Sully Suspended

[KGs Knee]

I get that the C's aren't bound to follow suit with "the law", I just don't agree with this action.

All this says is that you only have to be accused to be guilty in the eye of the public.  I abhor that mentality.

[Chris]

I get that the C's aren't bound to follow suit with "the law", I just don't agree with this action.

All this says is that you only have to be accused to be guilty in the eye of the public.  I abhor that mentality.

If he were found guilty, the consequences would be much stronger.  I think there is no problem with suspending him for embarrasing the franchise and the league for getting arrested in the first place. 

Obviously, every situation is different. But, based on what we do know about this case, from the original complaint, etc., it is more than reasonable that they give him a slap on the wrist, and a firm warning. 

[Fafnir]

All this says is that you only have to be accused to be guilty in the eye of the public.  I abhor that mentality.

Alternately it says that he admits accountability for not preventing the situation. Once again he's never called it a false accusation, merely that he's not guilty of the charges.

Also his job is a basketball player, therefore a public entertainer. So PR at its core is his primary job function, even if usually its through the duties of playing a game.

[fairweatherfan]

I get that the C's aren't bound to follow suit with "the law", I just don't agree with this action.

All this says is that you only have to be accused to be guilty in the eye of the public.  I abhor that mentality.

If he were found guilty, the consequences would be much stronger.  I think there is no problem with suspending him for embarrasing the franchise and the league for getting arrested in the first place. 

Obviously, every situation is different. But, based on what we do know about this case, from the original complaint, etc., it is more than reasonable that they give him a slap on the wrist, and a firm warning.

Yup, damaging the brand.  We also don't know what Sully privately told management about the incident; if he admitted some culpability to them, I think it's reasonable to feel justified in suspending him.

[erisred]

Tank-You verrrrry. Much.  .........Mr Ainge


Sooooooooooooooo......much for game  one 

He's lucky it's just 1.  I would've given him at least 5 games, plus maybe about 10 paychecks, all going to Boston's "Reach" program (Domestic Violence Shelter, organization)

Seriously. The fact that this is treated as less of an issue than the guys who fail drug tests is, at best, a little messed up.

Mitigated, of course, by the fact that the charges were dropped, and innocent until proven guilty and all that.

This. Well deserved one game suspension. Should have gotten at least three. Nothing to do with tanking at all.

Yeah, I'd have gone 3 games, without pay, and the forfeited pay going to a deserving, related, charity.

It is important that this "sting" Sullinger, not be something he can shrug off. One game is a flagrant 2 on the court and I'd judge this incident as being more serious than that. Not a lot more, but enough more that 2 or 3 games would be justified...and I think it would have been the proper "sting" to administer.

OTOH, I hope we can just let this issue go to sleep in here now...and hopefully never have to wake it back up related to *any* Celtics player.

[aingeforthree]

Tank-You verrrrry. Much.  .........Mr Ainge


Sooooooooooooooo......much for game  one 

He's lucky it's just 1.  I would've given him at least 5 games, plus maybe about 10 paychecks, all going to Boston's "Reach" program (Domestic Violence Shelter, organization)

Good luck getting that by the union.

Proportionality and precedent is something you have to consider when it comes to workplace discipline.

Exactly what's wrong with society, government, etc.

The 'right' thing is never done in these situations unfortunately.  Unions, government, etc. all get in the way.

It's why our society is where its at today.  In the Shaq hole.

So the "right" thing is whatever sounds good off the top of your head? 

And like Faf says, due process and rule of law are not some radical new social development.

No, not at all.

[crimson_stallion]

Tank-You verrrrry. Much.  .........Mr Ainge


Sooooooooooooooo......much for game  one 

He's lucky it's just 1.  I would've given him at least 5 games, plus maybe about 10 paychecks, all going to Boston's "Reach" program (Domestic Violence Shelter, organization)

Seriously. The fact that this is treated as less of an issue than the guys who fail drug tests is, at best, a little messed up.

Mitigated, of course, by the fact that the charges were dropped, and innocent until proven guilty and all that.

Why is it messed up?

One is a workplace issue, compliance with the drug policy and integrity of competition.

Another is a personal life issue that doesn't impinge the game itself, merely Sullinger's character given that the charges have been dismissed.

Punishing employees for issues in their personal life is something that's fraught with peril for an employer.

Athletes like Sully are in the public eyeand they are looked upon as role models by the younger generations.

When something like this gets in the news the public immediately associate this with the team because the public only knows Sully as a Boston Celtic.  As such urs ray to argue that this type of situation reflects badly on an organisation.

Also you can argue that it sets a bad example to the younger generations that domestic violence is ok - grown men can do it and get away with it without impact, so it must not bfs that bad.

Their are many businesses outside of basketball where a case like this witvisibility lic visibility could be used as an example by their employees.

Terrence Williams was dumped by the team largely because of his gun charges...which were also dismissed.  It is what it is!

[D.o.s.]

Tank-You verrrrry. Much.  .........Mr Ainge


Sooooooooooooooo......much for game  one 

He's lucky it's just 1.  I would've given him at least 5 games, plus maybe about 10 paychecks, all going to Boston's "Reach" program (Domestic Violence Shelter, organization)

Seriously. The fact that this is treated as less of an issue than the guys who fail drug tests is, at best, a little messed up.

Mitigated, of course, by the fact that the charges were dropped, and innocent until proven guilty and all that.

Why is it messed up?

One is a workplace issue, compliance with the drug policy and integrity of competition.

Another is a personal life issue that doesn't impinge the game itself, merely Sullinger's character given that the charges have been dismissed.

Punishing employees for issues in their personal life is something that's fraught with peril for an employer.

I think we're talking about different drug tests.

To that end, I think we're both talking about things that can be easily classified as "a personal life issue that doesn't impinge on the game itself."

Another topic for another thread (but not at CB, I don't believe).

The 70s and 80s proved that recreational drug use were as big concern for the game's integrity and level of competition as performance enhancers. (NBA cares more about recreational drugs than performance IMO)

Death, failure to perform at high levels, and draft busts galore because of them.

[Tr1boy]

We really missed him last night. Got outrebounded badly and sullinger would of def helped

[D.o.s.]

We really missed him last night. Got outrebounded badly and sullinger would of def helped

Possibly.

Good for the Celtics to suspend him, though.

[Eja117]

Tank-You verrrrry. Much.  .........Mr Ainge


Sooooooooooooooo......much for game  one 

He's lucky it's just 1.  I would've given him at least 5 games, plus maybe about 10 paychecks, all going to Boston's "Reach" program (Domestic Violence Shelter, organization)

Good luck getting that by the union.

Proportionality and precedent is something you have to consider when it comes to workplace discipline.

Exactly what's wrong with society, government, etc.

The 'right' thing is never done in these situations unfortunately.  Unions, government, etc. all get in the way.

It's why our society is where its at today.  In the Shaq hole.

Due process and rule of law is an awful thing when it conflicts with your personal views of "what should be done".

rule of law seems to have absolutely nothing to do with the sports world

[Fan from VT]

False accusations make great stories so they get a lot of attention. They are the vast vast minority of cases. It is really really easy to avoid being accused of domestic violence...if you want to.

[action781]

Seriously. The fact that this is treated as less of an issue than the guys who fail drug tests is, at best, a little messed up.

Mitigated, of course, by the fact that the charges were dropped, and innocent until proven guilty and all that.

Why is it messed up?

One is a workplace issue, compliance with the drug policy and integrity of competition.

Another is a personal life issue that doesn't impinge the game itself, merely Sullinger's character given that the charges have been dismissed.

Punishing employees for issues in their personal life is something that's fraught with peril for an employer.

I think we're talking about different drug tests.

To that end, I think we're both talking about things that can be easily classified as "a personal life issue that doesn't impinge on the game itself."

Another topic for another thread (but not at CB, I don't believe).

The 70s and 80s proved that recreational drug use were as big concern for the game's integrity and level of competition as performance enhancers. (NBA cares more about recreational drugs than performance IMO)

Death, failure to perform at high levels, and draft busts galore because of them.

While you are not inaccurate when you use the umbrella of "recreational drugs", no NBA players have died from marijuana use.  Nor can you definitively attribute a failure to perform at a high level to use of marijuana.  There is a big difference between marijuana and other recreational drugs -- and the NBA acknowledges such in their policies.  The suspension for a third violation of marijuana use is 5 games.  Substances like cocaine result in a dismissal from the NBA. 

I'm assuming that marijuana is the type of drug test that D.o.s. was referring to and I agree that it's messed up that marijuana use is punished 5x higher than domestic violence here.  There may be an argument to be made as well for the discrepancy of punishments between domestic violence and "hard drug" use as well.

[mgent]

Seriously. The fact that this is treated as less of an issue than the guys who fail drug tests is, at best, a little messed up.

Mitigated, of course, by the fact that the charges were dropped, and innocent until proven guilty and all that.

Why is it messed up?

One is a workplace issue, compliance with the drug policy and integrity of competition.

Another is a personal life issue that doesn't impinge the game itself, merely Sullinger's character given that the charges have been dismissed.

Punishing employees for issues in their personal life is something that's fraught with peril for an employer.

I think we're talking about different drug tests.

To that end, I think we're both talking about things that can be easily classified as "a personal life issue that doesn't impinge on the game itself."

Another topic for another thread (but not at CB, I don't believe).

The 70s and 80s proved that recreational drug use were as big concern for the game's integrity and level of competition as performance enhancers. (NBA cares more about recreational drugs than performance IMO)

Death, failure to perform at high levels, and draft busts galore because of them.

While you are not inaccurate when you use the umbrella of "recreational drugs", no NBA players have died from marijuana use.  Nor can you definitively attribute a failure to perform at a high level to use of marijuana.  There is a big difference between marijuana and other recreational drugs -- and the NBA acknowledges such in their policies.  The suspension for a third violation of marijuana use is 5 games.  Substances like cocaine result in a dismissal from the NBA. 

I'm assuming that marijuana is the type of drug test that D.o.s. was referring to and I agree that it's messed up that marijuana use is punished 5x higher than domestic violence here.  There may be an argument to be made as well for the discrepancy of punishments between domestic violence and "hard drug" use as well.

So you set a limit on the # of games one gets for hitting their girlfriend/wife, then you have to justify suspending a player for a season when he simply hit another man in the audience?

The idea here is that discrepancy of punishment is based on the league/team's image being harmed, not on how bad the act itself is.  Otherwise the league would be forced to defend why JR Smith killing someone is only worth this many games.  How do you figure out "how many time worse" that is than marijuana use?  And where do you draw the line?

It's an argument that the NBA doesn't want or need to get into.  How do you decide how many less games you get if you test positive for marijuana with a medical marijuana license because you can't be found guilty in a court of law?  At a certain point you just have to accept, as a sports fan, that any suspension is just a slap on the wrist to filthy rich athletes most of who live less than ethical lives (caught or not) and we just ignore it in the sake of entertainment. 

[Fafnir]

Pretty good thoughts mgent.

I do want to chime in and say testing positive for marijuana is certainly not punished more severely than domestic violence in this case.

The third offense is 5 games for a positive test. If this was Sully's third set of dropped charges do you think it'd still be one game? If the punishments were merely equal the C's would just give him a warning instead of a suspension.