15
   

NFL Fires a Player qua Domestic Violence; morally right??

 
 
One Eyed Mind
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Sep, 2014 11:40 pm
@hawkeye10,
Oh, I have hope in people - I don't have hope in animals that show no signs of humanity in their body language.

I'm not sure why you get your "humans" and "animals" mixed up, but considering you're a military man, I am not surprised.
hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 15 Sep, 2014 11:57 pm
@One Eyed Mind,
Quote:
Oh, I have hope in people - I don't have hope in animals that show no signs of humanity in their body language.

so you know what a man is made of by watching one 20 sec video recording of his life...

IMPRESSIVE!

You remind me of this movie scene

One Eyed Mind
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Sep, 2014 12:05 am
@hawkeye10,

Are you familiar with psycho-profiles of serial killers?

They are unbelievably accurate.

Considering I am known for reading people like books, I wouldn't doubt myself anymore than I did before.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  4  
Reply Tue 16 Sep, 2014 12:17 am
@hawkeye10,
Employers have always had the right to terminate the behavior of employees who violate contractual obligations or rules of conduct.

And I suspect you exercise that right in your restaurant.

The NFL has a right to exclude someone whose public behavior is as reprehensible, and illegal, as that exhibited by Rice in that elevator. Rice has made himself a liability for them and their business interests.

You've already tried to pass off domestic violence as being within the norm for a man, really no big deal, and the understandable reaction to being provoked by a female--all of which are pure BS. What Rice did in that elevator is inexcusable, beside being illegal, and he should be held accountable for the consequences of his actions, including whatever disciplinary action the NFL wants to take that they consider to be in their best interests and the interests of their sport.

Rice is no innocent victim, he created this situation himself by failing to control his violent tendencies, and he happened to get caught on video tape, and when that video was publicly released, it was what really forced the NFL's hand. If they didn't mete out the harshest penalty in this case, with clear visual evidence, all their talk about wanting to address their systemic problem with domestic violence would become meaningless.


hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 16 Sep, 2014 12:29 am
@firefly,
Quote:
Employers have always had the right to terminate the behavior of employees who violate contractual obligations or rules of conduct.

And I suspect you exercise that right in your restaurant.

The NFL has a right to exclude someone whose public behavior is as reprehensible, and illegal, as that exhibited by Rice in that elevator. Rice has made himself a liability for them and their business interests.


Yes, the NFL has the power. If they were more civilized they would refrain from using it most of the time.

Quote:
all their talk about wanting to address their systemic problem with domestic violence would become meaningless.
All of that talk was a bad idea. Supporting that talk by trying to become domestic violence judges and handing out punishments compounds the mistake.

The correct response would be " we will cooperate fully with law enforcement, and any player who is found guilty of sexual assault or domestic violence by a court of law will have their employment status brought up for immediate review. We in the NFL condone violence and massive body blows only when they take place on our football fields. If our employees try it at home we will chop them off at the knees (yay, more violence!)"

OK, I made that last part up. They should not be that honest...it would be bad for business.
firefly
 
  3  
Reply Tue 16 Sep, 2014 01:56 am
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
The correct response would be " we will cooperate fully with law enforcement, and any player who is found guilty of sexual assault or domestic violence by a court of law will have their employment status brought up for immediate review

That is generally the stance they do take, and it's the position they have currently taken with Adrian Peterson regarding his child abuse charges, even though the photos of his 4 year old's injuries have been made public.'

I think the release of that elevator video made that option impossible in the case of Rice. He is clearly shown committing an act of domestic violence that everyone can see for themselves, an act of violence so severe that it left his wife unconscious, followed by his dragging/pulling her incapacitated body out of the elevator like a sack of potatoes, rather than treating her as an injured person who required considerably more careful handling.. Did he even seek any medical help for her? The fact she lost consciousness indicates she sustained a concussion, a brain injury, a loss of normal brain functioning, due to a jarring of the brain within the skull. It is a situation that does warrant medical attention to monitor for any further symptoms.
http://www.brainline.org/content/2009/06/facts-about-concussion-and-brain-injury_pageall.html

With that kind of video evidence, not only did the NFL not need a legal conviction to act, the public outcry after it went viral forced the NFL to take the harshest option possible. That video nailed Rice and it prevented the NFL from passing the buck to the judicial system, particularly since they had already failed to press for a conviction. If the NFL had not come down hard on a player whose actual act of domestic violence was preserved on video and now on display for the world to view, they'd be garnering even more controversy and public outrage then they are getting now. This video made it impossible for the NFL to trivialize domestic violence and it really forced their hand. It's ultimately for the good in terms of exposing, quite literally, the problem of domestic violence within their organization, and confronting them with the need to address it in a serious manner. That video made it impossible for the NFL to bury its head in the sand, it demanded a strong response from the NFL, and the NFL delivered.

'
engineer
 
  0  
Reply Tue 16 Sep, 2014 06:59 am
@firefly,
firefly wrote:

I don't think we can compare professional athletes to factory workers, or salesmen, or to the average working Joe. These people are celebrities, and part of their celebrity involves a loss of privacy in their private lives, particularly when it involves criminal transgressions that receive wide attention in the media. That is the price of fame.

I understand that, but there are approximately 1600 pro football players. How many can you name? I can probably name 10. That is not very famous. The reason people think you cannot compare them to factory workers is because they get paid more, not because they are really all that famous. There is a belief out there that people who are "blessed" with these very high paying jobs better toe the line because we'll happily bring them down otherwise. The question remains, do you help the situation by firing someone who commits a non-work related crime? I don't see it. Rice now has no incentive to work on his problem. He has his money and is denied his career no matter how exemplary he behaves going forward. Compare to Michael Vick. Vick served his time (for running dog fighting rings), was rehabilitated, is back in the NFL and campaigns against animal cruelty. In my opinion, the NFL is better off with Vick playing and rehabilitated than banned forever even though there are a lot of people who would prefer the latter.

firefly wrote:
Rice not only has a personal image to protect, an image that helps to get sponsors and endorsements, and to sell merchandise and autographs that bear his name, his image and brand also reflects on, and affects, his team, and the NFL as a whole. And anything he does to tarnish his personal image, as he has done, has a ripple effect that damages the business interests of his team and the NFL. That's also the price of fame.

I agree in part but I think this is way overstated. Rice is one small cog in a very large machine. I doubt significant number of people will stop watching football if Rice continued to play. More likely that more would watch to root against him. If sales of his merchandise falls off, then give him a smaller contract deal.

firefly wrote:
There may be many other NFL players who engage in domestic abuse, but they do so undetected, in a private situation, and they don't have the irrefutable evidence of their criminal violence recorded on a surveillance video that the media replays constantly, and that will forever remain accessible on the internet.

That's an amazing excuse for domestic violence, but if you want to go that way, most people would think if they were alone in an elevator that they were in private as well. I wonder how many investment bankers make millions then go home and abuse their families? I doubt very much that if one got busted, their Wall Street firm would fire them.

firefly wrote:
It is difficult to see how Rice is not a major liability to the NFL right now, particularly since they seem plagued with continuing instances of domestic abuse among players. Right now, I think they are dealing with 4 cases, including Adrian Peterson's child abuse allegations. Given that irrefutable, and extremely disturbing, video evidence, how could the NFL not make a strong example of Rice by doling out the harshest punishment possible?

I think the NFL has brought this upon themselves by effectively saying they are responsible for their players' conduct. I don't know of many employers who feel they need to comment on their players' off the field behavior.

firefly wrote:
I don't think the criminal justice system handled this case well--an assault this serious should not have merited the leniency of a pre-trial diversion program, which is little more than a slap on the wrist, and which will leave Rice able to have the entire incident expunged from his record.

Of course, you are entitled to that opinion, but at the same time you should recognize that the court had all the information, the statements from both participants and a lot of experience in seeing domestic violence cases day in and day out. You and I have only what the press thinks will be juicy enough to get a reaction in a few column inches or a thirty second video segment.

firefly wrote:
I'm not worried about Rice being unemployed, he's already been paid $22 million for the portion of his contract when he was playing, so he won't be applying for food stamps anytime soon. I'm more concerned about possible undetected brain damage his partner might have sustained when he knocked her out cold.

What is going to stop him from doing it again now that he has no job, plenty of money and the hatred of the entire country? Is this a better place for the victim or would continued pressure to improve so he could have a chance to salvage his career been a better choice?
Frank Apisa
 
  0  
Reply Tue 16 Sep, 2014 07:19 am
@engineer,
Outstanding post, Engineer. Very well reasoned...nice expressed.

Firefly...I agree with you on many thing, but I think you missed the mark on the Ray Rice thing...for the reasons Engineer pointed out.
0 Replies
 
engineer
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Sep, 2014 07:39 am
Here is an interesting data crunching article from 538.com on domestic violence and crime rates in the NFL.
0 Replies
 
Germlat
 
  2  
Reply Tue 16 Sep, 2014 08:00 am
@engineer,
When there is irrefutable evidence ( caught on camera) that someone has committed a felonious act, an agency can revoke a contract. Professionals in most areas would not be able to hold a license or certificate after a felony conviction (in some professions a misdemeanor suffices). An attorney would be disbarred, a nurse would be banished from practice, a teacher could no longer hold a license, etc. It's no different for a teacher simply because the wage is lower. That paycheck still pays all the bills. Even if this player has not yet been legally convicted, the visual evidence is proof enough.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Sep, 2014 08:09 am
@firefly,
Quote:
That is generally the stance they do take, and it's the position they have currently taken with Adrian Peterson regarding his child abuse charges, even though the photos of his 4 year old's injuries have been made public.'


The Peterson case is a black/white thing....blacks tend to believe in traditional corporal punishment and whites tend to believe that it is child abuse. The NFL is looking at a mutiny within the ranks if it goes after black culture with Peterson, as the NFL is over 65% black.

THe Vikings are standing by Peterson, and today I see that Radisson has dropped the Vikings as a result. That is fine for Radisson, as I bet they dont have very many black customers.

The bigger issue for the union is that unless they put their foot down, unless they force management to grow some balls, they are going to find themselves having union members ejected from the NFL for telling off color jokes before too very long. Business is business, but at some point the NFL needs to stand up for the rights of its talent. The NFL needs to remember that increasingly those bitching about NFL practices dont buy tickets or watch games on TV anyways, they are too morally pure to pursue such a violent pastime . The corporate sponsors of the NFL would do well to remember this as well. The NFL is going to have to tell its corporate sponsors enough is enough, we are going to get back to football. Come with us if you like. The NFL's dream of growing revenue by over 100% in ten years might have to go on the shelf. That would maybe be a good thing anyways given the last few years problem of having increasing difficulty selling out stadiums because of constant price increases for everything related to attending a game.
0 Replies
 
engineer
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Sep, 2014 08:37 am
@Germlat,
I don't think anyone is saying the Raven's can't fire Rice. Just about everyone has made the point that private employers can hire and fire at will for any reason. The question is more if they should. I would argue that as long as the press didn't get a hold of it, a lawyer, nurse or teacher would not be fired for non-work related felonies. For cases where there was no conviction at all, I don't even think their licenses could be pulled regardless of whatever video was out there. You can't just disbar a lawyer because he agreed to get counseling.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Sep, 2014 10:26 am
@engineer,
I have asserted that there is a difference between the Ravens firing him from a job and the NFL banning him from a profession. For a lawyer t would be the difference between being fired from a firm and being disbarred.
0 Replies
 
Germlat
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Sep, 2014 11:05 am
@engineer,
Well...generally there's a contract in place and you agree to the terms. If you violate the agreement, you can't scream it's not fair! The person entering the agreement knew beforehand what the terms entailed.
engineer
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Sep, 2014 12:32 pm
@Germlat,
Based on NFL history and practice prior to this, the agreement is that nothing would happen or you would have to agree to counseling. This one strike and you are banned forever policy is completely new and is being applied retroactively. Rice was originally given a two game ban.
Germlat
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Sep, 2014 12:35 pm
@engineer,
engineer wrote:

Based on NFL history and practice prior to this, the agreement is that nothing would happen or you would have to agree to counseling. This one strike and you are banned forever policy is completely new and is being applied retroactively. Rice was originally given a two game ban.
then if he didn't agree to the contract...he can fight it legally.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Sep, 2014 12:37 pm
@engineer,
This thing is far from played out...and I would not be surprised to see Rice in the backfield of some team before this year is out.

And while I deplore what he did...I doubt his playing more football is going to have a negative impact on the much needed "war" against abuse of women.


engineer
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Sep, 2014 12:39 pm
@Frank Apisa,
I think Rice would be a great spokesman against domestic violence. I could see him on stage saying in no uncertain terms "What I did was wrong and I'm spending every day of my life trying to be a better man..." Sometimes the quest for vengeance overwhelms any attempt at justice.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Sep, 2014 01:14 pm
@engineer,
engineer wrote:

Based on NFL history and practice prior to this, the agreement is that nothing would happen or you would have to agree to counseling. This one strike and you are banned forever policy is completely new and is being applied retroactively. Rice was originally given a two game ban.

Nor do I recall the NFL ever before handing out a punishment, and then with no new information increase it based upon PR needs. That they did this really gets in the way of the NFL line that they are now in the domestic violence justice business......justice has nothing to do with appeasing angry mobs.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Sep, 2014 01:55 pm

When I started this thread,
it seemed a little slow in taking off,
but it has become briskly active.





David
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Should cheerleading be a sport? - Discussion by joefromchicago
Are You Ready For Fantasy Baseball - 2009? - Discussion by realjohnboy
tennis grip - Question by madalina
How much faster could Usain Bolt have gone? - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Sochi Olympics a Resounding Success - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 12/22/2024 at 10:36:56