Boo Khaki Posted August 18, 2021 Share Posted August 18, 2021 26 minutes ago, Damaged Radio said: C’mon now, there’s literally no chance that’s the case. As the posters said above, students, players lounges, hospitality etc. Then he's kept out of those spaces. Basic safeguarding, a condition of his employment. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Derry Posted August 18, 2021 Share Posted August 18, 2021 I reckon the boy was probably a young and drunk moron rather than a massive threat to every woman he'll ever meet. If he's served his punishment for the crime then he should be allowed to live his life. Especially if he's better than Elliott... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomohawk Posted August 18, 2021 Share Posted August 18, 2021 Can't really believe some of the stuff that is being posted here. Imagine this was your younger sister, girlfriend, mum, friend or anyone else that you know that this lecherous creep forced himself upon. While it's by no means rape, it was not consented (from what I've read anyway) and no one deserves to be the victim of this. The guy may very well be a cracking player but I think we'd be insane to sign him, especially given his lack of remorse. Aside from the feelings of any female staff at Dens, how would female supporters, especially those that have been the victim of something similar, feel when he's in the team? I get the point that Gowser has a record (as did Benedictus and Gallagher) but society deems sexual offences to be more heinous than assault, something I'm inclined to agree with. I can only hope that McPake and Nelms see sense on this one and recognise that the risk is far greater than any potential reward. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dee Bliss Posted August 18, 2021 Share Posted August 18, 2021 48 minutes ago, johnnydun said: Fair enough, where do you draw the line on what incidents go on the register and what don't, it's all about opinion I suppose. It’s not opinions though, it’s the rule of law. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boo Khaki Posted August 18, 2021 Share Posted August 18, 2021 8 minutes ago, Damaged Radio said: Strange lengths to go to just to sign a sex offender when the other option is just don’t sign a sex offender. 'Strange lengths'? It's not as if he's going to have to be accompanied 24/7 by armed police or monitored remotely. He trains, he plays, he goes home afterwards, is treated by club staff in an appropriate setting and at an appropriate time. It's not overly complicated or particularly awkward to implement. Presumably you are opposed to sex offenders being employed under any circumstances? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boo Khaki Posted August 18, 2021 Share Posted August 18, 2021 Just now, Damaged Radio said: If you’d wish your club to impose such measures to keep female employees safe just to sign a sex offender when the other option is don’t sign him then we’re never going to agree on this. I'm just curious why you think football clubs are a special case and different to other employers. If the lad was a brickie he wouldn't be prevented from bricklaying even if there were females employed by the same company. Any measures taken are only going to effect the employee in question, it's not like anyone else at the club is having their routine upset or being prohibited from certain areas just because there's an employee with a criminal history. All employers have the option 'not to sign sex offenders', it doesn't necessarily mean it's the correct thing to do, or what's best for society as a whole. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomohawk Posted August 18, 2021 Share Posted August 18, 2021 12 minutes ago, Boo Khaki said: 'Strange lengths'? It's not as if he's going to have to be accompanied 24/7 by armed police or monitored remotely. He trains, he plays, he goes home afterwards, is treated by club staff in an appropriate setting and at an appropriate time. It's not overly complicated or particularly awkward to implement. Presumably you are opposed to sex offenders being employed under any circumstances? How do you deal with an end of season awards dinner where the entire squad is in attendance along with members of the public? Or a calendar signing at the shop? Or any other perfectly reasonable scenario where players and supporters interact? We shouldn't put paying, long-term supporters of the club in a position where they feel uncomfortable or, worse, terrified. If he'd shown remorse and learned from it then it might be a different story but, to me, this just seems like a typical "I'm a footballer and I'm going to do as I please" story. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boo Khaki Posted August 18, 2021 Share Posted August 18, 2021 Just now, Thomohawk said: How do you deal with an end of season awards dinner where the entire squad is in attendance along with members of the public? Or a calendar signing at the shop? Or any other perfectly reasonable scenario where players and supporters interact? We shouldn't put paying, long-term supporters of the club in a position where they feel uncomfortable or, worse, terrified. If he'd shown remorse and learned from it then it might be a different story but, to me, this just seems like a typical "I'm a footballer and I'm going to do as I please" story. He wouldn't be present at any of those types of events as a condition of his employment. If he wants a contract, those are the stipulations. Again, I'm not in any way less repulsed by sex offenders than anyone else, and in this particular case it does appear that the lad in question hasn't really got his head around contrition, which worries me, however, on the simple question of whether or not it's acceptable for football clubs to employ people with convictions, I don't see how they are any different to any other employer, and I don't believe it's either realistic or beneficial to imply that offenders should be denied participation in society once they've served their sentences. I ask again, what would be the difference if he was working a till in Asda? He's still going to be working with female colleagues and serving female customers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomohawk Posted August 18, 2021 Share Posted August 18, 2021 1 minute ago, Boo Khaki said: I'm just curious why you think football clubs are a special case and different to other employers. If the lad was a brickie he wouldn't be prevented from bricklaying even if there were females employed by the same company. Any measures taken are only going to effect the employee in question, it's not like anyone else at the club is having their routine upset or being prohibited from certain areas just because there's an employee with a criminal history. All employers have the option 'not to sign sex offenders', it doesn't necessarily mean it's the correct thing to do, or what's best for society as a whole. No one pays (at least not that I'm aware of) or idolises bricklayers. Neither do they buy the shirts of the company that employs the bricklayer. Basically and in the nicest possible sense sense, no one really notices bricklayers and what they get up to in their private or working lives (other than the regular appearance of bricks being stuck together). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boo Khaki Posted August 18, 2021 Share Posted August 18, 2021 Just now, Damaged Radio said: Do you honestly believe Asda would employ him if he disclosed his criminal record? Depends on whether it's a role which his criminal past precludes him from occupying. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin.Hood Posted August 18, 2021 Share Posted August 18, 2021 30 minutes ago, Boo Khaki said: Depends on whether it's a role which his criminal past precludes him from occupying. He wouldn't be working in a supermarket whether that be on shopfloor or warehouse or call centre ( maybe can work from his own home ). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twinkle Posted August 18, 2021 Share Posted August 18, 2021 One of your supporters has penned an open letter to the club regarding this and it seems to have gathered a bit of traction on twitter https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdvAkGyYavVq6k6_xZFUseOa3ObcS6jIEKCfvQTg-b3Vlzp7A/viewform 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted August 18, 2021 Share Posted August 18, 2021 5 hours ago, Day of the Lords said: TBF Plenty of United fans thought the whole David Goodwillie thing was a right laugh and even had a song for it. However it was a bit dickish of me so duly edited. The only ones who thought it was a right laugh seemed to be kids, I think all the Arabs on here showed their feelings. That said credit to the Dees on here, I hope your club pays attention. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludo*1 Posted August 18, 2021 Share Posted August 18, 2021 2 hours ago, Robin.Hood said: He wouldn't be working in a supermarket whether that be on shopfloor or warehouse or call centre ( maybe can work from his own home ). Timpsons is in the supermarket. They actively try to hire rehabilitated criminals, do they not? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derry Alli Posted August 18, 2021 Share Posted August 18, 2021 I'd maybe feel sympathy for the guy if he was pished and had a drunken fumble. He's absolutely @WATTOO'd the lassies hair, stuck his hand up her top - told her to dress less provocative - and then went back and stuck his hand up her top again. He's a fucking creep. Get him to f**k. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dee Man Posted August 18, 2021 Share Posted August 18, 2021 5 hours ago, Boo Khaki said: That's true, but in terms of safeguarding it's not remotely the same thing. People are well aware, or at least, the relevant people will be aware. It's not like he's an offender who has gone under the radar, evaded detection, or is passing DBS despite being a known offender. Adults aren't as susceptible to deception or coercion, so it's not the same as potentially putting children at risk. As far as I'm aware there are no women at DFC who are employed in roles that mean they work directly with the 1st team squad, so even if he is signed it shouldn't be too difficult to ensure that he doesn't come into contact with female employees. I completely accept that this might make women in particular uncomfortable, but as I said, the only way to prevent that is to prohibit anyone with any history of offending being permitted to participate in public life in any way. Every time the players walk through the main entrance at Dens there are about 5 or 6 women who work in the office immediately on the right hand side through the door. Not to mention there is a woman who sits on the bench every week. Not a great look to have one player in the squad you have to keep away from them. Anyone who forces themselves onto what are generally considered to be the 2nd most vulnerable members of society can get volleyed into the Tay as far as I'm concerned. BTW, how do you know he hasn't "gone under the radar"? This sort of behaviour isn't generally in isolation. I doubt he just got unlucky and got caught the first time he did it. I know footballers aren't generally renowned for their intelligence, but to plead guilty, not appeal and then further down the line attempt to plead your innocence and blame bad counsel advice is probably as thick as it gets. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meeniedee Posted August 18, 2021 Share Posted August 18, 2021 21 minutes ago, Granny Danger said: The only ones who thought it was a right laugh seemed to be kids only kids yir arse...your east stand used to belt out songs about how he does what he wants, 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludo*1 Posted August 18, 2021 Share Posted August 18, 2021 Dunno how I feel about this. Can certainly understand both sides. Think everyone/a lot of people have done something shite when drunk, but to the extent he went to? Not so sure. Football is such a public career that he'll be hounded wherever he goes, but the justice system has decided he should walk the streets and is eligible for work. How long should society punish him for something he done drunk at 21? On the other hand, I'm very uneasy about the whole thing for the reasons that have been discussed already and I totally get why people are dead against it. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnydun Posted August 18, 2021 Share Posted August 18, 2021 3 minutes ago, Ludo*1 said: Dunno how I feel about this. Can certainly understand both sides. Think everyone/a lot of people have done something shite when drunk, but to the extent he went to? Not so sure. Football is such a public career that he'll be hounded wherever he goes, but the justice system has decided he should walk the streets and is eligible for work. How long should society punish him for something he done drunk at 21? On the other hand, I'm very uneasy about the whole thing for the reasons that have been discussed already and I totally get why people are dead against it. Exactly my stance Ludo. I think we should avoid signing him. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K.T Posted August 18, 2021 Share Posted August 18, 2021 Should just sign Greg Stewart, imo. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.