Movers and shakers tonight?

[SWA]

People didn't boycott Wembley as the news about Chapman hadn't been made public at that time!!!!!!!

[YF Dan]

For goodness sake, once someone has served their time, do we not want them integrated back into society?

[theox]

A quick google search indicates the level of criticism Truro got from the national tabloid press for signing McCormick so I think the OUFC press office better batten down the hatches today...........

Whilst I agree that once a person has served their time (whether the sentence is long enough is a different argument altogether) the PR disaster here is terrible particualry as Lenagan's justification for it was basically that McCormick is cheap and possibly (being the operative word) still quite a good keeper. I wish he was getting his 'second chance' elsewhere......

The other thing that doesn't sit right with me is that I will feel very uncomfortable watching kids at games appluading a man who has killed 2 children. That's a personal thing but I do not believe I will be alone.

[theox]

One example of 44 news stories that appear on a Google News search for 'Luke McCormick'.

http://www.itv.com/news/story/2013-02-0 ... rd-united/

Headline is 'Death Crash Goalkeeper signed'.

Not brilliant PR.

[Yankee Clipper]

For goodness sake, once someone has served their time, do we not want them integrated back into society?

For me this is as much about the huge PR disaster that the club have heaped upon themselves by signing him. Integrated back into society yes, but don't want him playing professional football at my club.

Also I take task about served their time. This man was in his mid 20's so no kid, he knowingly got into a car whilst drunk and uninsured and proceeded to kill two young people. Whilst I fully appreciate that sentence was passed by a judge, I feel that 4 years is woefully short of paying his dues.

I am always someone who believes in second chances but wish that Oxford United a self proclaimed family club, with Chapman already in the squad had the common sense and moral decency to see what an unmitigated shit storm this would create.

It's a poor move, and I for one am disappointed in them.

[Isaac]

I thought IL's statement was a bit crass yesterday, since it alluded to the fact that McCormick was cheap. And there are two possible reasons for that 1) He's not very good and/or 2) his previous conviction. It undoubtedly is a mistake from the club as there will be a significant amount of negative PR from this and the benefit of having McCormick is arguably not worth it. Having two ex-convicts at the club does make me start to wonder if it's a policy decision though....

There are some perplexing double standards from our fans though (I just had a look at YellowForum and it seems to be in meltdown about having a killer at the club) - there are a lot of similarities between McCormick and Chapman, both made a bad decision with terrible consequences and have subsequently paid for their mistake. Chapman was welcomed back with largely open arms, McCormick is possibly going to be hounded out.

[theox]

I thought IL's statement was a bit crass yesterday, since it alluded to the fact that McCormick was cheap. And there are two possible reasons for that 1) He's not very good and/or 2) his previous conviction. It undoubtedly is a mistake from the club as there will be a significant amount of negative PR from this and the benefit of having McCormick is arguably not worth it. Having two ex-convicts at the club does make me start to wonder if it's a policy decision though....

There are some perplexing double standards from our fans though (I just had a look at YellowForum and it seems to be in meltdown about having a killer at the club) - there are a lot of similarities between McCormick and Chapman, both made a bad decision with terrible consequences and have subsequently paid for their mistake. Chapman was welcomed back with largely open arms, McCormick is possibly going to be hounded out.

Perhaps some of difference in reaction relates to the fact that Chapman was 'one of ours' when it happened so we 'stuck by him' whereas with McCormick we are unnecessarily taking on someone else's mess. Plus, there will always be more emotion involved with both drink driving and where children are killed.

[amershamwrighty]

I'm pleased that this place is an oasis of calm and reason this morning - albeit with strong opinions either way - after the hysteria on Twitter last night.

My view ? At the risk of sounding like a woolly liberal, before I judge McCormick, there are three questions :

- has the judicial system been properly applied ? Almost certainly yes, whether or not you agree that 2 years inside is adequate punishment

- is there a risk of reoffending ? Don't know. Suspect there is a risk, but possibly a small one

- has he expressed genuine remorse ? According to IL, apparently so

I guess the chap is going to be paying for his crime for the rest of his life, as is Chappers.

One thing I hope is that if he actually plays for us, he isn't booed. I don't expect him to be applauded for anything other than a decent performance.

[Myles Francis]

There are some perplexing double standards from our fans though (I just had a look at YellowForum and it seems to be in meltdown about having a killer at the club) - there are a lot of similarities between McCormick and Chapman, both made a bad decision with terrible consequences and have subsequently paid for their mistake. Chapman was welcomed back with largely open arms, McCormick is possibly going to be hounded out.

You say double standards, I say having full regard to the circumstances of their crimes. From the outset, let me state that I was very uncomfortable with the club's support of Chapman, and found a lot of the fans support of him distasteful and disrespectful to the family of the deceased.

Both the Chapman and McCormick incidents resulted in the tragic loss of life of innocent parties. Where they differed though is that Chapman's was in a moment of inattention whilst sending a text, whilst McCormick took a premeditated decision to get in an uninsured car and drive it at excessive speed whilst double the legal limit of alcohol was in his system. There was also a significant difference in age (and, you'd think, maturity) between the two.

[Isaac]

I really don't want to get into the details of the cases as it's depressing. I agree there is a difference (as shown by the length of prison sentences they received), but it's a relatively subtle difference. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if both IL and Wilder took into account the Chapman reaction when they decided to sign McCormick.

The problem for me is, if you say Chapman ok, McCormick not ok and are going to be asked why, you are going to end up attempting to make excuses for Chapman, and/or demonising McCormick. To me the choice is

1) Accept the position that they've served their time and have the right to be re-integrated back into society
or
2) Suggest OUFC have a charter around players with convictions and whether they're allowed to play for the club or not.

My view, for what it's worth, is 1).
Ultimately though, this could have been avoided by OUFC not signing McCormick in the first place.

[Radley Rambler]

There are some perplexing double standards from our fans though (I just had a look at YellowForum and it seems to be in meltdown about having a killer at the club) - there are a lot of similarities between McCormick and Chapman, both made a bad decision with terrible consequences and have subsequently paid for their mistake. Chapman was welcomed back with largely open arms, McCormick is possibly going to be hounded out.

[/quote]

You say double standards, I say having full regard to the circumstances of their crimes. From the outset, let me state that I was very uncomfortable with the club's support of Chapman, and found a lot of the fans support of him distasteful and disrespectful to the family of the deceased.

Both the Chapman and McCormick incidents resulted in the tragic loss of life of innocent parties. Where they differed though is that Chapman's was in a moment of inattention whilst sending a text, whilst McCormick took a premeditated decision to get in an uninsured car and drive it at excessive speed whilst double the legal limit of alcohol was in his system. There was also a significant difference in age (and, you'd think, maturity) between the two.[/quote]


I think this is the nub of it for many people. I have often texted whilst driving and perhaps there but by the grace of God go I. Chapman was hugely unfortunate in that his momentary lack of attention due to his texting resulted in the death of another and a friend of his family at that. I actually felt incredibly sorry for him at the time. I'm not trying to excuse him but it could have happened to me and I suspect the vast majority of people who have driven since texting was invented. I should point out that since Chapman's conviction I have never texted from my car because his example made me think very carefully about what might just happen if I continued......

I have never however, got into a car twice over the drink drive limit without insurance and driven at high speed.

I accept YF Dan's point about McCormick having served his time and he should therefore, be allowed to resume his career but in terms of club PR, this is not a good decision. I will not boo McCormick and will treat him like any other player.

[JoeyBeauchamp]

There are some perplexing double standards from our fans though (I just had a look at YellowForum and it seems to be in meltdown about having a killer at the club) - there are a lot of similarities between McCormick and Chapman, both made a bad decision with terrible consequences and have subsequently paid for their mistake. Chapman was welcomed back with largely open arms, McCormick is possibly going to be hounded out.

You say double standards, I say having full regard to the circumstances of their crimes. From the outset, let me state that I was very uncomfortable with the club's support of Chapman, and found a lot of the fans support of him distasteful and disrespectful to the family of the deceased.

Both the Chapman and McCormick incidents resulted in the tragic loss of life of innocent parties. Where they differed though is that Chapman's was in a moment of inattention whilst sending a text, whilst McCormick took a premeditated decision to get in an uninsured car and drive it at excessive speed whilst double the legal limit of alcohol was in his system. There was also a significant difference in age (and, you'd think, maturity) between the two.

This is spot on. If there is a 'less worse' offence it was Chapman's. i would imagine many otherwise right-thinking, law-abiding people, me included, have sent a text at the wheel, or broken the speed limit. If that action then results in killing someone then you deserve to face the consequences, but it is essentially a tragic set of circumstances brought about by a stupid error. To knowingly jump behind the wheel when shit-faced and uninsured is a very different thing.

He may turn out to be great for us, but surely there were other keepers out there with less, shall we say, baggage?

[Mooro]

Crumbs, an awful lot to say on this, but given that I already gave yesterday over to watching the transfer window develop, I cannot afford to write today off as well….
So in short:

Firstly, my own personal view - I am happy for LM to play on a talent/form basis I am happy for him to join us having served his ‘time’, assuming references to his repentance are true I am happy for the club to be seen to be offering people second chances/rehabilitation I am happy that any negative PR, if there is any, will soon pass.

However, a question for myself – at first glance I was astounded at the level of venom cursing around the veins of YF last night, how could they be spouting so much rubbish I thought. However, on reflection, I now question whether I am right to consider those views as a gross over-reaction which should be dismissed as such or whether I am at fault for not being able to recognise those as legitimate alternate views that should be respected, even if I do not concur or even understand?

I suspect the same question should then be posed to CW/IL, if they have not already considered it, along with a second question as to whether their view (which I suspect mirrors my own {or I theirs to be more accurate}) means that the club should plough ahead hoping to win over the naysayers, or should the diversity of opinion across the fanbase be sufficient to put aside their own views and step away from such a controversial decision in the interests of club unity, at the potential costs of weakening the side on the field?

AS for PR – I would hope that somewhere, beyond any short term hype, a more considered study of the stories of Chapman, LM and OUFC is made one day, with issues such as rehabilitation and the moral standpoints attached to such offences assessed, without the hype we are seeing at present. Could some good come of this, not least through more people adjusting their behaviour regarding driving with care and attention as RR did?

Then, the offence – I still think that LM and Chapman should be put together on this, as although LM may have made a decision (while drunk, upset and angry – according to reports) to drive while over the limit and at speed, Chapman made a conscious decision (while completely sober) to be playing with his phone rather than concentrating on driving. Is a bad judgement made under the influence any worse than one made while sober? Neither to me, however, are anything beyond misjudgements that on 99 occasions out of 100 would have resulted in no harm to anyone, but on this 100th occasion had tragic consequences, rather than some of the accusations that have emerged. There is arguably less intention to harm others than with those convicted of assault or even, more tenuously, adultery.

“There but for the grace of God go I

[Isaac]

This is spot on. If there is a 'less worse' offence it was Chapman's. i would imagine many otherwise right-thinking, law-abiding people, me included, have sent a text at the wheel, or broken the speed limit. If that action then results in killing someone then you deserve to face the consequences, but it is essentially a tragic set of circumstances brought about by a stupid error. To knowingly jump behind the wheel when shit-faced and uninsured is a very different thing.

He may turn out to be great for us, but surely there were other keepers out there with less, shall we say, baggage?

This is what I mean about making excuses or demonising. Just because what Chapman did is something that lots of us may have done in the past, it doesn't necessarily make it any less dangerous.

As for driving over the limit - if you, like most of us, occasionally get drunk of an evening and then drive the next day there is a very good chance you have driven over the limit.

[JoeyBeauchamp]

This is spot on. If there is a 'less worse' offence it was Chapman's. i would imagine many otherwise right-thinking, law-abiding people, me included, have sent a text at the wheel, or broken the speed limit. If that action then results in killing someone then you deserve to face the consequences, but it is essentially a tragic set of circumstances brought about by a stupid error. To knowingly jump behind the wheel when shit-faced and uninsured is a very different thing.

He may turn out to be great for us, but surely there were other keepers out there with less, shall we say, baggage?

This is what I mean about making excuses or demonising. Just because what Chapman did is something that lots of us may have done in the past, it doesn't necessarily make it any less dangerous.

As for driving over the limit - if you, like most of us, occasionally get drunk of an evening and then drive the next day there is a very good chance you have driven over the limit.

It doesn't make it less dangerous, but it makes it slighly more understandable.