Accidents are No Djoking Matter

 After gauging all the pros and cons of sharing our most valuable opinion on the matter, we decided to weigh in a week after Serbian tennis player Novak Djokovic accidentally hit a line umpire with a ball and was removed from the US Open. Our verdict? The Joker, indeed, deserves being suspended. Many armchair umpires believe that since Djokovic's action was unintentional, he should have been spared. In response, we summon. Harvard sociologist Robert K Merton's 1936 paper, "The Unanticipated Consequences of Purposive Social Action' a.k.a the theory of unintented consequences. Yes, three-time Us Open winner had no intention to hurt the official. But the world's No.1 ranked player does have a history of rash, impulsive on-court behaviour. So, while many have argued that sports in general would be in peril if unintentional action causing injuries was penalised, the risk Djokovic poses to others when he b'emotes' is high. A person, for instance, having a few drinks taking to the wheel of a car may not want to hit a pedestrian. But he certainly increases the chances of such an 'accident' occurring. Hence the illegality of drinking and driving and driving. Hence the nudge to Djokovic to calm down while playing. This is the unintended lesson we consciously glean from the tennis court of law.