Ormy I doubt very much the police media contacted sky sports highly doubtful and it seems a strange protocol to have someone from the club outside there houses with a clipboard chatting away to cameras. Let the police deal with these matters
Mate, given we know that the Old Bill and News International have been scratching each others backs for the best part of a decade then I think you are being highly charitable in your views.
Scotland Yard's PR team is choc-a-bloc full of ex News International people.
Is it ok with you if I have an opinion ? Not that it's got anything to do with you considering your not 'admin'.
I understand not being allowed to comment to much on legal cases but it dosn't sit comfortably with me that the club havn't condenmed (Sp) the alleged rape yet they immdiatley brought the 'train incident' t public light and condenmed them then threatened to take further action.
It seems that this is not a minority's view either as me and others on here agreed with Loco's post...
So let's look at Steve Kavanagh's quote: “This kind of abhorrent behaviour is totally condemned by our club and in addition to assisting the police, for our own part we will be seeking to ban for life anyone who is found guilty of racially offensive chanting.”
So "this kind of abhorrent behaviour", no one there mentioned by name, he didn't even say displayed by these 9 men just this kind of behaviour. That doesn't sound to me like the club is condemning anyone yet.
The second part, "we will be seeking to ban for life anyone who is found guilty of racially offensive chanting", he is clearly only saying if anyone is found guilty of chanting racist songs that they should be banned. Again not condemning those arrested yet just stating something which any normal person would agree with.
Before you get on your high horse again I suggest you back up your allegations with some facts.
Part of the problem in this country - those who see themselves as middle class are normally working class and have views that only benefit the middle class and those that are middle class like the idea of being working class and have views that benefit the working class. All in all, a right twisted mess but thats how the establishment like it.
I think Henry is referring to the minority who consider those who are arrested for intimidating the public and singing racist songs on trains as victims in some way when they are arrested.
Is it ok with you if I have an opinion ? Not that it's got anything to do with you considering your not 'admin'.
I understand not being allowed to comment to much on legal cases but it dosn't sit comfortably with me that the club havn't condenmed (Sp) the alleged rape yet they immdiatley brought the 'train incident' t public light and condenmed them then threatened to take further action.
It seems that this is not a minority's view either as me and others on here agreed with Loco's post...
You have made it quite clear where you stand on a number of issues, but one thing is for sure, and that is that you are in the minority, thankfully.
For the record, I'm not middle class, never voted Labour or Liberal and I tell non-PC jokes.
Good lord Chirpy.....we have something in common......whoever would have thought it!
Is it ok with you if I have an opinion ? Not that it's got anything to do with you considering your not 'admin'.
I understand not being allowed to comment to much on legal cases but it dosn't sit comfortably with me that the club havn't condenmed (Sp) the alleged rape yet they immdiatley brought the 'train incident' t public light and condenmed them then threatened to take further action.
It seems that this is not a minority's view either as me and others on here agreed with Loco's post...
You have made it quite clear where you stand on a number of issues, but one thing is for sure, and that is that you are in the minority, thankfully.
For the record, I'm not middle class, never voted Labour or Liberal and I tell non-PC jokes.
Good lord Chirpy.....we have something in common......whoever would have thought it!
Isn't it a case of the club (in respect of the currently innocent nine fans) helping Police with their enquiries. I'm quite sure the club will be called upon to assist the alleged rape charge against one of their players if and when required. Imo, the alleged racist chanting is linked more closely to the club (happend on a CAFC match day) than an alleged rape by a player (who was off duty).
Ignoring the obvious and unpleasant agenda of the OP he is comparing chalk and cheese as Len says.
On the one hand the club has a responsibility to assist the police investigation and send a clear message to others of that ilk e.g. those supporting "the lads", that the club will take the appropriate action in the event that they take part in anything similar. Think of it as preventative action if you like.
On the other is a particularly sensitive case involving two very young people, one of whom is an employee, which is presumably unrelated in any way to the workings of CAFC. Therefore any comment would be inappropriate. Even if you ignore the laws around sub judice, etc.
Don't know why people are having any trouble differentiating between the two situations.
I am astonished that a Club Representative could be so stupid as to go with the police in this way, and the sight of television camera's should have sent him running. Imagine if this sets a precedent, where will it end? The only thing the Club should do in such circumstances, is to assume innocence and only act when a conviction has taken place. Was this person wanting to see himself on television ? Once again the British media starts to meddle, and our so called ( because he certainly does not represent me ) Representative should be severely reprimanded, perhaps in the prescence of Sky News camera's.
I hope that if anyone is found guilty of any offences similar to those the Charlton 9 or the player have been accused of, that everyone associated with the club, fans included, will come out and condemn the guilty parties.
Somehow I think this would only be the start of a 'free the CAFC xx(insert number of guily people)' campaign against the middle class, left wingers who made up all the charges.
I hope that if anyone is found guilty of any offences similar to those the Charlton 9 or the player have been accused of, that everyone associated with the club, fans included, will come out and condemn the guilty parties.
Somehow I think this would only be the start of a 'free the CAFC xx(insert number of guily people)' campaign against the middle class, left wingers who made up all the charges.
Indeed. You don't have to go very far beyond this site to know what the real political agendas are of some who post on here. Left wing tossers are not the propblem.
Isn't it a case of the club (in respect of the currently innocent nine fans) helping Police with their enquiries. I'm quite sure the club will be called upon to assist the alleged rape charge against one of their players if and when required. Imo, the alleged racist chanting is linked more closely to the club (happend on a CAFC match day) than an alleged rape by a player (who was off duty).
So if one of my colleagues goes and robs a bank tomorrow on his day off it is less reflective on my company than if one of our customers does it coming back from a meeting at our offices?
RMg, if they are convicted, do you really think that we would need to condemn them ? Your comment about ' free the CAFC whatever ', is mildly insulting and bloody silly.
Isn't it a case of the club (in respect of the currently innocent nine fans) helping Police with their enquiries. I'm quite sure the club will be called upon to assist the alleged rape charge against one of their players if and when required. Imo, the alleged racist chanting is linked more closely to the club (happend on a CAFC match day) than an alleged rape by a player (who was off duty).
So if one of my colleagues goes and robs a bank tomorrow on his day off it is less reflective on my company than if one of our customers does it coming back from a meeting at our offices?
Good point. Both are wrong and so there really should be no arguement (in my opinion).
RMg, if they are convicted, do you really think that we would need to condemn them ? Your comment about ' free the CAFC whatever ', is mildly insulting and bloody silly.
I think the point being made was that there are a few on here, thankfully not many, who would not condemn the nine if they were proven guilty.
RCT customers of a bank and those of a football club are clearly very different!!!
Wish I'd known that before I gave my bank details to one of the Jackpot sellers and tried renegotiating my overdraft with the Ticket office last week ;-)
redsek, interesting point but we would only know if they chose not to condemn them by them showing support for the offenders, in which case they would reveal their true selves.
Isn't it a case of the club (in respect of the currently innocent nine fans) helping Police with their enquiries. I'm quite sure the club will be called upon to assist the alleged rape charge against one of their players if and when required. Imo, the alleged racist chanting is linked more closely to the club (happend on a CAFC match day) than an alleged rape by a player (who was off duty).
So if one of my colleagues goes and robs a bank tomorrow on his day off it is less reflective on my company than if one of our customers does it coming back from a meeting at our offices?
From what I know, the Police sought the club's help regarding the racist chanting and the club has expressed publicly that it condemns such behaviour. As for the allegation against one of the players, I doubt the Police have approached the club, and given that it is a very serious allegation concerning a 17 year old boy perhaps they decided not to make a comment. Is that wrong?
I think that the club should have a robust opinion and take all necessary action to stamp out racism in and around it. Including assisting the police as far as possible in identifying any perpetrators of racism and prosecuting them. Even if found not guilty I also think that the club is within it's rights to use a lesser standard of proof than a court of law to ban people for this. And other hate crimes. Regarding the serious offence by an employee, unless the club has the same level of evidence in front of it as it gets from the CCTV etc at the ground I think it has to be a bit more circumspect. But if found guilty - or proven to a lesser degree that would stand up in an employment tribunal - then the employee should be summarily dismissed. I am constantly amazed at the implicit racist bile and fellow travelling with racists from some on here. I wish they'd crawl back under their stones.
Even if found not guilty I also think that the club is within it's rights to use a lesser standard of proof than a court of law to ban people for this. And other hate crimes. .
Well by that logic would you expect them to apply the same approach to things like rape then?
Even if found not guilty I also think that the club is within it's rights to use a lesser standard of proof than a court of law to ban people for this. And other hate crimes. .
Well by that logic would you expect them to apply the same approach to things like rape then?
1 - 'The 9' - the club was right to work with the police on this matter as they have, but wrong to tag along for the arrests. Their comment to effect of 'if found guilty...' was quite right.
2 - 'The rape' - the club is correct to not comment, they have not been involved in the investigation or had complaints made to them about this person.
3 - The naming of the player - as I understand it, unless there is a banning request from a judge the paper are within their rights to name the person arrested. Might not be right but that is the crux of the matter.
1. Football clubs will always take contrary views where players are involved. Chelsea's reaction to Mutu's positive test was rather different to their defence of captain John. Similarly Liverpool were all merrily wearing Suarez shirts, but if that had been a flop they wanted shot of, how might that have changed? Man U vigorously defended Ferdinand's accidental failure to attend a mandatory drugs test. Would they be taking the same line if a City player pulled the same stunt in the run-in? In any case accused is different to found guilty. For all we know the lad could be a monster or he could be a young boy who is stuck in the middle of a nightmare that could destroy his career. 2. On reflection the club shouldn't have been grandstanding arrests, but the programme comments are entirely appropriate. In fact if it had been left at that, then nobody could be complaining, surely?
Comments
Scotland Yard's PR team is choc-a-bloc full of ex News International people.
“This kind of abhorrent behaviour is totally condemned by our club and in addition to assisting the police, for our own part we will be seeking to ban for life anyone who is found guilty of racially offensive chanting.”
So "this kind of abhorrent behaviour", no one there mentioned by name, he didn't even say displayed by these 9 men just this kind of behaviour. That doesn't sound to me like the club is condemning anyone yet.
The second part, "we will be seeking to ban for life anyone who is found guilty of racially offensive chanting", he is clearly only saying if anyone is found guilty of chanting racist songs that they should be banned. Again not condemning those arrested yet just stating something which any normal person would agree with.
Before you get on your high horse again I suggest you back up your allegations with some facts.
I think Henry is referring to the minority who consider those who are arrested for intimidating the public and singing racist songs on trains as victims in some way when they are arrested.
slippers off shoes on and back to work
good thread ruined
for the record i agree with Colthe3rd
totally
On the one hand the club has a responsibility to assist the police investigation and send a clear message to others of that ilk e.g. those supporting "the lads", that the club will take the appropriate action in the event that they take part in anything similar. Think of it as preventative action if you like.
On the other is a particularly sensitive case involving two very young people, one of whom is an employee, which is presumably unrelated in any way to the workings of CAFC. Therefore any comment would be inappropriate. Even if you ignore the laws around sub judice, etc.
Don't know why people are having any trouble differentiating between the two situations.
The only thing the Club should do in such circumstances, is to assume innocence and only act when a conviction has taken place. Was this person wanting to see himself on television ? Once again the British media starts to meddle, and our so called ( because he certainly does not represent me ) Representative should be severely reprimanded, perhaps in the prescence of Sky News camera's.
Somehow I think this would only be the start of a 'free the CAFC xx(insert number of guily people)' campaign against the middle class, left wingers who made up all the charges.
Unless I completely misread the post.
Regarding the serious offence by an employee, unless the club has the same level of evidence in front of it as it gets from the CCTV etc at the ground I think it has to be a bit more circumspect. But if found guilty - or proven to a lesser degree that would stand up in an employment tribunal - then the employee should be summarily dismissed.
I am constantly amazed at the implicit racist bile and fellow travelling with racists from some on here. I wish they'd crawl back under their stones.
1 - 'The 9' - the club was right to work with the police on this matter as they have, but wrong to tag along for the arrests. Their comment to effect of 'if found guilty...' was quite right.
2 - 'The rape' - the club is correct to not comment, they have not been involved in the investigation or had complaints made to them about this person.
3 - The naming of the player - as I understand it, unless there is a banning request from a judge the paper are within their rights to name the person arrested. Might not be right but that is the crux of the matter.
Two thoughts
1. Football clubs will always take contrary views where players are involved. Chelsea's reaction to Mutu's positive test was rather different to their defence of captain John. Similarly Liverpool were all merrily wearing Suarez shirts, but if that had been a flop they wanted shot of, how might that have changed? Man U vigorously defended Ferdinand's accidental failure to attend a mandatory drugs test. Would they be taking the same line if a City player pulled the same stunt in the run-in? In any case accused is different to found guilty. For all we know the lad could be a monster or he could be a young boy who is stuck in the middle of a nightmare that could destroy his career.
2. On reflection the club shouldn't have been grandstanding arrests, but the programme comments are entirely appropriate. In fact if it had been left at that, then nobody could be complaining, surely?