• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Ched Evans

tommysvr said:
If someone like him were to ever be signed by Spurs, I wouldn't be supporting them until he left.

I hope someone gives him a career ending injury in his first match. The ironic thing would probably the sympathy giving to him vs the sympathy towards the poor young girl.
Click to expand...

Poor young girl who was drunk looking for sex and had cocaine in her system? Let not paint her to be some poor 12 year old who was assaulted in an alley.

I don't advocate *struggle cuddle* in the least its a disgusting act which deserves harsh punishment but this case to me reeks of injustice
 
tommysvr said:
If someone like him were to ever be signed by Spurs, I wouldn't be supporting them until he left.

I hope someone gives him a career ending injury in his first match. The ironic thing would probably the sympathy giving to him vs the sympathy towards the poor young girl.
Click to expand...

I've got to admit, if I thought he was guilty of real proper capital R *struggle cuddle*, then I would probably hold this point of view. But from what I have read about this case, I have my doubts.
 
And those two replies just show how widespread this *struggle cuddle* culture is. What is REAL *struggle cuddle*? What a ****ing absurd thing to say. This is a guy who was actually convicted of a crime which the vast majority aren't. But you're going to come onto a forum and blame the victim because she was drunk?

Have a good look at yourselves you ****ing macarons.
 
Have a read of the facts which support his appeal before you get all high and mighty. This was a pretty civilized thread on a sensitive topic before you popped in.
 
A few ground rules guys if you want to continue this discussion here.

1. Please no name calling.

2. Terms like 'real *struggle cuddle*' are pretty offensive to many and are likely to provoke hostile responses from other posters. Please do not use them.

3. When talking about the victim please show some sensitivity and consideration. How would you feel if someone was talking about a close female relative of yours in the language some have used?

4. If you want to talk about the facts of the case please back that up.

5. Please bear in mind that this is a public forum.

If you cannot keep it civil, we will lock the thread. And please remember the site rules.
 
Well that's great, a bunch of radical feminists threatening violence and dildo *struggle cuddle* and an organization backs down from what they're legally entitled to do.

I'm withholding comment until the case review is complete, but from what I've read it seems to me the decision will be reversed - I'm going by what I've read on Ched Evans's website, and if all that is accurate then it seems to me a case that shouldn't have even gone to court.
 
Bonsaiboy said:
Well that's great, a bunch of radical feminists threatening violence and dildo *struggle cuddle* and an organization backs down from what they're legally entitled to do.

I'm withholding comment until the case review is complete, but from what I've read it seems to me the decision will be reversed - I'm going by what I've read on Ched Evans's website, and if all that is accurate then it seems to me a case that shouldn't have even gone to court.
Click to expand...

I'd strongly suggest at the very least making a decision from facts via an impartial website. Clearly Ched Evans site is going to have some bias. This website seems to be presenting an impartial summary with a link to the full court transcript https://www.crimeline.info/case/r-v-ched-evans-chedwyn-evans
 
Richie said:
I'd strongly suggest at the very least making a decision from facts via an impartial website. Clearly Ched Evans site is going to have some bias. This website seems to be presenting an impartial summary with a link to the full court transcript https://www.crimeline.info/case/r-v-ched-evans-chedwyn-evans
Click to expand...

Like I said, I'm withholding comment and judgement fully until the case review is complete but the information there didn't change my view radically - taking all the available evidence into account, it was a downright bad decision to find him guilty and basically destroy his life. Sees her unconscious on the pavement and has sex with her, yes, that would be *struggle cuddle*, but that's a long way from what happened.
 
a mob without consequence, barking up the wrong tree

the anger is more than warranted, but it shouldn't be targeted at the Oldham administration, the problem is our criminal justice system, they should be banging down the doors of the CPS
 
minnow said:
As soon as I heard it my gut reaction was I don't need to know anything about his case at all, he's been convicted by a court, people who have heard all the evidence decided he was guilty of a horrible crime. If he is innocent, I wish him luck with his appeal and getting his career back. But convicted rapists shouldn't have a high profile place in football, for the same reasons given by the sponsors who have backed out of deals with Oldham - it suggests a lack of decent values for clubs to employ them. If Spurs were to sign a convicted rapist I would never go to see them again unless they came out with a strong statement reversing their policy. I've had a ST for 11 years and am a lifelong fan and I would be gutted, but I wouldn't want to be part of it. I don't want my club to say it's okay to be a rapist - yeah carry on like normal mate, we can turn a blind eye seeing as you served (half of) your time. No, I want them to have standards, ethics, principals and I want to be proud of the players, not ashamed. There should be consequences for actions as serious as this. Clubs have zero responsibility to maintain the careers of convicted rapists.

I'm disgusted by Oldham's owners and feel sorry for their fans. I'm glad this is being talked about though. I'd hope that whatever club at any level he tried to sign for would have too much respect for themselves and their fans than to want a rapist on their books.

And now it looks like Evans's soon to be father-in-law is bank rolling the signing, the wages, and compensation if all the sponsors leave and the club suffers financial losses. What a lucky girl, and a wonderful life they'll have together that family, can't see anything going wrong there.
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...lub-after-family-put-2m-on-table-9963909.html
Click to expand...

This pretty much defeats all the "he should be allowed to make a living".
The father should just give him the money and both of them should **** off.
 
Bonsaiboy said:
Like I said, I'm withholding comment and judgement fully until the case review is complete but the information there didn't change my view radically - taking all the available evidence into account, it was a downright bad decision to find him guilty and basically destroy his life. Sees her unconscious on the pavement and has sex with her, yes, that would be *struggle cuddle*, but that's a long way from what happened.
Click to expand...

You can't consent while very drunk. End of story.
When the girl woke up alone in the hotel room the first thing she noticed was that she had urinated on herself. She was that drunk.
 
Modric THFC said:
You can't consent while very drunk. End of story.
When the girl woke up alone in the hotel room the first thing she noticed was that she had urinated on herself. She was that drunk.
Click to expand...

She was a regular drinker and 2.5 times the drink driving limit is not drunk enough - in my opinion - to take away her ability to decide whether or not she would go - unaided - to a hotel room and have sex with a footballer. The jury agreed with this, but I've yet to see a rational explanation to explain why Mr Sloppy Seconds was found guilty when the second rate footballer who picked her up and took her home was found innocent. It's bizarre and utterly irrational. Because he was a better looking, more high profile footballer?

And there is also the aspect of personal accountability. I got absolutely shid faced to the point I had no idea what happened to me once the previous evening when I was 17. It disturbed me not knowing how I got home or what happened to me - I could have been ar5ed raped for all I knew - and I learnt from it and I never got that drunk ever again.

I actually do feel very sorry for her, not because she was raped, because I don't believe she was, but she got into something - egged on by others for financial gain when she knew there was a footballer involved - and she's ended up wrecking her own life as well.

The whole thing has been used by radical feminists with an agenda.
 
Bonsaiboy said:
She was a regular drinker and 2.5 times the drink driving limit is not drunk enough - in my opinion - to take away her ability to decide whether or not she would go - unaided - to a hotel room and have sex with a footballer. The jury agreed with this, but I've yet to see a rational explanation to explain why Mr Sloppy Seconds was found guilty when the second rate footballer who picked her up and took her home was found innocent. It's bizarre and utterly irrational. Because he was a better looking, more high profile footballer?

And there is also the aspect of personal accountability. I got absolutely shid faced to the point I had no idea what happened to me once the previous evening when I was 17. It disturbed me not knowing how I got home or what happened to me - I could have been ar5ed raped for all I knew - and I learnt from it and I never got that drunk ever again.

I actually do feel very sorry for her, not because she was raped, because I don't believe she was, but she got into something - egged on by others for financial gain when she knew there was a footballer involved - and she's ended up wrecking her own life as well.

The whole thing has been used by radical feminists with an agenda.
Click to expand...

Are you for real?
 
I don't know Ched Evans, I don't really care about Ched Evans and I think it's more than possible that if I ever met Ched Evans, I wouldn't particularly like him

But I don't want to live in a society where chest-thumping idiots on Twitter decide where convicted criminals, who have served their time, can and can't work while they're being rehabilitated. The fact that he is out on licence is irrelevant - he is entitled to earn a living and he is entitled to return to football. If no clubs wanted to employ him, fair enough. But they do and are being prevented from doing so from the backlash and that is such a dangerous precedent. Do we really want Twitter users to decide which professions are OK for convicted criminals to go back to, and which aren't

Some posters on here seem to be suggesting he shouldn't be able to get a job anywhere - how do they suggest he make a living? And if they agree he must be allowed to make a living otherwise essentially the other option is a life of crime, would be they kind enough to provide a list of jobs and professions they do feel it's Ok for him to do, and why one of those is not football
 
tommysvr said:
Are you for real?
Click to expand...

Like I said, I reserve judgement until the case is heard, but in my opinion if this was *struggle cuddle* then there is a 1000 rapes every weekend in Saudi Sportswashing Machine alone. Maybe it is a British working class cultural thing - with middle class feminists using it to suit their purposes, when in fact all they're doing is devaluing *struggle cuddle* itself.

Personally, other than a big belly, the biggest turn off in a woman is being worse the wear.

Really, this is one of those cases where it's just a case of you get an easier life if you go with one particular point of view, and the sanctimonious pricks - not directed at anyone - will always retreat into that view and start calling names to anyone who doesn't agree.

It's like the Michael Brown thing - you can't say he was clearly a junkie off his head who used his superior strength to steal from and bully a shopkeeper, then, when confronted by a cop, did the same again and tried to steal his gun, before running away then turning around and charging at the cop. No, you can't say that. He was an innocent man who got wrongly shot and that's what I believe... honestly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back