Skip to content

Report: Cable not likely to face discipline

Two weeks after ESPN breathlessly reported on domestic violence allegations against Raiders coach Tom Cable, ESPN is now reporting that Cable is not likely to be disciplined in connection with those allegations.

So the circle is complete. 

But there’s another issue that an astute league insider raised with us a week ago.

Why didn’t Cable get the benefit of the same “do not report” decree that Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger enjoyed back in July?

In both cases, there weren’t — and won’t be — criminal charges.  In both cases, an extended period of time passed between the incident and the allegations.

The obvious difference, of course, is that ESPN didn’t break the Roethlisberger story.  As to Cable, the allegations of domestic abuse are their baby.

Then there’s the fact that Roethlisberger enjoys “most favored nation” status in Bristol, given the access he provides to ESPN.

Meanwhile, a source with knowledge of the situation tells us that Cable was first informed of the planned ESPN report, which debuted on Sunday, November 1, only two days earlier.  Under normal circumstances, that wouldn’t be much time to respond to the charges in a meaningful way.  On that specific weekend, the Raiders were heading to San Diego to face the Chargers.

So why not hold it for a week, when the Raiders had a bye and Cable could have provided a more thorough response?

Regardless of the manner in which ESPN handled the details of the Cable report, a clear disparity exists between its decision to milk the more recent situation for all it was worth and its decision to treat the news of the sexual assault lawsuit against Roethlisberger like a sh-t sandwich with a side of radioactive gravy.    

Permalink 20 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Legal, Oakland Raiders, Rumor Mill, Top Stories
20 Responses to “Report: Cable not likely to face discipline”
  1. NagaSwan says: Nov 15, 2009 12:34 PM

    wrong!

  2. Raiderman says: Nov 15, 2009 12:35 PM

    BSPN. Nuff Said. Anti Al, Anti Raider lies. Nuff Said.

  3. bearsrule says: Nov 15, 2009 12:40 PM

    ESPN makes news and creates it’s own history. It makes it’s own rules. I stopped watching long ago. Sports is much more enjoyable without listening to those nitwits. Somebody needs to get Bob Ley out of there and bomb the rest of it.

  4. ericpburt says: Nov 15, 2009 12:41 PM

    Next thing ya know, ESPN is gonna just start copying other peoples stories word for word…

  5. Paulitik says: Nov 15, 2009 12:42 PM

    Cable and Big Ben get nothing, yet Coach Smith gets a $15k fine for trying to slug DeAngelo Hall. Where is the justice in the NFL? Goodell should have rewarded Smitty for trying to take that chump down!

  6. JSpicoli says: Nov 15, 2009 12:43 PM

    It doesn’t take an “astute league insider” to see the bias.
    Way to go out on a limb after it has been obvious for 10 years that Bristol has a hard on for Alameda. You are really starting to fit into the “real” media there Florio.
    In my opinion, a real journalist would be brave enough to start digging around on ESPN bias, and how they are formed and acted upon. That is, if you had the balls enough to say that the emporer is nude.

  7. Tdk24 says: Nov 15, 2009 12:45 PM

    Ben makes them more money. Bunch of pole smokers.

  8. wallyworld says: Nov 15, 2009 12:46 PM

    ESPN showed how “classy” they are when Tom Jackson did a rip piece on them last Monday which was their bye week. When was the last time any other team got that attention on a bye week? I am sure this week ESPN will report that Cable is hiding Weapons of Mass Destruction in his backyard or that he got Sarah Palin’s daughter pregnant.

  9. wolfpackraider says: Nov 15, 2009 12:54 PM

    not to mention things like the “bonehead plays of the week” last weekend.
    Raiders had a bye, yet at the end of the segment they showed at least 4 different Raider games and plays from earlier in the season.
    Completely uncalled for and out of place in the bonehead plays… OF THE WEEK!

  10. DanMarinox says: Nov 15, 2009 12:55 PM

    I blame Mike McCarthy & Ted Thompson for this.

  11. HarrisonHits says: Nov 15, 2009 1:05 PM

    And this surprises you that the huge anal passage of a network is inconsistent and shows favoritism in its reporting ?
    Hell they have essentially ignored and made a non-story Cable breaking his assistant’s jaw. But imagine if those allegations had been made against Bill Belichick ? All you would have heard 24 hours a day was that Belichick broke an assistant’s jaw and what were the police and league going to do about it in a massive feeding frenzy whether he had done anything or not.
    They are the most discredited sports reporters around. The don’t even deserve to be classified as press.

  12. AbeFreshly says: Nov 15, 2009 1:08 PM

    BSPN did not want to offend Obama’s appointed Ambassador to Ireland, the almighty Rooney. Maybe this is also why the Steelers always seem to get all the crucial/cheeeeeezy calls, too.
    The mere fact that it was a blackmail attempt by McNulty on Roethlis is a HUUUUUUGE story by itself. BS didn’t even want to breathe on it. In fact, I could be wrong, but I don’t think that BSpn ever mentioned the name of “Andrea McNulty” even once…not even a hint at Ms McNulty’s motives, her lies, or her surprisingly unappealing appearance.
    SURPRISINGLY unappealing…maybe even “SHOCKINGLY”

  13. Quagmire says: Nov 15, 2009 1:15 PM

    Maybe the league figures that coaching the Raiders is a greater penalty than any discipline they could dole out.

  14. Bird Man says: Nov 15, 2009 1:16 PM

    Maybe because the charges against BR were bullshit and Tom Cable probably did beat those women?

  15. Richm2256 says: Nov 15, 2009 2:03 PM

    DanMarinox says:
    November 15, 2009 12:55 PM
    I blame Mike McCarthy & Ted Thompson for this.
    I know I shouldn’t, but I always get a chuckle out of that.

  16. INVAIDUH says: Nov 15, 2009 2:04 PM

    Raiderman took my thunder.
    JSpicoli is on the money.

  17. AbeFreshly says: Nov 15, 2009 2:07 PM

    Yes, Bird Man. The charges against BR were BS, but the blackmail attempt surely was not. It is arguable that the blackmail against a ‘Probowl-Superbowl-winning-QB’ story is even bigger than the sexual assault charge…at the least, they are both equally newsworthy. BSpn wouldn’t touch either story. Try to keep up.

  18. SteelerJoe says: Nov 15, 2009 3:01 PM

    You are an idiot, Florio! There is no comparison between the two situations. Cable has repeatedly abused people over the years, that’s why he is being investigated. Roethlisberger has been a class act since he came into the NFL, his only mistakes being the normal young man growing up errors, and the “crime” you want him crucifed for is looking more and more each day like a golddigger trying to turn a sexual encounter into a big payday. You know all of this, but there’s no sensational story in the truth, is there? You are a poor excuse for a human being, let alone an objective reporter.

  19. swervinmervin says: Nov 15, 2009 3:03 PM

    Florio -
    Dont let this topic die out. Keep pushing it until ESPN is forced to respond. They need to be called out for their crooked reporting.
    Good work to bring this topic to light, but dont stop here.

  20. as big as a hat says: Nov 15, 2009 8:31 PM

    Florio, you chased that last Cable story like it was an ambulance, and even opined that the league needed to “do something” about him. You must be a graduate of the JaMarcus Russell School of Finger Pointing.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!