Press "Enter" to skip to content

Editorial: Standard suspensions reflect disturbing trend

When senior basketball player Austin Barnes was arrested and charged with domestic abuse, fans of the men’s team were worried Bradley would be without its lone senior for an extended period of time.

Barnes was arrested and charged with domestic battery, a misdemeanor, in August, and in October the team announced a minimum three game suspension for the forward. Barnes would be suspended for exactly three games, one of which included an exhibition game against Augustana, a game the Braves lost.

Two weeks ago, junior Warren Jones was arrested at Big Al’s strip club and was charged with obstruction of identification and criminal trespass. Jones was suspended indefinitely, a suspension that ended up matching Barnes’ three-game punishment.

Although Jones was active for Bradley’s game Wednesday, he did not enter the game for the Braves. Coach Geno Ford said after the game that decision was not made based on the suspension, instead saying it was more based on effort and preparation in practice.

The length of those suspensions is initially what this column was intended to be about.
However, there is no possible way to compare the two crimes the Bradley players mentioned above allegedly committed. Yet, it would appear that is exactly what Bradley has done by suspending the two players for the same amount of time.

The suspensions would appear to show that the crimes are equal when, in fact, they are radically different.

It is important to note that neither Barnes nor Jones have been convicted of anything. Both players could, in theory, be found innocent or have the charges dropped. For his part, Barnes faces a conveniently-timed bench trial March 18, a week after the season ends.

However, while investigating this piece, a potentially disturbing trend emerged.

In November 2003, then-senior Jabbar Battle was arrested and charged with domestic battery after what was initially called an altercation on campus. Battle averaged 4.6 points and 3.2 rebounds for Bradley the season before, but at the start of the 2003-2004 season found himself suspended indefinitely.

Battle would eventually be sentenced to one year’s probation, which he completed to have the charge dismissed.

In this case, “indefinitely” equated to a two game suspension. At the time, The Scout wrote an opinion piece calling the length of this punishment an injustice. Battle was suspended for two games, both of which came against so-called no-name opponents, similar to how Barnes’ suspension was handled.

If it were limited to just those two cases, it would be one thing. Five years later, however, the exact same thing happened again.

Senior Daniel Ruffin was arrested and charged with domestic battery after allegedly assaulting a woman at an apartment. Ruffin, like Barnes and Battle, was initially suspended indefinitely. Ruffin’s indefinite suspension lasted two games.

Eventually, he also was sentenced to probation, and like Battle, the charge would be reduced from domestic battery.

So, now we’re left asking questions. Does Bradley seriously believe that domestic battery is a comparable crime to illegal trespass? Are three games the maximum suspension Bradley’s coaching staff is willing to apply, regardless of the crime?

This is not meant to be an indictment on any individual player. The players mentioned above have every right to a fair trial and are innocent until proven otherwise.

The question here is why these suspensions were given out.

Just like our athletes don’t wear “one size fits all” uniforms, these “one size fits all” punishments doled out by the Athletics Department do not seem appropriate. At this point, you have to wonder, is it less of a Bradley basketball issue, or more of a Bradley Athletics issue?

Copyright © 2023, The Scout, Bradley University. All rights reserved.
The Scout is published by members of the student body of Bradley University. Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the University.