Ched Evans to train with Sheffield United

Status
Not open for further replies.
He doesn't have a right to a football career any more than Gary Glitter has the right to a pop career.

Just because the State won't prevent him working if he can find an employer doesn't mean anyone has to give him work or that's it's in any way unlawful or immoral for employers, fans or commentators to believe it would be inappropriate whilst he is an unrepentant convicted rapist.

SAFC don't have to make the SoL available to Gary Glitter for gigs even though 'he has served his time' and this board would go mental if it did.

But that's exactly the same logic being shown by those that claim that a SUFC or any other club 'should let Ched Evans' train' or that it's 'political correctness gone mad' to criticise them if they do.

the likes of the bbc has paid royalties to gadd since his multiple convictions and links to the yewtree investigation.

i find it a long bow you're drawing mind. plenty of footballers with multiple convictions for terrible crimes and little remorse have had careers in the game after or in between prison stints... marlon king, lee hughes...

i appreciate evans still refuses to recognise the courts decision but if he had/did then i think that would make his efforts to rejuvenate his career slightly easier and perhaps more palatable.
 


This is the interesting thing, I still find the whole story around his arrest and prosecution slightly dodgy BUT that does not mean he is innocent. If he wins his appeal I'll have an element of sympathy for him BUT he shouldn't have put himself in that situation. It sounded a bit like "I'm a footballer, I can do what I like".

Imagine the piss and wind if somebody had said that about the claimant.
 
We were talking about the unconventional circumstances not making it rape, what they decided in this specific case is irrelevant.

However I do think anyone who has that kind of resolute faith in the judicial system in this country is a bit foolish tbf, though he may very well be guilty.
Not many ifs buts and maybes in that post
 
I respect your right to an opinion but there's not one single part of your argument that makes me believe that a convicted rapist should be welcomed back to a once-proud football club that purports to represent its local community. He's welcome to rehabilitate back into society and I've got some shit that needs shovelling that he can start off with.

Anyhow, common sense has prevailed and Sheff U have belatedly told him to steer clear. I hope he f***s off back under a stone.
I don't have strong opinions one way or the other. But I wonder how the lynch mob would feel if an appeal was successful! People are very judgemental and have very black and white opinions without considering the many shades of grey there are in most people's lives and decisions.
 
I think the crux of the matter is that the justice system in this country is pathetic, Evans was found to be guilty by a jury of his peers, was subsequently sentenced to five years in prison and is then released after serving half of his sentence. If he'd served the full term I doubt a career in football on his release would have been an option.
Not being an expert can anyone explain his early release seeing as he has reportedly shown no remorse for his crime?
Arguments that he can't show remorse for a crime he claims he's not guilty of are irrelevant, I'm asking how under the circumstances he was released early?
 
the likes of the bbc has paid royalties to gadd since his multiple convictions and links to the yewtree investigation.

i find it a long bow you're drawing mind. plenty of footballers with multiple convictions for terrible crimes and little remorse have had careers in the game after or in between prison stints... marlon king, lee hughes...

i appreciate evans still refuses to recognise the courts decision but if he had/did then i think that would make his efforts to rejuvenate his career slightly easier and perhaps more palatable.

I'm not sure the BBC play Gary Glitter tracks or show video of him anymore to be honest, but if they did, and he's not a bankrupt (which to be honest I'd assumed he would be by now) then they would have to pay him royalties as his property isn't forfeit when he gets convicted. If Ched Evans owned a house when he was sent to jail, I couldn't just go and live in it for nowt could I? I'm not sure what point you're trying to make by mentioning royalties here.

Lee Hughes was extremely contrite, at least in public, about his crime and that helped a lot. Some crimes are harder than others to gain public forgiveness for, but if Evans had held his hands up and said 'I've made a terrible mistake. I misread the meaning of my mate's text and thought the girl was up for it. I thought as long as she didn't say no it couldn't be rape. Can I ask all that those who are supporting me not to blame the poor girl' he might find the public a lot more ready to forgive.
 
I'm not sure the BBC play Gary Glitter tracks or show video of him anymore to be honest, but if they did, and he's not a bankrupt (which to be honest I'd assumed he would be by now) then they would have to pay him royalties as his property isn't forfeit when he gets convicted. If Ched Evans owned a house when he was sent to jail, I couldn't just go and live in it for nowt could I? I'm not sure what point you're trying to make by mentioning royalties here.

Lee Hughes was extremely contrite, at least in public, about his crime and that helped a lot. Some crimes are harder than others to gain public forgiveness for, but if Evans had held his hands up and said 'I've made a terrible mistake. I misread the meaning of my mate's text and thought the girl was up for it. I thought as long as she didn't say no it couldn't be rape. Can I ask all that those who are supporting me not to blame the poor girl' he might find the public a lot more ready to forgive.

the bbc payed him royalties for playing his songs (or part of) last year. 68k i think. the point being he's allowed to earn a living and the good folk of the UK are contributing to that through licensing fees, not just an independent company like a football club, albeit one that still relies on public/community support. the analogy between evans and gadd is fairly extreme for me. but you brought him up so it's fair to explore the issue i think.

lee hughes may have been contrite in public well after the fact but that's not what the bloke who he seriously injured said of him, and hughes not only fled the scene of a very serious crime, he also pled not guilty and also appealed. it was only after all of those were exhausted that his contrition began. though that's still on step ahead of evans at the moment. hughes has multiple convictions too as does marlon king. 2 more appropriate comparisons in my opinion. both earn/earned money out of football post serious, multiple convictions/prison.
 
Sensible decision from Utd. This argument about him being allowed to continue his trade is so flawed. If anyone in a high profile job had been convicted of such a heinous crime, they'd have to accept that career was over. It's unpalatable for someone in a position of trust to continue after a rape conviction- politician, doctor, copper, entertainer or footballer. By all means carry on with his life but keep your head down and stay out of the limelight would be my advice.
 
Sensible decision from Utd. This argument about him being allowed to continue his trade is so flawed. If anyone in a high profile job had been convicted of such a heinous crime, they'd have to accept that career was over. It's unpalatable for someone in a position of trust to continue after a rape conviction- politician, doctor, copper, entertainer or footballer. By all means carry on with his life but keep your head down and stay out of the limelight would be my advice.

I keep saying, he needs to move overseas if he wants to play football.
 
I keep saying, he needs to move overseas if he wants to play football.

Aye. Still though, the moment he scores a goal and celebrates, I would imagine most decent people will have mixed emotions. Qatar might be canny.
 
Aye. Still though, the moment he scores a goal and celebrates, I would imagine most decent people will have mixed emotions. Qatar might be canny.

Most people don't really care about that wiki leaks Julian Assange bloke in this country. He's suspected of rapey type stuffs. When you move counties, things get glossed over a lot of time.

Qatar, aye, sounds ideal. They f***ing hate woman there anyway........
 
I keep saying, he needs to move overseas if he wants to play football.
It might be his only option now, I'm sure if he has a decent agent he could get a contract in China or Russia or something, could even earn close to what he was on at Sheffield United before this all kicked off if he's lucky. Gives him a clean break from England where this issue is only gonna hold him back (for better or for worse, depending on your point of view).
 
Sensible decision from Utd. This argument about him being allowed to continue his trade is so flawed. If anyone in a high profile job had been convicted of such a heinous crime, they'd have to accept that career was over. It's unpalatable for someone in a position of trust to continue after a rape conviction- politician, doctor, copper, entertainer or footballer. By all means carry on with his life but keep your head down and stay out of the limelight would be my advice.

He's hardly Jimmy Savile. He shagged an adult who, in his opinion had consented to sex, yet in the opinion of the judiciary was over some invisible line where she was incapable of consent.

If guilty, which I doubt, he's not in the same league as Luke McCormick, who is freely plying his trade.

The big difference here is the case has become a hobby-horse for feminists.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PTR
He's hardly Jimmy Savile. He shagged an adult who, in his opinion had consented to sex, yet in the opinion of the judiciary was over some invisible line where she was incapable of consent.

If guilty, which I doubt, he's not in the same league as Luke McCormick, who is freely plying his trade.

The big difference here is the case has become a hobby-horse for feminists.
Bollocks, people are annoyed because he took advantage of a lass who was pissed and in no fit state to consent, therefore rape. It's f***ing simple
 
Bollocks, people are annoyed because he took advantage of a lass who was pissed and in no fit state to consent, therefore rape. It's f***ing simple

Yawn. So pissed she can run and bend down in high heels and a tight dress, as seen in the CCTV footage.
 
He's hardly Jimmy Savile. He shagged an adult who, in his opinion had consented to sex, yet in the opinion of the judiciary was over some invisible line where she was incapable of consent.

If guilty, which I doubt, he's not in the same league as Luke McCormick, who is freely plying his trade.

The big difference here is the case has become a hobby-horse for feminists.
Rape apologist.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top