an outside view

If you are any sort of sports fan, you’ve heard them all before. I’m talking about those phrases that are an everyday part of our sports vernacular. “Defense wins championships.” “Good pitching will beat good hitting every time.” “You play like you practice.” “Titles are won in the off-season.” These phrases have found a permanent home in our sports jargon.

There’s one more that has slipped in and unfortunately it is even more commonplace these days than the ones I mentioned . It’s “innocent until proven guilty.” Bad boys are making headlines everyday. NFL player arrested for this. NBA star arrested for that. College player charged with X. Baseball player suspected of Y. We are as used to seeing arrest records in the newspapers as we are box scores. A key stat for today’s players is number of run-ins with the men in blue. Wally Wideout had 105 career touchdown catches, won two Super Bowl rings, and had two arrests – once for beating his girlfriend and once for drugs.

And what is the first thing we hear when one of these stories breaks? “Hey, the guy is innocent until proven guilty.” If it happens to be a player on our favorite team, we argue, “He hasn’t been convicted of anything.” We will predictably hear the coach say, “I want to let the judicial process run its course before making any decisions.” The athlete says, “I look forward to having the opportunity to clear my good name.” Translated into plain English, this “innocent until proven guilty” mumbo jumbo really means, “We can’t afford to lose that player for the big game.”

“Innocent until proven guilty” is a fundamental right that we Americans enjoy. The framers of the Constitution, our lawmakers, and the courts have gone to great lengths to protect that fundamental right and that is a good thing. But do you really think Thomas Jefferson was talking about the rights of athletes gone wild? Do you think for one minute Ben Franklin would understand our using the concept to justify allowing an athlete to play some silly game?

Next to “separation of church and state,” the “innocent until proven guilty” doctrine is perhaps the most misunderstood and misapplied doctrines in our society today. It is a legal concept – not sports. Sure, Michael Vick is “innocent until proven guilty” as far as a court of law is concerned. So is Pacman Jones. So are Barry Bonds and Kobe Bryant. So are the college athletes who get arrested for fighting at a bar. It is up to the prosecutors to prove they committed any crimes. In the absence of evidence and a conviction, they are all innocent and that is as it should be.

But that is where their protection ends. The Constitution can afford no one protection in the court of public opinion. The same standard doesn’t apply to a football coach who feels it necessary to discipline a player. It doesn’t apply to the NFL Commissioner who has reason to believe a player has acted in a manner that is detrimental to the league. Although, these athletes may be entitled to some type of due process, the standards of evidence are much different. A coach doesn’t have to wait for a court to convict a player before taking action. The Commissioner doesn’t have to wait for the wheels of justice to turn before banning a player. I don’t want to see Pacman Jones in jail unless he is convicted by a jury of his peers. The same goes for Vick or any other American accused of a crime. However, fans need to leave the “innocent until proven guilty” argument out of it when it comes to allowing an athlete on the field of play.