Quote Originally Posted by pbmax View Post
You can't reverse engineer a crime from a joke. Illegal ball tampering is only one of possibly dozens of explanations that would only make sense if you knew the participants and had the whole conversations. Despite that joke, both employees denied the suggestion that they were engaged in tampering after ref inspection. Under oath.

Weak sauce and all by inference.
PB, your not being honest about this. You can't pick one post and say that's all we have been discussing. I am not reverse engineering a crime from a joke, I am explaining how that threat-based joke supports all the other evidence. Of course it is by inference, they didn't break down the door to the bathroom because he stole the balls from the referees and they didn't have a chance. They botched the measurements by not taking more care in how they took them.

Your repeated inference that there is no evidence of a crime, is just flat wrong. Is it iron-clad, no, but there is plenty of evidence.