[Closed] Footballer suspended " inappropriate conduct toward underage girls on the net"

Yes.

Yes he should lose his job. He has cost his club a fortune due to sponsors not wanting to be associated with a club who employs a sex offender.

Part of his job would probably involve going and meeting kids in hospital and fundraising events.

Did this not happen 4 years ago when he was 16?

Puts a completely different slant on it IMO.

Of course many will say the Justice system's punishment was not enough and he should be punished in other ways forever...keep buying the tabloids guys 🙄

He is only 20 but the girls were 12 and 14

What do you mean "only" 20 ?

EDIT :

Did this not happen 4 years ago when he was 16?

Puts a completely different slant on it IMO.

Yes. Although a 16 year old boy interested in 12 year old girls ain't healthy imo.

Effectively he groomed two children for sex despite knowing their ages

Does that not make him a paedophile?

Yes he should lose his job and will more than likely be hounded out of football by fans and players alike once the season starts.

No one likes a nonce

He knew their age yet pursued them and knew what he was doing - IMO a potentially dangerous and disturbed lad. Lose his job? Well maybe they have a position of responsibility in the public limelight so yes.

Nope, he should continue to march out on that pitch in front of a few thousand home and opposing fans on a weekly basis, and I'm sure they'll express their opinions on the issue in a constructive and forthright manner.

I know where you're coming from TJ. In another job, it might not matter as he wouldn't have that "celebrity" status favoured by the media and that would make his sacking unfair. However, he [i]does[/i] come into contact with kids as part of his job and as such I think the correct decision has been made.

Hell yes, its wrong behaviour, sending children pictures of male genetalia! Should really go to prison for that, he was grooming them in my opinion.

Dunno really earnie. Young and stupid? Makes no odds tho does it his age - he is over 16 and should know better. he should have known the girls ages as well - its not as if they lied to him about their ages

cynic-al - Member
Did this not happen 4 years ago when he was 16?

Druidh - thats the point. Is he getting punished twice because of his celebrity status?

I ain't defending him at all - Genuinely interested in folks views on it.

I dont see why the guy should loose his job in the same way as if he was a joiner/banker/bike shop worker just so long as he does not come into contact with children.

There was a lot of pish in the local media going on about the club loosing a sponsor, a water company which was for the massive sum of £5000 pa, seems to me like the company were looking for some additional advertising.

While the guy deserves and should be punished for what he has done i dont think it has anything to do with his job.

tuppence worth

6 posts and...

No one likes a nonce

Biting analysis there!

I saw someone being interviewed saying he was not an appropriate role model, but how many footballers are?
If I did what he did id get struck off the register and lose my job, but I dont know if the same should happen to him, he's got to work somewhere.

I think opposing fans would've made it pretty difficult for him to do his job.

The Southern Yeti - Member

I think opposing fans would've made it pretty difficult for him to do his job.

Thats for sure

sweepy - Member

I saw someone being interviewed saying he was not an appropriate role model, but how many footballers are?

Indeed - who was it that has been prosecuted several times for beating folk up? How many rapist footballers get away with it? how many Thugs?

TandemJeremy - Member
Druidh - thats the point. Is he getting punished twice because of his celebrity status?

Druidh - thats the point. Is he getting punished twice because of his celebrity status?

Should Hearts be punished because they employed him?

I also think that the fact he's a 'celebrity' makes the case more twisted.

I've been waist deep in clunge since I got this t-shirt..

[img] [/img]

I'd be unstoppable if I was famous in real life.

Part of his job would probably involve going and meeting kids in hospital and fundraising events.

not part of their job, just an additional thing that some of them do.

Yes he should lose his job. He has cost his club a fortune due to sponsors not wanting to be associated with a club who employs a sex offender

surely that is a company/club decision?

However, he does come into contact with kids as part of his job and as such I think the correct decision has been made.

If that is true then he should loose his job

Hell yes, its wrong behaviour, sending children pictures of male genetalia! Should really go to prison for that, he was grooming them in my opinion

I agree he should have been punished in that way.

The guy is guilty for the offences he was convicted for but i dont think he should loose his job. The club had been supporting him in that aspect. However he was made to apologise to the club, fans and team mates but not to the victims, which seems very very wrong

Does anyone here believe someone on the register should be able to get a job? Or believe (or have evidence relating to, some chance!) he/she is capable of change?

Doesn't take long on Hearts website to find something like:

'To utilise the power of sport, the popularity of football and Heart of Midlothian players as positive role models to motivate, educate, and inspire children, youths and adults within our community through a range of innovative and progressive programmes and events.'

If they expect their players to be role models and to inspire young people, there's surely no way he can stay

How will denying them work help tho, that just means they've got time on their hands, and a grudge against the world.

I saw someone being interviewed saying he was not an appropriate role model

On a general point I don't understand the thing about footballers being judged as role models.

Young lads with a talent for football don't go into the game to improve the lives of individuals and society in general any more than young plasterers do. They go into to play a game they love and earn lots of money.

Now clearly this particular case is more than 'not being a good role model' but let's look at a plasterer who shags about a bit. If his footballer brother shags about a bit we get "doesn't he realise he's a role model?"

From the noises coming from tynecastle it would appear that the club are/were behind the player and have bowed to media and not general public/supporters

Now clearly this particular case is more than 'not being a good role model' but let's look at a plasterer who shags about a bit. If his footballer brother shags about a bit we get "doesn't he realise he's a role model?"

But he is dragging the football clubs name through the mud whereas if is brother is a council plasterer nobody is interested. what he does.

Bringing employer into disrepute is often used as a reason to dismiss staff in a similar situations all the time according to HR manager wife (not her personally but cases mentioned in HR press) irrespective of "celebrity status".

Assume you took this to a logical conclusion and treated all staff the same - i.e. every member of the team had a socially unacceptable criminal record but you let them play. How many people would pay good money at the turn-style to watch 11 people on the sex offenders register every week. Comes down to brass tacks. I find I do it myself - ever since I discovered what the chap behind metcheck had been up to I stopped using the site although his crime had absolutely nothing to do with forecasting the weather (although some of the forecasts were pretty criminal!).

What about the footballers who beat people up then? What about Mat Stevens the rugby player - Cocaine use. What about those done for drunk driving?

Then it comes down to how 2 faced you can be! How important they are to the club's success or how much of a blind eye you turned to someone else committing the same offences that was important to club success and if you feel you have to treat them equally.

I just feel a load of inconsistency in the treatment of sportsmen and their misdemeanour's. People keep employing Craig Bellamy, looks like Thomsons career is over

Mat Stevens got a 2 year ban for cocaine use which he admitted., the same week Mike Tindal got caught drink driving for the second time and got no censure at all

Had a similar case around here with one of the senior guys at Fujitsu losing his job because he liked to get his tackle out in front of young girls: [url= http://www.birminghammail.net/news/top-stories/2011/06/06/fujitsu-it-worker-put-on-sex-offenders-register-for-flashing-at-children-in-chelmsley-wood-97319-28829084/ ]Fujitsu flasher[/url].

Not really hugely sympathetic to sex offenders of any variety, but given that footballers aren't exactly renowned for their glowing intellect, maturity or morals I'm not really surprised either. Given that the club's sponsors were starting to drop them and obviously a lot of people would feel uncomfortable cheering on a sex offender, I'm not really sure what else the club could do.

Hearts don't seem to have much luck with sex offenders do they.

"cynic-al - Member

Does anyone here believe someone on the register should be able to get a job?"

Uh, yes. Of course.

What about Mat Stevens the rugby player - Cocaine use. What about those done for drunk driving?

My brother-in-law was done for drink driving and whilst I wasn't particularly impressed, I would have been unimaginably less impressed had he been done for trying to shag a 12 year old girl.

Cocaine use and drunk driving doesn't fall in the same category as having sex with children. And as already mentioned, no one likes a nonce.

What about the footballers who beat people up then? What about Mat Stevens the rugby player - Cocaine use. What about those done for drunk driving?

You see with "taking cocaine" or "beating people up", one hopes that the offender can be shown the error of his ways and persuaded to change his behaviour.

However, and I'll try to tread carefully here...no matter what direction my life has taken, or what kind of stuff I've done, roughly the same stuff has turned me on for years - yes, variations on a theme (Gaw bless the internet 🙂 ) but until the day I die, roughly the same things will keep turning me on. I'm sure I'm not the only one here that would admit to [i]every[/i] single thing - some of them might be a tad embarrassing but we're all the same...we all have kinks we probably wouldn't like to talk about in polite company. And I can't see it changing. Look at the pron sites - the biggest sections are "teen" (probably mostly watched by old ****ers) and "mature" (probably mostly watched by young ****ers). "Age difference" in sexual activities seems to be something that our culture seems to enjoy.

And therein lies the problem with paedophiles - they get turned on by kids that we deem too young - the question we have to ask ourselves is: is it possible to switch off their reaction to the things that turn them on? I suspect it's a lot easier to teach someone right from wrong, but sexual arousal triggers are such base instincts - so I dunno...maybe there are studies to say it can be done...but I remain sceptical.

(Bleeding heart liberal)

It's quite easy to be reactive in cases like this.

I've never seen why there should be a link between professional and private lives unless, well, there's a direct link. A schoolteacher gets convicted for being a nonce, fair enough, being in a school isn't the best of ideas. But generally, it shouldn't matter.

If I got caught out having an affair, and got sacked over it, I'd have a fairly healthy case for unfair dismissal. If the same happened to someone in the public eye, they'd be suspended / sacked / recast / asked to retire from parliament / dropped by their label etc etc.

I'm not condoning what this guy did. Frankly, I've never heard of him and don't know the first thing about the case. But taking it at face value, if he's acted inappropriately then he should be punished according to the extent of the law, but he shouldn't receive addtional punishment just because he's "famous."

DD raises a very interesting, and wholly different point. Ahem.

Giggs is a good example. Has he "brought his employer into disrepute"? Aside from the fact that your average terrace-goer is thinking "go on Giggsy my son, give 'er one from me," in real terms has his club (whoever that is, sorry, I have no clue; ManU? Whatever) actually been brought into disrepute? Does your average football fan, or indeed any football fan, give a tuppenny crap one way or the other? Is there anyone out there actually going "well, I've followed United for 20 years, but after Giggs was caught with a slapper, I'm never going to another match again. Accrington Stanley all the way for me now" ?

No, what would it achieve?

I just feel a load of inconsistency in the treatment of sportsmen and their misdemeanour's.

Oh wow. That's like so unfair TJ. It isn't like that sort of thing happens EVERY DAY and murderers walk free and guilty people avoid punishment and judges get it wrong. You'd think sportsmen were being singled out for inconsistent treatment rather than it being the norm.

On a general point I don't understand the thing about footballers being judged as role models.

Whether you understand it or not, they are role models. They are in the public eye and are heroes to plenty, so there should be a minimum level of behaviour expected.

He should go to a Spanish club and limit his grooming to girls of 13 or older. Or join the French national squad and pay the girls for real sex. He'd then get a short suspension and become famous enough to get signed up for some lucrative personal sponsorship deals.

He should go to a Spanish club and limit his grooming to girls of 13 or older.

The consistency question is an interesting one and I don't think you can make a generalisation about how sporting clubs deal with individual cases.

The club I support had a young player convicted of causing death by dangerous driving. He was texting whilst driving and caused an accident which killed another driver. He admitted the charge, was sent down for two years and the club took the decision to stand by him and aid him in his rehabilitation after his sentence was completed. The club has, in past, terminated the contract of a manager for racial abuse.

I think it's about a proportionate response to individual circumstances.

Most if not all football contracts have a charitable working clause in them, meet the hospital patients organise events and so on. A lot of these will have young, inexperienced and impressionable folk at them. On the sex offenders register the individual has his ability to complete this part of his contract severely limited.

Is there not a minimum age for a Facebook account? Were they pretending to be older?

Either way he was stupid, and given the ridiculous status that footballers have these days he should be setting a good example for all those deluded father and sons who think they will be the next big thing on the pitch.

M6TTF - Member
Were they pretending to be older?

As far as I can see they were not

[url=

T&Cs[/url], minimum age 13. So the 12 year old has lied about her age to appear older. Must look further TJ. 😉

I hardly think that "well, Your Honour, she [i]looked[/i] thirteen" is going to wash, somehow.

How about: "I put it to you Your Honour, that child is sexy!"

(with thanks to Frankie Boyle).

If I got caught out having an affair, and got sacked over it, I'd have a fairly healthy case for unfair dismissal

and there's the thing. Footballers can't be "sacked" as such as they're not usually employees, they're contractors on fixed term contracts. So, if Hearts decide to terminate the players contract, then they are open to being sued breach of contract and IIRC the normal settlement would be the base renumeration of the contract (ie no bonuses). The player then lies low for a couple of months, let's say till the January transfer window opens and the huffing and puffing has blown over, then joins a lower league side - Dundee are skint and would probably take a free SPL quality player, failing that, lower down the leagues. Result, player is still playing and earning the same as before (settlement from Jambos plus wages from Morton or whoever). Result for everyone bar Mad Vlad.

He should have been born in an earlier age:

In the UK in 1927 the age for Marriage was raised from 12/13 to 16 with parents consent.

Roman law gave the minimum age for marriage as that of puberty which was 14 for boys and 12 for girls; these remained the legal age for marriage until the late 19th Century in Britain though that for girls seemed to be assumed also to be 14.

In the 1800 it was common for Girls to wed at 14.

The problem with the witch hunt school of justice is that it doesn’t let the facts get in the way of righteous indignation.

Personally I nothing of the guy, I know nothing of the girls involved and I know nothing of the facts of the case. So truthfully its not really possible to hold any opinion other than what a silly boy. In general terms though, I think it might be more responsible for the club and others to be discussing getting the fella some help rather than jumping on an easy mount bandwagon.

In the 1800 it was common for Girls to wed at 14.

In 1800 women were regarded as property, life expectancy was around 40, and small children were sent down mines and under moving machinery in cotton mills. Fortunately things change!

These days, we have to put warning labels coffee cups. Progress!

(-:

If hearts dont dump in on behalf of their sponsors, the ag for away fans will force him out of the game.

M6TTF - Member

Is there not a minimum age for a Facebook account? Were they pretending to be older?

Apparently he knew at least one of them in real life so that probably doesn't wash. Not sure which it was though.