On Sunday after the Cleveland Browns lost to Washington Kellen Winslow Jr. went public with details of the medical issue – a staph infection – that kept him out of the team’s game a week earlier.

He said he was upset with the team because it wanted to keep the infection quiet and blamed him for not wanting it revealed, and saved particular venom for general manager Phil Savage for not calling on him while he was hospitalized.

“I heard from [head coach] Romeo Crennel and I heard from my position coach [Alfredo Roberts] when I was in the Clinic. I heard from my teammates. But I never heard from the main man – Phil Savage – and that really disappoints me. Sometimes I don’t even feel a part of this team,” according to an Associated Press story posted at www.nfl.com (and linked to above).

On Tuesday the Browns issued a statement announcing that they have suspended Winslow without pay for one game.

“The Cleveland Browns are committed to winning and taking care of our players,” the statement on www.clevelandbrowns.com Web site starts. “We are also committed to protecting the privacy of our players, particularly with regard to medical issues. To that end, following discussions with Kellen Winslow and his representation, the Browns agreed to make every effort to maintain the confidentiality of his recent medical condition.”

Okay so far.

“As an organization we have worked hard to ensure the safety and well-being of our players. Consistent with this effort, we have consulted with the team’s medical experts to ensure that any instances of staph infections are evaluated and treated thoroughly and expeditiously, and in accordance with the recommended standard of care,” the statement, attributed to Savage.

Okay, that’s fine. No issues, although there have been a half-dozen players who have had staph infections over the last couple years.

Finally, it continues later: “Kellen has expressed his desire to be a productive member of the Cleveland Browns. His comments and behavior on Sunday evening, however, were unwarranted, inappropriate, and unnecessarily disparaging to our organization. His statements brought unjustified negative attention to our organization, and violated the team-first concept of our football squad. Therefore, disciplinary action will be taken in the form of a one-game suspension without pay for conduct detrimental to the club.”

This is the part that concerns me. Winslow raised his concerns about the safety of the locker room and revealed, of his own volition, information about what caused his hospitalization. It seems to me that the specifics of his illness – and whether or not they should remain private – are his business and his business alone.

Yes, Winslow was indelicate in his statements about the team and Savage. No question – but I’m not sure he’s wrong in wishing that the general manager of the team might check in once or twice.

As far as stating “There’s obviously a problem (with staph) and we have to fix it,” as he told the Associated Press. “It’s unfortunate, because it happens time and time again,” isn’t Winslow simply stating a truth?

A half-dozen staph infections since 2005 is a lot. And while the team may have legitimately tried to solve whatever problems might be causing the issue it would still seem as though Winslow speaks the truth in saying something more should be done.

I’ve never been a huge fan of Winslow’s. He was a little too brash entering the league for my tastes. But I don’t think a player gives away the right to speak his mind just because he signs a contract to play a game. He didn’t threaten anyone, he didn’t attack anyone. He simply stated an opinion.

In this case – and please tell me if you think there’s something I’m missing here – in this case, I don’t think the punishment fit the crime.