Discussion
goldblum said:
Who is "cheering him on"? D'you mean the incidental fact that his employment in football might mean he is cheered for his on-pitch actions and people can't tell the difference between that and condoning his actions in the rape case?
It may seem distasteful, but we the public are not the lawmakers and we should abide by what the courts decide. Further, opinion in this matter is a purely subjective construct whereas laws are decided on an as much of an objective level as possible. They should apply to all, equally.
Being cheered on by OLdham fans, that is what the fan said he wouldn't like.It may seem distasteful, but we the public are not the lawmakers and we should abide by what the courts decide. Further, opinion in this matter is a purely subjective construct whereas laws are decided on an as much of an objective level as possible. They should apply to all, equally.
I don't see public making laws and issuing sentences, but they are (and have every right to be) vocal in who they want in the public arena. Oldham can still go ahead and hire whomever they wish, no public are preventing them from doing this, but they decided it's best not to, because they do not want the reaction to it, and thus the world turns. It's our system. The law has already been settled, that is not what galls some here.
goldblum said:
Most of the country couldn't care less, but a tiny but very vocal PC minority would like to extend sentencing in law by way of mob pressure to cover some kind of post-sentence employment. A sentence beyond a sentence, if you like. It's worrying and speaks volumes for the way British society has changed.
It's not post sentence though. I keep saying this but either people are choosing to ignore it, or don't understand it.He has been released on licence. He is still serving his sentence, the custodial part of his semtence is over so far, but that's it. He can be recalled to prison at any point for any offence to serve the rest of his time.
Halb said:
Being cheered on by OLdham fans, that is what the fan said he wouldn't like.
He/she doesn't have to like it - it's the law.Halb said:
I don't see public making laws and issuing sentences, but they are (and have every right to be) vocal in who they want in the public arena.
Again you speak of "the public". This is not the case though, it's not "the public" - and this is even acknowledged by the contributors to this thread who don't want Evans to play - it's a tiny minority who through media and financial pressure seek to influence Oldham's chairman/board and dictate who is morally upstanding enough to play.Halb said:
Oldham can still go ahead and hire whomever they wish, no public are preventing them from doing this, but they decided it's best not to, because they do not want the reaction to it,
Seriously? You think that's not the same as being prevented from doing so? - Clarksonesque semantics there!Halb said:
and thus the world turns. It's our system. The law has already been settled, that is not what galls some here.
How would a return to football be different if Evans returned to motor racing or hockey etc. D'you think there'd be so much hand-wringing?Here's an idea - If people are so appalled with Evans they can register their disgust by staying away from games.
goldblum said:
goldblum said:
Is there any legal restriction on him being paid to play football after he's released from prison?
LoonR1 said:
No
LoonR1 said:
It's not "post sentence" though
I know. If it pleases you I'll use 'incarceration'.My view FWIW is that the crime he committed was pretty awful, but others have got back into the game after far worse. Don't see why he should be excluded permanently. I do think he needs to be a bit more humble though
LoonR1 said:
It's not post sentence though. I keep saying this but either people are choosing to ignore it, or don't understand it.
He has been released on licence. He is still serving his sentence, the custodial part of his semtence is over so far, but that's it. He can be recalled to prison at any point for any offence to serve the rest of his time.
What difference does it make? You are either in prison or you are not. Me and you could be in prison tomorrow and I'm pretty sure neither of us are on license. Being on licence just makes it slightly easier to be sent to prison. And in regards to one of your previous posts... You can't just be sent back for anything. He has been released on licence. He is still serving his sentence, the custodial part of his semtence is over so far, but that's it. He can be recalled to prison at any point for any offence to serve the rest of his time.
The idea that you should remain in a state of captivity once released from prison is very very poor. Once released from prison you have the opportunity to rebuild your life. Not allowing them to do so is a hugely negative step.
photosnob said:
What difference does it make? You are either in prison or you are not. Me and you could be in prison tomorrow and I'm pretty sure neither of us are on license. Being on licence just makes it slightly easier to be sent to prison. And in regards to one of your previous posts... You can't just be sent back for anything.
The idea that you should remain in a state of captivity once released from prison is very very poor. Once released from prison you have the opportunity to rebuild your life. Not allowing them to do so is a hugely negative step.
There's a world of difference. If either of us are accused of a crime then we'll get a trial and then sentenced if found guilty. He'll be back to seve the remains 2 and a bit years without discussion. The idea that you should remain in a state of captivity once released from prison is very very poor. Once released from prison you have the opportunity to rebuild your life. Not allowing them to do so is a hugely negative step.
Yes you can just be sent back for anything (as described by me earlier, not anything in the widest sense), whilst on licence and serving the remainder of your sentence in the outside.
http://www.offendersfamilieshelpline.org/index.php...
Edited by LoonR1 on Friday 9th January 17:25
LoonR1 said:
I do think he needs to be a bit more humble though
If the image we're being painted of him by the media is true then I'd agree. I'm no fan of football in any shape or form, I just like an even playing field for everyone. He can't be stopped getting a job - how can someone be rehabilitated without one? - But as a society we can't allow judgement by a minority on twitter..or whatever. The trouble is the game of football itself, the obscene amounts of money, the insane dedication of some fans, the cheating and play-acting on pitch. In a way it's almost self fulfilling that the game itself creates this vile bloke with too much spare time and money and then goes through throes of recrimination and self-judgement before, eventually, taking him back. Yay football!goldblum said:
If the image we're being painted of him by the media is true then I'd agree. I'm no fan of football in any shape or form, I just like an even playing field for everyone. He can't be stopped getting a job - how can someone be rehabilitated without one? - But as a society we can't allow judgement by a minority on twitter..or whatever. The trouble is the game of football itself, the obscene amounts of money, the insane dedication of some fans, the cheating and play-acting on pitch. In a way it's almost self fulfilling that the game itself creates this vile bloke with too much spare time and money and then goes through throes of recrimination and self-judgement before, eventually, taking him back. Yay football!
There are many vile people in football, not all of them players, but they are the ones who the public are interested in. Ravel Morrison is a classic example. The problem is that the biggest tearaways tend to be the best players and there is no apprenticeship period before decent money kicks in. 18 year olds can be earning 30,000 a week. If I'm honest I'd be dead by now if id had that money at their age. Agents and sycophants combine to bring out the worst in many of these youngsters too. photosnob said:
Pothole said:
tter crap. If a man is raped by another man while intoxicated he would be expected to press charges and the rapist would expect to be convicted and jailed.
And if a women sleeps with a man who is drunk? Or if a women performs another sex act, is that sexual assault? Women like men are just as capable of being in the wrong... goldblum said:
Halb said:
Being cheered on by OLdham fans, that is what the fan said he wouldn't like.
He/she doesn't have to like it - it's the law.goldblum said:
Halb said:
I don't see public making laws and issuing sentences, but they are (and have every right to be) vocal in who they want in the public arena.
Again you speak of "the public". This is not the case though, it's not "the public" - and this is even acknowledged by the contributors to this thread who don't want Evans to play - it's a tiny minority who through media and financial pressure seek to influence Oldham's chairman/board and dictate who is morally upstanding enough to play. It's not a tiny minority, that is your projection. I know people who don't think he should be hired but they are not openly stating it on twitter or whatever. Morals do come from 'the public'. goldblum said:
Halb said:
Oldham can still go ahead and hire whomever they wish, no public are preventing them from doing this, but they decided it's best not to, because they do not want the reaction to it,
Seriously? You think that's not the same as being prevented from doing so? - Clarksonesque semantics there!goldblum said:
Halb said:
and thus the world turns. It's our system. The law has already been settled, that is not what galls some here.
How would a return to football be different if Evans returned to motor racing or hockey etc. D'you think there'd be so much hand-wringing?goldblum said:
Here's an idea - If people are so appalled with Evans they can register their disgust by staying away from games.
Great idea! On QT last night Davis and Wales made the point that in certain jobs after certain crimes (they rattled a few off) that one simply cannot expect to walk straight back into the old position. It is short-sighted and particularly arrogant/moronic to think one can. Evans has chanced his arm, and come up short. He needs to win his appeal.
Edited by Halb on Friday 9th January 18:35
I've looked at the first part of your post but as we obviously differ wildly in our perception of what's actually happening out there I don't think there's much point.
Anyway,no, they don't. Don't get confused between morals and group norms. Norms and social reinforcement start at age 4-5, thus the importance of family life. Group norms start generally in teenage years when a 'base' of individual beliefs (morals) are already in place. An individual's group norms are often transient with the individual reverting to previously held beliefs when they recover identity. Of course it is quite possible to be part of a group and not follow accepted behaviour as long as an individual's behaviour doesn't challenge the group's identity too much. What we are witnessing here with the Evans case is not moral outrage, it's a more basic human emotion that wants someone to be seen to pay for a crime, regardless of the ramifications and regardless of the fact they've already been incarcerated. The phrase here is SEEN TO PAY, and football is way to much fun for it to be allowed to happen. Evans mustn't just pay the way the law has decided, oh no , there's higher forces at work here.
Halb said:
Morals do come from 'the public'.
Is this 'the public' as I see it or your version? Anyway,no, they don't. Don't get confused between morals and group norms. Norms and social reinforcement start at age 4-5, thus the importance of family life. Group norms start generally in teenage years when a 'base' of individual beliefs (morals) are already in place. An individual's group norms are often transient with the individual reverting to previously held beliefs when they recover identity. Of course it is quite possible to be part of a group and not follow accepted behaviour as long as an individual's behaviour doesn't challenge the group's identity too much. What we are witnessing here with the Evans case is not moral outrage, it's a more basic human emotion that wants someone to be seen to pay for a crime, regardless of the ramifications and regardless of the fact they've already been incarcerated. The phrase here is SEEN TO PAY, and football is way to much fun for it to be allowed to happen. Evans mustn't just pay the way the law has decided, oh no , there's higher forces at work here.
Halb said:
Evans has chanced his arm, and come up short.
He hasn't 'chanced his arm' - this implies he took risky punt at something and couldn't manage it. This was not the case as it was external factors that prevented him playing for Oldham. Based on the fact other footballers have been re hired by clubs I'd say the 'risk' was minimal. What's prevented him from playing isn't even threats against him, it's threats of a financial nature to those who would hire him.goldblum said:
I've looked at the first part of your post but as we obviously differ wildly in our perception of what's actually happening out there I don't think there's much point.
Fair enough. 
goldblum said:
Halb said:
Morals do come from 'the public'.
Is this 'the public' as I see it or your version? goldblum said:
Anyway,no, they don't. Don't get confused between morals and group norms. Norms and social reinforcement start at age 4-5, thus the importance of family life. Group norms start generally in teenage years when a 'base' of individual beliefs (morals) are already in place. An individual's group norms are often transient with the individual reverting to previously held beliefs when they recover identity. Of course it is quite possible to be part of a group and not follow accepted behaviour as long as an individual's behaviour doesn't challenge the group's identity too much. What we are witnessing here with the Evans case is not moral outrage, it's a more basic human emotion that wants someone to be seen to pay for a crime, regardless of the ramifications and regardless of the fact they've already been incarcerated. The phrase here is SEEN TO PAY, and football is way to much fun for it to be allowed to happen. Evans mustn't just pay the way the law has decided, oh no , there's higher forces at work here.
Anyway, yes they do. Moral outrage...possibly. No-one I know is outraged, but there are probably those out there that are, maybe even genuinely!
goldblum said:
Halb said:
Evans has chanced his arm, and come up short.
He hasn't 'chanced his arm' - this implies he took risky punt at something and couldn't manage it. This was not the case as it was external factors that prevented him playing for Oldham. Based on the fact other footballers have been re hired by clubs I'd say the 'risk' was minimal. What's prevented him from playing isn't even threats against him, it's threats of a financial nature to those who would hire him.Once again you don't give an argument in return you just disagree... . An interesting tactic but one that doesn't exactly make debate easy.
Halb said:
Evans has chanced his arm, and come up short.
He hasn't 'chanced his arm' - this implies he took risky punt at something and couldn't manage it. This was not the case as it was external factors that prevented him playing for Oldham. Based on the fact other footballers have been re hired by clubs I'd say the 'risk' was minimal. What's prevented him from playing isn't even threats against him, it's threats of a financial nature to those who would hire him.Halb said:
Yes he has, he has expected to walk straight back into the old job. It was a risky punt, evidence by what has happened, what occurred at Sheffield should have been enough to even the most blinkered, but turns out it wasn't.
Uh-huh.The risk you speak of that Evans should have been aware of occurred after he tried to get 'the old job' back! How on earth you think Evans could have foreseen the furore that has ensued? Have other footballers convicted of rape tried to work again at Sheffield but been barred through action instigated on social media?Gassing Station | Football | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff