Quote:
Originally Posted by dallass-blows 2
duke had their seaon taken from them for nothing. they did nothing wrong.
if he isnt found guilty yet why the hell would you suspend him?
|
I found it interesting an article in the Washington Post today kind of touched on this.
"Commissioner Goodell has made a point of disciplining some players prior to them being prosecuted," Wayne Pacelle, president of the
Humane Society of the United States, said in a telephone interview. "In this case, every indication we've gotten is that the NFL intends to wait until the legal process has played out. To us, that would seem to invalidate an independent code of conduct. What do you need a code of conduct for if you're simply going to wait for the courts to act? We believe Michael Vick should be suspended immediately. This set of activities is heinous. It would seem to warrant harsh treatment under a code of conduct."
washingtonpost.com
I revise my earlier position to say that I think the NFL should lean towards waiting for a conviction. That just makes a lot of sense, it would avoid punishing those who are innocent. I do, however, believe that those with a serious track record should be void of this luxury, and should face consequences immediately.
Even with all the evidence that is available to the public, the principle behind the issue is clear; without a past history of criminal behavior it's inappropriate to punish a player not yet convicted.