Ched Evans - Rational View

I'm sorry, but I don't agree with that one jot. If that person has done something wrong, and in this case, it's one of the lowest forms of wrongs I can think of, then he should be punished. A few years in prison - is that just for taking the choice away from a young woman, and probably scarring her for life, both emotionally and physically? I don't think so. I don't have children yet, but I often go to the football games with my mum and/or my wife, and I wouldn't want them sat in the stands, seeing a convicted rapist running around the pitch, enjoying doing something he loves to do. What if the woman that had been raped was your wife? Would you be happy to watch him play football, be it live or in the stadium, or would you want him extricated?

 

Then change the law and change the sentencing.

 

If only...

 

It raises observations about the type of crime and criminal too.

If you knew somebody who had done time for burglary, you would in theory want him rehabilitated into society so he could get a job, pay his way and EARN a living rather than keep STEALING a living. Lesson learned, new moral standards ...... win / win.

But a rapist ? Whether he accepts it or not. Does the same reasoning apply ? Do we hope he returns to work, lesson learned and tries again ? If he is not accepted back as a player, where else would he work ? Media ? Coaching ? Working with young offenders ? As Fi says, there are some bodies where he just won't be allowed to work, simple as ! What profession is deemed suitable to you ? And if the answer is none, are you happy to see him drift into other criminal areas to "earn" a crust. No. Then really what we are saying is that he should have been eliminated at trial - off with his head and we shouldn't have to worry about him.

I could never have sympathy with a rapist, but would have a little more sympathy with his 'situation' had he not been such an arrogant ar53hole from start to finish. A bit of humility, a large dose of forgiveness and a willingness to know he has done wrong and get back on track and I could well be a little more given to reluctantly accepting him back into society in some shape or form.

 

I posted on this subject the last time we had this debate, grey areas,....fine lines....and so on
now another debate which i dont mind as this subject will run and run.
but what if it was your son who was about to be released, would you take the same stance he shouldnt be allowed this or that, like many are, or would you be saying , hes done his time clean slate......
Give him a chance....or would you have cast him away and disowned him.

 

Exactly and what does this say about football.

 

A difficult issue. Answering in terms of the original post only. In terms of reoffending given that the delightful Ched believes his actions were blameless I would say you have a definite risk of reoffending. You only learn your lesson if you think there's a lesson to learn

 

Chop his **** off?

 

Would it be OK if he was to serve your mum/wife in Tesco? How about he goes in to plumbing and calls round to fix your taps while you're at work? Just where do we draw the line about where people with convictions that have done their time should or should not be allowed to work?

And of course it goes further than employment because he lived in Millhouse Green, how safe would you feel if he went back there to live? If you say he shouldn't live there then he's the same person even if you banish him to Doncaster and would they feel any safer?

If we don't believe that people can't be rehabilitated back in to society then we either have to reintroduce the death penalty for more than murder or send people to jail for life. Is that what you're saying?

 

Not far enough....nail it to us forehead

 

Depend though. Say you were in the same position as Ched who is adament the jury got it wrong. Would you admit to something you believe you didn't do even though you were found guilty of it just so you can come back to football?

 

If he was a ***** footballer this wouldn't matter.

Personally, I don't think he should be able to continue a career in football.

But, I'd laugh my **** off if he returned to Immoral FC.

 

If he appeals and it is upheld, then fair enough. I did not follow the court case and have no legal training, but he was tried and found guilty on the evidence available. I am aware that mis-carriages of justice occur and this case may have boiled down to one persons word against another, but the circumstances are still un-savoury. Sport seems willing to turn a blind eye to behaviour shunned by most other factions of society, as long as you're good, that is.

 

Spot on cannot put it any better

 

Apologies, it was very long and I was at work so I put my views without reading anyone else's.

 

And when I said, everyone misses the obvious point, that wasn't directed at you, it was about Sheffield United fans.

 

As well as the moral issue there is also the question of security .
Clubs get clobbered enough as it is, extra security will be a must as the nature of his crime will infuriate fans and non fans into trying to confront him imo.
Is it fair to expect clubs such as Rochdale etc with low gates payi g extra security to protect him or should they claim from sheff utd
Evans will have had to spend his time in a segregation wing of the prison for the nature of his crime so imo he will be susceptible to the odd screwball making a name for himself.

 

It's not a complicated one for me: convicted rapists shouldn't be allowed to play football. In the US the NFL are having the same ethical questions raised about players convicted of Domestic abuse. For me the game is a multimillion pound (probably billion) pound industry - the eyes of world on the players both on the pitch and off it. There have to be ethical standards for the game. I certainly think if you have committed a crime which has resulted in your imprisonment you should not be permitted to play by the Football Association. I think it is up to the FA to schedule a list of offences that are clearly incompatible with the aims and the moral values of the game. Sexual offences should be on the list without question, racially or religiously aggravated offences too.