"Deflate-Gate" Idiocy

Our President has established...or perhaps I do him a disservice and he simply reflects...an attitude in the country where no one is ever responsible or suffers consequences for anything.  The NFL for some reason never had officials in total control of Game Balls.  Seems like an oversight to me.  And not a particularly egregious one, but an error nonetheless.

But that error was discovered last year in a manner that threatened to bring mirth and derision down on the league for failing to oversee one of the most critical tools of the game...the ball.  What to do?  What to do!  For some inane reason, "Our Bad!  We'll fix it!" did not come to their collective minds.  Instead, they focused on how to blame someone...anyone...else.  Who could they possibly put on the hot seat that already had erred in the past (ala the guy who already has a record so everyone will certainly believe that he transgressed again)...Hello, New England Patriots.

The League made a bunch of assumptions (always a really bad beginning for any action): 1) that the "under pressure" was deliberate; 2) that the staff of the New England Patriots reduced the pressure; and 3) that Brady both knew and condoned it.  Of course, there is no proof of any this.

If you inflate balls indoors, with warm air, and then take them outside into winter or late fall weather, the air pressure goes down.  That is why we have to re-inflate our auto tires in the late fall and winter.  If the balls were inflated indoors to the lower legal limit called for in the rules, as soon as they were taken out to the field, that pressure would drop.  No rules were broken.  The League didn't have any provision requiring or even suggesting that the officials check ball pressure prior to or during a game.  Is that New England's fault?  I have no recollection of anyone proving that any ball-boy or anyone else on the Patriot's staff did anything with the ball pressure.  Did any confess?  If so, I missed that headline.

Finally, I have 5 friends who played Quarterback at various levels, up to and including top University teams.  All of them say that they could not tell pressure in a ball: a ball they liked in cold weather sometimes turned out to have higher air pressure than another that they did not like.

As a side note, some point out that Brady "destroyed" his phone when he got a new one.  Well, he had given the league the emails that he thought had anything to do with the matter before, and he was fully aware of how easy it is to get data off any electronic device even when you think you have erased it, so his decision to completely destroy his phone after he had gotten a new one seem like good common sense to me...and I am not a star subject to a desire of many to know the most insignificant details of my life.  He did a smart thing.

So...this action by the National Football League is not about Justice, ...or Punishment...as much as it is about their desire to save face and direct attention away from their failure to supervise game balls properly to someone or something else...and it was the New England Patriots turn to be in the barrel.

Sports and Domestic Violence

It used to be that when one's transgressions reached the stage of being prosecuted by the authorities, the result of that process was deemed to be the extent of punishment.  Some went to jail, and when they got out, there were a variety of ways for that person to earn his or her way back into the work force and into society at large.

Should the transgression not reach the level of prosecution by authorities...or whatever the disposition by the courts...the matter was deemed over with and done.  For the most part, a transgression did not trigger a doomsday scenario.

Apparently those days are gone forever.  Mind you, I am in favor of the strictest possible punishment and treatment that will deter and prevent violence in any situation.  Domestic violence is abhorrent.  And I would think that random violence in society among and between those who do not know each other is equally abhorrent.  Although one would not know that by current standards.  A person who gets in a bar fight with a stranger, may be fined, or even get probation and go right back to work with little public notice.  The exceptions are Politicians and Athletes...providing they are men.  Women get a pass.  Not sure why...but they do.

In the NFL now, you lose you ability to earn a living in your chosen profession if you are accused of Domestic Violence.   If you are convicted of Domestic Violence, you lose that ability permanently...or for so long as to amount to permanent, given the short productive period for an athlete.  The Legal punishment now is simply a preliminary element.  Is that right?  Should there be a discussion about that.  If there are children and an ongoing family existence, is removing the earning power helpful to the family?  Does that make sense?  Does keeping a person from gainful employment teach anyone anything?  Progressives and Liberals for years have been preaching about the fallacy of revenge, arguing for rehabilitation and counseling...but in this case they now preach of revenge.   Should this switch and the motivation for it be open for discussion?  Because I have heard nothing along that line...and whatever the outcome it would seem appropriate to think and talk it through to understand the logic.  Because the current logic escapes me and I would like to hear it laid out fully.

And...I would suggest that if the logic is there to support this extended punishment and behavioral level for participation in sports, that it be extended to fans also.  It seems only fair...especially given the behavior of some fans at all sorts of sporting events.  Perhaps one should not be able to buy a ticket to a sporting event unless they can show that they are free from DWI or any alcohol related charges or conviction, of any arrests or convictions for any sort of violence (Domestic or otherwise).  And if they are buying multiple tickets, that the same information should be put forth for whoever is going to be sitting in those additional seats.

Fair is fair.  Equal is equal.  What is good for the Goose should certainly be good for the Gander.

Let us have this discussion...