When does democracy become.......

[cee-dee]

When does Democracy become mob rule?

Failing that, when does mob rule become democracy?

Democracy is supposed to be the rule of the people and that's usually decided by the majority supporting the same idea?

I'm particularly thinking about the case of Ched Evans and the statement made by the chairman of Sheffield United that Ched Evans was prevented from playing there by mob rule (otherwise reported as "mob-like behaviour").

Now it seems that Oldham Athletic are considering offering him a place and there's been reports that they won't be swayed by any similar protest. A bit insensitive that isn't it considering the many recent reports concerning Oldham and Rochdale abuses?

[fallen-archie]

This chap has been through the courts system and served his sentence accordingly. Although now supposedly a free man he will carry baggage for the rest of his life due to his conduct and behaviour, in the end I would hope that most would wish to see the individual show some remorse and to get on with his life avoiding further pit falls. However the emergence and growth if social media has opened up new opportunities for pressure groups and activists who milk it for all they can while others through fare means or foul try to control output to service their own political ends. An example would be the outcry about Ched Evans whereby his continued portrayal as a dangerous rapist is fine but the situation and goings on past and present in East Lancashire is restricted territory.
Is it mob rule? I don't think so but I do think we are living through a period of control normally associated with a dictatorship, That means the Law itself is being undermined or at least manipulated.

[aernethril]

It's a very interesting set of questions CD.

The guy has served part of his sentance but as I understand it, is still on parole because that is why he has been banned from joining an overseas club at this time.  So he's not totally free as yet.

I don't think any of this has been handled at all well and will continue as far as I can see as it is such an emotive and divisive situation.

I certainly don't have an answer and I think any club who takes him on is going to face problems but in the end if one club does stick by him and he keeps himself clean and plays well, eventually a lot of the shouting will die down and he may even go on to get recognition for his playing.

I'm not sure democracy as such does come into it, but if a sufficient number of people (supporters/ ticket buyers etc) are so vehemently against someone being in their club, it surely cannot make sense for a club to ignore their comments or anger even.

Social media is giving more people a voice - for good or bad - who otherwise would have to just accept what the 'big boys' decided, whether that is in this situation, or in business etc.  Life is not so clearly structured any more.

Another example is that of Geoffrey Boycott who has been denied his gong due to his being found guilty a couple of decades ago to beating his partner.  Whitehall vetoed it despite many calls for him to be knighted.  Personally, I think on the balance of things it's a correct decision because despite the evidence suggesting his claims that she fell could not support this, like Evans, he has always denied he did it.

BUT - the key thing for me is that there is no balance overall - far too many shysters and later proven to be utterly dishonest and criminal persons have gongs dished out to them and it's only very recently that we've seen a few withdrawn later down the line.

In some ways (just some) I wish more people did have more of a say in whether someone could be rewarded, or allowed to just pick up their life as they wanted, when there is a background of something very wrong.  But then again, what happens when someone is wrongly convicted and cannot clear their name?

But overall, I reckon that one reason why "mob rule" is so effective but also so 'scary' is because for too long, those at the top have been shoving the little guys around and dictating how things will be run with only an eye on their own pockets.  So when "mob rule" does achieve something, they don't like it and they have to decry and denigrate it to feel safe.

It would IMHO have been utter folly for SU to have taken the guy back, and that should have been blatently obvious.

I have a personal reason for being rather biased (although I try not to be) in that I have seen how someone can manipulate others, manipulate the system so that their behaviour goes not only unpunished (we are talking borderline criminal here), they then go on to get sympathy and the 'victim' is berated for their attitude of not being kind or thinking about how the abuser must be feeling.

We simply don't have things right in this society as far as I'm concerned and as long as there are people who insist on supporting anybody who is the 'underdog' - whilst failing to see that it is their own need - to be the do-gooder, the forgiving person, whilst refusing to see how abusive this becomes to the real victim.

So, if OA do take Evans on, and they do have a backlash then maybe, just maybe, they'll start to think again about whether it is right to force a decision down people's throats just to prove a point or because of their own dicatorial attitude to those who they feel are beneath them.

[j_uk643]

He hasn't served his sentence, he is out on licence, half way through a 5 year sentence
and like most in such circumstances there are conditions and restrictions attached to licences.

There appears to be conflating of democracy in political terms, with legitimate legal protest .
They aren't the same and governments here seldom have a 'majority' - just more votes than their nearest rival.

Evans has been turned down by several clubs, but currently it's up to individual clubs whether to sign Evans, as it is up to individuals to legitimately campaign/protest against that.

In many other walks of life, offenders on release would seldom walk back into their former employment, but instead struggle to find work, football is currently one exception and until and if the FA rule on this, it remains an option in football, though not for most other areas.

Nobody that I've seen objects to Evans working, indeed his future father in law has offered him a job.What they do object to is a high profile celebrated role model position with all that that entails, that's the issue.

Reading some of the things posted by Evans supporters, clearly demonstrated to me, that those opposed to his return to that role have a valid point. Should those Evans supporters be described as 'mob rule' when they are advocating the same crime that Evans was convicted of, to deal with those who oppose his return to his former position?

Those opposed to Evans return have included patrons, and celebrity supporters of SU, local Radio and Sheffield Star newspaper.
Olympian Jessica Ennis-Hill said she could not support her name being used on the stand if Evans returned.
In response several 'fans' suggested she should be dealt with like Evans victim, except in more graphic language than i can use here - mob rule?
Some have gone further in their bid to deal with those opposed to Evans return to his former high profile role.One Chester FC fan suggested the use of very sharp common first name diy tool in an entirely different manner than that intended.

The victim in all this has had to change identities 5 times I understand, because of similar threats made against her by Evans supporters - mob rule?
Some 'fans' have called for a ban on the Star and Sheffield Radio from Bramall Lane because they were considered non supportive of Evans in his bid to return to SU.

Fortunately, not all take the same view,irrespective of club, whether fans, sponsors, or patrons
One SU sponsor came out fairly quickly with a statement saying they are a 'family firm, with family values' and as such could not continue sponsorship if Evans returned - are they 'mob rule'?

co-chairman Phipps' comments on Evans, suggest its not only some fans that need to change, but management as well. As one more enlightened SU fan said, 'we didnt let Evans down - he let us down'

The legitimate opposition to Evans return is in regard to his former position in the public eye,, and the messages this sends out, nothing to do with employment in general. Clearly from a number of comments and threats made by so-called 'fans' thats a valid concern.

Ebay is a commercial shopping site, not primarily in the business of providing forums as such for any and every 'agenda' view

[fallen-archie]

True Mr Evans is out on Licence, but that is as part of his rehabilitation and return to society if you oppose that then we need to rethink the way we deal with offenders.
I was not aware of any mob supporting Evans, some friends and family certainly but mob ?
Talking of celebrity I would find it easier to name some so called reality tv stars than I would a current Oldham Athletic player, but if they do have celebrity as you put it is that not another incentive for those who have made a mistake in the past ie a chance to rebuild ones life. I don't suggest this in all cases but it's worth a thought.
Finally eBay is primarily a shopping site, we all love it to bits. It also provides a range of forums which are not restricted to its primary activity. When people express their own opinions and others challenge those views then you are able to at least consider all perspectives, Sadly such honest open discourse sets the clock back with those intent on people towing a line because for some Liberal or intellectual reason they feel they know better and will prevail. Defamation and hate speech have no place on here, but allowing folks to express their own life experiences should not be seen as negative.

[j_uk643]

If you can point me to where rehabilitation states you must return to your former occupation, I would be fascinated.

Then simply because you are 'unaware' of other social media in detail does not mean it doesn't exist.

Perhaps you might, but then you are of an older generation, and clearly not a supporter.

Do you love it to bits?, difficult to see that, historically speaking of course.

The rules and instructions are fairly clear, and it's not a democracy, most commerce isn't. Nothing to do with any of the reasons you suggest, quite the opposite.

[fallen-archie]

I cannot point to a specific because there isn't one. Nor can I see anywhere that you may not pursue a career or skill practiced previously.
Again and reasonably, just expressing an opinion, based upon what I have been able to see.
In many societies the older generation are respected for their views and experience, it doesn't make them right but neither should they be dismissed.
Not sure which rule and instructions you are referring to, but there is little point debating if only one side can be heard.

[j_uk643]

No there isn't so why imply there is -  though admitting your offence is normally part of the rehabilitation process,but not an absolute requirement

If you cant see where barriers exist both formal and informal, I suggest you talk to some offender organisations, they will be able to educate you on the matter. Of course if you have no interest really....

Age related to your point re OA, and fans.Respect is earned they say.

You've been here about 5 years or so, and you are unaware of the rules and instructions? I suggest you take the matter up with the current DM, should be an interesting conversation for many reasons, not least for your previous with his predecessor.

[fallen-archie]

My apologies I think your comments are too personal and not helpful, once you start suggesting people you do not have a clue about require educating that smacks of unreasonable and on that basis I withdraw from this discussion, Goodnight.

[upthecreekyetagain]

A point of view from a different perspective by a female journalist - http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/12/letting-ched-evans-play-football-would-give-young-o...

Ched Evans playing football again following a serious conviction won't be setting a precedent either - these two killers play without receiving much aggro

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/drink-drive-killer-luke-mccormick-made-3875699

http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/local-news/crash-killer-lee-hughes-im-147688

[cee-dee]

Hmmmmmm, some interesting posts on here?

OK, I'll throw some more fuel on the fire then.

How about Lost Prophets singer Ian Watkins "resuming his career" in the public eye on his release? If you were a fan of the band would you be happy with his return?

Would the (probable) public outcry lead to allegations of "Mob Rule"?

There's plenty of comments about Ched Evans, "He's served his time" but what about the woman involved? She's got a life sentence? So far she's had to move 5 times due to people of similar ilk that threatened Jessica Ennis after the furore at Sheffield United.

We'll have to wait and see what comes out over Oldham Athetic but in the circumstances, if you were a supporter, would you be happy for Evans to play?

[upthecreekyetagain]

If Ched Evans had actually threatened anyone in the way you describe then of course he should suffer the consequences of those actions.

I don't see the logic behind suggesting that because the victim of his **bleep** and Jessica Ennis have suffered due to the actions of others he should also be made to suffer.  Surely a more sensible attitude would be to say that those behaving in such a manner should be brought to book.

[cee-dee]

You're absolutely right about those threatening being brought to book but the proposed actions of Evans making out that it's OK to carry on where he left off is provocative and insensitive and he would have attracted less attention to himself if he'd have adopted a more low-profile approach to his future life.

Anyway, what's your view on where the line should be drawn between domocracy and mob rule?

[astrologica]

It has been said many times on News reports and in the newspapers that people are disappointed that Mr Evans hasn't expressed remorse in any way. For him to express remorse would indicate that he accepts that he is guilty of the crime he was accused of. He obviously still maintains his innocence. The trial was very unsatisfactory and at the moment there is an enquiry under way. Miscarriages of justice do happen. Maybe a retrial would be a good thing in this case. How many of us would apologise for a crime that we knew we were not guilty of? Not many I suspect.

[upthecreekyetagain]

It strikes me that it was more a case of 'market forces' rather than 'mob rule' that was the real reason why Sheffield United didn't re-employ Ched Evans - potential loss of sponsorship, ticket sales etc.

Football is not renowned for its high moral standards, either on or off the field - it is far more a matter of money talks - so in answer to your specifc question, I don't think that in this case it was either democracy or mob rule that was the deciding factor.

[upthecreekyetagain]

In answer to your other question regarding a supporter's view of Ched Evans being employed then I think you'll find that the vast majority would support this IF he plays well.  I think the case of Luke McCormick I linked to earlier demonstrates this.

[sir_arthur_strebe-grebling]

The nub of this appears to be that, unfortunately and incomprehensibly to normal people, the mob seems to think that someone who kicks a football around is a 'role model'.

[upthecreekyetagain]

---

@sir_arthur_strebe-grebling wrote:

The nub of this appears to be that, unfortunately and incomprehensibly to normal people, the mob seems to think that someone who kicks a football around is a 'role model'.

---

It's more the case of 'normal' people basing their arguments against the re-employment of Ched Evans on the supposition that footballers are role models!

[lhasa.two]

I don't think  60,000 people signing a petition can be called 'mob rule'. It's a clear case of people demonstrating their democratic right to protest that Ched Evans is not a player they want back in a club they support. Their support has paid his salary of £20,000  per week until the end of his contract which has now ended and they didn't want him back.

Call me old fashioned but this is not a decent man, he is a convicted rapist, he two timed his fiancee, has sought publicity to support his "innocence" and stupidly our legal system has now granted him an appeal.

He hasn't given his victim a second thought of how this **bleep** and subsequent publicity means she has not been able to resume her life. He's a disgrace and I hope he never gets another job in football.

[upthecreekyetagain]

---

@lhasa.two wrote:

I don't think  60,000 people signing a petition can be called 'mob rule'. It's a clear case of people demonstrating their democratic right to protest that Ched Evans is not a player they want back in a club they support. Their support has paid his salary of £20,000  per week until the end of his contract which has now ended and they didn't want him back.

Call me old fashioned but this is not a decent man, he is a convicted rapist, he two timed his fiancee, has sought publicity to support his "innocence" and stupidly our legal system has now granted him an appeal.

He hasn't given his victim a second thought of how this **bleep** and subsequent publicity means she has not been able to resume her life. He's a disgrace and I hope he never gets another job in football.

---

Hardly! - The Blades average attendance last year was only 17,500. 

Likewise I'm not sure how you can call the legal system stupid before any appeal has been heard - what if an appeal clears him?

Do you feel the same about the two killers I linked to earlier in the thread?  Both seem to have been accepted back by the fans.

I'm a Seagull's season ticket holder and I'm not sure how I'd react if any of those players were employed by my club, I suspect I'd be like the majority of the fans and judge them on how they performed on the field.

I certainly wouldn't defend him on the basis of his morals, if footballers were judged on their behaviour off the field there would be many better known players than Ched Evans out of a job!