean "jump through every single hoop" either. So now we see Brady's motivation. One part of his refusal is the NFLPA precedent, which his agent Don Yee has said before. The other is that the NFL has lost its freaking mind as it tries to play FBI. The league is drunk off its own imagined power over the players, and feels bolder with every collective-bargaining win over the union. Even as Goodell spoke, it's pretty obvious that in Brady's appeal that either he gives in to the NFL's wishes to see his texts or else. If you're an NFL player, especially a prominent one like Brady, this has to end somewhere. Not to mention that Brady's decision to not share texts was vindicated when Wells made the very unprofessional decision to use assistant equipment manager John Jastremski's texts about having Brady sign a football when he passed 50,000 career yards in the report. Those texts had absolutely, positively no bearing on the report ... other than to embarrass Jastremski. Ask Richie Incognito and Jonathan Martin too if they'd share all their texts again, after Wells' report on the Miami Dolphins bullying scandal revealed some that were quite embarrassing and had little to do with the case. Seeing all of that, I doubt Brady has any regret about not sharing his text messages or emails with Wells. Goodell told us what we needed to know on Wednesday. The NFL has an explicit expectation that its employees turn over personal communications when asked, or the petty league has no problem suspending them and costing them millions of dollars and their reputation. And now we can see why Brady was correct to refuse. Edited by sdsgo, May 21 2015, 11:33 AM.
|
|
|
|
| foxglove | May 21 2015, 07:47 PM Post #26 |
|
Sounds like Brady is a civil libertarian and perhaps doesn't quite trust the NFL. In fact one of the first things his agent said was that the NFL was conducting a sting operation. |
|
|
|
| sdsgo | Jun 17 2015, 11:21 AM Post #27 |
|
Why Roger Goodell might be in tough spot on Tom Brady suspension By Sally Jenkins Columnist June 17 at 11:04 AM Tom Brady is said to be seeking total exoneration, and it appears he’s entitled to it. The idea that Brady and the New England Patriots intentionally deflated footballs for a competitive advantage has been discredited by everyone from sidewalk chemists to Web physicists to unlicensed ceramicists, not to mention your own common sense. But most importantly, it is utterly shredded in a new scientific analysis by the American Enterprise Institute, which shows the only inflation problem is in NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell’s head. The NFL paid millions for a fundamentally flawed report by lawyer Ted Wells that made Brady and the Patriots out to be slam-dunk guilty, based on more than 100 pages of mathematical analysis of ball pressurization . . . that turns out to erroneous. The AEI’s report totally rejects the finding that the footballs used by the Patriots in the AFC Championship had a significant drop in air pressure compared to the Colts. But the truly damning sentence is this one, buried in its erudite phrasings and equations: “The Wells report’s statistical analysis cannot be replicated by performing the analysis as described in the report,” the AEI concludes. Translated into normal English: The math didn’t add up. It’s a standard principle in science: If you can’t replicate a set of results, then there is a problem with them. A flaw or a fraud is at work. Either you made a mistake, or you made it up. <more> Story Link Deflating ‘Deflategate’ Kevin A. Hassett,Stan Veuger Before “Deflategate,” the National Football League’s most recent controversy, there was “Bountygate,” in which New Orleans Saints officials were accused of offering bonuses to Saints players who injured members of opposing teams — a policy alleged to have been in place from 2009 to 2011. Initially, several Saints officials and players were penalized by the N.F.L. In 2012, however, we published an analysis of N.F.L. injury data that found that the Saints injured fewer opposing players than all but two teams did in 2009, and fewer than all but one team did from 2009 to 2011. Even if Saints officials offered “bounties,” there was no good evidence that Saints players were influenced by them. We presented our findings at an N.F.L. hearing in November 2012. The next month, the N.F.L. vacated all the players’ suspensions. Considering that our impartiality was at least implicitly recognized by the N.F.L. in the past, we believe that our analysis of the evidence in Deflategate, in a study released Friday by the American Enterprise Institute, could help resolve this latest controversy. Deflategate is a dispute about whether the New England Patriots used deliberately underinflated footballs in their playoff victory over the Indianapolis Colts in January. (Each N.F.L. team provides its own footballs when on offense, and an underinflated football may be easier to handle in cold or wet conditions.) The N.F.L. commissioned a study, known as the Wells report, that concluded that it was “more probable than not” that Patriots personnel deliberately violated the rules and that Tom Brady, the Patriots quarterback, was aware of it. Following the release of the Wells report last month, the N.F.L. penalized the Patriots organization and suspended Mr. Brady for four games. Our study, written with our colleague Joseph Sullivan, examines the evidence and methodology of the Wells report and concludes that it is deeply flawed. (We have no financial stake in the outcome of Deflategate.) <more> Story Link AEI Report: https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/On-the-Wells-report.pdf |
|
|
|
| kbp | Jun 17 2015, 06:20 PM Post #28 |
|
The NFL administration is looking like the "F" stands for fools! |
|
|
|
| kbp | Jul 28 2015, 03:09 PM Post #29 |
|
Time to visit the civil court system? . |
|
|
|
| Baldo | Jul 28 2015, 03:49 PM Post #30 |
|
There was a discussion of that of NFL Live. Some suggest the NFLPA will file suit in Federal Court. It can either be in Minneapolis or Boston. The choice of Judges is important. The Judge in Minneapolis is more knowledgeable on NFL procedures. The first step would be to try and get a court order to stop the suspension until the case is heard. That could take months. On the other side is the NFLPA & NFL agreement which gives the Commissioner the power. A lot is at stake, one being Goodell's job and payback against the Pats. Edited by Baldo, Jul 28 2015, 03:50 PM.
|
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · LIESTOPPERS UNDERGROUND · Next Topic » |
11:55 AM Jul 13