Hob Nob Anyone?

semtex1871 wrote:I have actually got the right hump with birds who haven't put out after leading me on......

You sound like a keeper.

Royal Ginger wrote:

semtex1871 wrote:I have actually got the right hump with birds who haven't put out after leading me on......

You sound like a keeper.

That's the point, there was no Seamen involved......

semtex1871 wrote:I agree with Brendy here. It's a given that when you go back to some birds house or she comes back to yours that there is a chance of getting some action.

I have actually got the right hump with birds who haven't put out after leading me on......

That isn't what Brendy said though.

Gulity, although hasnt he already done his time ...

Sounds like quite a determined guy, doesn't take no for an answer, makes sure he gets what he wants.

could do with some of that up font tbh

Back in training with Sheffield United according to the BBC

Norfolk Royal wrote:

melonhead wrote:


girl who meets up drunkenly with random bloke on street and agrees to go back to his hotel room has given consent.
imo

Oooooh, debatable, controversial Brendy.

Pepe the Horseman wrote:There's no reasoning with him, wiggso.

ever

Hendo wrote:Back in training with Sheffield United according to the BBC

I think this is because the PFA/Evans have threatened legal action, as its believed the club could be legally culpable in restricting his ability to pursue his career if they don't.

he'll probably have to go abroad in order to carry on with football imo.

Melonhead wrote:
I think this is because the PFA/Evans have threatened legal action, as its believed the club could be legally culpable in restricting his ability to pursue his career if they don't.

Really? But I thought they cancelled his contract/sacked him when he was sent to prison. Why would they be legally liable for him once he got out?

melonhead wrote:

Hendo wrote:Back in training with Sheffield United according to the BBC

I think this is because the PFA/Evans have threatened legal action, as its believed the club could be legally culpable in restricting his ability to pursue his career if they don't.

he'll probably have to go abroad in order to carry on with football imo.

If he agrees to go to a foreign country, say Spain, it means all Spanish people can have sex with him.

I personally think the World of professional football should be closed to Ched Evans now.

Let him be a labourer on a building site instead.

would we be saying the same to a labourer, as in he cant go back to labouring so let him be a footballer?

I get the argument that being a professional footballer comes with responsibilities, and that having a convicted rapist in your team does stem to some criticism. HOWEVER he has served his time, no one apart from the court, Ched and the women in question know the true facts about the night. the guy deserves to get on with his life and he can mae it back being a professional footballer then so be it BUT it would take a very brave club to do such a thing!

Don't forget the profession has had people come back to the sport after being convicted on manslaughter and death by dangerous driving. I don't think there was such a political storm when they came back to the profession??

But why? There are a list of jobs that he legally is now not allowed to do as a sex offender. Professional football is not one of them. It is a very dangerous route to go down when the general public starts dictating what people can and cant do.

The internet/facebook generation is a very powerful thing - even a few years ago, when Hughes and McCormick killed people, there wasn't this sort of outcry. I reckon that's because there wasn't the same ability to create mass hysteria.

What a load of appalling bandwagon jumping and double standards over an admittedly clearly contemptible individual in Ched Evans.

My understanding is such that Jessica Ennis-Hill has a stand named after her in 2012. In 2013 Sheffield United employ a man convicted of sexual assault, Marlon King. In 2014 Sheffield United offer convicted rapist Ched Evans the opportunity to train on a non-contract basis. Ennis-Hill demands that decision be reversed or she will take away her patronage. I feel for the women to be honest, utterly bandwagoned by pronouncements from fellow Sheffield United supporters of a high profile (a namely television presenter and an MP).

Evans has been convicted, spent the custodial part of his sentence and under the HUMAN RIGHTS that liberals stoutly defend he is at liberty to commence employment, subject to certain public protection criteria being satisfied. As Sheffield United as a private company are at liberty to employ who they so choose under the same criteria. As far as I can see, the only public protection issue for a mediocre footballer like Evans is in the crowd being struck by one of his wayward shots on goal. Seems to me that much of the reaction isn’t based on any remote concern for public protection.....more a social injustice that someone convicted of a despicable crime can continue to earn a large wage. In which case, blame our Criminal Justice system and the wonderful Human Rights Acts we are subjected to. Not Evans or Sheffield United.

I don’t buy the role-model BS either. It doesn’t credit young people with much intelligence for one thing. At an impressionable age I loved football probably even more so than I do now, yet my role models were writers or people who impressed me with their knowledge or people who achieved life-changing things. It is entirely possible to want to play football like Wayne Rooney and to realise that effing and blinding at officials such as he does is entirely contemptible. And I am sure that young people realise that off pitch criminal behaviour is equally abhorrent. If they don’t then I rather suspect there are some parenting and educational issues at play somewhere, nurture vs nature and all that.

Complete double standards from liberals, who on the other hand would have you believe that issues such as CSE rings based around Asian men abusing vulnerable young white women are “not a race issue”. They are right.....such things are Religious and cultural issues, although one dare not suggest as such through fear of causing offence. No right-minded person is suggesting that the Muslim community be vilified over this. But you have to admit to problems – however uncomfortable – to be able to embrace solutions. In the Ched Evans case, the uncomfortable ‘problem’ for those vilifying Sheffield United is that Human Rights Act absolutely protect the ‘right to life’ of convicted criminals (as it - almost always imho - should). And it therefore MUST be applied consistently, and not dependent on fame or wealth or otherwise.

I was thinking about McCormack and Hughes myself. I guess the issue there is that no matter how gross, self-centred and selfish they were, they never actually set out consciously to kill the people they did. If you kill someone with a car you are charged with murder or manslaughter, if you kill someone in a crash then it is (usually) causing death by careless/dangerous driving. I can't recall anyone being charged with killing someone deliberately via the means of a car accident. However, we may think of them, neither crash seemed to include premeditation on their part. Rape is a fully conscious crime, that is undertaken through a choice the assailant makes, not like you can really wake up and go 'Ooo, how did that get there?'

I'm not sure how much bandwaggoning is going on. I guess the thing is that if you are someone in the media spotlight, you are expected to behave in a certain way (even if you don't want to), and reaction is borne out of that. I think many people's problem with him, is that he hasn't apologised, and even admitted he did it. I know there will be those who say he may not be guilty, but at this time he is. 12 people sat and listened to the whole case, saw every gesture and nuance, and decided he was guilty of the crime. We could all second guess them if we wished, but if we weren't there how can we? It's not like his innocence campaign is going to show negative points is it? The problem is that at this stage (until we hear anything to the contrary) he is a convicted rapist that has shown absolutely no remorse for the serious crime he has committed, and that probably makes him toxic.

Maybe his legal team have told him not to say anything.
If you really believe your innocent then you're not going to say you are. Are you?

I "know" someone who is innocent of his crime and is told if he admits he is guilty he'll get out of prison quicker. He will not admit he did it just to get an early release.

I was surprised Hughes got back into football so easily. His actions, whether he meant it or not, resulted in the death of someone, and he ran away from the scene.
I think Hughes's crime is worse.
At least the young lady has a life to lead................

Is Ched still looking to appeal his conviction?

Pepe the Horseman wrote:
Is Ched still looking to appeal his conviction?

I don't think it is him appealing this time, think it is the Criminal Review Board or something. His prospective father-in-law is backing his campaign, but I am not sure if it interacts with this at all.

Elm Park Pasty wrote:I was thinking about McCormack and Hughes myself. I guess the issue there is that no matter how gross, self-centred and selfish they were, they never actually set out consciously to kill the people they did. If you kill someone with a car you are charged with murder or manslaughter, if you kill someone in a crash then it is (usually) causing death by careless/dangerous driving. I can't recall anyone being charged with killing someone deliberately via the means of a car accident. However, we may think of them, neither crash seemed to include premeditation on their part. Rape is a fully conscious crime, that is undertaken through a choice the assailant makes, not like you can really wake up and go 'Ooo, how did that get there?'

I'm not sure how much bandwaggoning is going on. I guess the thing is that if you are someone in the media spotlight, you are expected to behave in a certain way (even if you don't want to), and reaction is borne out of that. I think many people's problem with him, is that he hasn't apologised, and even admitted he did it. I know there will be those who say he may not be guilty, but at this time he is. 12 people sat and listened to the whole case, saw every gesture and nuance, and decided he was guilty of the crime. We could all second guess them if we wished, but if we weren't there how can we? It's not like his innocence campaign is going to show negative points is it? The problem is that at this stage (until we hear anything to the contrary) he is a convicted rapist that has shown absolutely no remorse for the serious crime he has committed, and that probably makes him toxic.

Re your first para - I agree with that on the whole. However, the anti-Evans camp keep trotting out the line 'how will his victim feel when they see him?' - well how do the families of those that Hughes and McCormick killed feel?!