Report: NFL had no recorded sound from the field in Cleveland

Getty Images

During his appeal hearing Wednesday, Myles Garrett accused Mason Rudolph of a racial slur. Rudolph “vehemently denied” using a racial slur in a statement Thursday.

The NFL investigated Garrett’s claim using the game officials’ report and all camera angles. It did not, however, have any recorded sound at its disposal, Mary Kay Cabot of cleveland.com reports.

The NFL announced it found no evidence to support Garrett’s claim after appeals officer James Thrash upheld Garrett’s indefinite suspension.

Referee Clete Blakeman, who was in close proximity to Garrett and Rudolph as the fight began, said in the officials’ report he did not hear a racial slur, according to Cabot.

Interior offensive linemen were mic’d up during the game, but that audio is not recorded, per Cabot. There also was no audio available from any of the Fox Sports cameras.

Garrett tweeted a statement Thursday night, saying, “I know what I heard.”

23 responses to “Report: NFL had no recorded sound from the field in Cleveland

  1. Maybe that’s why Garrett decided to try to use that to reduce his suspension. They may not have any recorded audio but there were a bunch of people around and if nobody else heard it then Garrett is probably lying. I find it extremely hard to believe it happened since he never mentioned it until the closed door meeting with the NFL. Does anyone honestly believe it would have gone unmentioned until this time. That’s a pretty classless move by Garrett.

  2. He also said he thought it would stay internal. Which means he could lie about it and nobody would be the wiser.

  3. If so or if not, the only reason Garrett wasn’t arrested for assault and battery is Rudolph wasn’t hurt. I wish Garrett would have thrown the guys helmet in the stands. Rich people acting like poor people.

  4. I think a lot of you are missing a major point that goes beyond this situation. How are players supposed to trust NFL investigations if confidential information hits the public? Only Garrett and Rudolph know what was said or wasn’t said. What I do see is a league that is going to have issues getting people tell them anything if when they can’t keep confidential information confidential.

  5. Just wonder why if interior linemen were mic’d up there is no recording of it?

    Isn’t that the whole purpose of having them mic’d? To ‘record’ the sounds of the game?

    Sounds to me like NFL films (isnt that owned by NFL?) might have erased the recording?

    Or maybe the audio guy just innocently forgot to hit ‘record’ and didn’t figure that out til after the game?

    Interesting???

  6. Hold on now. Garrett knows there are microphones every where on Thursday and Monday night football. It would What does the NFL mean there is no audio?.. Plus the linemen involved were miked up. What the NFL is claiming is not possible.

  7. Let me get this straight – they don’t record mic’d up players but somehow, the TV broadcast replays snippets, from earlier in the game, of those mic’d up players … that they didn’t record. I’m not saying Rudolph said something or didn’t … but I am saying that it definitely seems like the audio gets recorded.

  8. “How are players supposed to trust NFL investigations if confidential information hits the public?”

    Garrett made a public racism charge against Rudolph. I’m sure the NFL has rules against racial slurs. Rudolph deserves to have all evidence made public to clear his name if he’s innocent. Evidence is not confidential.

  9. You just can’t make this stuff up if you tried. The NFL will go to ant and all lengths to stick it to Cleveland.

  10. I hope Garrett is intelligent enough to understand that, because of the delay, most are simply not going to believe him even if this did happen.

  11. i don’t believe them but that being said the NFL should use this as a learning experience…they should put as much effort to record on field audio as they do for video…they have all the latest technology at their disposal…it is not a difficult thing to do…

  12. We always assume it’s a particular word when we hear racial slur. Maybe it was another word that one person considers a slur and the other person doesn’t. Polygraph time. But really does it matter? You can’t assault someone because they call you a name.

  13. Pretty amazing that a story showing there’s no corroborating electronic evidence immediately provokes conclusions that Garrett is lying. How would any of you know that? You wouldn’t know — so pipe down.

  14. If he would have heard it he would have said something on the field. You don’t lose your mind and not say why at that moment. He waited a few days to say something? He also decided to trash someones name in the process and unfortunately no writer or any of these football shows is saying that. All everyone is saying “they didn’t hear it”.

  15. he said something that set Garrett off
    maybe he wished him “Merry Christmas”
    but I suspect, in this case, Garrett is telling the truth

Leave a Reply

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