...anyway not much sign of any agreement happening here.
Back to the original question. Ticket situation was obviously a farce but to be fair to the club they did get us all in in time. Good to see such a healthy turnout at this level. Fantastic to deny you the win after you booed a clearly badly injured player on a stretcher.
A lot of interesting points on here, albeit stuff we've gone over time and time again, whether it be McCormick, Hughes, Evans (before the revised verdict, and not getting into whether that technicality suddenly makes him innocent), but I digress...
The one point I never see people making, is that time in jail, usually makes it very hard to continue your previous job, if not impossible. So I don't think there is any "right" to waltz straight back into your previous job, let alone the unique setting of a football career. I like @Salisbury_Blue , would prefer the scenario of such a player signing for us not to come up.
I wouldn't find myself abusing him, but then I think a lot of chanting is moronic as it is, and agree on not using a tragedy to try and score points, or put someone off!
@BeaconsfieldBlue , you've probably been quite clumsy with your wordings, but McCormick DIDN'T serve the sentence the judge gave him. It was half. Would the full sentence have meant he'd "paid his dues". I suppose that depends on how close to it you are. It's very easy for people to just use that phrase, but imagine if you were involved. It's guaranteed you'd think differently.
As for the comments on Philo. Clearly, the very slight difference that seems to be left out, is that he wasn't fortunate enough to stroll back into his profession. He paid the ultimate price.
He was still like family to a lot of our players, so I don't hold any show of compassion to his memory against anyone. I find it odd anyone would.
Having said that, the decision to retire his shirt may well not have been taken if the facts had been known first.
If I may join in Eric's and Mr Salisbury's conversation with a few thoughts.
I hold no moral superiority over Luke McCormick. I don't drink and drive but in truth there were a couple of occasions in my youth when I was probably over the limit. I have consciously driven slower in built up areas but in truth still drive too fast on motorways. I have turned off my hands free after a near miss but still find my fingers itching when a email pops up. Worst of all I still in honesty drive when tired or distracted. I am not a better human being than McCormick just a luckier one. I dare say you are too.
Let's cover off the punishment angle too. McCormick served the time the judge in the case, guided by laws established by our representatives in Parliament, considered appropriate. He has paid his debt. Of course, in reality he will never erase the memories of what he has done, that will be a life sentence. I don't know how often he thinks of that day now, I suspect it is regular, I do happen to know he needed a lot of help to come to terms with what happened in prison. But for the grace of god......
And then lets look at the role model aspect. McCormick has been a model ex-offender since leaving jail, such that he has risen to being club captain at his employer. This country jails far too many people , is awful at rehabilitating them and suffers far too high reoffending rates as a result. In particular we are dreadful at offering opportunities to ex-offenders once they get out. Every re-offender creates new victims. How strong a role model do you think McCormick is to those nervously trying to rebuild their lives after leaving jail, how much hope does he give them that they too can live productive useful lives rather than just follow the same old reoffending spiral.
But then why are we talking about such subjects. Because the abuse of McCormick is not a commentary on his past actions, its banter innit. You can see it in their little faces shining with excitement as they turn for approval to their mate after the latest witless ignorant abuse. it is as banal and ignorant as a resident of High Wycombe suggesting to a resident of York that their city is a shit-hole. And bless them these scamps are blissfully unaware that in their stupidity, they make far more eloquent comment on themselves than they do on McCormick and by association on their fellow Wycombe supporters. And as is their wont, these guys, who could be and often almost are a great credit to Wycombe Wanderers snatch defeat from the jaws of victory and besmirch rather than enhance the good name of Wycombe Wanderers.
And in so doing, they allow the supporters of a club who showed such wanton casual disregard for its customers on Boxing Day, whose moronic supporters saw fit to abuse a seriously injured player on a stretcher for the second year running and who employ a snivelling worm as a manager to claim that our club and its supporters are no better than theirs. And in truth they are right.
@DevC , McCormick was sentenced to 7 years +. He didn't serve anywhere near that time.
And since when do those who have been in prison get to wander back into their previous jobs? Most jobs would rule it out in an instance i'd wager.
Interesting debate..reading about the serviceman that committed rape locally will lose his pension and his job and guess will never be able to return to any of the forces.McCormack returned to his professional and earning quite well I would think .
For the record, Malone, McCormick served approximately half his sentence in jail and half on license - as is the UK criminal justice system. You are surely not suggesting he should be treated differently to any other offender due to his profession.
As it happened it took McCormick some time to gain employment in his chosen profession after leaving jail. Its a major problem with Uk justice system that makes it very hard for ex-offenders to gain useful employment. While we maintain that culture, we virtually guarantee the very high levels of re-offending we get in this country. And every time an ex-offender re-offends, there are new victims of crime.
@DevC said:
Its a major problem with Uk justice system that makes it very hard for ex-offenders to gain useful employment. While we maintain that culture, we virtually guarantee the very high levels of re-offending we get in this country. And every time an ex-offender re-offends, there are new victims of crime.
Most people who have been to prison don't stroll back into their chosen profession, with or without a very temporary drop in status. He has been treated differently to most ex cons, mostly because the world of football is largely without morals. We see that with the McCormick, Hughes, Evans pre overturned decision, Marlon King, Liverpool backing a racist and many others
@Aylesburyblue , I'm not familiar with that case, but in the absence of any other details, it seems there's clearly a massive difference there! The former obviously choosing to commit such a vile crime, while McCormick, as dreadful a result, and due to his sheer recklesless, wasn't planned.
Although some would say if you put yourself in that position, you're as good as planning carnage.
Football is different to most jobs. It's a highly specialised role - there are a very limited number of people who can do McCormick's job, which is the main reason he finds it easy to get a job after leaving prison. Nothing to do with morals.
The traveling blues were in the most part magnificent out singing the home support even when two goals behind and the lad on the drum deserves a medal it all took me back to the early days in the league with St. Martin
There were some tasteless remarks toward the Plymouth keeper but it was only from a very small section of the away end.
There you go back to my controversial best
@EwanHoosaami said:
Morris_Ital nice to see you back, have you been absent for a while?
Thanks I did flounce off for a couple of months and thought that was that but prior to the orient game half way through a disappointing steak slice a little voice told me to stop being such a big tart
When I was a barman, a guy who used to come into the pub was convicted of accessory to manslaughter. He was young, stupid and under the influence of drugs and alcohol.
He had served his time, admitted his guilt, and was coming in to enjoy a pint.
I didn't shout "murderer" at him for the duration of his pint, because it would have been a horrible thing to do, and it wasn't my place to do it. I also didn't follow him into his place of work and do it there either.
He had been punished in accordance with the law, and now seemed a thoroughly decent bloke.
I am not responsible for metering out justice or public humiliation for crimes committed/suffered by third parties, and neither are you.
Why is it OK to verbally abuse Luke for 90 minutes just because he earns a (probably fairly modest) salary in the public eye?
I find it quite strange you can be so liberal on the right to cruise back into his priviledged job position, yet so hard line on never being allowed to drive again. For me i'd go along with the latter, but I'd suggest that he can find another job that isn't a priviledged position where people are paying to watch you, as if you're some sort of star. It isn't footballer or the dole.
Every single footballer ever doesn't end up on the dole post football!
What would you classify as privileged job positions? I assume you mean being a sportsman of any kind, golfer, athlete tennis player etc? Would you say an actor, singer etc also come within your definition? Who would specify what employment he could take up?
I don't want to get into all of that, but representing a community, where fans pay to watch you play is certainly a privileged position, that he must thank his lucky stars he's been allowed such easy access back into.
You don't want to get into all that because there is no actual answer. You cannot legally stop an individual carrying on his employment unless there are rules in their profession e.g The Law Society.
As an aside I don't remember any abuse aimed at Ched Evans at Chesterfield. Was I just too far from the main group of abusers to hear or did they deem him not worthy of their ire?
And for what it's worth I 100% agree with @bill_stickers
The bottom line is, the maximum punishment for causing death while driving while either drink/drug driving or plain dangerous driving is woefully lenient.
That said, that isn't Luke McCormick fault and while, imho, he probably should have spent longer in jail, it was handed a sentence the law felt appropriate and once servers that sentence (which is has done - in jail and on licence) he should be allowed to seek and receive paid work.
If you think the law needs changing (which I believe it is) then you need to lobby your MP.
He is in the privileged position that he has a specialised profession for which he is good at - that's the smooth.
He has to take the rough with that smooth though - and that's "banter" from the terraces for what he did. Not that he needs much reminding about it as any normal human would probably think about it every day.
Just to play devil's advocate here for a moment, as I think this issue is not as black and white as most posts here paint it... Theoretically, what if Wycombe signed a convicted nonce? Would you all be happy about the fact that he served his time and now it's his right to earn a living? Or one of Crewe's old nonce coaches joined our backroom team?
I'm not trying to posit a straw man here, but understand if different crimes have different rules, and if so, is noncing a child somehow worse than killing a child?
I think there is a distinct difference here. A convicted nonce INTENDED to commit the offence. McCormack did not INTEND to go out and kill someone but was RECKLESS and should have been aware of the possibility of killing or maiming another driver/pedestrian. The first is likely to reoffend the second hopefully unlikely.
A nonce cannot be rehabilitated as he has an inherent and continual desire to reoffend so no I would not want such a person involved with the club.
Comments
...anyway not much sign of any agreement happening here.
Back to the original question. Ticket situation was obviously a farce but to be fair to the club they did get us all in in time. Good to see such a healthy turnout at this level. Fantastic to deny you the win after you booed a clearly badly injured player on a stretcher.
What did you think of that banner then?
A lot of interesting points on here, albeit stuff we've gone over time and time again, whether it be McCormick, Hughes, Evans (before the revised verdict, and not getting into whether that technicality suddenly makes him innocent), but I digress...
The one point I never see people making, is that time in jail, usually makes it very hard to continue your previous job, if not impossible. So I don't think there is any "right" to waltz straight back into your previous job, let alone the unique setting of a football career. I like @Salisbury_Blue , would prefer the scenario of such a player signing for us not to come up.
I wouldn't find myself abusing him, but then I think a lot of chanting is moronic as it is, and agree on not using a tragedy to try and score points, or put someone off!
@BeaconsfieldBlue , you've probably been quite clumsy with your wordings, but McCormick DIDN'T serve the sentence the judge gave him. It was half. Would the full sentence have meant he'd "paid his dues". I suppose that depends on how close to it you are. It's very easy for people to just use that phrase, but imagine if you were involved. It's guaranteed you'd think differently.
As for the comments on Philo. Clearly, the very slight difference that seems to be left out, is that he wasn't fortunate enough to stroll back into his profession. He paid the ultimate price.
He was still like family to a lot of our players, so I don't hold any show of compassion to his memory against anyone. I find it odd anyone would.
Having said that, the decision to retire his shirt may well not have been taken if the facts had been known first.
If I may join in Eric's and Mr Salisbury's conversation with a few thoughts.
I hold no moral superiority over Luke McCormick. I don't drink and drive but in truth there were a couple of occasions in my youth when I was probably over the limit. I have consciously driven slower in built up areas but in truth still drive too fast on motorways. I have turned off my hands free after a near miss but still find my fingers itching when a email pops up. Worst of all I still in honesty drive when tired or distracted. I am not a better human being than McCormick just a luckier one. I dare say you are too.
Let's cover off the punishment angle too. McCormick served the time the judge in the case, guided by laws established by our representatives in Parliament, considered appropriate. He has paid his debt. Of course, in reality he will never erase the memories of what he has done, that will be a life sentence. I don't know how often he thinks of that day now, I suspect it is regular, I do happen to know he needed a lot of help to come to terms with what happened in prison. But for the grace of god......
And then lets look at the role model aspect. McCormick has been a model ex-offender since leaving jail, such that he has risen to being club captain at his employer. This country jails far too many people , is awful at rehabilitating them and suffers far too high reoffending rates as a result. In particular we are dreadful at offering opportunities to ex-offenders once they get out. Every re-offender creates new victims. How strong a role model do you think McCormick is to those nervously trying to rebuild their lives after leaving jail, how much hope does he give them that they too can live productive useful lives rather than just follow the same old reoffending spiral.
But then why are we talking about such subjects. Because the abuse of McCormick is not a commentary on his past actions, its banter innit. You can see it in their little faces shining with excitement as they turn for approval to their mate after the latest witless ignorant abuse. it is as banal and ignorant as a resident of High Wycombe suggesting to a resident of York that their city is a shit-hole. And bless them these scamps are blissfully unaware that in their stupidity, they make far more eloquent comment on themselves than they do on McCormick and by association on their fellow Wycombe supporters. And as is their wont, these guys, who could be and often almost are a great credit to Wycombe Wanderers snatch defeat from the jaws of victory and besmirch rather than enhance the good name of Wycombe Wanderers.
And in so doing, they allow the supporters of a club who showed such wanton casual disregard for its customers on Boxing Day, whose moronic supporters saw fit to abuse a seriously injured player on a stretcher for the second year running and who employ a snivelling worm as a manager to claim that our club and its supporters are no better than theirs. And in truth they are right.
@DevC , McCormick was sentenced to 7 years +. He didn't serve anywhere near that time.
And since when do those who have been in prison get to wander back into their previous jobs? Most jobs would rule it out in an instance i'd wager.
Well said @DevC
Interesting debate..reading about the serviceman that committed rape locally will lose his pension and his job and guess will never be able to return to any of the forces.McCormack returned to his professional and earning quite well I would think .
For the record, Malone, McCormick served approximately half his sentence in jail and half on license - as is the UK criminal justice system. You are surely not suggesting he should be treated differently to any other offender due to his profession.
As it happened it took McCormick some time to gain employment in his chosen profession after leaving jail. Its a major problem with Uk justice system that makes it very hard for ex-offenders to gain useful employment. While we maintain that culture, we virtually guarantee the very high levels of re-offending we get in this country. And every time an ex-offender re-offends, there are new victims of crime.
Nail on the head.
Most people who have been to prison don't stroll back into their chosen profession, with or without a very temporary drop in status. He has been treated differently to most ex cons, mostly because the world of football is largely without morals. We see that with the McCormick, Hughes, Evans pre overturned decision, Marlon King, Liverpool backing a racist and many others
@Aylesburyblue , I'm not familiar with that case, but in the absence of any other details, it seems there's clearly a massive difference there! The former obviously choosing to commit such a vile crime, while McCormick, as dreadful a result, and due to his sheer recklesless, wasn't planned.
Although some would say if you put yourself in that position, you're as good as planning carnage.
Football is different to most jobs. It's a highly specialised role - there are a very limited number of people who can do McCormick's job, which is the main reason he finds it easy to get a job after leaving prison. Nothing to do with morals.
The traveling blues were in the most part magnificent out singing the home support even when two goals behind and the lad on the drum deserves a medal it all took me back to the early days in the league with St. Martin
There were some tasteless remarks toward the Plymouth keeper but it was only from a very small section of the away end.
There you go back to my controversial best
@Morris_Ital nice to see you back, have you been absent for a while?
Good to hear from you after a long absence @Morris_Ital but if that is your controversial best, most of us must qualify as outrageous.
Thanks I did flounce off for a couple of months and thought that was that but prior to the orient game half way through a disappointing steak slice a little voice told me to stop being such a big tart
When I was a barman, a guy who used to come into the pub was convicted of accessory to manslaughter. He was young, stupid and under the influence of drugs and alcohol.
He had served his time, admitted his guilt, and was coming in to enjoy a pint.
I didn't shout "murderer" at him for the duration of his pint, because it would have been a horrible thing to do, and it wasn't my place to do it. I also didn't follow him into his place of work and do it there either.
He had been punished in accordance with the law, and now seemed a thoroughly decent bloke.
I am not responsible for metering out justice or public humiliation for crimes committed/suffered by third parties, and neither are you.
Why is it OK to verbally abuse Luke for 90 minutes just because he earns a (probably fairly modest) salary in the public eye?
Interesting comments @bill_stickers . Have a good trip to Cheltenham.
@bill-stickers - Spot on post. What would really be achieved by preventing a convicted criminal from earning a living and instead living on benefits.
Any person convicted of drunk driving could have killed an innocent person (or themselves) if the cards had been dealt differently.
I do feel that McCormick and anyone else who kills someone while drink driving or on drugs should be given a LIFE driving ban.
I find it quite strange you can be so liberal on the right to cruise back into his priviledged job position, yet so hard line on never being allowed to drive again. For me i'd go along with the latter, but I'd suggest that he can find another job that isn't a priviledged position where people are paying to watch you, as if you're some sort of star. It isn't footballer or the dole.
Every single footballer ever doesn't end up on the dole post football!
What would you classify as privileged job positions? I assume you mean being a sportsman of any kind, golfer, athlete tennis player etc? Would you say an actor, singer etc also come within your definition? Who would specify what employment he could take up?
I don't want to get into all of that, but representing a community, where fans pay to watch you play is certainly a privileged position, that he must thank his lucky stars he's been allowed such easy access back into.
You don't want to get into all that because there is no actual answer. You cannot legally stop an individual carrying on his employment unless there are rules in their profession e.g The Law Society.
Would you be able to re-enter your profession if you'd served time?
I'm.bored move on!
As an aside I don't remember any abuse aimed at Ched Evans at Chesterfield. Was I just too far from the main group of abusers to hear or did they deem him not worthy of their ire?
And for what it's worth I 100% agree with @bill_stickers
Well Ched Evans was acquitted unless I am mistaken.
A good debate of a tricky subject - if you're bored you can jog on to the next tread. It's that simple.
The bottom line is, the maximum punishment for causing death while driving while either drink/drug driving or plain dangerous driving is woefully lenient.
That said, that isn't Luke McCormick fault and while, imho, he probably should have spent longer in jail, it was handed a sentence the law felt appropriate and once servers that sentence (which is has done - in jail and on licence) he should be allowed to seek and receive paid work.
If you think the law needs changing (which I believe it is) then you need to lobby your MP.
He is in the privileged position that he has a specialised profession for which he is good at - that's the smooth.
He has to take the rough with that smooth though - and that's "banter" from the terraces for what he did. Not that he needs much reminding about it as any normal human would probably think about it every day.
Just to play devil's advocate here for a moment, as I think this issue is not as black and white as most posts here paint it... Theoretically, what if Wycombe signed a convicted nonce? Would you all be happy about the fact that he served his time and now it's his right to earn a living? Or one of Crewe's old nonce coaches joined our backroom team?
I'm not trying to posit a straw man here, but understand if different crimes have different rules, and if so, is noncing a child somehow worse than killing a child?
I think there is a distinct difference here. A convicted nonce INTENDED to commit the offence. McCormack did not INTEND to go out and kill someone but was RECKLESS and should have been aware of the possibility of killing or maiming another driver/pedestrian. The first is likely to reoffend the second hopefully unlikely.
A nonce cannot be rehabilitated as he has an inherent and continual desire to reoffend so no I would not want such a person involved with the club.