Barnsley have signed a player accused of

Whoa fella I wasn't having a pop at you individually rather saying we should all take a step back its so easy for a witch hunt to take place

 

No one is comparing him to Lee Hughes. He was just used as an example of a footballer that was in trouble with the law.

No one is saying he's guilty. It explicitly states he's not in the op.

 

I know Jay and it's a very valid question. For me the answer is I'm happy with the signing ethically if the guy is worth our help. I think everyone who's worth a second chance deserves it.
And I do know we haven't signed him for altruistic purposes but I hope they had some bearing in things.

 

I'm really not after a witch hunt. I believe in innocent until proven guilty. And I don't really want to talk about the incident. I am interested in the views of people about signing a player who will face trial. And I don't think there's a right answer.

 

Thrilled about the player signing but not so about the potential charges.

Innocent until proven guilty of course though!

Is he accused of being the person responsible for the stabbing or is he being charged as an accomplice? My thoughts are that surely if they had significant evidence that he did the stabbing then he wouldnt be out walking the streets would he has he would surely be considered dangerous?

 

What was your stance when we 're signed hammill a player convicted if assaulting female paramedics while at work?

 

How you work that one out. irrelevant.. Unlike my reply to Jay... It seems you've already found him guilty... The time to comment is when we know the full facts until then it's just gossip and accusations until he goes on trial the lad is innocent of all charges..

 

I thought what Hammill did was pretty reprehensible. However, he pleaded guilty, acknowledged he was at fault, apologised and if what I've read about him since is correct, attempted to improve himself as person after the incident.
None of that makes it OK what he did, but I believe if people acknowledge they were at fault and attempt to make up for that then they should be given a second chance to prove themselves.

 

Interviewer: So Mallik, I want you tell me about a time that you showed true grit and determination in the face of a difficult situation, what was it and how did you respond?

Mallik: well I was once in this fight in Leeds with a group of mates and the bloke was really being an arse, so we stabbed him.

Interviewer: Nice one you’re in.

 

Can’t deride Fleetwood for their actions then look the other way when it comes to signing a player.

 

Mallik states on the official site that "Barnsley made me feel wanted".

Let's try to keep it that way, until we know more.

 

I don’t know enough about the lad, other than he’s from and still lives in a dodgy area, his brother was killed by a gang the other year allegedly, and he has allegedly been involved in an incident last year where someone got stabbed (he didn’t stab anyone, it’s alleged he was involved earlier in the situation). You could to take a wild guess and link the two as a retaliation crime if you wanted to.... but I’ve no idea.

Seems to me he just needs to use his money to get out of the area and make a clean break away from it and leave his old mates behind so he doesn’t ruin his own life or career before it’s too late.

 

Contract caveats perhaps

 

FFS - I’m talking about when I was his age.
Late teens to mid twenties every fooker I knew was always mixed up in some sort of battle.
Might be a generational thing - or what estate you were brought up on.
If you have seen the film Kes - then you have seen a reflection of my background.

Someone mentioned a knife - I’m talking about fighting without knifes.

 

It causes me no concern at all.

He is a young man accused of offences he denies.

Unless and until convicted there is no issue. He is innocent until proven guilty.

In the event of offences being proved then the nature of the offences, the factual basis of the convictions and the sentence imposed would require the position to be considered afresh.

 

I had a bit of a "holier than thou" attitude towards who we ought to have at Oakwell , until the Ben Stokes episode.

Bash 'em Ben is now the darling of the Lords pavilion, despite the evidence of his thuggery, and despite his "innocence" (by virtue of being charged with the wrong offence).

So why should we look at what Mallik may or may not have done, turn our noses up and say "it's not cricket".

 

If he was accused of the actual stabbing I think the charges would be more serious - gbh.

 

From the reports he lives not far from my office in Colton, it’s full of old people, sleepy middle class suburb.

 

Thing is like you pointed out in your first post, until proven guilty he is innocent. I would tear the contract up should that change but until that time there is zero issue here.

It's slightly different when clubs were signing players who had already previous been found guilty in a court of law.

So I'd say the unethical bit would be to not give him a chance when indeed he may be found innocent anyway.

 

I was talking with Hammil 2 years ago in the Royal at Barugh Green.
I couldn't get away as he was desperate to speak.
He felt the need to discuss is incident.
I kept saying to him we all make misstakes.
Having listened to his side of the story I changed my views about him.
He promised me 4 tickets for Preston away ,my first game as I was away for the summer.
True to his word he left them in the ticket office at Preston.
Someimes we can all be judgemental and have our opinions of different people we should know all the facts before we judge.
However I can see where Jays coming from regards other teams buying players with history.
He who hath no sin let him cast the first stone.