Culture of Corruption

On the left here is a picture from a recent soccer game played in the English Premier League. Ryan Shawcross (on the right) is shown sliding through Aaron Ramsey, breaking his leg in the process (you can see it if you look closely....but you may not want to). From one point of view, this was a terrible accident. Shawcross had no intention of injuring Ramsey, certainly not this badly. He was in tears following the incident (and after being red-carded and sent off). What's most interesting isn't the injury itself, but the discussions in the aftermath. You see, while Ramsey will be out of action indefinitely (but at least a few months), Ryan Shawcross was immediately "called up" to the English national team. That led to a flurry of articles and opinions about the merit of such a promotion. On one hand, you had folks calling for Shawcross to be suspended for his violent conduct. They argued that Shawcross had no business being on the English squad so soon after committing a horrific foul. On the other hand, you had folks arguing that Shawcross is a "fine lad" who was simply involved in a horrible accident, and shouldn't have to suffer anything more for it.

So which side is true? On which side do we find justice? The answer is the former. Shawcross has no business being anywhere near the English national team right now, and this incident is just the latest symptom of a growing (in my opinion) corruption not only in soccer, but in all sports and Western culture itself.

Those who defend Shawcross typically point out that soccer is a physical game, and accidents happen. They often talk about "being manly" in defense and "getting stuck in." A few hard kicks to the shins of your opponents is just a way to let them know you're there. OK, but if you hold to that you cannot pretend to be surprised when such behavior leads to a brutal injury. Shawcross may not have intended to break Ramsey's leg, but he was performing an inherently dangerous action and must be held responsible for its results, regardless of his intention. He obviously felt no compunction about violently fouling his opponent, so how can we absolve him of guilt when the result was worse than he intended? It is dishonest to pretend that the injury was simply an accident.

I'm going to borrow an excellent analogy from Paul Gardner of Soccer America. If I drive like a maniac along the freeway, honking my horn to scare folks out of the way just so I can get where I'm going a little faster than normal, should I not be held responsible when I cause a wreck? "I never intended to hurt anyone, I just wanted to get home quickly," isn't a valid excuse. When Bart Simpson walked around punching the air in front of him and warning that he wasn't responsible for anyone who happened to get hit because he needed to move his arm... it was a joke. But I wonder if people understand that anymore. It is completely dishonest and immature to behave poorly, and then try to absolve your responsibility for that behavior.

You see, this is not just limited to Ryan Shawcross and a bad tackle. Dishonesty, immaturity, and corruption are rampant, and I no longer see anyone truly standing up against it. During a soccer broadcast some time ago, commentator (and former US national team captain... and apparent philanderer) John Harkes gushed praise on a player for trying to fool the ref into giving him a throw-in when the ball should have gone to the other team. Harkes said something to the effect of, "That's great. You gotta try to get every edge. I always tell players on my teams to do that." Harkes' statement was not challenged by his co-commentator.

The examples go on and on. Today you can hardly watch a game without somebody diving and flopping around on the ground even when they've barely been touched, hoping to win a penalty or other harsh judgment out of the referee. This behavior is often derided by commentators, but how is it any worse than defenders hacking down an attacker simply to slow down the opponent, or standing in front of the ball to delay a free-kick? Those behaviors are often lauded as "professional fouls" or "being a gamer."

The latest prominent example came from a recent World Cup qualifier. France was playing Ireland with the winner advancing to the finals in South Africa this summer. The winning goal came courtesy of a blatant handball by Thierry Henry (the incident is pictured to the right). The referee was blocked by a mass of players and did not see the handball, and the goal was allowed to stand. The Irish went ballistic, as one would expect, but had to go on with the game. They showed exemplary sportsmanship and integrity. Henry and the French did not. But while the uproar was significant, nothing official was done. Even more damning, many folks used the incident as an argument for more officials, or for more replay review of incidents. While those options might be helpful, isn't there some responsibility on the part of the players to police themselves? The unstated theme of those articles demanding more officials and technology is that players will TRY to cheat, and will only obey the rules when the whistle is blown on them. Even worse, the assumption seems to be that players SHOULD cheat, and it's up to the referees to stop them.

To his credit, Henry later came out in favor of replaying the whole game. But it never should have come to that. Everyone screws up now and then. In the heat of the moment, it's understandable that Henry would stick his hand out just a little, hoping to stop the ball so he could get a shot on goal. Sometimes your body just reacts. But as soon as he realized what had happened, Henry should've instructed his teammates (He was the captain of the team, remember) to immediately allow the Irish to tie the game. That would've been the honest and sporting move, and it wouldn't require extra officials or replay cameras. But imagine for a moment if that could've even taken place? Would the other players have agreed to do so? Would the coach have allowed it? And what would the reaction have been in the general public? I greatly fear that had Henry performed such a noble act, in France he would've been turned into a pariah. And for those who think differently, take a look at these other recent incidents, and gauge your response.

This is not just a soccer problem. To wit:

• Bill Belichick and the New England Patriots were recently exposed as having illegally filmed their opponents while they won Super Bowls. While the public at-large criticized him (and the team) in scathing terms, how many Patriots fans offered to surrender their titles? How many demanded a public apology or resignation? By contrast, how many folks did you see (especially on TV) that just scoffed at any such suggestion, proclaiming that "everyone does it," or "if you're not cheating, you're not trying." The whistle-blower, Eric Mangini, was excoriated as a turncoat and tattle-tale.
  
• Scads of baseball players took illegal steroids for a decade or so before they were finally exposed by Jose Canseco. They knew it was illegal. They knew it affected games. They did it anyway. And when they were exposed, how many came right out and admitted wrong? All we got were lies and mumbles about discussing the future. And while the public outcry was large, what really changed? Aren't the users still just popping homers and pointing "scoreboard?" The whistle-blower, Jose Canseco, was excoriated as a lying jerk (although he's been right about just about everything he claimed).
  
• The NBA has been indirectly fixing games for years. Everyone knows it, but it continues simply because everyone is making money. Michael Jordan shoves Bryon Russell out of the way to hit a title-winning shot, and everyone admires his "competitiveness." Sacramento and Portland are eliminated by the Lakers in the early 2000s thanks to some ridiculously one-siding officiating, and everyone buys another Shaq or Kobe t-shirt. The whistle-blower, referee Tim Donaghy, was excoriated as a "rogue element" with a gambling problem and a jerk.
  
• Collegiate "amateur" athletics is a joke. Everyone knows it. Everyone makes excuses. Have fans of USC stopped supporting their team even though the program is rife with payouts and other rules violations? Have people stopped buying Reggie Bush shirts because he accepted a house and money to play at USC (and illegally pushed Leinart into the endzone against Notre Dame, but that's another story)? Have the fans at other big schools (and small) stopped cheering their teams when wrongs were exposed, or have they pointed the finger at other programs and whined about being unfairly persecuted? There has been no USC whistle-blower, because apparently everyone has been bought off or is afraid to come out (and who would blame them? Look at what happened to the other whistle-blowers....)

I could go on and on, but you get the point. And while in each of these instances there has been some type of outcry, what has been the consequence? Nothing has changed, except those brave enough to dare question the corruption have been largely ruined (partly of their own actions, it must be said). And we haven't even ventured outside of sports yet! What about the recent "climate-gate" scandal? Instead of apologies and corrections, we get Al Gore telling us that those folks who fabricated data were just under a lot of pressure and still empirically correct. What about Mark Sanford dancing off to have an affair in Argentina, then retaining his job as governor of South Carolina (only returning public money used to finance his affair after a FOIA request revealed it)? What about President Obama railing against "greedy" wall street executives, then appointing a number of folks to his cabinet that were exposed as having cheated on their taxes?

Just to be clear, I'm not advocating being a legalistic Martinet. I'm not condemning anyone who goes 2 miles over the speed limit. I'm talking about honesty vs. hypocrisy. There is no shame anymore in our society, and it starts with us. When was the last time you felt shame? I have to admit I'm too defensive whenever anyone points out a mistake I've made. I'm too quick to point the finger or make excuses when I come up short. I'm part of the problem.

And how did we get to this point as a society? How did we get to the point that corruption is so widespread and even worse, so widely accepted? There is a phrase to describe the attitude of far too many people these days, and it is a philosophy that has battled for prominence in all cultures and over all time periods. That phrase is:

The ends justify the means

According to Ryan Shawcross (and his defenders), the end of playing strong defense justifies the means of playing like a reckless fool and breaking opponents' legs. According to John Harkes, the end of getting an extra throw-in justifies lying to the referee. According to Thierry Henry, the end of qualifying for the World Cup justifies an illegal handball. According to Bill Belichick, the end of winning a Super Bowl justifies making illegal videos. According to many baseball players, big home runs and big-money contracts justify using illegal steroids. According to Al Gore, protecting the environment (and making big money on the lecture circuit) justifies falsifying data and lying in reports.

Well, I'm saying (writing, actually) that it doesn't. That philosophy is 100% wrong. The ends do NOT justify the means. And you know who actually espoused that a long time ago? The man/Son of God himself, Jesus Christ. In the sermon on the mount, Jesus tells us that it's not just the outward action that counts, but the inner thoughts as well. It's not just the big commandments that matter, but "whoever breaks the least of these commandments and teaches others to do so will be called least in the kingdom of heaven."

So what are we to do?

We have to start making folks accountable for their actions. We have to stop buying t-shirts from cheats. We have to stop cheering for liars. We have to withhold support from the corrupt and dishonest. And it won't be easy, because the corrupt and dishonest are...... ourselves.

I have to stop making excuses whenever I do something wrong. I have to stop turning a blind eye to wrongdoing performed by people that I like. If my political party does something dishonest and wrong, I have to call them out on it, and demand they be responsible. If my favorite football team cheats, I have to call them out on it and hold them responsible. If the US soccer team wins the World Cup via cheating, I have to call them out on it and not celebrate a tainted "victory."

The ends do NOT justify the means!

SAH