Moral dilemma for some. When the UF LB went after the eyes of an opposing player during a pile up and he received a 2 quarter suspension with the conference blessing there was a big stir around the country that the punishment did not equal the crime.
The questions are......
Was it a deserving penalty considering that an Oregon player received what was initially a 1 year suspension for a post game sucker punch? (Personally I'd rather be punched than blind)
What about a pitcher who throws at a batter? (college or pro)
What about the runner who slides in high with metal cleats or through a base with the intent of physical contact? (college or pro)
What about the flagrant intentional basketball foul? (college or pro)
Is there a mentality within athletics that cheap shots with "intent to injure" are part of the game and the athlete is either hit with only a fine or short suspension to apease the pc public?
Is it a "sliding scale" depending on who you are and/or who you play for?
PED's are a kiss of death because of public/government pressure but intent to maim is dealt with a proverbial slap on the wrist in comparision.
Why, when the whistle blows we throw away fundemental rules?
A societal flaw? Is it the "cave man" mentality to prove who the king of the hill is?
Do we still have gladiator mentality only with fitted clothes, broader media, and skyboxes?
Any thoughts?
Original Post