Discussion in 'Hall Of Fame' started by Omega, Oct 17, 2014.
No he shouldn't.
People did kick up a bit of stink when Lee Hughes was coming back into the game but not as much because the original offense wasn't covered as much on the news to begin with.
But seen as Evans is a 'former Manchester City player' and a full Welsh International in the eyes of the media in a time were that club is doing well then it was given more coverage then the Lee Hughes case during the investigation and of course afterwards.
My main question is, if she had sex the same night with both Evans and the Port Vale defender, most likely around the same time then why did Evans get sent down and the other lad didn't?
It's a really tough one. CAN he play again? Well of course he can, he's done his time and this is his profession, of which his skills are in demand. SHOULD he play again, as a convicted rapist, and not only a convicted rapist but an unrepentant convicted rapist? I wouldn't sign him, and as a Welshman I hope he doesn't get picked again for the national side. Saying that, will my tone change should Evans become the next Radomel Falcao and signs for Barcelona? I don't know, I'd like to think not but I couldn't promise that.
Couple of people have mentioned the somewhat odd details surrounding his conviction, regarding the girl's admitted drunkenness and the Port Vale fellow also having sex with her but avoiding a prison sentence. Why? It's a nagging feeling which, as a bloke who sometimes has sex with girls, you wonder if meeting a drunk bird at a nightclub and having sex with her would result in my prison sentence too. Are the details and evidence from his trial in the public sphere? For one to go to jail and the other not, you've got to think there's some incriminating evidence somewhere which proves one had sex and the other raped.
For me at least, given the choice, I'd consign Ched Evans to the scrapheap. I just wouldn't feel right morally with that on my conscience.
Also, with the poll - I voted "yes". He should be allowed to play again, but I wouldn't give him the chance.
There are quite a few footballers over the years who have committed assault, actual bodily harm and hell even killed people.
Patrick Kluivert killed someone whilst at Ajax via dangerous driving and did 240 hours of community service before going on to have a stellar career. No one batted a bloody eyelid.
Craig Thomson showed his manly bits to a 12 and a 14 year old girl, offered to have sex with the 14 years old and sex chatted with them. He was given a £4,000 fine and put on the sex offenders register for 5 years. Hearts loaned him out to Lithuania and since then he has played for another club over there before coming back to Scotland to play lower league football.
Vinnie Jones whilst at QPR committed an act of assault, got a minor sentence, was allowed to play for the club again as well once released. Joey Barton, at City and Newcastle, committed acts of assault and was allowed to return to both teams.
Graham Rix, then 42 and assistant manager of Chelsea back in 1999 was convicted for 12 months for sleeping with a 15 year old - he was released in 6 months and allowed to return to Chelsea in his previous role.
Luke McCormick whilst at Plymouth caused a crash that killed two kids whilst driving around drunk as hell. He did his time, came back for Truro and then Oxford and is now back at Plymouth where he is, get this, the club captain.
Go look at Marlon King's rap sheet - the worst of which was Sexual Assault and Actual Bodily Harm whilst a Wigan player back in 2008-09. He was convicted, served time, released and found work at both Coventry and Birmingham City after that.
The of course we have Lee Hughes, killed someone by dangerous driving back in 2003, did 3 years, signed by Oldham once he leaves the club, then in 2011 beats a women up, originally charged with sexual assault and battery it was dropped down to common assault but Notts County still employed him.
There are no morals in football - he will find a club in League One or Two and maybe one day end up back in the Championship. I don't think Wales will pick him again but aside from that, no matter what peoples moral objections are, he will find work.
I've still got a problem with Lee Hughes. I don't feel he in any way paid for his crime whatsoever.
Oh and this kind of crap is not limited to just Football - take for instance American Football. Ray Lewis pretty much murdered someone, got away with it on a technicality, somehow became universally loved as leader of the Baltimore Ravens defence and is now a lock for the Hall of Fame and has a statue in Baltimore near the stadium. He is like the anti-OJ! Then you have Josh Brent, killed his team mate Jerry Brown by crashing the car they were in drunk and high as hell. He was charged with intoxication manslaughter, convicted but only got 180 days jail time and will be available to play for the Dallas Cowboys again later on this season after the NFL and the team let him back. He killed his fellow Cowboy and they are letting him back?!?! Plus Leonard Little whilst playing for the Rams again drunk as hell, drove into someone, killed them and served time for manslaughter before being allowed back to the Rams.
In basketball, Charles Smith killed two people doing the same thing, served time and then found a career moving about between the Canadian League, the NBA and Europe.
Don't even get me started on boxers. Riddick Bowe, Mick Tyson, Trevor Berbick and loads more with rape and kidknapping convictions but still allowed to box after release and earn tonnes of money, then you have Craig MacTavish who killed someone whilst drunk driving, then after release went on to win four Stanley Cup in Ice Hockey and be a coach, general manager and commentator after retiring.
Oh and last but not least of the top of my head you have Phil Taylor, Darts legend, indecently assaulted two women in 1999, had his MBE removed, fined £2,000 but served no jail time and is still from then and till now the face of international darts with computer games, tournaments wins and all sorts.
There is no morals in sports, just money.
Should there be morals in sports? Is it sports job to judge people? Is that fair when other people can commit the same crimes and go back and do their jobs? IS the law not there as our moral punishment for criminal acts?
Oh I cast no aspirations myself on the morals of sport full stop. Just that I don't get how people are surprised when people like Evans or any of those I mentioned get a job after they are sentenced and serve their time. It has happened for years and years across nearly every sport you can think of and like you say, it happens in 'real life' as well unless of course you are a teacher and you are done for a sexual offense against minors in which case I don't think anyone will ever employ you.
The issue really is with a) the criminal justice system giving out sentences in some cases that are nothing and don't punish or rehabilitate correctly or b) peoples preconceived notions that sports people are role models despite half the time it showing that the higher paid any person in any occupation the more likely it is they act like tits because money usually gets them out of the trouble such behaviour brings.
My post was showing that if all of those people can be re-employed then Evans is going to be so its pointless debating it. Legally there is no case against it and as for morals, there are none in sport, its an entertainment, result and cash driven business, that's all.
But I did ask "should" there be morals in sport? Do you think "sports" should have to be moral arbiters when the justice system is there for that exact reason? (regardless of whether you think the justice system works or not)
It could be said that society just doesn't have any morals. If a plasterer or a plumber or a lorry driver or sales admin (etc) can be expected to return to work after serving their time, but sport has no morals because sportsmen can return to sports, then logically no one has morals.
However perhaps the biggest moral is that if you do your time then you should be entitled to get your job back?
Well the whole point of jail is rehabilitation and punishment, therefore if you have done jail time and served your sentence then under the agreed laws of the land you are entitled to work again - of course if you reoffend then you should be sent back with a harsher jail sentence then before to reflect that you have committed previous offences. The issue here though is that the tariff system is pants and the jail system is a joke but that is societies problem - not sports.
As for Meg's point - there are sometimes moral checks in some sports, its just they don't work very well. For instance Ray Rice was originally suspended for two games following the battery of his wife, which some people thought was too lenient at the time - it took the footage being leaking onto the web for them to take a stricter approach about two months after his original suspension was given to him, the NFL then banned him for the season and his team cancelled his contract.
Likewise in the case of Josh Brent, his team had to first agree to re-sign him and to that they had to get permission from the NFL. As there is no media buzz around that case anymore then they said yes - were as the quarter back of the 49er's was caught on social media wearing Beats headphones and they fined him £10,000 because the official sound equipment supplier for the league is Bosse - because he was on social media 'committing an infraction against league rules' he was punished and even threatened with a suspension if he is caught wearing them again in public.
If the media cares or someone that could removed funding cares then the sporting institutions involved in a case care. John Terry didn't break any laws when he slept with Wayne Bridge's ex, but the media kicked off and he lost the England captaincy. The media have kicked off about this so Evans may not find a team straight away. The media didn't care about Lee Hughes that much so he got a new job, the Kluivert case got buried in the press and therefore he continued his career without issue.
That just means there is a weird double standard now instead of a proper system. Either don't care at all or actually, if you want to get involved in moral matters, set up a proper board of review etc, etc. Don't just react in a few cases when someone prints a big story or someone threatens to remove funding and ignore every other case.
You're not really answering the question though Gring's. Simply yes or no, should "sports" have morals when most other industries don't? Regardless of whether you consider the justice system to be good enough. Is it right that a sport takes a moral position, either way, on an issue like this when there is the law in place to deal with and punish those found guilty of committing an offence.
Should Sheff Utd have any prerogative to further judge Ched Evans subsequent to his release?
I don't know about "should", because that's a bit too black and white for me, but I think sports teams probably have a bit more social responsibility than the average business because of their cultural position. They claim to, and usually actually do, represent communities on a national, sometimes international level (Manchester is Manchester United, Amsterdam is Ajax, New York is the Yankees) so I think they do have that added level of having put themselves in the position where they're vaguely speaking for and representing millions of people in a way that's slightly more personal and slightly more complicated than the usual salesman/customer relationship.
Again, I don't know about "should", because that implies someone should stop them, or they're "wrong" if they do the opposite or something fixed like that, but I think it's a lot easier to say a sport's team should have a more public, more communal morality than almost any other kind of business because of the unusual relationship. In terms of that relationship, a sports team is probably closer to a religion or a political party in a lot of ways, and I think most people would agree that moral standards probably have to be a little tighter in those groups than they would be in the rest of the world (at least ideally, obviously, in real life, it's the exact opposite).
I don't agree with that either and if someone asked me at the time if he should have went back to play, I'd have said no all the same.
I think sports is different case, I don't think sports can be compared to a lorry driver for instance. Sports is an industry which actively influences people from all ages but because it influences children who look up to those in Sports such as Ched Evans etc there really should just be morals. As much as it is their job, I wouldn't want to even risk passing on the subliminal message to children that it's okay to do bad things because you'll get forgiven and everything will be the same as if nothing happened just because you're good at what you do.
Things such as lorry drivers etc, there is much less (practically none) influence on people/children. People like Ched Evans should go back to work in some manner - just not one in the public spotlight where they can influence and inspire children.
The official line from the girl is that she was too drunk to give consent, and whilst that may be true (but likely wasn't) I find it ridiculous that anyone could be found guilty of rape on that basis. If she was too drunk to give consent there and then, how can she possibly know that she did refuse to have sex with them? But even if she did refuse, there is no proof to back up her version of events, it's what she said against what the two men have said and, strangely, one man was found guilty and the other wasn't.
It worries me that men can be sent to prison on this basis. It's not fair that if you have consensual sex with a girl one night, she regrets it the next morning, cries rape and that's it, you're a rapist. It's completely wrong. I'm sure there are lots of girls who have had a lad back to their house, a hotel room or whatever, have refused sex and have been raped but whilst I feel for them, there has to be more evidence of assault if a person is to be found guilty than just their word against another persons.
Having read a bit about the case, I don't personally believed that she was raped but I might be completely wrong with that, it's only my opinion. I don't know what happened, but that's the point, unless there is conclusive proof that an assault did take place, then the benefit of the doubt should be given to the accused. It must be such a soul destroying thing to be tarnished with if you were innocent, and I don't agree with handing out guilty verdicts when there is a lack of proof.
I'm probably with Boyo on this one. Should he be allowed back? Well he served his time so, unless the FA wishes to make a statement to all other footballers that treating women as objects of abuse is a terrible thing to do, it's highly conceivable that he'll get a job somewhere and probably make a lot of money and hopefully never rape a woman again. However, would I let him into my team were I in such a position? No. This isn't John Terry breaking a 'man code' or Ryan Giggs going behind his brother's back, scummy guys though they both are. This was an illegal act where a man had sex with someone who didn't consent and is unrepentant about it. Why would I want that in my team? Sure, football is the kind of sport where homophobia and misogyny are one step away from god status, but I just couldn't have someone like that in the team or even particularly feel comfortable playing against a club with him against us.
The problem in what I've just said is that I've spent far too long practically pandering to football culture. That's an horrific indictment of the sport that the biggest argument in Ched's favour is "well, it's football so of course he can come back."
If Micheal Vick can come back he should too
Almost as if by design..
Vick relatives ran a dog fighting ring with Vick's knowledge at Vick's home, Ched Evans raped someone according to a court of law (but not Judy Finnegan). As crappy as Vick's crime was, Evans was way worse.
Separate names with a comma.