ban and nothing more because his sexual misconduct was
non-violent in nature. You can’t acknowledge one aspect of
judgement and then disregard the other, which is what the NFL
is doing, and it is what you are doing as well

The NFL hired an independent disciplinary officer to investigate and
provide a decision on the case without bias or prejudice. She gave a judgement
that was based on fairness, and she implemented a disciplinary standard in regards
to the case, because the NFL lacks one.

Her words: “ 46 I am bound “by standards of fairness and consistency of treatment among players similarly situated.”47 The NFL argues that consistency is not possible, because there are no similarly-situated players. By ignoring past decisions because none involve “similar” conduct, however, the NFL is not just equating violent conduct with non-violent conduct, but has elevated the importance of the latter without any substantial EVIDENCE to support its position.”

She also acknowledged the fact that Watson missed the entire 2021 season, so that was
a form of time served.

You can’t acknowledge one part of the judgement and disregard the other. That would be
selectivity, unfairness and pure bias.