Jump to content

The New Raith Rovers Thread


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Raith Against The Machine said:

There's a real lack of nuance when it comes to discussing this case. Too many people want to reduce it to a black and white "guilty" and "innocent" as if it's a case of mistaken identity. Like the two possible scenarios are that David Goodwillie is a rapist, or he was at home reading his bible. He's either 100% guilty or 100% not guilty. 

And that's just not the case. The facts of the case may not have met the appropriate threshold for a criminal conviction (because of the need for corroboration, such as I understand it), but there's much more information about the events of the night. The actions of David Goodwillie, as detailed in the civil case, are the actions of a deeply despicable person. 

Too many people are choosing to be wilfully ignorant. They're choosing to take the headline "not successfully prosecuted in criminal court" because the person in question can score goals, without taking on board the additional information available. 

The justice system has to stick by very specific rules and standards. That's the best set of guidelines we have to keep all of us safe, both as victims and potentially as suspects of crime. 

But the rest of us aren't bound by that. We can take the information that's in the public domain and reach our own conclusions. 

It's deeply, deeply depressing that so many people are willing to go to bat for despicable scum like David Goodwillie just because he's good at football. 

That last paragraph was succinct and to the point. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can I add that I read the evidence the last time that we were linked with him and agree that there was wrongdoings.

Let's be realistic though...

Someone who is so insistent of his innocence to the extent that he appealed the initial verdict isn't going to show remorse (even for his actions leading up to the allegations) as he'd see it as an admission of guilt.

I'm not saying he shouldn't, more that he won't. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You hear stories from the press about two folk going home drunk and the next morning the woman feels she was too drunk to consent, and you think the two of them have got drunk and done something at least one of then regrets but its a mistake not a crime.

That's clearly not the case here. The two of them at the very least plied her with drink, obtained a key to a flat to take her to, assured a bouncer they would look after her, and preyed on her. I believe in second chances for most people, but the level of premeditation here makes me think he has some deep deep character flaws. I wouldnt touch him for all the reasons previously stated, and because I dont think he is the kind of character we want in the dressing room.

Edited by Halbeath Raith Rover
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Raithie said:

There is a possibility we weren't even linked with Goodwillie in the first place? Could have just been lazy journalism with it being pulled from this thread several pages ago and it suddenly grew arms and legs. 

The journo in question is normally pretty reliable, it seems more likely that someone at Raith has been weighing it up, it's no secret that you're a good, goalscoring striker away from being heavy favourites for the league, has someone thought that would sway the Raith faithful to be more forgiving for signing him? Sadly a few idiots have taken that view, however the vast majority are quite rightfully not having it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just wish folk would stop giving the Goodwillie stuff oxygen. All that's doing is giving the press more ammunition to fill column inches with pure conjecture at a time when they have much less to write about their beloved Premiership.

Just look how the Dundee Courier is all over this today and not all of it, by any means, on the sports' pages. None of this 'rumourmongering'  is doing the club any good when the full focus should be on being fully prepared for a derby battle on Sunday.

Edited by embow
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Grant228 said:

The journo in question is normally pretty reliable, it seems more likely that someone at Raith has been weighing it up, it's no secret that you're a good, goalscoring striker away from being heavy favourites for the league, has someone thought that would sway the Raith faithful to be more forgiving for signing him? Sadly a few idiots have taken that view, however the vast majority are quite rightfully not having it. 

We're a fair bit more than that away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this whole thing is going to end up being a master stroke by the club. Everyone knows we need a prolific striker but they’ve lined up someone who’s not prolific and are worried that the fans might moan. They start a rumour about wanting to sign Goodwillie, everyone goes crazy. They then announce the non prolific striker and everyone is over the moon that it wasn’t Goodwillie!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this whole thing is going to end up being a master stroke by the club. Everyone knows we need a prolific striker but they’ve lined up someone who’s not prolific and are worried that the fans might moan. They start a rumour about wanting to sign Goodwillie, everyone goes crazy. They then announce the non prolific striker and everyone is over the moon that it wasn’t Goodwillie!




So Gullan it is then……prolific strikers don’t grow on trees ya know…
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, bullywee2010 said:

I would fully agree with the above if Goodwillie had been tried and convicted in a criminal court rather than a civil court and if that had been the case I would've wanted him nowhere near my club. However, from speaking with people who were involved with the case and others in the law profession more generally the consensus is the Goodwillie case is the perfect example of why these sort of cases should not be allowed to be tried in a civil court. The fact someone with no criminal record for an alleged rape and who is not on the sex offenders register can have their career ruined by being branded a rapist is wrong. Ultimately, nobody knows what happened that night other than those present and if he maintains he is innocent then why should he have to fake repentance to be able to sign for clubs. The same arguments were made about Ched Evans down south who showed no remorse once released from prison, yet when found not guilty on appeal there was no apology from those such as Jessica Ennis that had prevented him (an innocent man) resuming his football career.

I am of course bias and want Goodwillie to stay at Clyde but that does not outdo what I think is an unfair restriction that he has had put on his career based on a massively reduced burden of proof and if he was to move on from Clyde for one last go at full-time football he would leave with our best wishes and a thanks for everything he has achieved with us. 

No.

Innocent. No.

Play for Raith. Hell No.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...