Baltimore Ravens football star, Ray Rice, last year in Atlantic City NJ, beat his girlfriend in an elevator until she passed out, and then camera's showed him dragging her out of the elevator. He pled not gulty to 3rd degree aggravated assault. He won't go to jail though, depending on what the NJ prosecutor does, he'll either get a pretrial intervention program or a plea agreement of probation without jail time. After all this, his girlfriend has since married him.
And the NFL has given him a two game suspension. And people have gone out of their freakin' MINDS! They rant and rave because the suspension isn't long enough. It's just a slap on the wrist, they say. It's a black on the NFL that they didn't do more, they say. Keith Olbermann went so far as to say the NFL, by making it just a two game suspension, has insulted every woman in America.
Before I go further, let me stress I am NOT okay with beating a woman. At all. I'm all for someone that commits a crime to be punished to the fullest extent of the last in the legal system. And while the options open to him don't seem to meet his alleged crime, in my mind it's up to the prosecutor's in the jurisdiction the crime was committed in.
Having said all that, I want to ask you all (or whomever remains reading, since this is a sports post). Let's say that instead of Ray Rice, NFL Player, its Ron Reed an accountant. Or Rob Wright, an engineer. Or Rick Reese, a line cook at McDonalds. Or Ryan Rose, a garbage collector. And let's say the Ron, or Rob, or Rick, or Ryan beat up their girlfriend's in an Atlantic City elevator and then was faced with a possible intervention program or probation from the legal system.
So you think Ron's accounting firm, or Rob's engineering firm, or Rick's McDonald's store, or Ryan's garbage collection company should take action against him as well? How many days should these guys get suspended from work for an assault charge that did NOT occur on the job, nor even in the city where they worked? How much punitive action should be taken against these guys, by their employers, IN ADDITION TO whatever punishments they get from the judicial system?
Does anyone else think it would be outrageous, unexpected, unorthodox and just wrong for the employers of these other guys to punish them, instead of just letting the courts handle it? Would an accountant, engineer, line cook or garbage man suffer any consequences from their employers in addition to the legal punishments? More importantly SHOULD they?
I'm not a Ravens fan, I have nothing against them either. I'm rather ambivalent about the team (other than the team's color being purple, which rocks!). I don't know Ray Rice, nor his fiance, and I don't plan to at any point in my life. So its not like I have a dog in this fight.
I'm just saying I think it's wrong for the NFL to do this. Now, if he had assaulted a referee on the field, sure take action. If he had taken a performance enhancing drug, that affects his job, sure take action. If he threw something at the opponents fans during a game, sure take action. All these things affect the game, which IS his job. Beating someone up, in the off season, when he's not working, and doing so in a place not even remotely related to his job...I don't think it's any of the NFL's business.
But even so, for people to lose their collective MINDS over a two-game suspension....please. People, let his bosses take action when he's done something on the job, or that directly affects his job. What happens when he's not working is not his employers business. Nor should it be the business of ANY of our employers.
POLT
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I think in some cases you would probably lose your job for being convicted of such a crime. It would reflect badly on the company to have a person accused and convicted of doing something criminal. However, beyond cutting all ties, to punish something with a loss of salary for something that happened outside the office and has no bearing on his "job" does seem extreme.
However, I'd be curious if any of those other guys you mentioned would get the same lenient (in my eyes) treatment that this guy did. He's an athlete who makes a lot of money, is in the public eye and makes his employers a lot of money. But that's neither here nor there in this case. It is what it is.
But there is also precedent. Has this team, or the NFL in general, handed out similar punishments to players in similar situations, who were conflicted of a crime and "punished", but then also received additional penalties from the NFL? If the answer is yes, then that is the condition of employment. "If you do X, you will suffer this consequence just like everyone before you did."
Post a Comment