Ched Evans to sign for oldham

[acko]

the sponsers pulling out of oldham as with patrons pulling out at blades sets a dangerous precident,who runs the football club the owners,the board or the sponsers and patron.will we come to the point patron or sponser pulling out because the club wish to sign a player whose religeon they dont agree with or the wrong ethnic origan,sponsers and patrons have now showing wh runs the clubs.and one question remains unclear the girl never cried rape the police assumed she was too drunk to consent to sex,sex she says she cant remember happening its only mcdonald and evans admittance that sex took place,no evidence i just wonder if it had been j.bloggs and i.doe the police would have prosecuted,but footballers could be good for career

[bpoolrover]

If I was sponsoring a team and thought that signing a rapist could cost me alot of money I would do the same,would u acko? Or would u lose lots of money As he has served his time?

[IDM]

the sponsers pulling out of oldham as with patrons pulling out at blades sets a dangerous precident,who runs the football club the owners,the board or the sponsers and patron.will we come to the point patron or sponser pulling out because the club wish to sign a player whose religeon they dont agree with or the wrong ethnic origan,sponsers and patrons have now showing wh runs the clubs.and one question remains unclear the girl never cried rape the police assumed she was too drunk to consent to sex,sex she says she cant remember happening its only mcdonald and evans admittance that sex took place,no evidence i just wonder if it had been j.bloggs and i.doe the police would have prosecuted,but footballers could be good for career

Sorry but you can't compare racial or religious discrimination with a rape conviction. 

It doesn't matter what the evidence was (to this argument) in that Evans is a convicted rapist.  Where the evidence is needed, is in the ongoing legal proceedings, not to determine whether or not it is acceptable that he plays for Oldham.

[IDM]

If I was sponsoring a team and thought that signing a rapist could cost me alot of money I would do the same,would u acko? Or would u lose lots of money As he has served his time?

Good point, it then becomes an argument of economics rather than ethics..

[Askern_reds]

Bloody hope we av a fantastic cup run n start climbing the league towards a play off place. We might just might start talking about the rovers and not Evans or Oldham ?

[acko]

your right askern but you started it,what my point was IDM the clubs owners should run the clubs with their board,but sponsers and patrons are now telling the clubs what they should or not do

[bpoolrover]

That's not true acko,how many sponsers left tiger woods after his affairs? Why would a spinster stay when there is a chance it will cost them lots of money?

[Askern_reds]

Oldham av informed sponsors of Evans sighning , they also say he got 2 n half year deal,

[IDM]

your right askern but you started it,what my point was IDM the clubs owners should run the clubs with their board,but sponsers and patrons are now telling the clubs what they should or not do

No they are not telling the clubs what they should do, not directly.  The sponsors/patrons are telling the clubs what will happen should the clubs take a certain course of action.

[Jonathan]

One could argue that Verlin Rainwater Solutions are currently manipulating the best publicity they'll ever have on the back of all this. Perhaps the only winner out of this whole sorry escapade.

Oldham have seemingly made their decision in full appreciation of the negative implications, of which there will be plenty, so it'd be nice (albeit unfortunately folly) to think this would be the end of all the news coverage and blatant stirring.

 

[Copps is Magic]

ZenOffice are the second sponsor to announce an end to the relationship. The headline now coming out of Oldham is that he is '80%' certain to sign (according to the BBC) so I don't think it is quite settled yet.

[colincramb]

All those who say he's done his time. What? He's still serving his sentence, just not in jail. He's on licence for the remainder. All that means is he's serving his sentence within a community setting and not a prison.

If and when he proves his innocence or, if not, shows a single degree of remorse should he even be considered for a position as a role model for the community. The whole way Oldham have handled this is a complete joke and is quite frankly disgraceful.

[BobG]

Are all those clubs that continued to employ Marlon Harewood a disgrace as well then Colin?

BobG

[wilts rover]

They probably are Bob as he has been stealing a living for a while - but I think you mean Marlon King?

[BobG]

Lol! You're probably right at that. Thank you!

Bob

[dknward2]

Nandos have also ended the sponsorship with oldham looks like this is going to cost Evans birds farther alot of money

[les@donr]

What will Oldham do if Evans's appeal isn't upheld?

[colincramb]

I hate to think whatever club he is employed at by the time the commission has looked at his case will do if his conviction is upheld. They will be effectively employing a convicted rapist that does not believe he has done anything wrong, which in my line of work woukd make an individual with that gravity of offence very high risk!

Of course, this is precisely why he should not have been employed until the commission have completed their investigation.

[TommyC]

I've been speaking to a number of colleagues (lawyers) about this and the general consensus seems to be that there's a decent chance his conviction will be overturned. No doubt the law firm that sponsors Oldham (who incidentally have confirmed they wont be withdrawing their sponsorship if he signs) have looked into the case and have come to the same conclusion and advised Oldham of this. If Evans' conviction is overturned and assuming he is still the player he was, they will have a player who suddenly becomes "in demand" minus the stigma that is currently attached to signing him. It would suddenly become acceptable to sign him. On that basis it starts to make a lot of sense particularly as they will have him signed up to a two and a half year deal.

On the subject of whether or not its actually right for a club to sign him at the present time or not, I really am truly on the fence. If I end up with a serious criminal conviction, I would be struck off and would no longer be able to practice as a Solicitor so the fact he could potentially be faced with no longer being able to ply his trade as a footballer really doesn't cut any ice with me. If I'd got a rape conviction my career would be finished.

 Having said that, I would no longer be able to practice law due to the requirements of my professional body (the Law Society) and the rules and regulations they set out. There are no such tests/rules for footballers so it boils down to a moral issue as to whether fans/sponsors are prepared to pay money to the club that employs such a person. The worry I have however is that the woolly liberal media in this country is very good at whipping up a storm over issues such as this (and Evans himself has courted the media also) and this manipulates peoples moral compasses so that they feel obliged to demonstrate their moral outrage. I'm sad to say it, but I treat such moral outrage with cynicism. Let us not forget that we've stood and watched wife beaters, gangsters, drug takers, drug dealers, violent men and even someone convicted of manslaughter turn out for Rovers and I really don't recall us being so vehemently against them playing for us. Is what Ched Evans did really so much worse than kicking someone to death outside a nightclub as was the case with one of our recent players? I think before we seize the moral high ground we should consider some of the unsavoury characters we've had playing for us in the not too distant past. What's changed? Have we all suddenly discovered we have morals about this kind of thing? Or is it the work of the media? Its a tricky one!

[Askern_reds]

How many men on here who are against Evans playing ever been with a girl who's pissed? Round back top rank night club, time n place , Romeo and Juliet's ,mr David's, bet there's a few? Can't see what Evans done anny different the girl never said no?

[BillyStubbsTears]

Tommy

What's changed is the ability of ordinary people to engage in a broad discussion on this.

Back when we were employing Jimmy Kelly and Micky Norbury, there was no way for individuals to engage in anything beyond a cursory discussion with their immediate circle of friends. And I suspect that many fans were blissfully unaware of what these players had done.

We have access to ongoing discussions now. Crucially, none of us have the excuse of ignorance of a situation. That has been a revolution. And the debates that emerge can revolutionise attitudes.

I draw a parallel with the issue of high profile paedophile cases.  Back in the 70s, such cases went unnoticed (or if noticed, were ignored) because their wasn't a widespread debate. We really DID have an agenda led by a small number of media outlets back then and if they didn't run with a theme, no-one did. Or if an isolated journalist noted something disturbing, it could be ignored. There wasn't the mechanism for information to be disseminated and for attitudes to be shaped through discussion.

 It's different today. I cannot imagine that Savile would get away with abusing kids for 30 years without so much as an eyelid being batted in the age of Twitter and internet discussion. There are now outlets for information to be aired and for opinions to be tested. It is a revolution that we're barely beginning to come to terms with.

 Look at this thread. You can find two hundred different opinions just here about Evans. With a broad spectrum of opinions and counter-opinions.

THAT is what's changed, and it's happened in less than a decade. It is a game changer for how we deal with big societal issues and how we form our opinions.

In simple terms, we could excused for idolising Micky Norbury for his hat-trick while claiming ignorance or indifference about his crimes. We can't have that excuse about Evans.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Askern.

I asked you a question the other night and you didn't reply.

If you'd gone out on a lads weekend away, got shit faced beyond the point that you could remember what had happened, got off with a woman and had sex with her, then the woman had phoned her (male) friend who had come and joined in and f***ed you up the arse while you were barely conscious, would he be absolved of rape because you didn't say "no"?

[Askern_reds]

If a woman was raped why would she phone a friend to come n join in,and no matter how pissed I was if someone gunna shove somat up my arse there would be fists flying in and a good fight happening

[IDM]

Askern you completely missed BST's point. 

[IDM]

How many men on here who are against Evans playing ever been with a girl who's pissed? Round back top rank night club, time n place , Romeo and Juliet's ,mr David's, bet there's a few? Can't see what Evans done anny different the girl never said no?

Askern a drunk woman or man can still consent.  If you read some of the stuff about Evans'case I am sure a point is made that for the other player, it was reasonable that he assumed consent had been given (perhaps by the woman's actions?) therefore not guilty of rape.

However, I assume that none of us here were on the Jury in Evans' trial?  Therefore none of us are party to ALL the evidence presented nor to ALL the legal directions given by the judge, nor to the previous appeal etc.

So really anything you or I say about the trial and how a verdict was reached, whether we believe it correct or not, is supposition, perception, and opinion.

Stick to the facts, Evans was convicted and is unrepentant.  He is unrepentant (it seems) of getting himself in the situation, regardless of whether it was rape or not.  He could apologise for being there, for the hounding his victim has received, to his girlfriend, to his family, and to the football community in general.

The debate is whether he should sign for and play for Oldham, whilst a convicted rapist - not whether he should have been convicted in the first place.

[IDM]

If Evans' conviction is overturned and assuming he is still the player he was, they will have a player who suddenly becomes "in demand" minus the stigma that is currently attached to signing him. It would suddenly become acceptable to sign him. On that basis it starts to make a lot of sense particularly as they will have him signed up to a two and a half year deal.

That and that alone is why I can understand a club signing Evans now, however IMHO he should not play for the first team until he clears his name, and there should be a clause that allows him to be released from a contract at the request of the club, if the conviction is upheld.

[RJHeader]

How many men on here who are against Evans playing ever been with a girl who's pissed? Round back top rank night club, time n place , Romeo and Juliet's ,mr David's, bet there's a few? Can't see what Evans done anny different the girl never said no?

Askern a drunk woman or man can still consent.  If you read some of the stuff about Evans'case I am sure a point is made that for the other player, it was reasonable that he assumed consent had been given (perhaps by the woman's actions?) therefore not guilty of rape.

However, I assume that none of us here were on the Jury in Evans' trial?  Therefore none of us are party to ALL the evidence presented nor to ALL the legal directions given by the judge, nor to the previous appeal etc.

So really anything you or I say about the trial and how a verdict was reached, whether we believe it correct or not, is supposition, perception, and opinion.

Stick to the facts, Evans was convicted and is unrepentant.  He is unrepentant (it seems) of getting himself in the situation, regardless of whether it was rape or not. He could apologise for being there, for the hounding his victim has received, to his girlfriend, to his family, and to the football community in general.

The debate is whether he should sign for and play for Oldham, whilst a convicted rapist - not whether he should have been convicted in the first place.

Isn't there a video of him apologising to his girlfriend/family?

At the end of the day, there is no law in place within football that says convicted rapists/muderers etc cannot play professionally after serving time. So in that case, he is and should be allowed to play.

Until PFA/FA/UEFA/FIFA bring in a law to change this, then he should be allowed to play.

[RJHeader]

we also don't know the full details of the signing until Oldham release their statement today/tomorrow, so its difficult to say about pay/first team or not etc

[IDM]

You mean on his self promoting website?  No contrition towards the victim then, to stop her being pursued?

In law, and in football rules, he is ALLOWED to play.  Whether he should play or not is a different matter - that's the debate here.  Clubs are equally allowed not to employ him.

[BillyStubbsTears]

RJ

He IS allowed to play. That's bleeding obvious.

The point is that society is also allowed to react to this.

I'm making my own small reaction. I was planning on going to the match on Saturday with my 8 year old. I won't be doing that now. I don't want to give money to a club that is taking this action.