Never suggested that. I've been clear from the start that he's responsible for his own behavior, that it was unacceptable and properly punishable by ejection.
I don't think we disagree about anything at this point. We agree that Beckham became unhinged and acted inappropriately and that he was properly punished; and you now agree that Norman was also wrong and deserving of being punished beyond the in-game penalties, that the pregame stuff was inappropriate, that it was designed to threaten, and did. And we agree that it worked--it was an effective strategy.
I do think there is a broader point about the fundamentally irreconcilable conflict between the violence that is essential to the sport (including the stoking of that culture) and the professed concern for "player safety," which is clearly driven by the litigation risk. As a fan, I'm as guilty as anyone I suppose, because I am sensitive to the concern but I still watch blood sport just like people watched gladiators. It's an interesting dilemma, especially in a league that is increasingly stocked with real criminals committing real crimes, and where people have offered bounties for serious injuries to marquee players. As a father, it's been eye-opening to watch the culture start from such a young age. I still remember playing as a kid myself and perhaps it was always there because I remember certain coaches going beyond the pale, but it seems almost cultish now to a level I don't recall. Having only daughters drives me nuts in lots of ways, but not having to deal with the football scene in our town is one of many reasons I don't mind not having a son.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.