The World of Sports
The NBA ref who has proved what I've thought for a long time. THEY CHEAT.
Some fouls are called, some aren't. It's all done at the complete and utter descretion of the ref. Ask any Mav's fan about 2006's NBA finals series and they will tell you that lots of those calls were completely bogus. There's always been homecooking... always ... and hey when it benefits you, it benefits you. But blatant cheating - like the kind done by Tom Donaghy - is what they've been defending themselves against for a really long time.
I don't know what they are going to do. Especially for the Pheonix Suns. They - potentially - were seriously wronged.
Michael Vick ... if you're not aware ... he's been indicted by a federal grand jury for involvement in a dog fighting ring. He is said to the one of the leaders of "Bad Newz Kennels" which breeds dogs - pitbulls - for fighting that leads to death or near death. Dogs that survived were killed in incredibly horrible ways, including electrocution, hanging, and gun shots.
I've asked my husband the sports buff his thoughts on this. As he is an animal lover and a football fan. More over, he is very level and rational, and not inclined to let an emotional argument rule his decision.
And he married me? HAHA.
Anyway ... little chuckle on my part ... my husband is falling into the innocent until proven guilty camp.
His argument ... if he himself was indicted for serious charges he would hope that his employer would give him the benefit of the doubt and let him keep his job until such time a conviction or vindication is handed down.
I see his point but I throw out there the whole NFL-Players-as-child-role-models argument and we kind of hit an empasse. Like I said ... emotional arguments don't really weigh much with him. He's more a letter of the law type.
And to that point I wonder what the NFL will do. If they suspended him pending the outcome of his trial they are all but admitting they think he is guilty. If they don't and they stand behind him and he is convicted ... they are angering a large portion of the population by paying millions of dollars to a known animal abuser.
I was trying to relay the importance of this to my husband. I read somewhere in a magazine or online a long time ago about "signs you're raising a murder." Key among the list was a childs willingness to hurt defenseless creatures ... or pets. There was a story about a kid who has torturing a squirrel. He threw a rock at it, knocking it out, and then he pelted it with rocks over and over again until it was dead.
I guess the thought is that if a child learns at an early age to abuse those smaller / weaker beings that as adults they can continue that same behavior.
So for me ... people that abuse animals are scary because it's a pretty thin line from abusing animals, to abusing women, to abusing anyone they percieve as weaker.
But ... to my husband's point ... what if he really didn't have anything to do with it? And that's the NFL's problem. If Vick is exonerated (ha) and they've suspended him, their tough, line-in-the-sand rules will be weakened and tarnished. But if they wait a bit, put him on the sidelines but keep him on the team ... they have a better chance of setting an example and helping the SPCA bring publicity to this really awful issue.
Michael Vick has never portrayed himself as a nice guy. Because of that I (and probably countless others) are persuaded to believe him capable of this level of cruelty. If it were Peyton Manning, the public would blow it off as nonesense or at least be less apt to believe it. Peyton does those really funny fan commercials for that credit card ... he couldn't hurt a dog ... The public would be questioning the integrity of the DA, not Manning. But here ... no one is questioning the DA ... because everyone readily believes Vick capable of this crime.
So Vick has really done this to himself. More so if he actually did it I guess. And I'd like nothing more than to never see him in a football jersey again. I think he's a jerk. I thought that before this whole dog thing. There are some people out there you get a feeling about ... him and T.O. are bug squashers.
However ... it'll be hard enough for Vick to get a fair trial anywhere. I'm afraid that the public's willingness to condemn the accused before a gavel is dropped is leading us further and further down this rabit hole of damning the prosecuted and elevating supposed "victims" to sainthood on nothing more than heresay.
Some fouls are called, some aren't. It's all done at the complete and utter descretion of the ref. Ask any Mav's fan about 2006's NBA finals series and they will tell you that lots of those calls were completely bogus. There's always been homecooking... always ... and hey when it benefits you, it benefits you. But blatant cheating - like the kind done by Tom Donaghy - is what they've been defending themselves against for a really long time.
I don't know what they are going to do. Especially for the Pheonix Suns. They - potentially - were seriously wronged.
Michael Vick ... if you're not aware ... he's been indicted by a federal grand jury for involvement in a dog fighting ring. He is said to the one of the leaders of "Bad Newz Kennels" which breeds dogs - pitbulls - for fighting that leads to death or near death. Dogs that survived were killed in incredibly horrible ways, including electrocution, hanging, and gun shots.
I've asked my husband the sports buff his thoughts on this. As he is an animal lover and a football fan. More over, he is very level and rational, and not inclined to let an emotional argument rule his decision.
And he married me? HAHA.
Anyway ... little chuckle on my part ... my husband is falling into the innocent until proven guilty camp.
His argument ... if he himself was indicted for serious charges he would hope that his employer would give him the benefit of the doubt and let him keep his job until such time a conviction or vindication is handed down.
I see his point but I throw out there the whole NFL-Players-as-child-role-models argument and we kind of hit an empasse. Like I said ... emotional arguments don't really weigh much with him. He's more a letter of the law type.
And to that point I wonder what the NFL will do. If they suspended him pending the outcome of his trial they are all but admitting they think he is guilty. If they don't and they stand behind him and he is convicted ... they are angering a large portion of the population by paying millions of dollars to a known animal abuser.
I was trying to relay the importance of this to my husband. I read somewhere in a magazine or online a long time ago about "signs you're raising a murder." Key among the list was a childs willingness to hurt defenseless creatures ... or pets. There was a story about a kid who has torturing a squirrel. He threw a rock at it, knocking it out, and then he pelted it with rocks over and over again until it was dead.
I guess the thought is that if a child learns at an early age to abuse those smaller / weaker beings that as adults they can continue that same behavior.
So for me ... people that abuse animals are scary because it's a pretty thin line from abusing animals, to abusing women, to abusing anyone they percieve as weaker.
But ... to my husband's point ... what if he really didn't have anything to do with it? And that's the NFL's problem. If Vick is exonerated (ha) and they've suspended him, their tough, line-in-the-sand rules will be weakened and tarnished. But if they wait a bit, put him on the sidelines but keep him on the team ... they have a better chance of setting an example and helping the SPCA bring publicity to this really awful issue.
Michael Vick has never portrayed himself as a nice guy. Because of that I (and probably countless others) are persuaded to believe him capable of this level of cruelty. If it were Peyton Manning, the public would blow it off as nonesense or at least be less apt to believe it. Peyton does those really funny fan commercials for that credit card ... he couldn't hurt a dog ... The public would be questioning the integrity of the DA, not Manning. But here ... no one is questioning the DA ... because everyone readily believes Vick capable of this crime.
So Vick has really done this to himself. More so if he actually did it I guess. And I'd like nothing more than to never see him in a football jersey again. I think he's a jerk. I thought that before this whole dog thing. There are some people out there you get a feeling about ... him and T.O. are bug squashers.
However ... it'll be hard enough for Vick to get a fair trial anywhere. I'm afraid that the public's willingness to condemn the accused before a gavel is dropped is leading us further and further down this rabit hole of damning the prosecuted and elevating supposed "victims" to sainthood on nothing more than heresay.
Comments