OT: Holmes in trouble yet again ...

Submitted by Jedelman11 on April 30th, 2010 at 6:38 PM

http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/nfl/news/story?id=5151435

Given the amount of play the most recent Holmes incident got on this board, I figured I'd post this. The gist of the story is that flight attendants asked Holmes to turn off his ipod, and Holmes wouldn't. My favorite quote is Rex Ryan's response:

"I mean, OK, let's face it, he should turn off his iPod," he said. "That's what he should do. He should do that. I haven't had a chance to talk to Santonio, but he certainly should do that."

I'd put Holmes up there with B. Marshall as the two most likely candidates to get "Packman Jones'd" out of the league for a season...

Edit:  Maybe Roethlisberger too

Comments

Hard Gay

April 30th, 2010 at 6:43 PM ^

Everyone knows you wear a hoodie and pretend to sleep if you want to keep listening to your ipod.  Everyone who didn't go to OSU, anyway.

mattbern

April 30th, 2010 at 6:44 PM ^

You're right.  He's a terrible person for not turning off his ipod the first time.  The media blew this way out of proportion.  People are just looking for a reason to say he's a bad guy.

VectorVictor05

May 1st, 2010 at 9:12 AM ^

It's one thing to try and sneak by the flight attendants w/ your iPod still in during take-off/landing.  Lord knows I've done that before.  He's a HUGE dick because he makes a scene just cuz he thinks he's entitled to not follow the same rules as everyone else.  Not to mention he probably ruins the day of some flight attendant just trying to do her job.

So, in summary, trying to keep your iPod playing on take-off/landing is not by any means a big deal...harmless really.  However, persisting when a flight attendant asks you to turn it off to the point that you're approached by authorities afterward makes you an arrogant dick.

Zone Left

April 30th, 2010 at 6:46 PM ^

He should turn off his iPod, because it's the law.  However, the reasoning is bullshit.  IPods and other electronic devices do not, in any way, interfere with modern navigation equipment. 

I don't mind the cell phone rule, but the only reason not to have other gadgets out for takeoff/landing is in case of a rough landing or aborted takeoff that results in the gadget becoming a projectile.

tk47

April 30th, 2010 at 7:39 PM ^

  • Mythbusters has proven that the cell-phone/electronic device interference thing is bullcrap.  Mythbusters = Truth.
  • I enjoy negative stories about idiots from Ohio State ... that being said, who the hell cares if he wouldn't turn off his iPod, this is freaking stupid.

Njia

April 30th, 2010 at 9:12 PM ^

On a commercial flight, you don't f--k with a flight crew. You do what they say; that's the law. Doing otherwise could end with you waving goodbye from the terminal while your flight leaves and/or explaining yourself to the nice officer with a badge.

Louie C

May 1st, 2010 at 12:13 AM ^

I think the whole IPod, cell phone etc; interfering with airline equipment is b.s. I've never been on a plane before,  and quite frankly, I have a serious issue with being tens of thousands of feet in the air with equipment that could get fucked up by something as simple as someon using an IPod or cell phone. Thank you Atta and company for seriously fucking up the airline industry.

maineandblue

May 1st, 2010 at 2:11 PM ^

Apparantly he did turn it off when asked.

Move along, nothing to see here:

 

"As previously reported, [Santonio] Holmes was NOT removed from any airplane (4/29/2010)," a media release from the police department read. "He was asked to remove his Ipod (at one point), in which he complied. There's no further information to report."

http://www.ganggreennation.com/2010/5/1/1453562/police-tell-the-real-st…