Ched Evans

[deadpheasant]

After long discussions, Oldham City have removed interest in signing former convicted rapist Ched Evans. Should he be given another opportunity to play professional football? What's everyonew views on the matter?

[bunique]

Lengthy discussion in the Football thread

[eFestivals]

Lengthy discussion in the Football thread

It's probably better kept separate, as it's going on and on and on. I'll post something ion the footie thread to bring the discussion here.

[eFestivals]

Should he be given another opportunity to play professional football?

I'd say that's not quite the right question.

Should he be stopped from having the opportunity to return to football? My answer is 'no'.

If there are going to be rules about who can and can't play football, then let's have them formalised and codified (what crimes, what levels of football, what levels of pay, whether apologies play a part in changing things, etc), so that everything about those rules are 100% clear, and everything is said up-front rather than made up on the hoof.

Whether he actually has the opportunity to return to football or not is another different thing, which should be down to whether any club wishes to employ him or not, where they should be free to allow him to play if they want him, or turn him down if they don't - exactly as with any other player.

I strongly object to the mob who want to tell us all what Evans can't do, but won't say what normal life he should be permitted.

Edited January 9, 2015 by eFestivals

[zahidf]

Can i say Julia Hartley-Brewer's contribution on QT last night was one of the most stupid thing anyone has said about the whole thing? A lot of his supporters are generally as posionous as she is.

I see what Vince Cable means, but as a society, we generally agree that a guilty verdict is a guilty verdict.

[jump]

I still say it's a PR battle he has to win if he wants to play, it's not so much he's a "role model" but rather he would be part of a product the club puts out which requires to at least win over/gain sympathy from sponsors and fans rather than the faceless mob who would never be happy he's out of prison. Tbh he should of realised that when the team that knows him and promised him in prison they will sign him again and didn't rather than 3 months and the 5thv (?) collapse later.

[LOCHLAND5]

Marlon King (sexual assault)

Lee Hughes ( death by dangerous driving)

Luke McComick ( killed 2 children drink driving)

All of the above returned to professional football ............... Think the guy should be allowed to do the same

Edited January 9, 2015 by LOCHLAND5

[jump]

He needs to...

Show remorse and be repentant for the crimes he has committed.

or

Clear his name.

It's too late to show remorse now and would probably blow up in his face since he's constantly said he's innocent and all the shit with the girl.

[eFestivals]

Can i say Julia Hartley-Brewer's contribution on QT last night was one of the most stupid thing anyone has said about the whole thing? A lot of his supporters are generally as posionous as she is.

She got things spot on in the main.

The stupid are those who say what he can't do but won't say what he can do.

I knew at the time she said it that yoiu'd be on her words about how she'd have found him not guilty.

Care to tell me how come she's not allowed to read all of the evidence - wqhich you haven't - and form an opinion from it? As she clearly said, she doesn't see how a person can be deemed legally competent when drunk in one moment, and then legally incompetent ten minutes later.

She also made clear that she respected the verdict, and that she'd not been presented with the evidence in the same manner as the jury which might have led her to a different conclusion.

Her thoughts her different about the verdict than the verdict was. Yoiu thoughts are different about the sentence than the sentence was.

Care to tell me why you're allowed to reject the verdict of the court, while saying she's poisonous for doing the same as you?

[eFestivals]

He needs to...

Show remorse and be repentant for the crimes he has committed.

or

Clear his name.

and if he does neither, what then? He doesn't vanish. The issue of what to do with Ched the rapist remains, and needs to be solved.

So tell us how you'd solve it.

Or is it that you can't, same as all the others?

You might not like the view that people like me have put forwards, but at least it's a rational coherent workable and realistic view, when others only cause problems and have no solutions.

[eFestivals]

Yup... He has very much made a bed for himself... He has probably removed option 1... but it was there for him to take on his release...

He is all in on option 2 now...

No he doesn't.

What you mean is that's the only option you're saying he's allowed to have.

The fact that he DOES have other options* shows your take on things is wrong.

(* 'options' is the wrong word, because not being cleared isn't an 'option' he'll be choosing; it's what might happen).

Given that he might not be cleared, what then? As you say he has no options in those circumstances, will you be putting him to death....?

Why not have a workable view instead of an idiot one?

Edited January 9, 2015 by eFestivals

[pink_triangle]

I still say it's a PR battle he has to win if he wants to play, it's not so much he's a "role model" but rather he would be part of a product the club puts out which requires to at least win over/gain sympathy from sponsors and fans rather than the faceless mob who would never be happy he's out of prison. Tbh he should of realised that when the team that knows him and promised him in prison they will sign him again and didn't rather than 3 months and the 5thv (?) collapse later.

A rapist can never win a PR battle, however the law still allows a rapist to work and contribute to scoiety via the tax they pay. Even if he overturned the verdict there would still be some of the "theres no smoke with out fire"brigade.

If we let justice become a PR battle, then the system is screwed and the angry mob will always win. People will never get passionate about a rapist being released, moving into a community or getting a job, the reality is however that unless your in the "string them up" brigade these things must happen. If professional football is to be put on the list of jobs a rapist is legally not allowed ot do, then lets get the law changed,so we arent making things up as we go along.

[mrtourette]

former convicted rapist

Former?

[jonodillieono]

If she can't be held responsible for what she does when drunk then if she killed a person while driving under the influence should she go to jail?

[feral chile]

and if he does neither, what then? He doesn't vanish. The issue of what to do with Ched the rapist remains, and needs to be solved.

So tell us how you'd solve it.

Or is it that you can't, same as all the others?

You might not like the view that people like me have put forwards, but at least it's a rational coherent workable and realistic view, when others only cause problems and have no solutions.

Well he is subject t public scrutiny, as will be his club.

A lot of employers will have some kind of clause in the contract about damaging the reputation of the organisation, and in any business that's particularly subject to public scrutiny or consumer behaviour, trial by social media will have an impact.

[feral chile]

A rapist can never win a PR battle, however the law still allows a rapist to work and contribute to scoiety via the tax they pay. Even if he overturned the verdict there would still be some of the "theres no smoke with out fire"brigade.

If we let justice become a PR battle, then the system is screwed and the angry mob will always win. People will never get passionate about a rapist being released, moving into a community or getting a job, the reality is however that unless your in the "string them up" brigade these things must happen. If professional football is to be put on the list of jobs a rapist is legally not allowed ot do, then lets get the law changed,so we arent making things up as we go along.

I didn't realise we were discussing changing the law, so much as giving an opinion as to whether high profile businesses should be concerned about their reputation, and their influence within society.

I suspect it'll all come down to financial impact, and the effects on the business.

So a PR battle is precisely what it'll amount to.

Though I imagine they'll be looking closely at what the supporters feel, rather than Joe Bloggs generally.

Edited January 9, 2015 by feral chile

[eFestivals]

I love it when Neil tells me what I mean

He isn't signing for my club. Lots of damage now done... but at least we found our moral compass in the end. Now to repair the tatters of the last couple of days...

You've said what you mean - that his only option now is to be cleared.

Given that's patently idiotic, i've pointed out your idiocy.

If you don't wish your idiocy to be pointed out, don't post idiotic things.

[eFestivals]

If she can't be held responsible for what she does when drunk then if she killed a person while driving under the influence should she go to jail?

Yep, I've already pointed out the logical conflicts within the law's ideas around 'drunk' already in the footie thread.

Ultimately, I'd say that the law is suggesting that women are mentally inferior to men thru the non-logic that is being applied across these two things.

[eFestivals]

Well he is subject t public scrutiny, as will be his club.

A lot of employers will have some kind of clause in the contract about damaging the reputation of the organisation, and in any business that's particularly subject to public scrutiny or consumer behaviour, trial by social media will have an impact.

then mob rule wins, and no workable solution can exist to that mob?

We might as well hand Ched over to that mob, then, and let them string him up.

[jump]

A rapist can never win a PR battle, however the law still allows a rapist to work and contribute to scoiety via the tax they pay. Even if he overturned the verdict there would still be some of the "theres no smoke with out fire"brigade.

If we let justice become a PR battle, then the system is screwed and the angry mob will always win. People will never get passionate about a rapist being released, moving into a community or getting a job, the reality is however that unless your in the "string them up" brigade these things must happen. If professional football is to be put on the list of jobs a rapist is legally not allowed ot do, then lets get the law changed,so we arent making things up as we go along.

I don't mean it's a PR battle for justice but for the product the club is putting out, both sponsors and fans aren't gonna be happy about it so it's becomes how many of them can you keep which is where the "PR battle" comes in.

[pink_triangle]

I didn't realise we were discussing changing the law, so much as giving an opinion as to whether high profile businesses should be concerned about their reputation, and their influence within society.

I suspect it'll all come down to financial impact, and the effects on the business.

So a PR battle is precisely what it'll amount to.

Though I imagine they'll be looking closely at what the supporters feel, rather than Joe Bloggs generally.

Im not sure there is a single person who disagrees that it should be up to the individual club to make the decision. However when you look at Oldham the amount of people signing the petition that he shouldnt play for the club, was far more then the fans of the club. I am happy for club to discuss the pros and cons of signing the player and to go with the majority. Im also happy for fans to vote with their feet if they dont like the answer. No club should be forced to sign a rapist, but they should be free to make that decision without fear of the mob.

As I have said earlier my main concern is not with Evans but more that there is potential for social media campagns to happen when non famous rapists are released, making it very difficult for them to ever integrate.

[feral chile]

then mob rule wins, and no workable solution can exist to that mob?

We might as well hand Ched over to that mob, then, and let them string him up.

Legally, mob rule shouldn't win. The way businesses work will be different, as they have to cater for whoever keeps them in profit.

I'm not a football fan, therefore my opinion would have no impact on this. I would only know about footballers from the media, and they only report the bad stuff. So my generalised knowledge would come from the likes of Wayne Rooney and Ched Evans.

My husband is a fan, and he reminds me that this is only the sensationalist side, and that mostly it's full of people just doing a job they love and not bothering anyone else.

Then there are the club supporters, who are likely to be only interested in football skills and success on the pitch.

I suspect the main area where this would impact would be product endorsement. Nobody within the football industry will care if a non supporter thinks footballers are all savages. They wouldn't be spending any money there anyway.

But if it has any kind of effect on revenue, then it'll be an issue, just the same as celebrities get dropped from advertising campaigns when they get ht by scandal.

Edited January 9, 2015 by feral chile

[jump]

Im not sure there is a single person who disagrees that it should be up to the individual club to make the decision. However when you look at Oldham the amount of people signing the petition that he shouldnt play for the club, was far more then the fans of the club. I am happy for club to discuss the pros and cons of signing the player and to go with the majority. Im also happy for fans to vote with their feet if they dont like the answer. No club should be forced to sign a rapist, but they should be free to make that decision without fear of the mob.

As I have said earlier my main concern is not with Evans but more that there is potential for social media campagns to happen when non famous rapists are released, making it very difficult for them to ever integrate.

You're happy about fans making a decision themselves but are you also happy about sponsors deciding if they want to associated with the player who will be wearing their logo on shirt every week? Which where the problem really kicks in if both the spsonsors and fans have the right not to back him if they want then the club will lose too much for what he brings in.

[feral chile]

Im not sure there is a single person who disagrees that it should be up to the individual club to make the decision. However when you look at Oldham the amount of people signing the petition that he shouldnt play for the club, was far more then the fans of the club. I am happy for club to discuss the pros and cons of signing the player and to go with the majority. Im also happy for fans to vote with their feet if they dont like the answer. No club should be forced to sign a rapist, but they should be free to make that decision without fear of the mob.

As I have said earlier my main concern is not with Evans but more that there is potential for social media campagns to happen when non famous rapists are released, making it very difficult for them to ever integrate.

There wouldn't be such a media frenzy, hopefully. But they would face the same drawbacks with employers, I'd imagine, regarding declaring convictions. And if they failed to declare on a job application, and t got revealed later, they'd likely be dismissed. But that's the same as it is now, anyway.

It depends on the business, and whether its public reputation is vital (and it's likely to be pretty important in most cases).

[mrtourette]

Everyone is getting in on it now...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/30742947

You have to feel for the victim.... Worlds gone mad...

Perfectly reasonable to question the response to him re-intergrating, but seems irresponsible to question the actual verdict.