Ron Washington v. Josh Hamilton

As the local sports talk shows begin to go heavy into Ron Washington talk, some of Washington’s defenders are starting to emerge. One of the more popular arguments among Wash’s defenders is to bring up Josh Hamilton–the Texas Rangers’ star outfielder who has had his own well documented struggles with drug abuse in the past, including a binge cycle last year prior to spring training. The logic is that the Rangers have remained supportive of Hamilton, in spite of his slip-up last spring, getting rid of Washington would create a double-standard.

Is there double-standard? Yes, and it’s well justified.

Josh Hamilton is a player.  Ron Washington is the MANAGER, and as such is held to a much higher standard. When a player decides to abuse drugs, he risks having a negative impact on his own personal performance. The manager is charged with making every critical decision for the team. If he chooses to abuse drugs, he risks having a negative impact on the entire organization. If we accept that cocaine impairs decision making abilities, the possible scenarios for disaster to strike with a manager under the influence become infinite.

When a player makes a mistake under the influence, the manager, assuming he is lucid, can take the necessary steps to remove the intoxicated player from the game and limit the damage to the team. If the manager is under the influence, there is no one directly able to replace him, unless he retires to the locker room on his own.

What do you guys think? Is it defensible to have a double-standard when dealing with Ron Washington and Josh Hamilton?