"He (Woods) should have come out right away. Instead, he waited until it was politically correct to comment. The word 'lynch' ... there is no redeeming part of it," said Brown, appearing on the ESPN show, First Take.
In case you've been living under a rock, this all started near the end of the second round at the Mercedes-Benz Championship, Tilghman and analyst Nick Faldo were discussing possible challengers to Woods when Faldo suggested the players gang up on Woods.
"Lynch him in a back alley," Tilghman responded while laughing.
There was an immediate outcry, as there should have been and Ms. Tilghman was immediately suspended for two weeks. Almost as immediate was her sincere apology to one Tiger Woods who instantly accepted her apology and prepared to put the incident behind him and everyone else.Unfortunately Golfweek magazine ran an image of a noose on the cover of its January 19th issue to call attention to its coverage of the issue. Not the best of ideas and it landed editor Dave Seanor on the unemployment line.
Meanwhile people were clamoring for Tiger to do more, to show more bitterness and be upset about this whole issue. To his credit, Tiger was trying to move on.
But along comes Jimmy Brown...
With his comments, the proverbial can of worms is back open.
And Tiger is now forced to re-address the issue he (and many others) hoped was dead and buried.
"I thought the incident was pretty much handled and was over," Woods said. "I talked to Kelly. We discussed it for a little bit. She felt extremely bad about what happened. As I said earlier, she's been a great friend over the years, and everyone makes mistakes, and she certainly regrets what she said and what happened."
So my question to Jim Brown would be: What do you want Tiger to say and do right now in regards to this issue?
Everyone knows it was an insensitive remark. No one is disputing that. But it was between two people. Yes it was done for all the world to see but the bottom line it was one person saying something about another person. Not a whole group of people. But one person.
And that one person has accepted the apology as being sincere and earnest and forgave that person and was moving on.
Why must we rehash something that was resolved?
Do you ever think, Mr. Brown, that the world would be a little better place if we could forgive, NOT forget mind you... but forgive a little more and move on and NOT dwell on issues that are resolved?
The term "fanning the flames" comes to mind in regards to your jumping into this fray when for all intents and purposes, that fire fire was just a pile of smoldering ashes until you came along to resuscitate it.
Next time, Jimbo, just let sleeping Tigers lie.
'Til next time,
Steve O
No comments:
Post a Comment