Column: Athletes not above the law
Published April 27, 2010
Last week, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell suspended Pittsburgh Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger for six games for violating the league's personal conduct policy.
Roethlisberger was suspended after he was suspected of a second sexual assault in less than a year.
There has been a good deal of backlash about that decision. On the one hand, Roethlisberger has never formally been charged with a crime, (both alleged victims dropped charges) so it seems tacky to suspend someone on he-said she-said circumstances. On the other hand, he made the league and his team look bad by engaging in tawdry and deplorable behavior.
I don't care what Roethlisberger has done. He deserves to be suspended. Yes, I know it's not a crime to have premarital sex with people you meet at a bar, club, party, box social, soup kitchen or wherever; however, there is nothing savory about forcing yourself on someone, especially if one or both parties are under the influence of alcohol or drugs.
As a public figure, Roethlisberger should make better decisions. Whether either allegation is true, Roethlisberger should not have put himself in that situation to begin with, especially because he already got in trouble for sexual assault a few months earlier.
The problem, it seems, is athletes think they are indestructible and above the law. They are not, nor should they be. Being a professional athlete is a privilege, not a right.
Like it or not, young people look up to professional athletes. As a kid, I remember idolizing athletes. They hung the moon in my eyes. Little did I know, those men were doing illegal drugs, cheating on their wives and tainting the game.
Undoubtedly, young people across Pittsburgh idolize Roethlisberger. Now these kids might grow up thinking it is OK to do what Roethlisberger does. These athletes (and other celebrities for that matter) have a responsibility to the public. They are role models and should act like professionals, not hormonally-charged college students. I understand you are only young once, but they still need to remember they don't only represent themselves, but also the league and sport as a whole.
If these guys want to run around and get drunk, do drugs and threaten people at gunpoint, they shouldn't be allowed to play professional sports. Some of us puny and non-athletic people would kill to have the mad skills of a Michael Vick or a Gilbert Arenas. If I had the opportunity, I would gladly pursue an athletic career.
If these young men (and women; see Marion Jones) can't behave themselves, they should be forced to earn their living another way. I really don't think it is asking too much.
I'm not saying every professional athlete who does something illegal should be suspended, because that would make things sticky. Any athlete who endangers another person or brings harm to the league should be suspended. For instance, manslaughter and robbery would garner a suspension. Obviously, cheating on the significant other (which seems to be prevalent among professional athletes) would not be grounds for suspension. Upon reinstatement, those athletes would get one more chance — no three strike policy. If they screw up again, they obviously haven't learned their lesson, so I think it's fair if they aren't allowed to play anymore.
Behavior of athletes is a growing problem. Look at the NBA. There is a growing reputation that all basketball players are thugs. It certainly doesn't help when players run into the stands and start wailing on fans or bring guns into the locker room. The worst part is most athletes aren't like this. The poor choices by a few cause everybody to look at athletes differently.
The suspensions will also help quell behavior. Some of those athletes would not want to possibly sacrifice their fame and wealth. If they know their career was in jeopardy if they got caught driving drunk or shooting heroin, they might use a little more discretion and stop doing it.
Good luck on your suspension, Big Ben. I hope it has knocked some sense into you.