We’ve known for years that the liberal media loves to foment fear, anger, and disaster only to later shrug their shoulders, turn their palms skyward, and wonder what everyone is freaking out about, as the anger of the opposing sides that they have fueled turns over into a wildfire of uncontrollable rage and conspiracy theory.
Until now, I thought that was strictly a mainstream liberal media thing. Now we have tangible proof the sports media is just as guilty.
On Monday’s edition of Around the Horn on ESPN, analyst J.A. Adande was asked whether he bought or sold Redskin Jason Hatcher’s claim that calls --specifically an illegal hit call on Redskin Chris Culliver-- were due to bias on the part of officials toward the Redskins name:
Adande: I’m selling the nickname being the reason for that call but I’m buying that as being an example that maybe that nickname is passed its expiration date. If the players are thinking that, then guess what? Maybe Dan Snyder should change it so they won’t have calls go against them for no other reason, like it’s really offensive to a lot of people.
I guess “a lot of people” qualifies as nine percent in the world of J.A. Adande? Nine can be a lot, I guess.
But more importantly, why is the notion that bias amongst the officials towards the Redskins is some far-fetched idea? Former official Mike Carey asked and received permission from the league to not officiate Redskins games. Specifically, because he felt the name was offensive.
If an official cares enough to ask off Redskins games because he thinks the name is offensive, why is it crazy to think a call or two might go against them for the same reason?
No one knows why the official threw the flag on Chris Culliver. The call was atrocious. But so were the calls that went called and uncalled when the Lions played the Cowboys in the playoffs last year. Is the league anti-lion?
But what we do know is that the sports media’s cottage industry of Redskins hate has now officially succeeded in making bias from the officials a credible claim.
