Yes, Its probably for the best. I think deactivating a player of an team can give good distance. I think if a player has done wrong and really needs time away it should be given to that player. I feel that the teams that do this really do a wonderful job
Recent weeks brought information about several athletes being arrested or charged with assault and abuse convictions. This rising level of violence is quite disturbing and asks for high concern. Firstly, all of the accused athletes are excellent players with huge amount of fans, thus strict punishment has to be in place to discourage supporters of similar behaviour. Secondly for some reason sport fellows are excessive violent, why? Do they not feel untouchable because of their fame and money?
The words 'innocent until proven guilty' still have some meaning - taking someone off the team, even temporarily, is a punishment, and nobody should be punished for something that they may not have done. If we start doing that, then it opens the door to malicious allegations made by people who know that even if they don't prove it, they can hurt the person concerned.
It would be a mistake to automatically deactivate professional athletes for alleged assault, as every situation is different and not every case of alleged assault is representative of actual assault or crime. Unless there is proof immediately available, an athlete should not be deactivated until he is actually charged with a crime and not merely accused of one.