Ched Evans

[eFestivals]

PS: and do these exclusions from footie only apply to rapists, or do they apply to other crimes too? If so, which crimes?

You say you have a rational view on things, so show me you're rational by properly defining your thinking.

Saying only "stop Evans" as you are is persecution and not the rational. Give me the rational you want me to believe that you are.

Edited January 12, 2015 by eFestivals

[bunique]

Would that apply to all professional sport...?

[eFestivals]

Would that apply to all professional sport...?

who knows?

No one can satisfy the demands of the antis until those antis actually say what their demands are. I keep on asking but only ever get silence.

To date, anyone might think they're making it up as they go along only for the purposes of persecuting Evans. And that's because they're making it up as they go along for the purposes of persecuting Evans.

[eFestivals]

To be fair his post does say football that's regulated by the fa. Last I knew that didn't include a kick about in the park.

OK, but that does include pub football.

And yet from all the shouting they've done and i've heard so far, nothing of their stated reasons needs him banned from pub footie.

They've said it's about money, profile, and "role model", but now it's seems that it's not - and instead it seems to be about stopping Evans doing just about anything only because he's Evans and they don't like Evans.

If people can't give the reasons for wanting something, then they have no rational reasons - and the reason is then only to persecute a particular person, which is nothing morally better than what Evans was convicted for.

[zahidf]

Is pub football regulated by the fa? If so, then yes.

All professional sports? Yes, that would be a good idea.

What crimes? The same ones covering doctors. Murder/attempted murder/manslaughter, serious assault, anything getting you on the sex offendors register

[eFestivals]

Is pub football regulated by the fa? If so, then yes.

do you have a good reason for why, that y0ou're able to give?

If Evans isn't suitable to go to the pub, or kick a ball around for that pub, how would he be suitable to walk down the street?

All professional sports? Yes, that would be a good idea.

so anyone with a criminal convictioon should be banned from all organised sport, is that what you're saying?

The playing fields of the UK will be empty.

What crimes? The same ones covering doctors. Murder/attempted murder/manslaughter, serious assault, anything getting you on the sex offendors register

with doctors it's just about all crimes that dis-barr them from continuing to practise as a doctor.

So the same for all organised sport, any criminal conviction?

[eFestivals]

PS: if it's the sex offenders register, why is there no consistency? It's not like these antis kicked off about Marlon, so some sex crimes appears to be OK.

[zahidf]

do you have a good reason for why, that y0ou're able to give?

If Evans isn't suitable to go to the pub, or kick a ball around for that pub, how would he be suitable to walk down the street?

so anyone with a criminal convictioon should be banned from all organised sport, is that what you're saying?

The playing fields of the UK will be empty.

with doctors it's just about all crimes that dis-barr them from continuing to practise as a doctor.

So the same for all organised sport, any criminal conviction?

Well, we need consistency. Is pub football really governed by the FA? Had no idea! Ah well. He should have enough fans around to have a kick about in the park.

Major crimes: murder, attepted murder, aggravated manslughter, anything which will get you on the sexual offenders register.

If this was Cricket or Rugby back in the old days, Evans would have been given a bottle of brandy and a revolver, and he would have retired into his study to do the decent thing.

No honour in football in comparision.

[eFestivals]

Major crimes: murder, attepted murder, aggravated manslughter, anything which will get you on the sexual offenders register.

so streaking at a rugby match, then.

You say that someone who gets their willy or tits out and runs around harmlessly should not only be punished for interupting the game, they should be banned from all organised sport for the rest of their natural life.

Not because there's any good reason to do that. After all, I asked you to say why the need to ban Evans from pub footie, and you've not done so, presumably because you have no reason.

Just because it suits your prejudices that you can't define, can't reason, and can't make a case for.

Because you hate Evans for what he has done and refuse to move on or allow him to move on, as the traditional long-established British attitudes to considered-justice says you should.

Meanwhile, right now over at the BBC website there's some similar people to you who say your name should have you driven out of the country, because they say there's nothing you can do to make yourself a normal member of British society just as you say there's nothing Evans might do to make him a normal member of British society.

Edited January 12, 2015 by eFestivals

[kaosmark2]

What crimes? The same ones covering doctors. Murder/attempted murder/manslaughter, serious assault, anything getting you on the sex offendors register

Why the hell are sports players considered as important as doctors?

And based on "serious assault", why aren't you campaigning for Joey Barton to be kicked out of football?

[eFestivals]

And based on "serious assault", why aren't you campaigning for Joey Barton to be kicked out of football?

and Suarez too.

[feral chile]

I know this is a slight tangent but how come sports people who foul and cause serious injury can't get done for assault?

[eFestivals]

Why the hell are sports players considered as important as doctors?

Yup. I think all sense of proportion has been lost inside the outrage.

At then end of the day a footballer is like most other everyday-jobs. Most people don't much like the thought of Evans the Rapist as a footballer, tho they don't much like the thought of him stacking shelves in their local supermarket either ... and to pretty much the same extent.

Which is fair enough, but nothing of that view deals with the reality that time-served rapists have to get on with a normal-ish life back on the outside, which includes being able to earn a living. Perhaps even be a success!

[russycarps]

it seems to me that a lot of this outrage is to do with the fact that playing football is a job he enjoys and pays lots of money.

people feel a rapist should not be allowed to live an enjoyable life.

which is of course ridiculous. Once you've served your time in prison you should be free to do whatever you please, within the laws of the land. I cannot think of a single reason why a convicted rapist should not be able to kick a bag of wind around a field.

football just isnt important enough to have special laws made for it. Putting football on the same level as teaching and medical professions etc is ludicrous and quite obscene. Football is utterly meaningless.

[feral chile]

it seems to me that a lot of this outrage is to do with the fact that playing football is a job he enjoys and pays lots of money.

people feel a rapist should not be allowed to live an enjoyable life.

which is of course ridiculous. Once you've served your time in prison you should be free to do whatever you please, within the laws of the land. I cannot think of a single reason why a convicted rapist should not be able to kick a bag of wind around a field.

football just isnt important enough to have special laws made for it. Putting football on the same level as teaching and medical professions etc is ludicrous and quite obscene. Football is utterly meaningless.

I haven't signed any petitions, but my feelings towards this are the same as those towards anyone in a position of power or trust who abuses their position and treats people as playthings.

They are privileged people who then get corrupted and think they have more rights than others. And treat people with utter contempt. Because they think they can.

power corrupts, and power comes in many forms - money, status, influence.

So I think a high profile footballer and a low profile shop assistant are job descriptions that carry different responsibilities.

Edited January 13, 2015 by feral chile

[feral chile]

it seems to me that a lot of this outrage is to do with the fact that playing football is a job he enjoys and pays lots of money.

people feel a rapist should not be allowed to live an enjoyable life.

which is of course ridiculous. Once you've served your time in prison you should be free to do whatever you please, within the laws of the land. I cannot think of a single reason why a convicted rapist should not be able to kick a bag of wind around a field.

football just isnt important enough to have special laws made for it. Putting football on the same level as teaching and medical professions etc is ludicrous and quite obscene. Football is utterly meaningless.

Football can be a dream of something better for youngsters with few prospects.

I don't think you can ignore the fact that any aspirations towards fame and fortune will be linked to what these entail - which probably include freedom, power, and totty.

[mrtourette]

it seems to me that a lot of this outrage is to do with the fact that playing football is a job he enjoys and pays lots of money.

Absolutely right, as I said before most of the outrage comes from the sense of injustice that the victim is still suffering hasrrassment and abuse while the perpetrator is able to pick up his allegedly very priveleged lifestyle. It's the perceived gulf between the two situations that has driven a lot of the reaction, if he was just going back to a dead-end poorly-paid job or if she had been allowed to put it behind her and was doing well for herself then there wouldn't be half as much objection.

which is of course ridiculous. Once you've served your time in prison you should be free to do whatever you please, within the laws of the land. I cannot think of a single reason why a convicted rapist should not be able to kick a bag of wind around a field.

Again the fact that he only served half his time (not unusual, surely?) and the accusations that the CCRC has marked his case as a priority only fuels the perception that he is getting special treatment, and again compared with the situation the victim is in is what drives a lot of the outrage. "Rapist footballer walks back into millionare lifestyle and has appeal rushed through courts while victim still suffers abuse from his fans" is a very easy pitch to make and get support for, especially amongst the social media mouthbreathers who populate the bottom of the internet.

Edited January 13, 2015 by mrtourette

[feral chile]

Because it would be seen as accidental.

Duncan Ferguson got done when he headbutted another player in the nineties and I'm sure there are other examples.

But injury from a 'standard' foul being dealt with by the law would open up a right can of worms.

I seem to remember a controversial case ages ago where someone ended another player's career by breaking their leg, I can't remember if there were any criminal proceedings.

[feral chile]

Absolutely right, as I said before most of the outrage comes from the sense of injustice that the victim is still suffering hasrrassment and abuse while the perpetrator is able to pick up his allegedly very priveleged lifestyle. It's the perceived gulf between the two situations that has driven a lot of the reaction, if he was just going back to a dead-end poorly-paid job or if she had been allowed to put it behind her and was doing well for herself then there wouldn't be half as much objection.

Again the fact that he only served half his time (not unusual, surely?) and the accusations that the CCRC has marked his case as a priority only fuels the perception that he is getting special treatment, and again compared with the situation the victim is in is what drives a lot of the outrage. "Rapist footballer walks back into millionare lifestyle and has appeal rushed through courts while victim still suffers abuse from his fans" is a very easy pitch to make and get support for, especially amongst the social media mouthbreathers who populate the bottom of the internet.

I was going to disagree with this, but then I thought of the moral outrage right now about Ian Watkins getting his share of proceeds from Lost Prophets.

There's no getting away from the fact that in some industries, or certain sectors within that industry, a sexual conviction will ruin your career. What are the other band members of Lost Prophets up to now?

I used to love Lost Prophets, and it sickens me that I've seen them play live, not knowing what kind of power-corrupted sick mind Ian Watkins had. And I can't bring myself to spend money on them now, it would feel like condoning what he did.

So how come football fans can isolate the crime from his football? Is it because it's not so clear cut? Should paedophiles be allowed to return to celebrity status? Ian Watkins also has a talent that's not connected directly with children.

If you compare the treatment of the women involved in both cases, I can see parallels between the feeling of omnipotence of those manipulating them.

And that is the part of this that deeply concerns me.

Edited January 13, 2015 by feral chile

[mrtourette]

I know this is a slight tangent but how come sports people who foul and cause serious injury can't get done for assault?

It is possible, as scruffylovemonster said Duncan Ferguson was prosecuted and did time after being sent off for headbutting a player while at Rangers, although he had previous convictions for assault and I think was on probation at the time.

You do sometimes hear of teams 'considering legal action' against players or other teams over a particulalrly nasty injury that involves significant time on the sidelines (of course the teams are more interested in lost wages rather than any sense of justice for the player) but it never really transpires.

Of course players can be charged by police with on-field trnasgressions such as racism, maybe they apply common sense towards fouls that are expressly dealt with as part of the game and would only consider headbutting/punching as something different, and even then only in extreme cases (like Ferguson).

Ben Thatcher's elbow on Pedro Mendes a few years back is the worst thing I've ever seen on a football pitch and must have been close to being considered assault, it was 'investigated' by the police but never went anywhere.

Edited January 13, 2015 by mrtourette

[eFestivals]

So I think a high profile footballer and a low profile shop assistant are job descriptions that carry different responsibilities.

and yet i've not seen anyone who'd accept Evans banned from football but would be OK with him stacking shelves. Until such time as the antis can say what they would allow without protest, they have no solution to the dilemma they've created around the situation.

If power corrupts as you say, then by banning Evans you're swapping one abuser for another, and nothing changes - except that new abuser doesn't have the rep of Evans, and so would be more likely to successfully abuse.

The problem with Evans is that banning him from footie doesn't make him go away, and neither does it address anything about what we might do with ex-crims, or about any issues in the football world and how we as a society might respond to them. It merely persecutes an individual, without a basis for why (apart from 'to persecute') that stands up to rational scrutiny.

[eFestivals]

Football can be a dream of something better for youngsters with few prospects.

I don't think you can ignore the fact that any aspirations towards fame and fortune will be linked to what these entail - which probably include freedom, power, and totty.

you're starting to get into the realms of where we need euthinesia for anyone who who might gain a modicum of fame.

Any problems around that is not that people get fame (not that we could stop it anyway), but how others respond to that fame.

(are those who worship the famous doing the same as a drunk woman, unable to control their own actions - without needing the drink?)

The fact of someone getting famous doesn't make them anything special apart from that fame, and yet some people talk about "role models". Any role model that anyone sees is something they're putting onto that individual themselves, unless the famous person has actually carried out a further role in life in a model way to make themselves 'extra special'.

Evans hasn't carried out any public-facing model role in any of his life, he's merely kicked a ball about. Anyone who is thinking different needs to reconsider their own thoughts.

Edited January 13, 2015 by eFestivals

[mrtourette]

I was going to disagree with this, but then I thought of the moral outrage right now about Ian Watkins getting his share of proceeds from Lost Prophets.

There's no getting away from the fact that in some industries, or certain sectors within that industry, a sexual conviction will ruin your career. What are the other band members of Lost Prophets up to now?

I used to love Lost Prophets, and it sickens me that I've seen them play live, not knowing what kind of power-corrupted sick mind Ian Watkins had. And I can't bring myself to spend money on them now, it would feel like condoning what he did.

I hadn't heard of that, but why would there be moral outrage? Among the many reasons not to buy Lostprophets records giving money to a sick individual like that is one of them, but if a member of the public can live with that then I think it's dangerous ground to start witholding earnings from work done prior to a conviction. He was a sick fuck before his conviction and he'll be a sick fuck after his release, are we saying that he can never earn a living? Or that he can only earn a living in fields away from the public eye? Hard to police.

So how come football fans can isolate the crime from his football? Is it because it's not so clear cut? Should paedophiles be allowed to return to celebrity status? Ian Watkins also has a talent that's not connected directly with children.

Interesting point, I'm not sure 'football fans' as a group can. Some of those calling for his head will be 'football fans' while some of those taking a different stance may not have any interest in football. I doubt 'music fans' would lobby the offices of a record company who re-signed Ian Watkins and while there would probably be objections in wider society music isn't as bigger a platform as football to either make a case or worry about the (preposterous) 'role-model' effect.

Sure the level of the crime will dictate the reaction, I would imagine paedophilia is a step too far for even the most desperate owner and not excusable buy any fan, but then wouldn't that be just as bad as not allowing Ched Evans to rebuild his career? If Ian Watkins was a footballer and was trying to get a contract after release would people who object to that get accused of supporting mob justice by the likes of Neil in this thread? I guess so, because technically it's the same, but it's an uncomfortable thought. It would be hard to swallow but maybe the "he's done his time" line of thinking should also be applied. I would find it hard to, but then again I'm clearly not a decent and forgiving human being.

Edited January 13, 2015 by mrtourette

[eFestivals]

So how come football fans can isolate the crime from his football?

because rape is rape and football is football.

If his rape cannot be disassociated from his football, then all footballers are rapists and all rapists are footballers.

It is not necessary for a rapist to be a footballer, it only takes a willingness to rape.

[feral chile]

you're starting to get into the realms of where we need euthinesia for anyone who who might gain a modicum of fame.

Any problems around that is not that people get fame (not that we could stop it anyway), but how others respond to that fame.

The fact of someone getting famous doesn't make them anything special apart from that fame, and yet some people talk about "role models". Any role model that anyone sees is something they're putting onto that individual themselves, unless the famous person has actually carried out a further role in life in a model way to make themselves 'extra special'.

Evans hasn't carried out any public-facing model role in any of his life, he's merely kicked a ball about. Anyone who is thinking different needs to reconsider their own thoughts.

There are quite a few different points here that seem to be getting lumped together.

I'm not saying he should be banned from football. I'm not saying he works for the public sector.

But he does provide a service in the same way that all entertainers do, and that's essentially what he is. Therefore, he's subject to the vagaries of public opinion.

I would disagree with the idea that he's not a role model, I think any celebrity is potentially a role model. They have tremendous public influence, particularly over impressionable people.

regarding Ched Evans, I don't think he behaved well towards this girl. The consent issue is a grey area, admittedly.

But just supposing you have a situation where vulnerable people are blinded by the supposed glamour of a successful celebrity, and end up pressured/coerced (maybe that's too strong, I'm not sure how far I'd take it) into doing something that damages them or others mentally.

I don't want aspirations being formed that think it's OK to do that. It's abuse in my opinion, you might disagree with wording and semantics, but power tripping people is ust wrng as far as I'm concerned.

And I worry about people aspiring to any profession that would seem to condone the idea that success means the power to have no moral boundaries.