Movers and shakers tonight?

[joepoolman]

The two things that frustrate me the most when they are held against McCormick are:
1. The fact that it was kids that he killed, he didn't intend on killing children or adults, I understand the argument that children dying is more tragic, but if you think an adult(s) dying is less tragic then I guess it was bad luck that it was children that died and not adults.
2. The insurance part, unless I'm mistaken he wasn't convicted of driving without insurance, and much more importantly than that insurance couldn't bring those boys back.

I think we should all focus slightly more on what (I think) we can agree on though: what he did was fatally stupid and resulted in a genuine tragedy, he's been punished and is now at our club. No one has to like him or even applaud him, but I think we should still all support the team, at least during matches anyway.

[ty cobb]

Personally I don't think it's up to the club or the fans to make judgements on whether someone should be allowed to play football for a living. The law and the FA have not banned him for life from being employed in his profession for making a stupid mistake so why should we have the power to do that?

I may be of the opinion that the sentence he received was too short for the consequences of what he did but i don't make decisions about that. If society has determined he has served his sentence then he should be allowed to get on with his life - what do people want, that he never works again, or only is allowed to have a job that is outside the public eye? He has a family to support himself now.

Having to live with what he did is going to be far harder than dealing with the complaints of some of our fans.

From a football point of view I think he's a good signing and one we needed.

[Kernow Yellow]

Completely agree with Ty Cobb - what's the point of having a justice system if people are to barred from carrying out their profession once they've served their time?

The fact that Luke McCormick's line of work involves playing football in front of the general public will make it harder for him to rehabilitate himself into society, but he should certainly be allowed to try if he can. What would people rather he did - be a burden on the state for the rest of his life because people don't want to see him working again?

I happen to think that his sentence was way too lenient, but that's not his fault. He has consistently expressed plenty of remorse since the incident, and should be allowed, nay encouraged, to get back to contributing to society rather than sitting on his arse.

[Paul Cooper]

I tend to agree with Ty.

IF we as a society want to reintegrate people into socety then surl they have to be allowed to work?

From a personal perspective I want to know that he has repented, learnt from his mistakes and will try to do good going forwards, but that is personal view and surely he should be able to ply his trade if he is a free man and behaves?

[JoeyBeauchamp]

Everyone keeps saying he is repentant - well I'm sure he repents killing other human beings, that's without doubt, but both as a professional footballer and someone who has been convicted of drink-related offending, would he not have been better off not doing this? Surely what he did would put you off the sauce for life?

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/ne ... rmick.html

[Radley Rambler]

Everyone keeps saying he is repentant - well I'm sure he repents killing other human beings, that's without doubt, but both as a professional footballer and someone who has been convicted of drink-related offending, would he not have been better off not doing this? Surely what he did would put you off the sauce for life?

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/ne ... rmick.html

Sorry Joey, don't agree - he's having a pint for goodness sake. If he had a few more and then got into a car to drive, you would have a very valid point.

I'm afraid the example you have dragged up from the archives is typical of the sensationalist nonsense that rag puts out. Sadly people buy it as a result.

[YF Dan]

[quote=&quotMooro&quot]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

[OUFC4eva]

[quote=&quotMooro&quot]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

[JoeyBeauchamp]

Everyone keeps saying he is repentant - well I'm sure he repents killing other human beings, that's without doubt, but both as a professional footballer and someone who has been convicted of drink-related offending, would he not have been better off not doing this? Surely what he did would put you off the sauce for life?

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/ne ... rmick.html

Sorry Joey, don't agree - he's having a pint for goodness sake. If he had a few more and then got into a car to drive, you would have a very valid point.

I'm afraid the example you have dragged up from the archives is typical of the sensationalist nonsense that rag puts out. Sadly people buy it as a result.

Everyone's different, of course, but I would have thought going through what he went through would put you off drinking for life.

[recordmeister]

Maybe this guy could help our new signing and chappers:

http://www.livingxperienceconsultancy.c ... story.html

10 points for spotting the link to today's game.

[Radley Rambler]

Maybe this guy could help our new signing and chappers:

http://www.livingxperienceconsultancy.c ... story.html

10 points for spotting the link to today's game.

I wonder how many other professional footballers have a degree in Theology, not many I suspect.

[YF Dan]

Maybe this guy could help our new signing and chappers:

http://www.livingxperienceconsultancy.c ... story.html

10 points for spotting the link to today's game.

I was there when Otto and Mooney tore us to pieces in a 6-1 pasting.

I also used to work with his brother Wayne, who was a world champion at Karate.

[Hog]

Maybe this guy could help our new signing and chappers:

http://www.livingxperienceconsultancy.c ... story.html

I doubt it. This is the same bloke who ripped off his black arm band and dropped it to the ground only seconds after kick off following a minutes silence for someone at a game at The Manor in the late 90's. I commented on it at the time in Raging Bull.

[BigCrompy]

Personally I don't think it's up to the club or the fans to make judgements on whether someone should be allowed to play football for a living. The law and the FA have not banned him for life from being employed in his profession for making a stupid mistake so why should we have the power to do that?

I may agree with most of what you say Ty, but please PLEASE don't boil my blood by passing this off as a 'silly mistake', as that implies it is something that could happen to anyone.

Personally speaking I think it's a privilege to drive a car, but also a huge responsibility. I know how alcohol affects me, and the risk for me just isn't worth it. So I don't.

I think he made not a mistake but a gravely irresponsible, narcissistic, criminal decision. I live in a country where the vast majority think they have a God-given right to have a few drinks then drive themselves home, and the stock argument for one bogan persuading another to give him a lift home thus scrimping on a taxi is - &quotit's alright mate, you won't get caught&quot. Not, you will note, &quotit's alright mate, you may not have an accident and hurt yourself, me or someone else&quot.

I certainly concur that his crime is also his punishment, and hope that he will take it upon himself to make some good in the world now. This is by no means a personal tirade (and I hope you won't treat it as such) but just a request not to trivialise this issue, as particularly those of us who have been personally affected can find the drink-driving epidemic very hard to stomach.

[Dr Bob]

As theox has already said, drink-driving and killing children will always have more baggage (than texting and killing an adult). My first thought was utter disgust at LMs signing. It might be the law of the land that has determined the length of his sentence and the time spent inside, but I as an individual - to say the least - feel uncomfortable with that. Also, a football club is more than just that - it is a public institution and it represents and has standing in the local community. I feel this action stains that and, by association, stains me. I have no children, do not want children, and do not feel any particular connection to children, but it does bother me that a club which is so active in the community working with children will take on a player who has done what LM did.

Reading through this thread did make me question my own thoughts about ACs 'rehabilitation'. I was initially in favour of his re-integration into the club, for so many of the arguments very thoughfully put here about LMs recruitment. But the more I ponder it, the more uncomfortable I feel about that. If the club's owners and manager decide to retain/recruit AC and/or LM, that is up to them - but I do not like it.

As for the distinction some of you are trying to make about texting and drink-driving, do me a favour. It is not a simple single moment of distraction of a single text. It is having the phone on in the car, near to hand, for nothing other than the purpose of receiving and sending calls and/or texts (and, face it, texting is even more distracting than phoning). If it is so important that it has to be dealt with, pull over. Texting and drink-driving have the same fundamental sources - one or more of arrogance, ignorance, a belief in one's own superiority, and/or a misplaced belief in one's own ability to do something safely which the law, quite rightly, has deemed too dangerous.

I am currently pondering how to respond to this. If I just stop going to matches, having bought a season ticket there will be no financial impact on the club. Do I go and boo LM or hope others will do it for me? Do I write to the Chairman? Right now I do not know. I do know, however, that the more I think about it, especially against the backdrop of the reasoned, calm arguments given by you all here, the more convinced I am that, for me, this was a terrible decision for my football club to make.