Colts at Redskins 09/16/18
The latest scandal in the NFL has opened up a Pandora’s Box of rules and ethics.
The New England Patriots won a championship game while using illegal and under-inflated footballs–a lot less deflated and obvious than the image above. And all it took was a ball boy and a quick needle.
According to apologists, the sly indiscretion had little or no bearing on the outcome of the contest. Because, you know, the Patriots won the game 45-7. So, that makes the dishonesty acceptable.
Oh, really? So, there’s zero chance the Patriots built that big lead partially on a feeling of confidence quarterback Tom Brady felt early in the game, due to the comfort of handling and passing footballs that were doctored to fit his preference?
What if he had been forced to utilize less ideal footballs? In that scenario, is it possible he doesn’t complete six of his first nine passes and lead his team to an early 14-0 advantage and jumpstart an eventual blowout?
Or, what if the final margin of conquest had been slimmer? Would a 16-7 Patriots’ victory have been close enough for the apologists to admit the deflated balls might have impacted the result?
How much cheating is considered cheating? And does it really matter how much or how little a particular instance of cheating affects the result? It’s still cheating, no matter how many conditions are imposed, or how many slight degrees off of level the infraction registers. Right?
Suppose Tiger Woods won a golf tournament with an illegal number of clubs in his bag. And let’s say he never actually used the 2-iron his caddie carried around all day. Would the argument still hold that it didn’t affect the result? Even if he won by 9 strokes?
Maybe the Patriots did enjoy an advantage with the altered footballs. Maybe it helped them advance to the Super Bowl.
According to ESPN commentator Colin Cowherd, it doesn’t matter. It’s cheating, he allowed Tuesday on his nationally syndicated radio show, but it’s okay because there’s a corresponding penalty. He compared the incident to an illegal slash or high-stick in the NHL. The hockey player feels free to commit the penalty, because he knows the punishment will be a measly two minutes in the sin bin.
The Patriots cheated, said ESPN’s midday broadcaster, because they’d be okay with the resulting and relatively minor penalty of, say, losing a late-round draft choice. Assign a more stringent penalty, Cowherd reasoned, and these types of incidents would not occur. So, let’s get this straight: illegally altering a piece of equipment should be viewed the same as a trip in hockey or a flagrant hack in hoops?
Fancy logic. But flawed. There’s a big difference between secretly bending the rules behind the scenes of a contest…as opposed to openly fouling a competitor (intentionally or not) during play. Fouls are part of the games we play and officiate and enjoy; foul play is not.
If Kobe Bryant fouls an opponent, there’s a ref right there to call it. When the Patriots cheat in the shadows, the whistle might never blow.
Dave Coombs hosts the morning show on the flagship radio station of Syracuse Athletics and cheats only on his diet.
