|
|
Post by Gas Since 1957 on Jan 8, 2015 16:36:09 GMT
The part that I don't get is that Oldham pulled out due to a threat to rape a relative of one of their employees! How crazy is that - you dare to employ a rapist and I'll do a rape - honestly the internet is full of idiots! (me excepted of course!)
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2015 16:39:03 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2015 16:40:49 GMT
The part that I don't get is that Oldham pulled out due to a threat to rape a relative of one of their employees! How crazy is that - you dare to employ a rapist and I'll do a rape - honestly the internet is full of idiots! (me excepted of course!) The internet certainly is full of idiots yes. I think you'll find the reason was more to do with money though, whatever smokescreen OAFC are throwing up around this |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2015 16:41:31 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by clockendgas on Jan 8, 2015 16:41:37 GMT
I don't understand why any club would bother, I mean he's not world class. I would hope we wouldn't touch him with a barge-pole, morality aside it's just not worth the bother. That said he'll end up at Forest Green with the rest of the Parolees. With regards to Rovers I've been impressed with the calibre of bloke first and foremost that DC has signed. They all seem pretty decent and I don't think Evans fits the bill. totally agree, we dont need the bad pr, and i expect a few players wouldnt want him, think he would split the squad in two. its a no from me |
|
irishrover
Global Moderator
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,372 
|
Post by irishrover on Jan 8, 2015 16:56:09 GMT
Not withstanding any personal objections and the problems it would cause with sponsors, fans and other players in the dressing room I don't understand why anyone would sign a player who was still involved in a high profile legal case like this.
That's the point here. With someone like Lee Hughes (and I didn't approve and would find it hard to continue going if Rovers had signed him) the situation was at least a bit simpler; he did a horrible thing, he served his time, gave what I thought was an extremely half hearted apology, came out and there was a kerfuffle about him signing that lasted a week and then basically it was a matter for the consciences of clubs/fans involved because the wider publicity died. So it was a sort of rip the bandaid effect -but once that was done the lasting consequences to the clubs involved was limited.
This one is not going to go away - it's not a case that he's done his time and can get on with it now because he's still got a live case being contested which is going to generate an awful lot of publicity. Why would you want that distraction for the club or the player? If he fails, you have to go through the whole thing again and will be accused with some justification of standing by and supporting a rapist. It's not tenable - I'm not surprised sponsors are pulling out right, left and centre. Whether he should or should not have a future in football is clearly debateable. But I don't think there's a hope in hell of him getting a contract in English football until some kind of closure has been reached on the legal aspect of this and that seems entirely right to me. He's obviously entitled to try and clear his name if he wants to but I don't think he can expect a club to support him while he's doing it (which they would effectively be doing).
|
|
LJG
Peter Beadle
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 969
|
Post by LJG on Jan 8, 2015 16:59:33 GMT
Funny innit? Phil Taylor was runner up for BBC Sports Personality of the year in 2010 but they didn't prefix his introduction with "Two Time Convict of Sexual Assault: Phil 'The Power' Taylor!"
The Ched Evans argument is simply a lightning rod for irrationality - the terms of his licence don't prevent him being employed as a footballer, the FA have no by-law which prevents him being registered as a player.
People talk about footballers as role models for children but who are John Terry, Marlon King, David Pipe, Luke McCormick and Lee Hughes role models for?
People say he wouldn't be allowed to be a teacher or a solicitor - that's because those professions have a code of conduct: since the footballers code of conduct apparently permits calling some "a black c**t", bottling someone into a coma and killing someone's children while drunk before absconding I hardly think the analogy stands.
If there is an argument against Evans being allowed to play, it's against the FA and not any club nor the player himself. Why is one individual being pursued above all others?
The matter of remorse and rehabilitation is complete fallacious on both sides of the argument - guilty or not, remorseful or not we have a penal system which operates on a retributative model so rehabilitation is totally irrelevant: remorse or otherwise is considered at the sentencing stage, he's been sentenced, he's been released on licence, nothing he's trying to do changes any of that.
|
|
strung out
Paul Hardyman
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 758
|
Post by strung out on Jan 8, 2015 17:00:07 GMT
The part that I don't get is that Oldham pulled out due to a threat to rape a relative of one of their employees! How crazy is that - you dare to employ a rapist and I'll do a rape - honestly the internet is full of idiots! (me excepted of course!) Oldham were contacted by police and said no such threats had been made. |
|
|
|
Post by Gas Since 1957 on Jan 8, 2015 17:09:58 GMT
The part that I don't get is that Oldham pulled out due to a threat to rape a relative of one of their employees! How crazy is that - you dare to employ a rapist and I'll do a rape - honestly the internet is full of idiots! (me excepted of course!) Oldham were contacted by police and said no such threats had been made. So BBC News was talking rubbish then when they said the Police are investigating the threats. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2015 17:11:21 GMT
Yet 'sponsors' queue up to fund the latest Roman Polanski films? Graham Rix returned to football after serving time for doing the dirty with an underage girl? Footballers who have killed people are playing again. An actor who were convicted of murder appeared on national television in Eastenders..........yet not a peep from anyone? Double standards anyone? Personally I've never sponsored a Roman Polanski film, supported a club in which Graham Rix is involved, or been a fan of Eastenders, so not guilty... did you cheer jocky alexander ? |
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Jan 8, 2015 17:11:39 GMT
Not withstanding any personal objections and the problems it would cause with sponsors, fans and other players in the dressing room I don't understand why anyone would sign a player who was still involved in a high profile legal case like this. That's the point here. With someone like Lee Hughes (and I didn't approve and would find it hard to continue going if Rovers had signed him) the situation was at least a bit simpler; he did a horrible thing, he served his time, gave what I thought was an extremely half hearted apology, came out and there was a kerfuffle about him signing that lasted a week and then basically it was a matter for the consciences of clubs/fans involved because the wider publicity died. So it was a sort of rip the bandaid effect -but once that was done the lasting consequences to the clubs involved was limited. This one is not going to go away - it's not a case that he's done his time and can get on with it now because he's still got a live case being contested which is going to generate an awful lot of publicity. Why would you want that distraction for the club or the player? If he fails, you have to go through the whole thing again and will be accused with some justification of standing by and supporting a rapist. It's not tenable - I'm not surprised sponsors are pulling out right, left and centre. Whether he should or should not have a future in football is clearly debateable. But I don't think there's a hope in hell of him getting a contract in English football until some kind of closure has been reached on the legal aspect of this and that seems entirely right to me. He's obviously entitled to try and clear his name if he wants to but I don't think he can expect a club to support him while he's doing it (which they would effectively be doing). Putting aside his crime at the minute, I agree Irish. This is not done and dusted. He is currently involved in procedings to clear his name and it will only serve to cause distractions, stress and ill feeling whilst this is going on. What manager in their right mind would want that sort of nonsense floating around the dressing room and on the terraces. Ched Evans has every right to go and work. Regardless of whether that should be football or nor, the best thing for him to do right now is keep his head down and away from the emotional and sometimes irrational circus that is football. Currently Ched Evans is sampling a fraction of the distress that he has helped cause the victim. Personally that is the least he should get given what the victim has had to put up from the Ched Evan’s supporters (whether in his name or not) |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2015 17:20:10 GMT
Not saying for one minute Rovers should sign him but surely Lee Hughes, Pipe & now club captain(!) McCormick shouldn't have been allowed back on a football pitch having been convicted of serious crimes? Evans clearly can't apologise at present as the crime is still subject to a case review, if he apologises surely that destroys his defence? But as he filmed himself committing the act, and then showed his mates the clip on his mobile phone, this alone would prove that the act took place. The only issue to be resolved is whether the young lady consented. The jury at the first trial decided that she had not. As I remember it she did give consent to another male, but not to Evans. If he had not been so stupid and arrogant as to show the mobile phone clip to others, who then took to social media and mocked the victim, then I doubt that she would have pursued the matter. As I understand it the basis of his appeal is that the heavily intoxicated lady did give her consent. Highly endearing that. his 2 mates filmed, not him the appeal notes |
|
|
|
Post by warmleygas on Jan 8, 2015 17:21:12 GMT
Not saying for one minute Rovers should sign him but surely Lee Hughes, Pipe & now club captain(!) McCormick shouldn't have been allowed back on a football pitch having been convicted of serious crimes? Evans clearly can't apologise at present as the crime is still subject to a case review, if he apologises surely that destroys his defence? But as he filmed himself committing the act, and then showed his mates the clip on his mobile phone, this alone would prove that the act took place. The only issue to be resolved is whether the young lady consented. The jury at the first trial decided that she had not. As I remember it she did give consent to another male, but not to Evans. If he had not been so stupid and arrogant as to show the mobile phone clip to others, who then took to social media and mocked the victim, then I doubt that she would have pursued the matter. As I understand it the basis of his appeal is that the heavily intoxicated lady did give her consent. Highly endearing that. Eh? So did I read this right? She let some other bloke do her and then he did her after??? So they were all in the room together? I dunno if he's guilty or not but the girl hardly sounds in a position to take moral high ground. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2015 17:25:17 GMT
But as he filmed himself committing the act, and then showed his mates the clip on his mobile phone, this alone would prove that the act took place. The only issue to be resolved is whether the young lady consented. The jury at the first trial decided that she had not. As I remember it she did give consent to another male, but not to Evans. If he had not been so stupid and arrogant as to show the mobile phone clip to others, who then took to social media and mocked the victim, then I doubt that she would have pursued the matter. As I understand it the basis of his appeal is that the heavily intoxicated lady did give her consent. Highly endearing that. Eh? So did I read this right? She let some other bloke do her and then he did her after??? So they were all in the room together? I dunno if he's guilty or not but the girl hardly sounds in a position to take moral high ground. The crux of the case is that she was hardly in a position to do anything by the time Evans got to the room. |
|
LJG
Peter Beadle
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 969
|
Post by LJG on Jan 8, 2015 17:26:59 GMT
Oldham were contacted by police and said no such threats had been made. So BBC News was talking rubbish then when they said the Police are investigating the threats. Well if Oldham were contacted by police then it seems that they were investigating it, so ... no. |
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Jan 8, 2015 17:28:38 GMT
So BBC News was talking rubbish then when they said the Police are investigating the threats. Well if Oldham were contacted by police then it seems that they were investigating it, so ... no. but GMP have subsequently said no complaints have been made.
|
|
brizzle
Lindsay Parsons
No Buy . . . No Sell!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,293
|
Post by brizzle on Jan 8, 2015 17:28:52 GMT
But as he filmed himself committing the act, and then showed his mates the clip on his mobile phone, this alone would prove that the act took place. The only issue to be resolved is whether the young lady consented. The jury at the first trial decided that she had not. As I remember it she did give consent to another male, but not to Evans. If he had not been so stupid and arrogant as to show the mobile phone clip to others, who then took to social media and mocked the victim, then I doubt that she would have pursued the matter. As I understand it the basis of his appeal is that the heavily intoxicated lady did give her consent. Highly endearing that. his 2 mates filmed, not him the appeal notesI posted ''he filmed himself committing the act,'' and you have now posted ''his 2 mates filmed, not him.''I stand corrected, but you get my point and gist . . . don't you? |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2015 17:30:40 GMT
I posted ''he filmed himself committing the act,'' and you have now posted ''his 2 mates filmed, not him.''I stand corrected, but you get my point and gist . . . don't you? oh yes, this sort of thing goes on all over the place, my take on it is shes peed off the film got shown |
|
brizzle
Lindsay Parsons
No Buy . . . No Sell!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,293
|
Post by brizzle on Jan 8, 2015 17:31:18 GMT
But as he filmed himself committing the act, and then showed his mates the clip on his mobile phone, this alone would prove that the act took place. The only issue to be resolved is whether the young lady consented. The jury at the first trial decided that she had not. As I remember it she did give consent to another male, but not to Evans. If he had not been so stupid and arrogant as to show the mobile phone clip to others, who then took to social media and mocked the victim, then I doubt that she would have pursued the matter. As I understand it the basis of his appeal is that the heavily intoxicated lady did give her consent. Highly endearing that. his 2 mates filmed, not him the appeal notesBy the way, the link doesn't work. |
|
LPGas
Stuart Taylor
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,240
|
Post by LPGas on Jan 8, 2015 17:35:29 GMT
If the appeal finds him not guilty there will be a scramble for him. I think that if he had accepted what he did was wrong and made an apology (a heart felt one) then he would have been back at Sheffield United. Rape is very, very wrong and often destroys the life of it's victims, but in my mind it still doesn't compare with having your family killed by a drunk, who on release from a short prison sentence is back on the field.
Meanwhile what about the younger footballers, one of which was Brendan Rogers son, did they not do a similar thing?
|
|
