sjc Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 It does call into question the whole Crime, Punishment & Rehabilitation discussion. I am aware that Evans had never apologised to his victim for his action (until his "round the houses" one today) but in leu of his appeal that shouldn't surprise anyone really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AberdeenBud Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 I think he could have said what he said today a long time ago. Apologise for the distress caused, especially to the victim, without admitting any guilt. Compassion and humility don't seem to be his strong points though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 It does call into question the whole Crime, Punishment & Rehabilitation discussion. I am aware that Evans had never apologised to his victim for his action (until his "round the houses" one today) but in leu of his appeal that shouldn't surprise anyone really. It certainly does and that's where my interest is, not particularly in Evans. I don't remember Luke McCormick or Lee Hughes being subject to the same scrutiny, certainly not to this degree. They killed people, albeit accidentally, but recklessly. Did any sponsors or prominent supporters bale. Marlon King even gets a game and he's in and out the jail on a regular basis for wife beating among other things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandarilla Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 Neither is he legally barred from playing football. I doubt the sponsorship has a clause saying don't sign rapists. I've said before I couldn't care less, but the "anti" arguments don't stand up. It is all from a moral point of view, which is a perfectly permissable position to hold, but I'm not sure you can impose that belief on others as there is no legal basis to do so, I'm pretty certain there'll be a clause about bringing the sponsor into disrepute. I don't think anyone would deny that being associated with a club who signs rapists brings the sponsor into disrepute. Don't get me wrong - I think the sponsors are loving this. They're getting a huge amount of free publicity and looking like they're doing the honourable thing at the same time. And they're saving money on the withdrawn sponsorship. The whole thing is a moral argument - and should remain that way. The idea that there should be legislation introduced is just a minefield. The clubs are free to sign a convicted criminal - but they will have to endure the pressure that comes along with that. Yes there is no consistency here - but each case has to be examined on its own merit. There are simply too many intricate details to have hard and fast rules (which some folk seem to be calling for - what about X, Y and Z - they did bad things and are getting to play). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 I'm pretty certain there'll be a clause about bringing the sponsor into disrepute. I don't think anyone would deny that being associated with a club who signs rapists brings the sponsor into disrepute. Don't get me wrong - I think the sponsors are loving this. They're getting a huge amount of free publicity and looking like they're doing the honourable thing at the same time. And they're saving money on the withdrawn sponsorship. The whole thing is a moral argument - and should remain that way. The idea that there should be legislation introduced is just a minefield. The clubs are free to sign a convicted criminal - but they will have to endure the pressure that comes along with that. Yes there is no consistency here - but each case has to be examined on its own merit. There are simply too many intricate details to have hard and fast rules (which some folk seem to be calling for - what about X, Y and Z - they did bad things and are getting to play). The hard and fast rules already exist ie Parole, employment law, disclosure, child protection etc etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sjc Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 It certainly does and that's where my interest is, not particularly in Evans. I don't remember Luke McCormick or Lee Hughes being subject to the same scrutiny, certainly not to this degree. They killed people, albeit accidentally, but recklessly. Did any sponsors or prominent supporters bale. Marlon King even gets a game and he's in and out the jail on a regular basis for wife beating among other things. I wonder if Evans wins his appeal whether he'll be able to sue the Sponsors of Oldham for loss of earnings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 I wonder if Evans wins his appeal whether he'll be able to sue the Sponsors of Oldham for loss of earnings? That's what I was getting at earlier. It might be an expensive process though and by then he'd be better getting his head down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
54_and_counting Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 I wonder if Evans wins his appeal whether he'll be able to sue the Sponsors of Oldham for loss of earnings? i wonder if anyone will ever apologise to him if his appeal is won Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTChris Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 I'm pretty certain there'll be a clause about bringing the sponsor into disrepute. I don't think anyone would deny that being associated with a club who signs rapists brings the sponsor into disrepute. Don't get me wrong - I think the sponsors are loving this. They're getting a huge amount of free publicity and looking like they're doing the honourable thing at the same time. And they're saving money on the withdrawn sponsorship. The whole thing is a moral argument - and should remain that way. The idea that there should be legislation introduced is just a minefield. The clubs are free to sign a convicted criminal - but they will have to endure the pressure that comes along with that. Yes there is no consistency here - but each case has to be examined on its own merit. There are simply too many intricate details to have hard and fast rules (which some folk seem to be calling for - what about X, Y and Z - they did bad things and are getting to play). The hard and fast rules already exist ie Parole, employment law, disclosure, child protection etc etc. Absolutely - there are some jobs that a convicted criminal and specifically a convicted sex offender should be barred from as part of their punishment. Professional footballer isn't one of them. There are numerous convicted criminals, and some sex offenders, in football. Graham Rix was imprisoned for indecent assault and underage sex but walked straight back into his job and went on to work at several other clubs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sjc Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 i wonder if anyone will ever apologise to him if his appeal is won Are you alluding to Jessica Ennis? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twinkle Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 That's what I was getting at earlier. It might be an expensive process though and by then he'd be better getting his head down. Thats what started off this thing in the first place...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
54_and_counting Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 Are you alluding to Jessica Ennis? actually no, although her reaction (if evans is found innocent by appeal) might have seemed a bit over dramatic, she'd still have a point as even if innocent, what evans did was degrading, highly disgusting and extremely questionable others though like the various sponsors etc that have threatened each and every club he's been linked with, you have to believe that a bit of their current outrage is based on the "free publicity" it is generating for them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigkillie Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 The counter-argument to that, which has been made countless times, is that some (including myself) feel that he shouldn't have the privilege of being a football player, on a moral front. He is still serving for rape, and the life of a footballer in the UK is a privileged one, and one that he shouldn't have. There are plenty of good arguments for not wanting him at your club, but for me this isn't one of them. Stuff about it being a "priveliged job" is complete nonsense - it's a high profile job, but footballers don't have any responsibility within society and are basically just ordinary guys who happen to have a skill which makes them highly sought after in a multi-million pound industry. They're employed for that ability, not for their character. The only reason footballers are role models is because people make them into role models - the vast majority of them don't ask to be. As far as I am concerned, Evans has every right to be employed as a professional footballer and it's up to the individual employer to decide whether they wish to take him on. I wouldn't be pleased if Killie decided to sign him, and I would let them know that quite vociferously, but I don't see a reason to interfere if someone else does. It seems to be a moral crusade for a lot of people, and that would only make sense if these people also campaigned against Phil Taylor playing darts, Mike Tyson being involved in boxing etc, which doesn't really seem to have happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AberdeenBud Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 If this wasn't quite the clusterfuck already, Gordon Taylor has unleashed the forces of hell. http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/jan/08/gordon-taylor-ched-evans-hillsborough-pfa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miguel Sanchez Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 If this wasn't quite the clusterfuck already, Gordon Taylor has unleashed the forces of hell. http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/jan/08/gordon-taylor-ched-evans-hillsborough-pfa Was just coming on to post this. Beyond parody. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordo1872 Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 I wonder if Evans wins his appeal whether he'll be able to sue the Sponsors of Oldham for loss of earnings? If he wins his appeal, and it's a big if, he'll surely be entitled to compensation? Criminal injuries board? As per those acquitted of offences having served time in prison from a crime they didn't commit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AberdeenBud Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 Sorry but couldn't help but picture him in the ATeam after reading that last sentence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordo1872 Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 Sorry but couldn't help but picture him in the ATeam after reading that last sentence. Played the theme tune as I typed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 A Question Time audience member asked a good question. After the panel were listing the jobs he couldn't do, like teacher, accountant, lawyer, social worker etc, and footballer for some reason, she asked why it would be ok for supermarket workers to work with a rapist but not "professionals". The panel got well flustered, especially the Labour rep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AberdeenBud Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 A Question Time audience member asked a good question. That's a rarity in itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.