The Football League Thread

'I apologise for my actions on the night in question which, while I still firmly believe did not constitute a criminal offence, were inappropriate. It would also like to emphasise the fact that I don't see women as merely sexual objects for my own self-gratification, etc etc'

 

Could possibly of said that, but he is taking advice from his legal team on what he should and should not say.

 

..because he can't while he is going through a review.

 

And do you honestly think it would be worded differently if there wasn't appeal going on? Of course it wouldn't be, don't be so naive.

 

Well we will never know that so that's not relevant. You can't expect the man to come out and apologise for an act he feels he is not guilty of and that he is trying to prove his innocence on.

 

Threats against the Oldham staff. Unbelievable!

 

It's just trolls. Social media is a massive part of it.

 

Giving a voice to the minority.

 

Yep nutters get a platform.

 

Judge and jury then PL?.... settle down. He has been found guilty and served his sentence, He doesn't agree with that and has the right to appeal. If that doesn't work out then he has to accept it.

 

Sky news reporting Cardiff considering returning to playing in blue home kit after consulting with fans. About time.

 

The head of the Football Association has sparked fury by apparently comparing the situation of convicted rapist footballer Ched Evans with that of the Hillsborough tragedy.

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/pfa-boss-sparks-fury-comparing-8409641

Mirror Poll

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/footb...on-taylor-under-4944907#ICID=sharebar_twitter

 

Ment to have edited. Mod delete please.

 

I actually read a fair amount of stuff related to the Ched Evans case this evening (v bored). My gut said not guilty.*


* Thats Not Guilty, not Innocent.

 

That's how I saw it Pie. I read a lot of it as well and from what I read (though not all evidence is available to read), I found myself very suprised that the jury were convinced 'beyond reasonable doubt' which of course is what it needs to be.

 

I tend to agree with Pie and Saint_Ford. In particular I don't really see how they decided the woman in question was able to consent to sex with the other guy but wasn't able to consent to sex with Evans, especially as she supposedly can't remember anything that happened. I would think they're either both guilty or both not guilty.

 

I think it was accepted that she met the first man and agreed to go with him, so it would be hard to prove she hadn't consented. However, consent to one didn't mean consent to Evans. I would suggest that the first man had some duty of care to her and he behaved badly as well, but again that would be hard to prove. So one can be guilty, but not the other. It is a lesson to everyone to never drink so much that you can't look after yourself.

 

Sports minister saying that the FA should have taken a stance over Evans or provided leadership in this matter....can of worms anyone. How could the FA do this...restraint of trade springs to mind. When asked, a lawyer looked dreamily into the distance and said that it could be interesting...beware a barrister who thinks something could be 'interesting'.

 

Hopefully if he is innocent it gets sorted. I also hope Taylor gets sacked after that comment.

 

Don't get why people are upset about what Taylor said. He wasn't likening the 2 crimes or even equating Evans' suffering with those who lost family and friends at Hillsborough...he was pointing out that sometimes decisions made in courts get changed.