Ched Evans

Anything yellow and blue
Kairdiff Exile
Dashing young thing
Posts: 563
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 3:59 pm

Re: Ched Evans

Post by Kairdiff Exile » Mon Jul 15, 2019 10:01 am

Dr Bob wrote:
Mon Jul 15, 2019 9:20 am
Due legal process has been served, but he still seems an odious shit.
Exactly this. I was broadly in agreement with the club sticking by Adam Chapman and signing McCormick. They both made awful decisions, and dreadful things happened as a result. But they were repentant and were determined to show by their behaviour and attitude that they recognised the damage they had done, and both spoke openly about what they had learnt. Evans has always denied any wrongdoing - which may well be true legally, but morally it's clear that he made some bad decisions of his own and refuses to recognise the fact.

It may well be perverse on the face of it to support two Oxford players whose actions resulted in innocent people dying whilst feeling very uneasy about signing a player who has a clean criminal record - but Evans' signing doesn't sit right with me. Everyone deserves a chance of redemption if they make mistakes, but they first have to recognise that they made them.

OtmoorYellow
Puberty
Posts: 302
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2017 1:35 pm

Re: Ched Evans

Post by OtmoorYellow » Mon Jul 15, 2019 11:28 am

Ancient Colin wrote:
Sat Jul 13, 2019 9:48 am
This is a useful summing up of some of the key issues, along with some very unedifying details.
That is indeed a very helpful link. Thanks Colin.

The courts are not a moral arbiter as someone suggested. They decide on points of law. Law and morality are not the same thing, not by a long way. Law is about attempting to prove evidential facts and comparing them with the rules of society the demand penalty for failure to comply. Morality is personal judgement of circumstances.

I would hope most, if not all, of us would deride and chastise the morality of a man that takes advantage of a woman in at least dubious circumstances.

As the barrister made clear, the legal case of Ched Evans shows him neither to be guilty, nor innocent. It shows him to be not guilty beyond reasonable doubt. There is a presumption of innocence in not guilty verdicts, but not a proving of innocence. It is a shame we do not have the Scottish verdict of unproven, to provide a greater ability to distinguish between innocence and uncertainty.

Given the number of women within the environment of the club, not least of which will be the various women's teams, the question for OUFC is a moral and safety one:

Do Ched Evans known previous activities give rise to a concern with regards to those employed within the club? If the answer to that is yes, then he should not be signed as an OUFC player.

Would Ched Evans known previous activities bring the club into disrepute? Again, if yes, he should not be signed.

Would his signing be detrimental to the expansion of the women's game within OUFC? If yes, the club would need to think long and hard about the decision. Is one (replaceable) player's value to the team greater than the longer term value of the development of women's football?

There are a lot of serious questions, that require outcomes that are difficult to achieve, in order to favour such a signing. Is Ched Evans the only player capable of scoring goals who is available to us?

I still find myself doubting the grounds for such a signing.

Kairdiff Exile
Dashing young thing
Posts: 563
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 3:59 pm

Re: Ched Evans

Post by Kairdiff Exile » Mon Jul 15, 2019 12:30 pm

Agreed with all of that post, OY, except for this bit:
OtmoorYellow wrote:
Mon Jul 15, 2019 11:28 am
Would Ched Evans known previous activities bring the club into disrepute? Again, if yes, he should not be signed.
That's hard to square with our previous signing / re-signing of Adam Chapman and Luke McCormick. As I've said above, the question should be "Would Ched Evans' lack of remorse / recognition of his known previous activities bring the club into disrepute?" - and, like you, my answer to that would be an unequivocal Yes.
Last edited by Kairdiff Exile on Mon Jul 15, 2019 2:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.

OtmoorYellow
Puberty
Posts: 302
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2017 1:35 pm

Re: Ched Evans

Post by OtmoorYellow » Mon Jul 15, 2019 2:19 pm

Kairdiff Exile wrote:
Mon Jul 15, 2019 12:30 pm
Agreed with all of that post, OY, except for this bit:
OtmoorYellow wrote:
Mon Jul 15, 2019 11:28 am
Do Ched Evans known previous activities give rise to a concern with regards to those employed within the club? If the answer to that is yes, then he should not be signed as an OUFC player.
That's hard to square with our previous signing / re-signing of Adam Chapman and Luke McCormick. As I've said above, the question should be "Does Ched Evans' lack of remorse / recognition of his known previous activities give rise to a concern for those employed within the club?" - and, as for you, my answer to that would be an unequivocal Yes.
Maybe you mis-understand my meaning. I prefaced the quote with reference to women at the club, and the intended inference is a possible question mark over safety.

Whilst the consequences of someone who causes death by using a mobile phone whilst driving, or being over the alcohol limit, is ultimately the more severe, those consequences are not ongoing potential risks to female staff at the club.

Ched Evans apparently joined in a sexual encounter with a male friend and an unknown female, without invitation from the woman, without even conversation with the woman, who was so drunk she could remember nothing of the incident. He was found guilty of rape, and subsequently acquitted on appeal, on the grounds that the woman's actions in other sexual encounters, where she may or may not have been rather more lucid, were not deemed to be withholding of consent. In other words, the jury decided that because she had not withheld consent previously, then she wasn't withholding consent this time either, even though she was paralytic.

That may well have been enough for the appeal jury to find the case against Evans wasn't proven, but it wouldn't have been enough for me, and that doesn't mean his actions were in any way acceptable. And given that he denied wrongdoing, who is to say he would not do the same thing again?

That is a question of unnecessary risk imho.
Last edited by OtmoorYellow on Mon Jul 15, 2019 2:43 pm, edited 5 times in total.

Kairdiff Exile
Dashing young thing
Posts: 563
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 3:59 pm

Re: Ched Evans

Post by Kairdiff Exile » Mon Jul 15, 2019 2:29 pm

Sorry OY, I was so busy worrying about formatting that I quoted the wrong sentence. Have now edited the post so I say what I meant to say. :roll:

recordmeister
Middle-Aged Spread
Posts: 1717
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 11:34 am
Location: London

Re: Ched Evans

Post by recordmeister » Mon Jul 15, 2019 7:04 pm

OtmoorYellow wrote:
Mon Jul 15, 2019 11:28 am
Ancient Colin wrote:
Sat Jul 13, 2019 9:48 am
This is a useful summing up of some of the key issues, along with some very unedifying details.
That is indeed a very helpful link. Thanks Colin.

The courts are not a moral arbiter as someone suggested. They decide on points of law. Law and morality are not the same thing, not by a long way. Law is about attempting to prove evidential facts and comparing them with the rules of society the demand penalty for failure to comply. Morality is personal judgement of circumstances.

I would hope most, if not all, of us would deride and chastise the morality of a man that takes advantage of a woman in at least dubious circumstances.

As the barrister made clear, the legal case of Ched Evans shows him neither to be guilty, nor innocent. It shows him to be not guilty beyond reasonable doubt. There is a presumption of innocence in not guilty verdicts, but not a proving of innocence. It is a shame we do not have the Scottish verdict of unproven, to provide a greater ability to distinguish between innocence and uncertainty.

Given the number of women within the environment of the club, not least of which will be the various women's teams, the question for OUFC is a moral and safety one:

Do Ched Evans known previous activities give rise to a concern with regards to those employed within the club? If the answer to that is yes, then he should not be signed as an OUFC player.

Would Ched Evans known previous activities bring the club into disrepute? Again, if yes, he should not be signed.

Would his signing be detrimental to the expansion of the women's game within OUFC? If yes, the club would need to think long and hard about the decision. Is one (replaceable) player's value to the team greater than the longer term value of the development of women's football?

There are a lot of serious questions, that require outcomes that are difficult to achieve, in order to favour such a signing. Is Ched Evans the only player capable of scoring goals who is available to us?

I still find myself doubting the grounds for such a signing.
Just to play Devils Advocate for a moment: would we ask the same questions of a player found guilty of racial abuse, given the desire of a greater mix of backgrounds within the club? cf Danny Hylton

Also the jury that found him Not Guilty was made up of a majority of women (7 women, 5 men). Does that count for anything?

Jimski
Mid-life Crisis
Posts: 707
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 6:50 pm
Location: Oxford

Re: Ched Evans

Post by Jimski » Tue Jul 16, 2019 6:16 am

I suggest anyone who really would rather Evans didn't come to Oxford contact the club and make their views known. It might well not have much effect, but you never know. (I dropped them an email, though wasn't sure which address best to use, so goodness knows...!)

Kernow Yellow
Grumpy old git
Posts: 2895
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 5:16 pm

Re: Ched Evans

Post by Kernow Yellow » Tue Jul 16, 2019 3:19 pm

OtmoorYellow wrote:
Mon Jul 15, 2019 11:28 am
The courts are not a moral arbiter as someone suggested.
I didn’t quite say that (though I understand your point). I asked who should be a moral arbiter if not the courts? I’m in no way defending Ched Evans’ character, and I understand why people don’t want Us to sign him. I’m just not sure that should be good enough reason for not signing him. There will be a range of different opinions and judgements about him, but in the absence of a criminal conviction why should the club listen to one above another? There have been plenty of players I haven’t wanted Us to sign over the years, for footballing reasons and otherwise, but it shouldn’t be up to me or any other fan.

Obviously it’s up to the club to think about reputational damage when making a decision, but given that he has been plying his trade in this league for the last couple of seasons for other clubs without a huge amount of fuss I’d be surprised if there were a danger of any lasting repercussions on that front.

OtmoorYellow
Puberty
Posts: 302
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2017 1:35 pm

Re: Ched Evans

Post by OtmoorYellow » Wed Jul 17, 2019 12:57 am

Kernow Yellow wrote:
Tue Jul 16, 2019 3:19 pm
OtmoorYellow wrote:
Mon Jul 15, 2019 11:28 am
The courts are not a moral arbiter as someone suggested.
I didn’t quite say that (though I understand your point). I asked who should be a moral arbiter if not the courts? I’m in no way defending Ched Evans’ character, and I understand why people don’t want Us to sign him. I’m just not sure that should be good enough reason for not signing him. There will be a range of different opinions and judgements about him, but in the absence of a criminal conviction why should the club listen to one above another? There have been plenty of players I haven’t wanted Us to sign over the years, for footballing reasons and otherwise, but it shouldn’t be up to me or any other fan.

Obviously it’s up to the club to think about reputational damage when making a decision, but given that he has been plying his trade in this league for the last couple of seasons for other clubs without a huge amount of fuss I’d be surprised if there were a danger of any lasting repercussions on that front.
For some issues, it is important to see the bigger picture and take the moral high ground.

OtmoorYellow
Puberty
Posts: 302
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2017 1:35 pm

Re: Ched Evans

Post by OtmoorYellow » Wed Jul 17, 2019 1:06 am

recordmeister wrote:
Mon Jul 15, 2019 7:04 pm
OtmoorYellow wrote:
Mon Jul 15, 2019 11:28 am
Ancient Colin wrote:
Sat Jul 13, 2019 9:48 am
This is a useful summing up of some of the key issues, along with some very unedifying details.
That is indeed a very helpful link. Thanks Colin.

The courts are not a moral arbiter as someone suggested. They decide on points of law. Law and morality are not the same thing, not by a long way. Law is about attempting to prove evidential facts and comparing them with the rules of society the demand penalty for failure to comply. Morality is personal judgement of circumstances.

I would hope most, if not all, of us would deride and chastise the morality of a man that takes advantage of a woman in at least dubious circumstances.

As the barrister made clear, the legal case of Ched Evans shows him neither to be guilty, nor innocent. It shows him to be not guilty beyond reasonable doubt. There is a presumption of innocence in not guilty verdicts, but not a proving of innocence. It is a shame we do not have the Scottish verdict of unproven, to provide a greater ability to distinguish between innocence and uncertainty.

Given the number of women within the environment of the club, not least of which will be the various women's teams, the question for OUFC is a moral and safety one:

Do Ched Evans known previous activities give rise to a concern with regards to those employed within the club? If the answer to that is yes, then he should not be signed as an OUFC player.

Would Ched Evans known previous activities bring the club into disrepute? Again, if yes, he should not be signed.

Would his signing be detrimental to the expansion of the women's game within OUFC? If yes, the club would need to think long and hard about the decision. Is one (replaceable) player's value to the team greater than the longer term value of the development of women's football?

There are a lot of serious questions, that require outcomes that are difficult to achieve, in order to favour such a signing. Is Ched Evans the only player capable of scoring goals who is available to us?

I still find myself doubting the grounds for such a signing.
Just to play Devils Advocate for a moment: would we ask the same questions of a player found guilty of racial abuse, given the desire of a greater mix of backgrounds within the club? cf Danny Hylton

Also the jury that found him Not Guilty was made up of a majority of women (7 women, 5 men). Does that count for anything?
I’m not sure I would accept the inference that women might reach a different conclusion to the same evidence, compared to men.

Rape and racism are both abhorrent crimes. I would suggest using a limited amount of racist language (and I don’t know the facts regarding Hylton) does not remotely compare to the effects on a victim of rape, and I say that without implication as to the guilt or innocence of any particular individual.

OUFC4eva
Grumpy old git
Posts: 2368
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 5:57 pm

Re: Ched Evans

Post by OUFC4eva » Wed Jul 17, 2019 8:42 am

Kernow Yellow wrote:
Sat Jul 13, 2019 12:03 pm
As usual in cases like this there’s a moral maze to be navigated when considering Evans’ potential signing.

At the end of a lengthy legal process he has been found not guilty. And indeed he had already served his entire sentence for the original conviction anyway. So I don’t see any argument that he shouldn’t be allowed to continue his career as a professional footballer.

Obviously the details of the case, conviction or not, show him to be a man of very dubious moral standards and attitudes towards women. I understand why people wouldn’t want him representing Us. I also thought he came across as a nasty piece of work when he played against Us in his comeback game for Chesterfield, antagonising the crowd instead of keeping his head down.

But he wouldn’t be the first morally dubious idiot to have played for Us - Danny Hylton had served a ban for racially abusing an opponent before he arrived at OUFC, and ended up as a cult hero. Chapman and McCormick managed to rehabilitate themselves, as should be their right after serving their time. Evans has no criminal record at all as far as I’m aware.
Chris Zebroski was sacked by Plymouth for gross misconduct for attacking team mate Paul Wotton with a bottle.
Oxford signed him shortly afterwards.

(I am not equating what Evans was involved in with Zebroski’s violent attack by the way).

ty cobb
Middle-Aged Spread
Posts: 1077
Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 6:55 pm

Re: Ched Evans

Post by ty cobb » Wed Jul 17, 2019 10:13 am

If Oxford only signed footballers of decent morale standing we would struggle to get a team out every week.

He has played for 3 teams since the incident - I find it a little bizarre that Oxford are expected to somehow act as jury and judge - if the courts deem that he's free to carry on earning a living a footballer that's good enough by me otherwise we end up having to make all sorts of arbitrary morale judgements about who should pull on a yellow shirt.

Far more high profile players than Evans have done stupid things and carried on in their career - why shouldn't he, or are we suggesting that he should not be able to make a living anymore?

https://www.90min.com/posts/3326879-17- ... f-football

Jimski
Mid-life Crisis
Posts: 707
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 6:50 pm
Location: Oxford

Re: Ched Evans

Post by Jimski » Wed Jul 17, 2019 1:40 pm


OtmoorYellow
Puberty
Posts: 302
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2017 1:35 pm

Re: Ched Evans

Post by OtmoorYellow » Thu Jul 18, 2019 3:42 pm

ty cobb wrote:
Wed Jul 17, 2019 10:13 am
If Oxford only signed footballers of decent morale standing we would struggle to get a team out every week.

He has played for 3 teams since the incident - I find it a little bizarre that Oxford are expected to somehow act as jury and judge - if the courts deem that he's free to carry on earning a living a footballer that's good enough by me otherwise we end up having to make all sorts of arbitrary morale judgements about who should pull on a yellow shirt.

Far more high profile players than Evans have done stupid things and carried on in their career - why shouldn't he, or are we suggesting that he should not be able to make a living anymore?

https://www.90min.com/posts/3326879-17- ... f-football
Evans is perfectly entitled to make a living, inside football or outside football. I would just prefer it not to be at OUFC for the reasons previously given.

I don't see what profile has to do with the position, other than to the extent that it garners negative publicity.

Nor should the decisions of other clubs be a valid reason to follow their lead.

slappy
Grumpy old git
Posts: 2447
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 3:52 pm

Re: Ched Evans

Post by slappy » Thu Jul 18, 2019 5:12 pm

Where do we draw the line on this morality scale of who plays for the club?
There are always tales going around of player X or staff member Y having affairs. Other examples given of killing people in motoring accidents /drink driving, assaults, racism etc

Is Ched Evans a risk to the women at the club? I'd say probably not on a day-to-day level - though if there was a players' night out, you probably wouldn't recommend a woman go back to Evans's place on the basis he is a bit "rapey".

EDIT - i get that a lot of the argument is not about risk or regret or apologies, but about whether he is a suitable role model / character at the club.

Also, say Cristiano Ronaldo said he wanted to come and play for us? He is currently under investigation for an alleged rape of a women in a Las Vegas hotel room, with rumours of pay-offs. Innocent until proven guilty? Or too good to turn down?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests