davebuckley06

May I be the first to say that he used to be really good on football manager a few years ago

Nice touch for them all to turn up and pay their respects. Puts things into perspective

Adam Virgo looks like he's been kidnapped and forced to be there. Never seen anyone look so awkward on tv

Probably missed it somewhere but can you not buy season tickets for the new stand online? Only giving me the option of main stand or RRE

What was sang by our fans?

After looking further discrimination in the work place can is only against the law if you are discriminated against for any of the protected characteristics. Convictions isn't (as yet) a protected characteristic.

 

Doesn't mean discrimination of any sort for any reason is morally acceptable though

 

Nb not many people come on here and shoot down there own arguement

DAve

If you was right companies wouldn't be able to CRB check potential employees.

That's only for certain jobs tho is it not?

They really wouldn't be.

Show me that law.

A very quick search shows me this:

 

https://www.gov.uk/discrimination-your-rights/discrimination-at-work

Maybe, but following it through could ultimately have bankrupted the club.

I think the council's threat could have been the straw that broke the camel's back.

A simple meeting with all the sponsors a couple of weeks ago could have prevented this fiasco from ever getting off the ground.

The ignorance shown by the board is simply staggering!

It does look like the councils threat was key but is that morally right from the council?

 

Of course I agree that if the only two options we had were to take evans and go out of business or don't take evans and stay afloat then we have made the right choice.

 

However that should never have been the only options

 

People who have put us in this situation using whatever means necessary really need to have a real long look at themselves before they start to question anyone else's morals.

 

Pot kettle black springs to mind

I don't think there's any law that says you can't discriminate against a rapist who applies for a job. In fact there are some laws that make it mandatory to do so.

Your point about the majority is interesting. I'd feel pretty comfortable saying the majority of Latics fans were against the signing. My straw poll at work was probably the other way - most agreed he should be able to play football. When I put the scenario of "five job application forms, one from a rapist, which two get an interview?" in front of them their views shifted against the rapist.

Henry winter in the Telegraph has written this:

Oldham have been spectacularly stupid. The League One club ignored the moral issues of considering employing Evans. They also overlooked the practical problems hurtling their way, namely the public storm in its measured form (the majority) and also its menacing form (from the malevolent minority).

http://fw.to/CxcbdRV

You can call his malevolent minority a "mob". But I'm not part of it, even though I think the decision to progress things this far was just about the most stupid thing our football club could have done.

You can discriminate against a rapist who applies for a teaching job or certain healthcare jobs because these jobs are protected by law. Other than the jobs that are protected by law any other discrimination regardless of who or what they are against is quite simply discrimination

 

In your scenarios if they were real life cases your colleagues would be open to tribunal for discrimination

 

I'm not sure you can say they ignored the moral aspect of it. Afterall they have discussed the matter for at least a week that we know of this will have come up and is most likely one of the main talking points that came up.

 

I think we can say they were naive in under estimating the reaction but you can't account for absolute morons sending death threats and threats of rape. I'm sure most on here wouldn't have expected that. There was always going to be up roar but day by day that decreased, this I think they would have expected

Sir, I feel highly offended by your attempt to belittle those Latics supporters who came to the conclusion that Evans should not become a player for our team. Just because we have come to the same conclusion as the majority why have we been brain washed by them. Could it not be because it was the correct conclusion?

 

I haven't been influenced by any mod, I've no idea what has been said on social media as I don't use it, I have watched the BBC news items though, do they count as a mob leader?

 

I have followed the Evans case and acquainted myself with all the possible facts since his attempt to sign for Sheffield Utd. I then came to the conclusion that he should not return professional football.

 

And yes I have discriminated against him, he is a person of the lowest moral standards and a convicted rapist.

 

I also agree that we look ridiculous, this is because the board should have stuck to their original decision not to attempt to sign him.

Changing that decision is when they lost face.

 

The whole country is divided on this subject and despite despite what some may think the other players at the club will be divided as well. Those against his signing would probably have kept it to themselves for the good of "the team", but It would still have been a an unhappy dressing room. How would a divided team have dealt with the constant hostile baying of opposing fans every other week?

 

TBH if Evans had signed for Latics any game that he played in would have made me feel sick to the stomach, imagine him scoring, while he was sliding along the pitch on his knees with his arms in the air "Woohoo look at me I scored" I would feel nothing but nausea. Every victory with him in the side would have been a hollow one. If we won promotion it would be totally undeserved.

Reasonable and smart people suddenly deciding they can't think for themselves and deciding that you don't think evans should play for us is two completely different things. You could open your eyes and actually think for yourself and still be of the opinion he shouldn't play for us. It would wholly hypocritical for me to say people should think for themselves and decide he should play for us. You may not have been influenced by the mob that doesn't mean to say your not on the same level as the mob also doesn't mean to say you are. Many on here I would say are though.

 

If your truly offended with my post then I would suggest either you misread the post and jumped the gun or that infancy it's quite accurate and touched a nerve.

 

Your (and the rest of the anti evans brigades) stance that the majority were against him signing for us is bewildering also. What evidence do you have to suggest that your with the majority? A vote on owtb's? The same vote that 200 or so people voted in out of well over 2000 members? That's not a majority. The anti evans brigade were louder, more forceful and used majorly under hand tactics . . . This does not make them a majority.

 

You agree you have discriminated against him and then try to justify it??? Like there is any reason that breaking the law and lacking morals is acceptable because you feel strongly about something. You back the criminal justice system blindly in your stance that he is guilty yet in the next breath totally disagree with the criminal justice system who say he can go back to work just because it doesn't suit yours and many others views (sound like mob justice yet ....probably still won't see that though)

 

All this the board have embarrassed us and lost face is also a load of rubbish. Has it been handled perfectly? No . Outside of the latics fan base though how much criticism have we had for it? If you take your emotion out of it and look at the facts. We were thrown into a situation by the pfa ( Sundays announcement) despite a lot of media attention and pressure for updates we refused to rush into anything (positive) we took time to negotiate and come to a decision using the resources available ( Pfa , sponsors, the gaffer and presumably the squad he would be integrated into) ... I do agree sponsors should have been spoken to before it became public but if the PFA shafted us on Sunday how was that possible? Changing our mind after the origanal statement in no way makes us look stupid. It simply makes us look like we changed our mind. That happens everyday in football and in the wider world. I'm sure if you think about it at some stage this week/ month you personally have changed your mind about something ... Does that make you an embarrassment and mean you have lost face??? I would say not

 

 

You do make a very good point about his integration into the squad and that is something that surprisingly hasn't been talked about massively other than a few comments about if he starts scoring all will be fine. If I'm honest it's not something I have given much thought to until you have pointed it out. I would imagine your right and some players may have been against it. That could have a massive affect on the squad wether it be consciously or sub consciously.

 

I also agree with your point about cheer sing him to some extent. I've given this a lot of thought. I could happily have clapped him onto the pitch , when he did something good/skilful even scoring goals but I don't think I could sing his name although in the heat of the moment you never know. As others have said with time these apprehensions tend to leave us. I had no issue singing Hughes' name so maybe I would have been able to had we signed him or maybe back with Hughes I was young and immature and didn't appreciate the matter fully.

 

To your last point that every victory would have been undeserved. That quite frankly is aload of rubbish to put it nicely( which is a shame as we were starting to see eye to eye on a few things) How would 11 beating 11 be undeserved in anyway. Playing him wouldn't have been cheating

I sincerely hope you're not pigeonholing all anti-Evans supporters with that statement. Not wanting an unrepentant sex offender to represent the football club you support is a perfectly reasonable stance to take.

It may have been a bit too much of a sweeping statement not all but the majority yes

Do you mean predetory in the merely searching for easy sex kind of way, or do you mean something more sinister?

Just in the searching for easy sex kinda way

Let's steer clear of any further analysis of the case, please.

 

But I do want to just add, as part of the 'anti-Ched brigade' that I don't think anyone in favour of him signing is necessarily condoning his actions or defending him and I find your assertion that your opinion is common sense and mine isn't a tad difficult to swallow.

 

I didn't/don't want him to be a Latics player because he's a convicted rapist. It's not for me to analyse the case or to question the verdict that the jury reached and that the Court of Appeal didn't feel should be overturned. Whether you like it or not, he was convicted of rape. That's a fact, not an opinion. And I don't want my club to have rapist turning out for them.

I understand why u don't want him at our club. And I understand his conviction is fact. I havnt denied it is just putting 'the other' view across. The majority of anti evans brigade do see it as condoning it. It's just frustrating that grown men and women can't see the bigger picture and regardless of the courts decision can't see that things arnt always black or white or that it's been known on occasion that there have been miscarriages of justice just as Gordon Taylor has lauded to this evening

 

I'm not trying to persuade anyone anything. I'm just trying to put a balanced view across. Some people just refuse to accept/ see it

But realistically he has jus stated facts hasn't he. He hasn't said anything offensive or disrespectful.

 

Once again the baying mob will have there way though

Nicely put. This is why I think the mob rule that has stopped this is so disgusting. I feel deeply ashamed and sickened by the vile reactions of so many, sadly, some on this board but many more on social media in general as well as the two faced politicians and police chiefs etc.

 

Add to that the sheer incompetence of our Board and this has been the most dis-heartening week in the clubs history.

 

I really don't think I will bother on Saturday, just doesn't seem important or fun anymore

Disappointed with the club for giving into the mob but also disappointed with some people on here. There's the odd character you expect it from but there's a lot of we'll respected, reasonable and smart people on this forum who have suddenly decided they can't think for them selves or use any sort of reason. They have discriminated against him and are in the same league as the social media mob that have partly brought round this whole change of heart.

 

We look absolutely ridiculous now. At least if we saw it through we would have stuck to our convictions and backed what we started and claimed to believe in. I feel we would have saved a lot of face with a lot of people by following it through

 

Totally agree. Although personally whilst I'm not defending him, I'm not particularly bothered about him being in the room either.

 

Naive and ill advised - sure. Disrespectful to his girlfriend - certainly. But ultimately the only person he is hurting in any way via his mere presence in the room is his girlfriend, and that's a private matter.

It's a little bit predatory though int it

What do you suggest we replace the jury system with?

At no point have I implied we should replace it

 

They had to make a decision in this case it was based on opinion as the key thing couldn't be proved either way which is slightly worrying as unless I am mistaken to be found guilty in a court of law it has to be beyond any doubt

 

Which is why I feel he ought to concentrate on his criminal cases review instead of trying to get straight back into football. In fact, if I were in his shoes I'd have the heavily biased Ched Evans website closed down and openly discourage supporters of my cause to stop harrassing the victim. Then I'd fight tooth and nail to have my conviction overturned.

 

 

How do we know he's innocent? I believe we can only truly go off the verdict (and failed appeal) as the two crucial facts in all of this right now.

I think we all ( even the rediculously stubborn anti evans brigade) know full we'll that only 3 people know if he is innocent one can't remember and hasn't even accused him of it and the other two have said she consented. The case seems to be built around her being too drunk to consent. That is a matter of opinion as it can't possibly be proved. 12 jurors decided she was. That's were the ambiguity comes from and why so many people refuse to just blindly accept he's guilty. Problem is all the anti evans brigade take common sense as meaning people are condoning his actions and defending him

 

As far as I see no one has said he's innocent just questioned his guilt

 

That being said I don't think anyone has defending his actions in finding himself in the room origanally

Back to my immediate after match conclusions on Saturday;

To summarise it will be either;

a. Well done to the lads and manager, a good win and spirited display.

b. A point is ok under the circumstances.

c. I told you goals will be scarce with those holding midfielders.

d. What a shambles.

You missed e. If only we had an international striker proven at this level we might have won that

Dave, thanks for pointing that out and my sincere apologies, that was meat pie sausage roll and not you. Time for me to step back and read more carefully before I post. Sorry.

No worries

 

You're deliberately missing the point. The 'poor guy' as you called him is a convicted rapist. While there's a slender chance that might be overturned in seven months, as it stands he's a rapist and if he didn't want the problems that brings he shouldn't have raped someone.

I don't recall ever referring to him as 'poor guy' but feel free to prove me wrong. You should realise the world isn't black and white

One person is still people.

 

Edit - reverted text, not fair to change my post after its been replied to.

Is people not the plural for person??

Not rape people?

As far as we know he hasn't raped 'people'

I did no that yes

Apologies I may have misread your initial reply

 

(And not spotted my initial error)