Ebanda's Handyman Services Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 It'd be perfectly possible to maintain his innocence and look to clear his name without being complicit in the vilification of the woman concerned.If he maintains his innocence and reckons the girl in question has set him up I would expect him to have nothing but hate for her and is probably quite happy seeing her vilified.I'd have him at the Rovers if it was guaranteed that he'd score the goal that made us finish above Rangers in the final playoff spot. He'd probably end up at East Fife thereafter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThirdrockfromtheSon Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 Couldn't care less if he doesn't show remorse, he's done his time.I'm struggling a bit with this. He's done his time, fair enough.I'm not sure if he tried to appeal during his time in jail. If he did, fair enough. If he didn't appeal during his jail time, why not? Why wait till you're back out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoss Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 Couldn't care less if he doesn't show remorse, he's done his time. He hasn't done his time, he's on probation. (Me, I think his current behaviour is sufficiently contemptuous of the judicial system to warrant that being revoked, but clearly that's not up to me.) Going by most peoples judgements here anyone with a criminal record at all shouldn't be allowed to be a footballer all the same really no matter how serious or minor the offence is. Well then in case of any doubt I'll say once again - I wouldn't want to sign him because of his behaviour now, not because of his conviction. I had no issue with clubs signing Lee Hughes, who served longer for (ostensibly) a more serious offence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beachbum Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 No because he's shown no remorse and has done nothing to stop his victim being hounded. He can't show remorse because his case is under appeal. If he shows remorse it's an admission of guilt isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H Wragg Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 He hasn't done his time, he's on probation. (Me, I think his current behaviour is sufficiently contemptuous of the judicial system to warrant that being revoked, but clearly that's not up to me.) Well then in case of any doubt I'll say once again - I wouldn't want to sign him because of his behaviour now, not because of his conviction. I had no issue with clubs signing Lee Hughes, who served longer for (ostensibly) a more serious offence. Genuine question. What 'behaviour now' are we talking about? Has he openly been talking about the case? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LinkinFighter Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 Whoever signs him (if anyone at all) will have to be careful when putting up a player profile. CHED EVANS - GOALSCORING PREDATOR. aye, you could say he is. Horrific patter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilky1878 Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 He hasn't done his time, he's on probation. (Me, I think his current behaviour is sufficiently contemptuous of the judicial system to warrant that being revoked, but clearly that's not up to me.) Well then in case of any doubt I'll say once again - I wouldn't want to sign him because of his behaviour now, not because of his conviction. I had no issue with clubs signing Lee Hughes, who served longer for (ostensibly) a more serious offence. What behaviour now are you referring to then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waspy Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 Going by most peoples judgements here anyone with a criminal record at all shouldn't be allowed to be a footballer all the same really no matter how serious or minor the offence is. Poor tiff ha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilky1878 Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 Poor tiff ha Tiffs yer man! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liam_barnett Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 Where do you draw the line? What offences disgust you? Them all or just some. Sex offenders & murderers & the like should have no place at a football club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandarilla Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 What behaviour now are you referring to then? Its been reported that his website (or one linked to him in some way) has been actively hounding the girl and continuing to make her life a misery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H Wragg Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 "& the like"? Need to be specific. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandarilla Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 Sex offenders & murderers & the like should have no place at a football club. Aye that's pretty much it for me too. There are plenty of crimes whereby players can rehabilitate themselves but rapists are beyond that in my book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandarilla Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 "& the like"? Need to be specific. Surely each case should be discussed and debated individually. This is not a black or white issue - and a lot of folk seem to think that it is. There are a lot of nuanced issues surrounding these types of cases and therefore its usually not helpful to generalise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilky1878 Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 Its been reported that his website (or one linked to him in some way) has been actively hounding the girl and continuing to make her life a misery. So basically the website has been hounding her in what way linked do you mean does he have direct control of this site? Does he decide what gets said on this site? or has the website just took his side? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandarilla Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 So basically the website has been hounding her in what way linked do you mean does he have direct control of this site? Does he decide what gets said on this site? or has the website just took his side? I don't know chief - like I said its been reported (on 5Live this morning but I'm sure I've seen it elsewhere too) that a website attributed to him has been hounding the girl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crùbag Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 The PC Gone Mad brigade is far more dangerous than the PC Brigade in my view. I always find it quite disturbing how many P&B types are fully fledged members of the first one. Would love you to define this. As it stands the kind of people who rant about PC in any shape or form are usually Ukippers. Mad folk really. Objecting to a convicted rapist becoming a role model and mixing with young fans, families and kids does not make you mad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H Wragg Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 I don't know chief - like I said its been reported (on 5Live this morning but I'm sure I've seen it elsewhere too) that a website attributed to him has been hounding the girl. Unless he has any involvement at all with the website then it's content is completely irrelevant to what happens to him. That's obvious, surely? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandarilla Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 Would love you to define this. As it stands the kind of people who rant about PC in any shape or form are usually Ukippers. Mad folk really. Objecting to a convicted rapist becoming a role model and mixing with young fans, families and kids does not make you mad. I think you're missing his point. He's slagging off the 'PC gone mad' brigade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandarilla Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 Unless he has any involvement at all with the website then it's content is completely irrelevant to what happens to him. That's obvious, surely? If the website had no connection with him than yeah - I'd agree. But its being reported as being linked to him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.