Ched Evans

[bobby1]

“The arguments against Ched Evans playing again are so vacuous as to be beyond parody” Rod Liddle:

http://www.spectator.co.uk/columnists/rod-liddle/9410182/the-utterly-ludicrous-and-petty-campaign-against-ched-evans/

This bit really incensed me.

"One of the ironies is that the people who have signed these various petitions are more usually lenient on the issue of criminal justice — unless it is a crime to which they particularly object. Burglary, armed robbery, manslaughter, drug dealing etc. — they’re OK. Crimes against women and any racist stuff — nope, no rehabilitation, you’re scum and that’s that."

Because of course sex crimes are different to all the others he mentions. That's why sex offenders have to sign a register after they are released. That's why they aren't allowed to work in certain professions.

Perhaps we shouldn't be surprised a man who has a caution for domestic violence on his partner has no idea why a sex crime is different to all those others.

Using Twitter as a guide is pretty random, because people only talk about stuff which interests them.

But I would guess roughly the split over whether Evans should be allowed to play now is roughly 50:50 amongst men. Maybe even a small majority support his aim.

But amongst women I would say it is more like 10:1 against him returning to football.

No matter how much empathy we have or how hard we try, I think it is virtually impossible to know exactly how women feel about rape.

That was the bit I thought unnecessary in the article too.

[ripple11]

Excellent articles by Henry Winter and Paul Hayward.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/oldham-athletic/11334487/Ched-Evans-mob-rule-card-is-a-cheap-trick-by-an-unrepentant-rapist.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/oldham-athletic/11333205/Ched-Evans-affair-shamed-football-myopic-PFA-mute-FA-and-idiotic-clubs-all-disgraced-themselves.html

He apologised yesterday Keith, does this change your opinion of what has happened or of him?

It's unfortunate if what was in Evans statement was straightforwardly true - because it doesn't half sound like something written by a lawyer and PR person

I would bet 1/20 it was written by someone like a PR man or a lawyer. Who would you expect to right a press release/statement tho Jon?

The question would be why he didn't get them to write it sooner.

It would be a pretty poor lawyer (or PR for that matter) who just said, say and do no nothing no matter what.

EDIT: to clarify I mean, it comes across like they've told him to release it rather than it having anything to do with him at all

Yes that might be the case but surely he is very limited in what he can and cannot say with an appeal taking place. He isn't going to apologise after being in prison for something he thinks he didn't do so wouldn't apologise directly to the girl involved. So he has a situation where he has made an apology about something he can't talk about, involving someone he shouldn't mention and cannot tell his version of events. If you couldn't do all of those things then it's tough to make any statement and when you do it is always going to be pre written.

It is possible that he doesn't believe that rape took place but it could still be classed as rape in law but there is also a chance that sex with someone that doesn't remember it the day after took place. The lack of DNA at the scene, no traces of the drugs in the girls system were found in the hotel room or taken by the men. The girl told police she had no memory after leaving her mates but then said she remembered the exact drinks she drank during the night, then said her drink might have been spiked.

A little bit

From the official Court of Appeal Judgment:

 The doctor found no injuries to the complainant. The tests also revealed traces of cocaine and cannabis. The evidence was consistent with cocaine and cannabis having been ingested some days earlier.

[arbboy]

A £500k a year city trader is as much a role model to thousands of A level Economics students as Evans is a role model in the UK to thousands of kids who want to play in the EPL. (ie he isn't a role model). It's insane.

No he's not, nobody knows who the hell the average Joe £500k pa city trader is, only the odd one who earns a £5m+ salary. I bet no state-school kid under 16 could name 3 famous share traders.

How many kids from any school, whether it's state or private, could name 3 average joe footballers lurking in division 2 in the English leagues?  Literally none.  Ched Evans is not a role model.  To put it in context i would guarantee that pretty much no one on this forum could name the centre forward of Carlisle and we are all sports fans far more than your average primary school kid.

Footballers at this level are total nobodies who can walk down the street in the town/city they play in and no body has a clue who they are.  They are just normal people doing a normal job for not far off normal wages.

But he is a role model

If Ched Evans or another striker at any level is your childs role model i might suggest the parent should be a bit worried.

At what level of football do you stop being a role model as a player to kids you don't know and will never meet?  Div 1/2?  Conference? Conference south? centre forward for the dog and duck on a sunday morning?  I just don't get this role model stuff at all.  Become a better parent and teach your kids proper values in life then they will look to their parents as role models rather than some random guy they have never met who is talented at one thing and one thing only in life.

[The Camel]

“The arguments against Ched Evans playing again are so vacuous as to be beyond parody” Rod Liddle:

http://www.spectator.co.uk/columnists/rod-liddle/9410182/the-utterly-ludicrous-and-petty-campaign-against-ched-evans/

This bit really incensed me.

"One of the ironies is that the people who have signed these various petitions are more usually lenient on the issue of criminal justice — unless it is a crime to which they particularly object. Burglary, armed robbery, manslaughter, drug dealing etc. — they’re OK. Crimes against women and any racist stuff — nope, no rehabilitation, you’re scum and that’s that."

Because of course sex crimes are different to all the others he mentions. That's why sex offenders have to sign a register after they are released. That's why they aren't allowed to work in certain professions.

Perhaps we shouldn't be surprised a man who has a caution for domestic violence on his partner has no idea why a sex crime is different to all those others.

Using Twitter as a guide is pretty random, because people only talk about stuff which interests them.

But I would guess roughly the split over whether Evans should be allowed to play now is roughly 50:50 amongst men. Maybe even a small majority support his aim.

But amongst women I would say it is more like 10:1 against him returning to football.

No matter how much empathy we have or how hard we try, I think it is virtually impossible to know exactly how women feel about rape.

That was the bit I thought unnecessary in the article too.

That's what I meant about Evans having the chance to make a difference.

The whole case has highlighted the way a lot of young men objectify women and treat them like dirt.

Could you imagine a woman picking up a bloke at a kebab shop, taking him back to a Premier Inn and while they are in a taxi texting her mate "I've got a bloke" and her turning up expecting to join in (while two other women are trying to video the action)?

He *could* have been a positive role model for change, telling his story to adolescent boys, youth team footballers and explaining why what he did he was wrong, and why the "lad culture" should change.

I'm not saying he should have done that, but he could have. And if he had, we might truly have seen a rehabilitation and eventually acceptance back into football.

[bobby1]

Excellent articles by Henry Winter and Paul Hayward.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/oldham-athletic/11334487/Ched-Evans-mob-rule-card-is-a-cheap-trick-by-an-unrepentant-rapist.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/oldham-athletic/11333205/Ched-Evans-affair-shamed-football-myopic-PFA-mute-FA-and-idiotic-clubs-all-disgraced-themselves.html

He apologised yesterday Keith, does this change your opinion of what has happened or of him?

It's unfortunate if what was in Evans statement was straightforwardly true - because it doesn't half sound like something written by a lawyer and PR person

I would bet 1/20 it was written by someone like a PR man or a lawyer. Who would you expect to right a press release/statement tho Jon?

The question would be why he didn't get them to write it sooner.

It would be a pretty poor lawyer (or PR for that matter) who just said, say and do no nothing no matter what.

EDIT: to clarify I mean, it comes across like they've told him to release it rather than it having anything to do with him at all

Yes that might be the case but surely he is very limited in what he can and cannot say with an appeal taking place. He isn't going to apologise after being in prison for something he thinks he didn't do so wouldn't apologise directly to the girl involved. So he has a situation where he has made an apology about something he can't talk about, involving someone he shouldn't mention and cannot tell his version of events. If you couldn't do all of those things then it's tough to make any statement and when you do it is always going to be pre written.

It is possible that he doesn't believe that rape took place but it could still be classed as rape in law but there is also a chance that sex with someone that doesn't remember it the day after took place. The lack of DNA at the scene, no traces of the drugs in the girls system were found in the hotel room or taken by the men. The girl told police she had no memory after leaving her mates but then said she remembered the exact drinks she drank during the night, then said her drink might have been spiked.

A little bit

From the official Court of Appeal Judgment:

 The doctor found no injuries to the complainant. The tests also revealed traces of cocaine and cannabis. The evidence was consistent with cocaine and cannabis having been ingested some days earlier.

No traces of the drugs found in her system were found in the hotel room is what I mean.(did you misread that bud or maybe I have phrased it badly)

If her drink was spiked it would have been visible in her system, I haven't read of that being the case. If it did show up (I haven't read that it did but I might be wrong) then the fact there was no trace of substances in the room would seem to make it unlikely it was anything to do with the two guys if her drink had been spiked.

[arbboy]

“The arguments against Ched Evans playing again are so vacuous as to be beyond parody” Rod Liddle:

http://www.spectator.co.uk/columnists/rod-liddle/9410182/the-utterly-ludicrous-and-petty-campaign-against-ched-evans/

This bit really incensed me.

"One of the ironies is that the people who have signed these various petitions are more usually lenient on the issue of criminal justice — unless it is a crime to which they particularly object. Burglary, armed robbery, manslaughter, drug dealing etc. — they’re OK. Crimes against women and any racist stuff — nope, no rehabilitation, you’re scum and that’s that."

Because of course sex crimes are different to all the others he mentions. That's why sex offenders have to sign a register after they are released. That's why they aren't allowed to work in certain professions.

Perhaps we shouldn't be surprised a man who has a caution for domestic violence on his partner has no idea why a sex crime is different to all those others.

Using Twitter as a guide is pretty random, because people only talk about stuff which interests them.

But I would guess roughly the split over whether Evans should be allowed to play now is roughly 50:50 amongst men. Maybe even a small majority support his aim.

But amongst women I would say it is more like 10:1 against him returning to football.

No matter how much empathy we have or how hard we try, I think it is virtually impossible to know exactly how women feel about rape.

That was the bit I thought unnecessary in the article too.

That's what I meant about Evans having the chance to make a difference.

The whole case has highlighted the way a lot of young men objectify women and treat them like dirt.

Could you imagine a woman picking up a bloke at a kebab shop, taking him back to a Premier Inn and while they are in a taxi texting her mate "I've got a bloke" and her turning up expecting to join in (while two other women are trying to video the action)?

He *could* have been a positive role model for change, telling his story to adolescent boys, youth team footballers and explaining why what he did he was wrong, and why the "lad culture" should change.

I'm not saying he should have done that, but he could have. And if he had, we might truly have seen a rehabilitation and eventually acceptance back into football.

I could imagine a certain type of woman doing this if said man was a £100k a week footballer or pop star in just the same way as i could imagine a certain type of male doing what ched evans did.  Whether it is right or wrong is a totally different question.

Some sections of society do have young men who objectify women however there is the same small section of society which has young women who treat males like ched evans as meal tickets/sugar daddy's.  I think we have to realise both sections are using each other to get to their goals.  Both groups usually have terrible morals. 

[ripple11]

Excellent articles by Henry Winter and Paul Hayward.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/oldham-athletic/11334487/Ched-Evans-mob-rule-card-is-a-cheap-trick-by-an-unrepentant-rapist.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/oldham-athletic/11333205/Ched-Evans-affair-shamed-football-myopic-PFA-mute-FA-and-idiotic-clubs-all-disgraced-themselves.html

He apologised yesterday Keith, does this change your opinion of what has happened or of him?

It's unfortunate if what was in Evans statement was straightforwardly true - because it doesn't half sound like something written by a lawyer and PR person

I would bet 1/20 it was written by someone like a PR man or a lawyer. Who would you expect to right a press release/statement tho Jon?

The question would be why he didn't get them to write it sooner.

It would be a pretty poor lawyer (or PR for that matter) who just said, say and do no nothing no matter what.

EDIT: to clarify I mean, it comes across like they've told him to release it rather than it having anything to do with him at all

Yes that might be the case but surely he is very limited in what he can and cannot say with an appeal taking place. He isn't going to apologise after being in prison for something he thinks he didn't do so wouldn't apologise directly to the girl involved. So he has a situation where he has made an apology about something he can't talk about, involving someone he shouldn't mention and cannot tell his version of events. If you couldn't do all of those things then it's tough to make any statement and when you do it is always going to be pre written.

It is possible that he doesn't believe that rape took place but it could still be classed as rape in law but there is also a chance that sex with someone that doesn't remember it the day after took place. The lack of DNA at the scene, no traces of the drugs in the girls system were found in the hotel room or taken by the men. The girl told police she had no memory after leaving her mates but then said she remembered the exact drinks she drank during the night, then said her drink might have been spiked.

A little bit

From the official Court of Appeal Judgment:

 The doctor found no injuries to the complainant. The tests also revealed traces of cocaine and cannabis. The evidence was consistent with cocaine and cannabis having been ingested some days earlier.

No traces of the drugs found in her system were found in the hotel room is what I mean.(did you misread that bud or maybe I have phrased it badly)

If her drink was spiked it would have been visible in her system, I haven't read of that being the case. If it did show up (I haven't read that it did but I might be wrong) then the fact there was no trace of substances in the room would seem to make it unlikely it was anything to do with the two guys if her drink had been spiked.

Sorry misread by me.........and yes no traces of any spiked drink i have read.

[RedFox]

A £500k a year city trader is as much a role model to thousands of A level Economics students as Evans is a role model in the UK to thousands of kids who want to play in the EPL. (ie he isn't a role model). It's insane.

No he's not, nobody knows who the hell the average Joe £500k pa city trader is, only the odd one who earns a £5m+ salary. I bet no state-school kid under 16 could name 3 famous share traders.

How many kids from any school, whether it's state or private, could name 3 average joe footballers lurking in division 2 in the English leagues?  Literally none.  Ched Evans is not a role model.  To put it in context i would guarantee that pretty much no one on this forum could name the centre forward of Carlisle and we are all sports fans far more than your average primary school kid.

Erm sad to say but I do - Derek Asamoah - hope he gets a few tomorrow 

[DMorgan]

Mark, players are role models because football clubs market themselves as socially responsible members of the community. They actively market their product to families and point to their star players as role models to kids, doing community work in schools, hospitals etc.

The star players on a kids football team are the people that they admire. This becomes even more of a problem at a club like Hartlepool where Evans would undoubtedly be their main man. Fair enough these aren't huge clubs we're talking about and he's not gunna be all over the 9 o'clock news but it sets a precedent that people in positions of responsibility can commit horrible crimes and walk back into their role without even finishing their sentence.

Lots of people are pointing at the fact that he's a footballer and saying that he's being victimised for being successful,wealthy etc. and that people want one rule for footballers and another for everyone else, but I think that its completely the other way round. I'd have exactly the same opinion about anyone else in the public eye returning to a position of responsibility. By allowing Evans to play professional football in the UK again I think we'd be carving out a special exemption for football, one that sends a damaging message that if you're a TV presenter/insert marginally famous profession here and you commit a sexual offence you're gone but if you're a footballer its alright you don't even have to finish your sentence, as long as you can score goals you're good to go.

[The Camel]

“The arguments against Ched Evans playing again are so vacuous as to be beyond parody” Rod Liddle:

http://www.spectator.co.uk/columnists/rod-liddle/9410182/the-utterly-ludicrous-and-petty-campaign-against-ched-evans/

This bit really incensed me.

"One of the ironies is that the people who have signed these various petitions are more usually lenient on the issue of criminal justice — unless it is a crime to which they particularly object. Burglary, armed robbery, manslaughter, drug dealing etc. — they’re OK. Crimes against women and any racist stuff — nope, no rehabilitation, you’re scum and that’s that."

Because of course sex crimes are different to all the others he mentions. That's why sex offenders have to sign a register after they are released. That's why they aren't allowed to work in certain professions.

Perhaps we shouldn't be surprised a man who has a caution for domestic violence on his partner has no idea why a sex crime is different to all those others.

Using Twitter as a guide is pretty random, because people only talk about stuff which interests them.

But I would guess roughly the split over whether Evans should be allowed to play now is roughly 50:50 amongst men. Maybe even a small majority support his aim.

But amongst women I would say it is more like 10:1 against him returning to football.

No matter how much empathy we have or how hard we try, I think it is virtually impossible to know exactly how women feel about rape.

That was the bit I thought unnecessary in the article too.

That's what I meant about Evans having the chance to make a difference.

The whole case has highlighted the way a lot of young men objectify women and treat them like dirt.

Could you imagine a woman picking up a bloke at a kebab shop, taking him back to a Premier Inn and while they are in a taxi texting her mate "I've got a bloke" and her turning up expecting to join in (while two other women are trying to video the action)?

He *could* have been a positive role model for change, telling his story to adolescent boys, youth team footballers and explaining why what he did he was wrong, and why the "lad culture" should change.

I'm not saying he should have done that, but he could have. And if he had, we might truly have seen a rehabilitation and eventually acceptance back into football.

I could imagine a certain type of woman doing this if said man was a £100k a week footballer or pop star in just the same way as i could imagine a certain type of male doing what ched evans did.  Whether it is right or wrong is a totally different question.

Some sections of society do have young men who objectify women however there is the same small section of society which has young women who treat males like ched evans as meal tickets/sugar daddy's.  I think we have to realise both sections are using each other to get to their goals.  Both groups usually have terrible morals. 

Maybe I'm wrong, but I would guess the male section of this group is vastly bigger than the female section.

Although, to be fair I went to a nightclub with Ross Boatman many moons ago, when he was starring in London's Burning.

He literally had women throwing themselves at him, he could have taken his pick from about 90% of the women in the club.

[bobby1]

“The arguments against Ched Evans playing again are so vacuous as to be beyond parody” Rod Liddle:

http://www.spectator.co.uk/columnists/rod-liddle/9410182/the-utterly-ludicrous-and-petty-campaign-against-ched-evans/

This bit really incensed me.

"One of the ironies is that the people who have signed these various petitions are more usually lenient on the issue of criminal justice — unless it is a crime to which they particularly object. Burglary, armed robbery, manslaughter, drug dealing etc. — they’re OK. Crimes against women and any racist stuff — nope, no rehabilitation, you’re scum and that’s that."

Because of course sex crimes are different to all the others he mentions. That's why sex offenders have to sign a register after they are released. That's why they aren't allowed to work in certain professions.

Perhaps we shouldn't be surprised a man who has a caution for domestic violence on his partner has no idea why a sex crime is different to all those others.

Using Twitter as a guide is pretty random, because people only talk about stuff which interests them.

But I would guess roughly the split over whether Evans should be allowed to play now is roughly 50:50 amongst men. Maybe even a small majority support his aim.

But amongst women I would say it is more like 10:1 against him returning to football.

No matter how much empathy we have or how hard we try, I think it is virtually impossible to know exactly how women feel about rape.

That was the bit I thought unnecessary in the article too.

That's what I meant about Evans having the chance to make a difference.

The whole case has highlighted the way a lot of young men objectify women and treat them like dirt.

Could you imagine a woman picking up a bloke at a kebab shop, taking him back to a Premier Inn and while they are in a taxi texting her mate "I've got a bloke" and her turning up expecting to join in (while two other women are trying to video the action)?

He *could* have been a positive role model for change, telling his story to adolescent boys, youth team footballers and explaining why what he did he was wrong, and why the "lad culture" should change.

I'm not saying he should have done that, but he could have. And if he had, we might truly have seen a rehabilitation and eventually acceptance back into football.

This is where it all gets messy tho Keith, the girl approached the guy in the street, he didn't set out to 'target 'her. The phrase 'I've got a bird' means 'I've pulled' doesn't it?

If he was having sex with a girl in a hotel room and his friend was trying to video it thru the window why is he responsible for that? He didn't go to the room saying I'm going to rape this girl, why don't you record it lads' did he?

How can someone on the sex offenders register visit youth team footballers or speak to young people about these things?

If he is guilty then he doesn't deserve any benefit but the responsibility for a suspected sex crime has all fallen on him. He might be guilty but the evidence doesn't prove that and at the other end of the scale he might have simply had sex with a girl that was too intoxicated to remember consenting (remember, the night porter who was listening at the door confirmed he heard the girl request a sex act to be performed on her at the time). It is just such a wide chasm between those two things that it looks a really big call to make given the lack of evidence of rape.

[bobby1]

Excellent articles by Henry Winter and Paul Hayward.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/oldham-athletic/11334487/Ched-Evans-mob-rule-card-is-a-cheap-trick-by-an-unrepentant-rapist.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/oldham-athletic/11333205/Ched-Evans-affair-shamed-football-myopic-PFA-mute-FA-and-idiotic-clubs-all-disgraced-themselves.html

He apologised yesterday Keith, does this change your opinion of what has happened or of him?

It's unfortunate if what was in Evans statement was straightforwardly true - because it doesn't half sound like something written by a lawyer and PR person

I would bet 1/20 it was written by someone like a PR man or a lawyer. Who would you expect to right a press release/statement tho Jon?

The question would be why he didn't get them to write it sooner.

It would be a pretty poor lawyer (or PR for that matter) who just said, say and do no nothing no matter what.

EDIT: to clarify I mean, it comes across like they've told him to release it rather than it having anything to do with him at all

Yes that might be the case but surely he is very limited in what he can and cannot say with an appeal taking place. He isn't going to apologise after being in prison for something he thinks he didn't do so wouldn't apologise directly to the girl involved. So he has a situation where he has made an apology about something he can't talk about, involving someone he shouldn't mention and cannot tell his version of events. If you couldn't do all of those things then it's tough to make any statement and when you do it is always going to be pre written.

It is possible that he doesn't believe that rape took place but it could still be classed as rape in law but there is also a chance that sex with someone that doesn't remember it the day after took place. The lack of DNA at the scene, no traces of the drugs in the girls system were found in the hotel room or taken by the men. The girl told police she had no memory after leaving her mates but then said she remembered the exact drinks she drank during the night, then said her drink might have been spiked.

A little bit

From the official Court of Appeal Judgment:

 The doctor found no injuries to the complainant. The tests also revealed traces of cocaine and cannabis. The evidence was consistent with cocaine and cannabis having been ingested some days earlier.

No traces of the drugs found in her system were found in the hotel room is what I mean.(did you misread that bud or maybe I have phrased it badly)

If her drink was spiked it would have been visible in her system, I haven't read of that being the case. If it did show up (I haven't read that it did but I might be wrong) then the fact there was no trace of substances in the room would seem to make it unlikely it was anything to do with the two guys if her drink had been spiked.

Sorry misread by me.........and yes no traces of any spiked drink i have read.

no worries mate

[arbboy]

Mark, players are role models because football clubs market themselves as socially responsible members of the community. They actively market their product to families and point to their star players as role models to kids, doing community work in schools, hospitals etc.

The star players on a kids football team are the people that they admire. This becomes even more of a problem at a club like Hartlepool where Evans would undoubtedly be their main man. Fair enough these aren't huge clubs we're talking about and he's not gunna be all over the 9 o'clock news but it sets a precedent that people in positions of responsibility can commit horrible crimes and walk back into their role without even finishing their sentence.

Lots of people are pointing at the fact that he's a footballer and saying that he's being victimised for being successful,wealthy etc. and that people want one rule for footballers and another for everyone else, but I think that its completely the other way round. I'd have exactly the same opinion about anyone else in the public eye returning to a position of responsibility. By allowing Evans to play professional football in the UK again I think we'd be carving out a special exemption for football, one that sends a damaging message that if you're a TV presenter/insert marginally famous profession here and you commit a sexual offence you're gone but if you're a footballer its alright you don't even have to finish your sentence, as long as you can score goals you're good to go.

That's fine if you have that view.  My question is where do you draw the line on being a role model?  At what level can a footballer commit a rape and carry on playing when he has served his sentence?

I think it is a great time for good responsible parents if you have a young son who thinks footballers are role models to sit down with him and explain that footballers are human beings like everyone else in society.  You get good and bad ones just like any walk of life and teach them that they don't walk on water like some people seem to think.

[The Camel]

“The arguments against Ched Evans playing again are so vacuous as to be beyond parody” Rod Liddle:

http://www.spectator.co.uk/columnists/rod-liddle/9410182/the-utterly-ludicrous-and-petty-campaign-against-ched-evans/

This bit really incensed me.

"One of the ironies is that the people who have signed these various petitions are more usually lenient on the issue of criminal justice — unless it is a crime to which they particularly object. Burglary, armed robbery, manslaughter, drug dealing etc. — they’re OK. Crimes against women and any racist stuff — nope, no rehabilitation, you’re scum and that’s that."

Because of course sex crimes are different to all the others he mentions. That's why sex offenders have to sign a register after they are released. That's why they aren't allowed to work in certain professions.

Perhaps we shouldn't be surprised a man who has a caution for domestic violence on his partner has no idea why a sex crime is different to all those others.

Using Twitter as a guide is pretty random, because people only talk about stuff which interests them.

But I would guess roughly the split over whether Evans should be allowed to play now is roughly 50:50 amongst men. Maybe even a small majority support his aim.

But amongst women I would say it is more like 10:1 against him returning to football.

No matter how much empathy we have or how hard we try, I think it is virtually impossible to know exactly how women feel about rape.

That was the bit I thought unnecessary in the article too.

That's what I meant about Evans having the chance to make a difference.

The whole case has highlighted the way a lot of young men objectify women and treat them like dirt.

Could you imagine a woman picking up a bloke at a kebab shop, taking him back to a Premier Inn and while they are in a taxi texting her mate "I've got a bloke" and her turning up expecting to join in (while two other women are trying to video the action)?

He *could* have been a positive role model for change, telling his story to adolescent boys, youth team footballers and explaining why what he did he was wrong, and why the "lad culture" should change.

I'm not saying he should have done that, but he could have. And if he had, we might truly have seen a rehabilitation and eventually acceptance back into football.

This is where it all gets messy tho Keith, the girl approached the guy in the street, he didn't set out to 'target 'her. The phrase 'I've got a bird' means 'I've pulled' doesn't it?

If he was having sex with a girl in a hotel room and his friend was trying to video it thru the window why is he responsible for that? He didn't go to the room saying I'm going to rape this girl, why don't you record it lads' did he?

How can someone on the sex offenders register visit youth team footballers or speak to young people about these things?

If he is guilty then he doesn't deserve any benefit but the responsibility for a suspected sex crime has all fallen on him. He might be guilty but the evidence doesn't prove that and at the other end of the scale he might have simply had sex with a girl that was too intoxicated to remember consenting (remember, the night porter who was listening at the door confirmed he heard the girl request a sex act to be performed on her at the time). It is just such a wide chasm between those two things that it looks a really big call to make given the lack of usual evidence of actual rape.

If you, me or any responsible bloke receives a text message from a mate saying "I've got a bird", would we take this as invitation to go and join in?

I'd probably ignore that text, possibly text back something sarcastic about making sure he had suitable protection. I certainly wouldn't be hailing a cab to the Premier Inn hoping to get my wick dipped.

Maybe he couldn't talk to youth team footballers, or maybe he could get dispensation. I was just thinking aloud about how he could go about repairing his reputation.

But there's been a lot of talk about him being a role model, well he really could have been a positive role model if he had owned his actions and chosen to go down that particular path.

[DMorgan]

Mark, players are role models because football clubs market themselves as socially responsible members of the community. They actively market their product to families and point to their star players as role models to kids, doing community work in schools, hospitals etc.

The star players on a kids football team are the people that they admire. This becomes even more of a problem at a club like Hartlepool where Evans would undoubtedly be their main man. Fair enough these aren't huge clubs we're talking about and he's not gunna be all over the 9 o'clock news but it sets a precedent that people in positions of responsibility can commit horrible crimes and walk back into their role without even finishing their sentence.

Lots of people are pointing at the fact that he's a footballer and saying that he's being victimised for being successful,wealthy etc. and that people want one rule for footballers and another for everyone else, but I think that its completely the other way round. I'd have exactly the same opinion about anyone else in the public eye returning to a position of responsibility. By allowing Evans to play professional football in the UK again I think we'd be carving out a special exemption for football, one that sends a damaging message that if you're a TV presenter/insert marginally famous profession here and you commit a sexual offence you're gone but if you're a footballer its alright you don't even have to finish your sentence, as long as you can score goals you're good to go.

That's fine if you have that view.  My question is where do you draw the line on being a role model?  At what level can a footballer commit a rape and carry on playing when he has served his sentence?

I don't know where you draw that line but in my view being a professional footballer where your product is marketed to families and children falls inside that line.