Skip to main content

Ray Lewis deer-antler spray controversy

There have been rumors and allegations that current Baltimore Ravens and future Hall-of-Fame linebacker Ray Lewis used deer-antler spray to heal more quickly from an injury. There have been mixed reports on whether or not the spray contains a substance which has been banned by the NFL. 

I guess my question is this. Please keep in mind I'm not pro- nor anti-Baltimore Ravens (or Ray Lewis). Year in and year out around this time of year, the only things I really pull for with regard to the Super Bowl are great commercials and a great game. Okay, now, I completely understand why it should be illegal for players of any sport to use a list of banned substances which may give them an unfair advantage when they're actually playing. However, it doesn't make a great deal of sense to me for these substances to be illegal if these players are injured and simply trying to recover more quickly. I know people whom have been prescribed steroids, because the doctors believed it would quicken the recovery process. They then weren't tested at their workplaces and fired due to consuming a banned substance which would have allowed for them to be fully productive at work more quickly. What sense would that make? So, why are these substances, which are banned by leagues, not allowed when players are injured and just trying to get back to work more quickly? It'd be better for the league, when star players are injured, for them to get back out and playing as soon as possible. 

In my opinion, whether or not Ray Lewis used the deer-antler spray while he was hampered with an injury and trying to quicken the recovery, I don't think the guy should be punished for it. I'd say that about any player. If they're actively participating in a sport and consume an illegal substance which lends them an advantage, then they should be suspended. However, if they're injured and just trying to get back to work faster, I don't see a problem with it. They should start being smart alecks and have their doctors write notes for these prescriptions to the league commissioners. 
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun
2 comments
Read more

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i
Post a Comment
Read more

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"
Post a Comment
Read more