<p>[NFL</a> suspends Pittsburgh Steelers QB Ben Roethlisberger for six games - The Huddle: Football News from the NFL - USATODAY.com](<a href=“http://content.usatoday.com/communities/thehuddle/post/2010/04/nfl-suspends-pittsburgh-steelers-qb-ben-roethlisberger-/1]NFL”>NFL suspends Pittsburgh Steelers QB Ben Roethlisberger for six games)</p>
<p>A six game suspension and strong rumors flying that the Rooneys are attempting to trade him.</p>
<p>^^^</p>
<p>Way too strong, in my opinion. Reminds me a bit of the Duke lacrosse situation.</p>
<p>Maybe it takes a 6 game suspension to get Ben to wake up and smell the coffee. He needs to get to a rehab place–get the number from Tiger Woods–and take care of his problems, whether alcohol, sex or both.</p>
<p>I could maybe believe that Ben is being taken advantage of by unscrupulous women (consensual sex turns into a rape accusation to get $$ from rich guy) if this had happened only once. That it has happened at least TWICE makes me think that Ben is the problem.</p>
<p>In some fashion, Ben IS the problem. at the very least putting himself into compromising positions. I kind of think there’s something to the coercion, though. Based on no evidence, of course. However, he’s not denying anything, unlike the Duke lacrosse players.</p>
<p>Of course Ben is the source of his own problems. But the league’s decision reeks of cynicism to me, given the less than clear “facts” of this particular event in Georgia. If Commssioner Goodell is saying ‘no more,’ well that’s one thing. But what about equally important issues in the NFL. Young and intentially misinformed athletes are sustaining permanent damage to their health from concussions and the like, while the league is in denial. Correct the plantation mentality of the NFL while you’re lecturing people about the league’s image, Mr. Goodell.</p>
<p>The phrase “he got me drunk” is laughable. He didn’t put a funnel in her mouth and force booze down. He did encourage her to drink, and probably bought as many as she wanted to knock down. Big difference.
The phrase “took advantage of” is tricky too. As I see it, if she’s so drunk she’s passed out, then he has sex, that was a crime; rape- and that wasn’t “taking advantage”. She couldn’t say no. Similar if someone unbeknownst to her slipped something in her drink. then it’s rape. But If she chose to booze it up, and was so drunk she said “yes” when she normally would have said “No”, then that is taking advantage- but is absolutely not a crime. That falls on her poor judgment.</p>
<p>I am pleased the NFL is taking a firm line even though no criminal charges filed. It is a privilege to be employed by NFL, and players choose to sign a code of conduct clause when the are employed there. Remember- there is no dispute he knowingly provided and/or encouraged an underage woman to drink booze, then had some kind of sexual contact with her in a public restroom. Plenty enough for the Commish to punish him.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Once again, how is this Ben’s problem? The girl made it into the bar and was drinking before she met Ben, so he probably assumed that she was legal. The fact that she wasn’t reflects poorly on the bar and its bouncers, not on Ben.</p>
<p>Ben should do some personal reflection. I once read an article that said Ben was a guest of Arnold Palmer at Merion CC. Seems Ben behaved in a way that left Arnie a little miffed. Maybe Ben is the problem. I have been around extremely drunk young women in my day. I never felt it gave me the right to grope them or worse.
On another topic I have been a sports fan my entire life loved the NY Giants hated the NY Yankees but when the Giants team consisted recently of thugs and problem players I found I lost interest in them. So I can understand the issue with Steeler’s ownership considering shipping Ben out. On the other side I have a hard time hating the Yankees (as a Met fan I still can not root for them) since the team has so many classy players now.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Tom, I heard about that incident from a very reliable source and Arnie was, indeed, miffed. It happened at Laurel Valley, though, not Merion. I think the Roethlisberger stories in Pittsburgh itself are legendary in the business/restaurant/bar communities, and likely, mostly true. We have friends whose son is a high profile athlete in another sport in Pittsburgh, and the stories are certainly well-known to his teammates, some learned from personal experience.</p>
<p>I love the displacement people do. The issue is not and never has been him getting her drunk. As stated in the report, she was put in a locked hallway by a bodyguard. I forget if it was one of the cops who were there. BR came into the hallway. He forced her into a bathroom and assaulted her when she said no. The police failures - having their pictures taken with him, essentially cooperating in the provision of liquor to underage girls - tainted the case so much the DA couldn’t bring charges. </p>
<p>I’ve heard from reading NFL sites that not only are there 3 known sexual assaults but that he has been drunk and disorderly on more than one occasion. </p>
<p>But, the issue is that this guy is a sexual predator protected by his star status and even facilitated by the police. The NFL’s response was light, given that they suspended the black star player PacMan Jones for an entire year for frequenting strip clubs and being on the scene of a shooting and for being involved in a non-sexual form of assault on a stripper in a club. The black players - per stories leaked by the players union - see this as blunt favoritism for a white star QB because this guy would otherwise be in prison.</p>
<p>My bet, however, is that every Pittsburgh fan will find some reason to declare that BR is not only innocent but misunderstood, that these women enticed him, that they deserved it. Let it happen to your daughters. Let it be done by someone who doesn’t play sports. Then see if you are even slightly consistent. I’d bet not.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t think that BR would be in prison, at least in this case. The evidence just isn’t there. The girl/victim gave conflicting statements to the police about what happened, and wasn’t even sure if they had sex or not. She didn’t want to press charges. Her friends are the ones that pressed her to talk to the police, but they don’t know what happened either. The physical evidence just isn’t there.</p>
<p>I’m not saying that nothing happened; I think only BR knows what happened back there, and he may not even remember it if he was drunk enough. I just don’t think that they ever had a case.</p>
<p>As far as I"m concerned, anyone who’s as intoxicated as that young woman apparently was is not capable of true consent to sexual relations. It isn’t too much of a stretch to apply the words rape or sexual assault to having sex with someone in that condition. Even apart from the obvious disparities in age, size, strength, power, and privilege.</p>
<p>Any guy who thinks it’s OK to have sex with someone that intoxicated in a public bathroom, or defends that sort of behavior, is a guy I’d tell my daughter (if I had one) to stay far away from. Talk about a red flag!</p>
<p>He deserved the suspension. The Commissioner has very broad disciplinary powers that aren’t limited by what the legal system does or doesn’t decide to prosecute, and to compare this to the Duke lacrosse case is asinine.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So now rape is determined by BAC? If a .17 has sex with a .15, was the .17 actually raped?</p>
<p>Don’t have sex with someone you meet in a bar who’s that drunk, and you’ll never have to worry about the answer to that question, will you?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Easy to say when you’re sober. Maybe the solution is to make sure that you are more intoxicated then the person that you may be going home with?</p>
<p>No, rape is determined by lack of consent. If there is any doubt that a woman is not in any shape to give consent, then the “adult” needs to back off. Ben needs to learn how to back off and learn to act like a responsible adult. If this is what it takes - fine.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Right, and I wholeheartedly agree with this. The thing is, drunk people are able to say “yes” just as easily as sober people-and they do. Having sex with someone and waking up the next morning regretting your drunk decision does not mean that he “raped” you; it means that you got drunk and chose to make a poor decision.</p>
<p>Again, not saying this is what happened here. Like I said, only BR knows what happened in that bathroom.</p>
<p>Are you kidding Cuse(post 27)? How is it Ben’s problem if he was providing, maybe buying booze for someone under 21? You don’t see how it is ben’s problem?
In my state, that is illegal. Did you know, Cuse, that some people under 21 successfully sneak into bars? Did you know some states permit someone over 18 in a bar, even though they do not permit them to drink booze? Just being there, or even having a drink does not prove her age. Yes, the bar has some fault, but their fault does not excuse Ben’s fault. It just means more fault to go around.
It further becomes ben’s “problem” when the girl he was providing booze to accuses him of sexual assault. That would be true if she were 18 or 58.
I don’t have enough evidence to know if there was a rape, but I sure have enough evidence to see that
1)This is Ben’s problem and
2) it is because of Ben’s actions.</p>
<p>I see a big difference between “Ben’s Problem” and Ben’s illegal acts. In this case, there isn’t enough evidence to conclude he acted illegally but he did have stupid behavior that has caused him problems.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, it is entirely the bar’s fault. Yes, I’m aware that some bars are 18+, and I’m aware that some people have fake IDs. The thing is, it is the bar’s job to verify her age. If she is less than 21, she gets X’s on her hands, doesn’t get a wristband, etc. It is also their job to keep track of her and make sure that she doesn’t steal a wristband or wash the X’s off of her hands.</p>
<p>When I was a freshman I went into 18+ bars all the time and just washed the X’s off of my hands. More than a few times, the bouncers came up to me, asked me for my ID, and when they found out what I did, they kicked me out. That’s their job. </p>
<p>It isn’t BR’s job to be a bar’s bouncer. Now, if they had Big Ben at the door checking ID’s and he let this girl in knowing she was underage, and gave her a wristband, then it would be his problem. Their bouncer didn’t do his job, and he is the only one to blame (besides the girl herself) for the underage drinking that occurred.</p>
<p>Cuse, I don’t think it matters legally whether you do or don’t know that someone you’re plying with liquor is underage. It’s illegal to do that regardless of your purported lack of knowledge.</p>