Transcript for Roger Goodell to Personally Hear Tom Brady's 'Deflategate' Appeal
The latest now on deflategate. Tom Brady has field an appeal of his four-game Su pension. Commissioner roger Goodell will personally hear the appeal. Ryan smith has the story. Reporter: The league rejecting Brady's request for a neutral, third-party arbitrator. Attacking the detlatgate report adds wrought with problems. The wells report in context lays out the patriots' case. Stating there is no evidence that Tom Brady pretered footballs lower than the league norm of 1.5 and no evidence that anyone did anything. Locker room attendant Jim Mcnally, aka the deflator. According to the pats, that nickname has nothing to do with deflating footballs. One possibility, they say, it was a reference to his desire to lose weight. The in context report alleged Mcnally's alleged trip to the bathroom before the game. According to the pats, the report does not address where 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. Also new this morning, the NFL players' association representing Brady sharing the contents of the appeal exclusively with ABC news. Writing that Brady's punishment is based on insufficient evidence and his treatment is unfair and inconsistent. Asserting no player in the history of the NFL has ever received anything approaching this level of discipline for similar behavior. The players' association also vowing to call roger Goodell as a witness to answer questions about how his discipline was handled and what may have been a sting operation to implicate the patriots and Mr. Brady. Dan Abrams is here. Goodell, witness and judge. Surprised? Yeah. Technically, under the NFL constitution, roger Goodell is allowed and empowered to hear these sorts of appeals. Typically, you would expect the commission to hear this kind of appeal. In this case, with this amount of controversy, and because he's been under fire for so long now, I would have expected that he would have wanted an objective person to hear it. So what? If someone else comes in and says, they got it wrong on deflating footballs, what's the big deal? This is not a particularly sensitive topic. It's not related to racism or sexism or something like that. So if he gets repudiated as he has in the past, for example in the ray rice case, by an objective neutral arbitrator, who cares? En unusually detailed appeal? Very. Procedural, saying the executive vice president of the NFL didn't have the power to issue this punishment. Number two, the punishment doesn't fit the crime. It should have been fair and consistent with past punishments. Number three is substantive. Saying the wells report can't be trusted. Too many inconsistent sis. The vongest argument in my view, is punishment doesn't fit the crime. That could apply to the patriots' penalty as well. That's a separate appeal. They have until may 21st to appeal. They have a stronger argument within the NFL to appeal. The wells report itself cleared the owner and the coach. So why are the patriots getting this enormous fine and looking the draft picks? Their argue is stronger than Brady's. Brady has a more likely chance to take this outside of the NFL and sue in court if he loses in the NFL. All right, guys. Now to the alert for anyone
This transcript has been automatically generated and may not be 100% accurate.