Hines Ward Discipline

[latenighthero]

Braylon Edwards was recently fined $50,000 for his DUI charge. I don't recall seeing anything regarding discipline for Hines Ward despite his DUI charge.

Does anybody know if they have decided not to punish Hines Ward at all or if Goodell has yet to make a decision? I'm not sure if Ward has received any punishment from the league in the past but it seems slightly unfair that David Reed was given a 1 game suspension for his drug charge and Hines receives no discipline for his actions. I'm fairly certain that David Reed had no previous issues with the league and Reed's offense seems slightly less severe because although it is still illegal he is not putting other citizens in harm's way. Maybe it's an issue of veteran respect, but it does seem slightly unfair in my opinion.

I'm not trying to say that the league is out to get us or anything, but as with the Donte Stallworth scenario a few years back we all know how serious and dangerous this type of thing is. Roger Goodell seems to be trying to implement a "tough guy" approach as head of the league and I believe that this is the type of behaviour that he should be looking to eliminate.

Thoughts?

[Natty Boh]

Yes no suspensions or penalties for Hines Ward or Braylon Edwards. It seem Goodell is sending the message that DUI's are frowned upon but not going to land you in trouble with the league.

[berad]

[quote name='latenighthero' timestamp='1315363473' post='779582']
Braylon Edwards was recently fined $50,000 for his DUI charge. I don't recall seeing anything regarding discipline for Hines Ward despite his DUI charge.

Thoughts?
[/quote]

Moved this to the Other Teams forum.

I don't agree with Edwards' punishment. A suspension was more than warranted, with his other run-ins with the law.

Hines Ward hasn't been punished because his case has not been settled. As of now, he is only [i]accused[/i] of DUI. He still has his shot at a trial and legal defense - I believe it's set for Oct 6th.

[ravenbeast]

why do we bash goodell these are grown men were talking about this isnt highschool. hines not being disciplined yet is bull but the football players need to grow up and be men if they understood theres 20+million kids looking at them as idols.kenny britt braylon edward hines ward david reed.BE LIONS NOT LAMBS.

[JamesRules]

Goodell being Goodell right there. He helped the Steelers in 2005, now he's helping with his favorite receiver Hines Ward. At first I thought it was just Braylon in general that he doesn't like, but now I think it's just a select crew that he likes. I heard on a radio that one of the referee's is on the field to watch to make sure that every player wears their socks correctly and whatnot. If the players aren't, they get fined no warnings nothing of that matter. If NFL fines get worse every single year, imagine twenty years from now what they'd be like. It's downright absurd that people even talk about fines because I feel no player should be fined.

[ravensdfan]

[quote name='berad' timestamp='1315363934' post='779595']

Moved this to the Other Teams forum.

I don't agree with Edwards' punishment. A suspension was more than warranted, with his other run-ins with the law.

Hines Ward hasn't been punished because his case has not been settled. As of now, he is only [i]accused[/i] of DUI. He still has his shot at a trial and legal defense - I believe it's set for Oct 6th.
[/quote]

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't Ben only accused of something?

Sorry, but there are guys out there (not only Hines Ward) who did a whole lot worse things (Benson went to jail for assault for example) who are receiving no discipline at all. If Goodell is going to take a hard line then he needs to be consistent and fair. Not "oh we'll punish this one and let this one go".

[JamesRules]

[quote name='ravensdfan' timestamp='1315364180' post='779598']

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't Ben only accused of something?

Sorry, but there are guys out there (not only Hines Ward) who did a whole lot worse things (Benson went to jail for assault for example) who are receiving no discipline at all. If Goodell is going to take a hard line then he needs to be consistent and fair. Not "oh we'll punish this one and let this one go".
[/quote]
Not to get too off topic, but Cedric is probably the biggest monster in the league today. Lovie is a genius for getting rid of him.

The part that sucks is because the players will never say "we're done" and just quit the league until everything's fixed. But the league can fold on the players. That doesn't make sense to me. It's exactly like State's Rights vs. the US government.

[berad]

[quote name='ravensdfan' timestamp='1315364180' post='779598']

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't Ben only accused of something?

Sorry, but there are guys out there (not only Hines Ward) who did a whole lot worse things (Benson went to jail for assault for example) who are receiving no discipline at all. If Goodell is going to take a hard line then he needs to be consistent and fair. Not "oh we'll punish this one and let this one go".
[/quote]

Ben wasn't suspended for sexual assault [i](which, yes, he had been accused of twice)[/i]. But he [i]was[/i] suspended for conduct detrimental to the league, "impos[ing] inherent danger to the safety and well being of another person", and purchasing and/or facilitating the sale of alcohol to minors - per a letter Goodell sent to him.

I, too, want to see Goodell be more consistent with his discipline. You'll never see me say anything different. I actually mentioned Benson, Talib, and Britt when Reed got suspended. Do it equilaterally or don't do it at all.

[Doctor Who?]

Goodell is a joke...he never should have suspended Ben for being accused. Im not just saying that as a Steeler fan, but saying that for the reason that he opened a whole new can of worms for suspending players who arent even charged with anything. Cedric should be suspended, but Hines shouldnt be disciplined at all because a)first offense, and b)during a lockout, when they werent "NFL employees"

Goodell needs to be most consistent, or we need a disciplinary committee. Either way, he needs to be gone and fast!

[berad]

[quote name='Doctor Who?' timestamp='1315365395' post='779615']
Goodell is a joke...[b]he never should have suspended Ben for being accused[/b]. Im not just saying that as a Steeler fan, but saying that for the reason that he opened a whole new can of worms for suspending players who arent even charged with anything. Cedric should be suspended, but Hines shouldnt be disciplined at all because a)first offense, and b)during a lockout, when they werent "NFL employees"

Goodell needs to be most consistent, or we need a disciplinary committee. Either way, he needs to be gone and fast!
[/quote]

He wasn't.

[ravensdfan]

[quote name='Doctor Who?' timestamp='1315365395' post='779615']
Goodell is a joke...he never should have suspended Ben for being accused. Im not just saying that as a Steeler fan, but saying that for the reason that he opened a whole new can of worms for suspending players who arent even charged with anything. Cedric should be suspended, but Hines shouldnt be disciplined at all because a)first offense, and b)during a lockout, when they werent "NFL employees"

Goodell needs to be most consistent, or we need a disciplinary committee. Either way, he needs to be gone and fast!
[/quote]

No I'm not buying the "during the lockout" clause. It is still "detrimental to the league" whether or not it was during the lockout. Not buying the "first offense" crap either and I will try to find it, but I don't believe it actually is Hines Ward's first offense. I mean, this is Reed's first offense so...he should have been fine then.

If what was stated earlier is true , that Ben was suspended for providing alcohol to minors well, that is different then.

[JamesRules]

[quote name='Doctor Who?' timestamp='1315365395' post='779615']
Goodell is a joke...he never should have suspended Ben for being accused. Im not just saying that as a Steeler fan, but saying that for the reason that he opened a whole new can of worms for suspending players who arent even charged with anything. Cedric should be suspended, but Hines shouldnt be disciplined at all because a)first offense, and b)during a lockout, when they werent "NFL employees"

Goodell needs to be most consistent, or we need a disciplinary committee. Either way, he needs to be gone and fast!
[/quote]
So why would you want Goodell to leave if he's based the fines off of Steelers bias? Offcourt and first offense? That's encouraging players to make fools out of themselves in the offseason. We all know that to be a fact. Just because he fines James Harrison everygame, doesn't mean that he isn't being fair. He's telling him to get the message and stop right then and there.

If you think Goodell is unfair, then keep in mind that Ray's been fined for late hits and almost got fined for being tripped and causing the Quarterback to be tripped because of the effect of the two colliding into eachother.

[berad]

[quote name='ravensdfan' timestamp='1315366176' post='779625']

No I'm not buying the "during the lockout" clause. It is still "detrimental to the league" whether or not it was during the lockout. Not buying the "first offense" crap either and I will try to find it, but I don't believe it actually is Hines Ward's first offense. I mean, this is Reed's first offense so...he should have been fine then.

If what was stated earlier is true , that Ben was suspended for providing alcohol to minors well, that is different then.
[/quote]

[url="http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5121614"]LINK[/url] to a story about Goodell's letter and some details of the night

[url="http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/crime/ben-roethlisbergers-bad-play"]LINK[/url] of some more details of the night, including the purchasing of alcohol for the minors

Both links have some graphic material so discretion is advised. The second link has facts taken directly from the Georgia Bureau of Investigations report of the incident, including scanned images of the document. Other details can be found through more searching, I'm sure, but I don't want to read anymore about it...

I can't believe we have to revisit this mess.

[mhead66]

[quote name='berad' timestamp='1315363934' post='779595']

Moved this to the Other Teams forum.

I don't agree with Edwards' punishment. A suspension was more than warranted, with his other run-ins with the law.

Hines Ward hasn't been punished because [b]his case has not been settled.[/b] As of now, he is only [i]accused[/i] of DUI. He still has his shot at a trial and legal defense - I believe it's set for Oct 6th.
[/quote]
This is the correct answer. You can't (or at least shouldn't) punish a man - any man - before he is found guilty. After that, it should be consistent... Say, your first DUI, automatic 4 games. 2nd, one year...

Something like that, equally applied, and no one could complain.

[Doctor Who?]

[quote name='ravensdfan' timestamp='1315366176' post='779625']

No I'm not buying the "during the lockout" clause. It is still "detrimental to the league" whether or not it was during the lockout. Not buying the "first offense" crap either and I will try to find it, but I don't believe it actually is Hines Ward's first offense. I mean, this is Reed's first offense so...he should have been fine then.

If what was stated earlier is true , that Ben was suspended for providing alcohol to minors well, that is different then.
[/quote]

Its not bens responsibility to card every single person he buys drinks for...it was on the establishment that he was in to ID her. It also came out they knew she was under 21 (which isnt considered a minor, so i wont play semantics here) because they took a fake ID off her just weeks before the "incident". They never should have let her in. She and her friends were also following ben and his group around all night, she was trying to get their attention by pinching them at different times, and the girl also had a DTF name tag and asked different people in the group if they knew what it meant. When she first reported it, she said she wasnt raped, then she changed it to she wasnt sure, then after her friend talked to her and whatnot, she then changed it to she was raped (or sexually assaulted, whatever) so her credibility is already pretty bad. She also some weeks later sent a letter to the attorney saying she didnt want to pursue a case. If you were actually sexually assaulted, why would you not pursue it (and why wouldnt her family want it pursued) Fact of the matter is, no one really knows what really happened, and no charges were even filed, so goodell had a knee jerk reaction and never should have suspended him, especially after this could really be considered first offense considering the details that came out about the psychological instability of the girl from nevada. All he was guilty of is poor judgment, and that is something that everybody on every football team is guilty of at some point or another.

[Doctor Who?]

[quote name='JamesRules' timestamp='1315366599' post='779631']
So why would you want Goodell to leave if he's based the fines off of Steelers bias? Offcourt and first offense? That's encouraging players to make fools out of themselves in the offseason. We all know that to be a fact. Just because he fines James Harrison everygame, doesn't mean that he isn't being fair. He's telling him to get the message and stop right then and there.

If you think Goodell is unfair, then keep in mind that Ray's been fined for late hits and almost got fined for being tripped and causing the Quarterback to be tripped because of the effect of the two colliding into eachother.
[/quote]

Please tell me that you know there is a difference between the offseason and a lockout....

[H8R]

Hey, I'm surprised Sergio hasnt gotten punishment from the league for his DUI...

[PuRock]

[quote name='ravensdfan' timestamp='1315366176' post='779625']



No I'm not buying the "during the lockout" clause. It is still "detrimental to the league" whether or not it was during the lockout. Not buying the "first offense" crap either and I will try to find it, but I don't believe it actually is Hines Ward's first offense. I mean, this is Reed's first offense so...he should have been fine then.

If what was stated earlier is true , that Ben was suspended for providing alcohol to minors well, that is different then.
[/quote]

But the lockout does play a HUGE part. If you got in trouble during the lockout you are getting a "Get out of jail free" card. Its not fair, but that's how it is.

The NFLPA just won't allow any of these players to be punished since they weren't under contract, therefore their behavior can not be upheld to the personal conduct policy. Goodell wanted to so bad, but he would get a [profanity deleted] storm from the NFLPA and he'd lose. Hell look at Britt and Talib.

Most of our fans are 'grass is greener on the other side' folk. If somebody on the Steelers got suspended one game for what happened to Reed, we'd be clamoring that it isn't enough and not fair.

[berad]

[quote name='H8R' timestamp='1315396568' post='779740']
Hey, I'm surprised Sergio hasnt gotten punishment from the league for his DUI...
[/quote]

Same. He pleaded guilty to it a while ago, avoided any jail time.

[mhead66]

An interesting S.I. article on what we're discussing - it's defending James Harrison ( ) but it still raises some good points:

"Most companies aren't as arbitrary about it as the NFL is. Players need guidelines. They need to know the rules will be applied fairly, across the board, no matter who the offending player might be. Players need to know what to expect. On and off the field."

"That's not the league's only dance with hypocrisy. It decries fan violence, yet does nothing to eliminate the beer sales that fuel the rage. Beer = violence = bad publicity is not a stout enough equation for the NFL to mess with the lucrative relationship it enjoys with its beer sponsors."

[url="http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/paul_daugherty/08/31/harrison.benson/index.html?sct=nfl_bf2_a6"]http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/paul_daugherty/08/31/harrison.benson/index.html?sct=nfl_bf2_a6[/url]

[SteelYourThunder]

Who knows who get's punished and who doesn't anymore? I'm imagining Goodell with a Wheel of Fortune listing player names instead of numbers while spinning it and laughing maniacally.

[bpytnjr58]

Maybe his punishment should be having to dance with Chaz Bono this season.

[JamesRules]

[quote name='Doctor Who?' timestamp='1315371067' post='779676']

Please tell me that you know there is a difference between the offseason and a lockout....
[/quote]
Please tell me that you don't seriously think that committing a crime on a offseason/ lockout is any different than committing a crime during the regular season.

[Doctor Who?]

[quote name='JamesRules' timestamp='1315423504' post='780152']
Please tell me that you don't seriously think that committing a crime on a offseason/ lockout is any different than committing a crime during the regular season.
[/quote]

there is a diffference because the regular season they are employees of the NFL and can be held to the standards...during a lockout they arent employees, they arent under contract, therefore if they do something wrong, the nfl has no right dishing out discipline

[PuRock]

[quote name='JamesRules' timestamp='1315423504' post='780152']
Please tell me that you don't seriously think that committing a crime on a offseason/ lockout is any different than committing a crime during the regular season.
[/quote]

A crime is a crime is a crime whenever it occurs for the judicial system. Its up to that system to find him guilty w/ punishment. But in terms of the NFL, he wasn't under contract. My job can't fine me for being late if they've locked me out and aren't paying me (not the best example, but you get the point).

[ravensdfan]

[quote name='Doctor Who?' timestamp='1315446347' post='780645']

there is a diffference because the regular season they are employees of the NFL and can be held to the standards...during a lockout they arent employees, they arent under contract, therefore if they do something wrong, the nfl has no right dishing out discipline
[/quote]

I disagree. If they can suspend Pryor for 5 games for something that occurred while he was in college (NOT an employee of the NFL) then they have every right to discipline players who got in trouble during the lockout. Hypocrisy at its finest.

[callahan09]

[quote name='ravensdfan' timestamp='1315481152' post='780852']

I disagree. If they can suspend Pryor for 5 games for something that occurred while he was in college (NOT an employee of the NFL) then they have every right to discipline players who got in trouble during the lockout. Hypocrisy at its finest.
[/quote]

This is 100% correct. Inarguable, really.

[mhead66]

[quote name='ravensdfan' timestamp='1315481152' post='780852']

I disagree. If they can suspend Pryor for 5 games for something that occurred while he was in college (NOT an employee of the NFL) then they have every right to discipline players who got in trouble during the lockout. Hypocrisy at its finest.
[/quote]
They suspended Pryor because the NFL wants to protect the NCAA relationship that nets them billions in profit with no cash investment by the owners. Pryor was suspended by the NCAA and tried to circumvent them by declaring for the NFL, [b]after[/b] he got suspended by the NCAA - and GODdell was never going to take a player's side against the NCAA. GODdell could only suspend Pryor [b]after[/b] he became an employee of the NFL - which the locked out players were not - by the owners' decision.

It's really irrelevant to the argument about Ward. Like PuRock said, as a business owner, I don't have the authority to reprimand someone who's not currently employed by me - especially if I'm the one who separated the person from employment. The players didn't walk, the owners locked them out.

[callahan09]

[quote name='mhead66' timestamp='1315496082' post='781010']
They suspended Pryor because the NFL wants to protect the NCAA relationship that nets them billions in profit with no cash investment by the owners. Pryor was suspended by the NCAA and tried to circumvent them by declaring for the NFL, [b]after[/b] he got suspended by the NCAA - and GODdell was never going to take a player's side against the NCAA. GODdell could only suspend Pryor [b]after[/b] he became an employee of the NFL - which the locked out players were not - by the owners' decision.

It's really irrelevant to the argument about Ward. Like PuRock said, as a business owner, I don't have the authority to reprimand someone who's not currently employed by me - especially if I'm the one who separated the person from employment. The players didn't walk, the owners locked them out.
[/quote]

A locked out player is as much an NFL employee as an NCAA player, in fact I'd argue that they are more so.

[mhead66]

[quote name='callahan09' timestamp='1315503017' post='781129']

A locked out player is as much an NFL employee as an NCAA player, in fact I'd argue that they are more so.
[/quote]
An NCAA player is not an employee of anyone, he's a student. When the NFL players were locked out, they ceased to be employees of the NFL, while that condition existed. They couldn't enter team buildings, talk to coaches, or even get medical attention from team medical staffs. That's a little part of Manning's problem - he didn't want to act, independently of the team physicians' staff that had been treating him, so he put off surgery.

But they were no longer under contract until the collective bargaining agreement was signed. No one was allowed interaction with their team, and they weren't being paid or receiving benefits. So why should they be subject to the regulations of management at that time?

GODdell will not pursue suspensions for any players as a result of lockout behavior, or he'll get lawsuits in court - and lose...