To be fair to Taylor it seems as if he was comparing the initial verdict and handling of the case to Hillsborough (which is universally agreed to be a shambles), as opposed to content or subject of the crime.
To be fair to Taylor it seems as if he was comparing the initial verdict and handling of the case to Hillsborough (which is universally agreed to be a shambles), as opposed to content or subject of the crime.
Agreed - people are going over the top saying "how can Taylor compare a rapist to the people who died at Hillsborough ?". He isn't.
But it was still very silly to bring up, surely Taylor knows at least one other case where someone who is vilified later clears their name.
How is it going over the top, there has been hundreds of cases of miscarriages of justice against individuals that could have been cited ,
The Hillsborough case was not just a miscarriage of justice it was a tragedy that cost lives of men women and children, and was a lazy cheap distasteful attempt to compare Evans with a football story,
a lot of footballers, managers, coaches , owners , chairmen, directors , ex footballers who now play their role in the media like Taylor the chair of their gang
take fans and people as mugs, their morale compass is so low driven by power wealth and greed , that scum like Evans think they can do what they want say what they want and we are so dim it doesn't matter, its the contempt the disdain for those who make them who they are for having the ability to kick a piece of leather around that is the cancer in football
the sooner these so called professional footballers are given a licence to play that says, if you murder, if you cause death by any means other than a terrible accident out of your control, rape, touch women or men indecently, use racial or homophobic language, etc you will lose your licence and never be granted it as long as your judicial sentence doesn't change due to a miscarriage of justice
the better
the whole of the people involved in the handling and support of Evans just continue to make it worse
It still amazes me that Taylor is in his high powered position as a trusted representative of football and those that play it when he was caught frittering thousands of pounds away on a gambling obsession!
Gordon Taylor is long past his sell-by date, just look at the state of him whenever he is on TV. However, at least he has nailed his colours to the mast and has tried to support one of his union's members, albeit in a manner that leaves a lot to be desired. What I have difficulty with in this matter is the complete silence of both the Football League and the FA. By now the very least I would have expected is for Greg Dyke or someone else of similar standing to have made it quite clear that in future no footballers committed of a crime will be able to return to earning a living through football until the full length of their punishment has been served. They should also consider outlining that certain crimes will lead to footballers having their freedom to play under the auspices of the FA withdrawn completely. This happens in other professions. At the moment we have complete silence and unless this is rectified it is only a matter of time before we go through something similar with another offender.
Gordon Taylor is long past his sell-by date, just look at the state of him whenever he is on TV. However, at least he has nailed his colours to the mast and has tried to support one of his union's members, albeit in a manner that leaves a lot to be desired. What I have difficulty with in this matter is the complete silence of both the Football League and the FA. By now the very least I would have expected is for Greg Dyke or someone else of similar standing to have made it quite clear that in future no footballers committed of a crime will be able to return to earning a living through football until the full length of their punishment has been served. They should also consider outlining that certain crimes will lead to footballers having their freedom to play under the auspices of the FA withdrawn completely. This happens in other professions. At the moment we have complete silence and unless this is rectified it is only a matter of time before we go through something similar with another offender.
Greg Dyke made a statement earlier today
"We have reviewed the Ched Evans case in some detail at The FA and we have examined both the legal requirements and our rules and regulations and there is no basis for us to intervene directly in this particular case.
"That said, it is important that we continue to look at the issue of behaviour and attitudes within football, and recognise the unique privileges and responsibilities that come with being a participating member of the national game.
"I would encourage the game to consider and discuss this matter and the prospect for future guidelines or codes of conduct. The FA will certainly be considering it in line with our own ongoing review of what constitutes public or private communications and behaviour."
Hull City boss Steve Bruce has questioned the conviction of rapist Ched Evans and says the footballer should be given a chance to play again.
Some people just amaze me. Firstly, from a PR point of view, why get involved?
Secondly, what stupid comments. The bloke has been found guilty in a court of law, and subsequently had an appeal thrown out. You cannot say he has a case, because right now he does not. He is a convicted rapist. End of.
Hull City boss Steve Bruce has questioned the conviction of rapist Ched Evans and says the footballer should be given a chance to play again.
Some people just amaze me. Firstly, from a PR point of view, why get involved?
Secondly, what stupid comments. The bloke has been found guilty in a court of law, and subsequently had an appeal thrown out. You cannot say he has a case, because right now he does not. He is a convicted rapist. End of.
It must be to do with his years of legal training. Oh. Wait.
See another one who believes footballers are above other people in society,
There are crimes you commit in life that stop you returning to whatheou done previous, rape should be one that footballers shouldn't be able to return to from
What if one is found guilty of kiddie fiddling would the same people say that's okay he should be given another chance
John mcquirik (spelling) asked Jason cundy last night, are you telling me you would be happy to share a changing room with a rapist and interact socialise celebrate with him, what does that say about your morale code
His answer that's not the point though is it
Yes it is its exactly the point, why should good people have to And be forced to interact with a rapist
Julia Hartley Brewer was of the opinion that the case was basically her [victim's] word against his [Ched's] and that finding Clayton not guilty and Ched guilty was an impossibility given the short space of time between the acts. In response to cries that she was accusing the Jury of not believing the victim, she made the point that the Jury had not believed the victim's account for Clayton's case.
Whatever your opinion of the matter is, I thought it was brave to air such comments during this media storm. Asking for trouble.
Do you not get it? Doesn't matter about peoples opinions who were not in the courtroom. The only people that matter are the 12 people on the Jury who heard every single fact of the case and found the bloke guilty. That doesn't mean he may be innocent because some people agree differently. He is guilty.
Appalling comments by Bruce - trying to act as judge and jury...what an arrogant man.
Yeah. He should leave that to the people on this forum!
Judge and jury have already made their decision, the majority of people on here are not questioning it, unlike Steve Bruce who must have sneaked into the public gallery and listened to every minute of the evidence in order to make the comment he has
See another one who believes footballers are above other people in society,
Not just above other people but also above the law - the whole world of professional football reeks of it and I have the distasteful 'pleasure' of having to deal with it at some point most days. I'd like a pound for every time I've heard 'yes, but it's different in football'.
Julia Hartley Brewer was of the opinion that the case was basically her [victim's] word against his [Ched's] and that finding Clayton not guilty and Ched guilty was an impossibility given the short space of time between the acts. In response to cries that she was accusing the Jury of not believing the victim, she made the point that the Jury had not believed the victim's account for Clayton's case.
Whatever your opinion of the matter is, I thought it was brave to air such comments during this media storm. Asking for trouble.
And her area of expertise is what precisely? Oh yeah, she's a low rent journalist.
As far as I recall ALL the victim was able to say was that she could not remember the events of the night. So hardly one person's word vs another is it? There must therefore have been other evidence: from Evans himself (before he got lawyered up I would guess), his mate, the others who filmed some of the events from outside the window (was the footage itself used in evidence I wonder?) and the night porter who said the girl was drunk. Plus the experts of course.
Of particular interest is this: when passing sentence, the trial judge said: ".... was in no position to form a capacity to consent to sexual intercourse, and you (Evans), when you arrived, must have realised that." As the women herself had no recollection of the events, there must, surely, have been other evidence to support this contention?
So the rent-a-gob journalist was not being brave, merely utterly stupid.
Meanwhile, we await the outcome of the case review. Surely only the conclusion that there is new evidence of merit or that some of the excluded evidence should have been admissible will give Evans the result he is hoping for?
Comments
But it was still very silly to bring up, surely Taylor knows at least one other case where someone who is vilified later clears their name.
The Hillsborough case was not just a miscarriage of justice it was a tragedy that cost lives of men women and children, and was a lazy cheap distasteful attempt to compare Evans with a football story,
a lot of footballers, managers, coaches , owners , chairmen, directors , ex footballers who now play their role in the media like Taylor the chair of their gang
take fans and people as mugs, their morale compass is so low driven by power wealth and greed , that scum like Evans think they can do what they want say what they want and we are so dim it doesn't matter, its the contempt the disdain for those who make them who they are for having the ability to kick a piece of leather around that is the cancer in football
the sooner these so called professional footballers are given a licence to play that says, if you murder, if you cause death by any means other than a terrible accident out of your control, rape, touch women or men indecently, use racial or homophobic language, etc you will lose your licence and never be granted it as long as your judicial sentence doesn't change due to a miscarriage of justice
the better
the whole of the people involved in the handling and support of Evans just continue to make it worse
Taylor is so lost up his own arse
"We have reviewed the Ched Evans case in some detail at The FA and we have examined both the legal requirements and our rules and regulations and there is no basis for us to intervene directly in this particular case.
"That said, it is important that we continue to look at the issue of behaviour and attitudes within football, and recognise the unique privileges and responsibilities that come with being a participating member of the national game.
"I would encourage the game to consider and discuss this matter and the prospect for future guidelines or codes of conduct. The FA will certainly be considering it in line with our own ongoing review of what constitutes public or private communications and behaviour."
Read more at http://www.thefa.com/news/2015/jan/statement-ched-evans-090115#JbYL6J7BlTeW6Pzu.99
Some people just amaze me. Firstly, from a PR point of view, why get involved?
Secondly, what stupid comments. The bloke has been found guilty in a court of law, and subsequently had an appeal thrown out. You cannot say he has a case, because right now he does not. He is a convicted rapist. End of.
Secondly, what stupid comments. The bloke has been found guilty in a court of law, and subsequently had an appeal thrown out. You cannot say he has a case, because right now he does not. He is a convicted rapist. End of.
It must be to do with his years of legal training. Oh. Wait.
There are crimes you commit in life that stop you returning to whatheou done previous, rape should be one that footballers shouldn't be able to return to from
What if one is found guilty of kiddie fiddling would the same people say that's okay he should be given another chance
John mcquirik (spelling) asked Jason cundy last night, are you telling me you would be happy to share a changing room with a rapist and interact socialise celebrate with him, what does that say about your morale code
His answer that's not the point though is it
Yes it is its exactly the point, why should good people have to And be forced to interact with a rapist
Julia Hartley Brewer was of the opinion that the case was basically her [victim's] word against his [Ched's] and that finding Clayton not guilty and Ched guilty was an impossibility given the short space of time between the acts. In response to cries that she was accusing the Jury of not believing the victim, she made the point that the Jury had not believed the victim's account for Clayton's case.
Whatever your opinion of the matter is, I thought it was brave to air such comments during this media storm. Asking for trouble.
As far as I recall ALL the victim was able to say was that she could not remember the events of the night. So hardly one person's word vs another is it? There must therefore have been other evidence: from Evans himself (before he got lawyered up I would guess), his mate, the others who filmed some of the events from outside the window (was the footage itself used in evidence I wonder?) and the night porter who said the girl was drunk. Plus the experts of course.
This short summary of the Appeal is worth a read. https://crimeline.info/case/r-v-ched-evans-chedwyn-evans
Of particular interest is this: when passing sentence, the trial judge said: ".... was in no position to form a capacity to consent to sexual intercourse, and you (Evans), when you arrived, must have realised that." As the women herself had no recollection of the events, there must, surely, have been other evidence to support this contention?
So the rent-a-gob journalist was not being brave, merely utterly stupid.
Meanwhile, we await the outcome of the case review. Surely only the conclusion that there is new evidence of merit or that some of the excluded evidence should have been admissible will give Evans the result he is hoping for?