Club Statement 24 November 2021 - Page 3 - General Morton Chatter - TheMortonForum.com Jump to content
TheMortonForum.com

Club Statement 24 November 2021


Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Cet Homme Charmant said:

But some people are continually drawing attention to it already. I don't think they're going to let it go, so MCT's inaction is in fact perpetuating it. The cancelled Q & A would have been the prefect way for them to address it as it could have been contained 'in-house' without having to go public on it. They've fucked this up big time.

There’s a big difference between fans drawing attention to it and an employer doing it. It’s a bit awkward in the context of football but the club has to think about it’s duty - morally and legally - to its employee first and foremost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 93
  • Created
  • Last Reply
18 minutes ago, cmdc said:

There’s a big difference between fans drawing attention to it and an employer doing it.  

They'll never be able to draw a line under though by ignoring it and hoping it just goes a way. It won't. It's been dragging on for what, 5 months or so already.  I'm 100% sure that if they had addressed this early doors, we wouldn't be talking about it now. The grievances of those who feel strongly about this have just been magnified by the refusal of MCT to even extend them the courtesy of acknowledging them. It's not as if we have a big enough fanbase to shrug our shoulders about alienating a small but not insignificant chunk of it. 

Other clubs have addressed similar situations, and while their explanations probably didn't satisfy some of their fans, it at least drew a line under it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Cet Homme Charmant said:

They'll never be able to draw a line under though by ignoring it and hoping it just goes a way. It won't. It's been dragging on for what, 5 months or so already.  I'm 100% sure that if they had addressed this early doors, we wouldn't be talking about it now. The grievances of those who feel strongly about this have just been magnified by the refusal of MCT to even extend them the courtesy of acknowledging them. It's not as if we have a big enough fanbase to shrug our shoulders about alienating a small but not insignificant chunk of it. 

Other clubs have addressed similar situations, and while their explanations probably didn't satisfy some of their fans, it at least drew a line under it. 

But again, they should only do so with the consent of the player. In the eyes of the law he is rehabilitation and is entitled to be treated as such by his employer. It’s awkward that in a situation like this that might mean some discontent rumbles on, but the bigger picture is the duty of the employer to the employee. Say, for example, Morton found themselves on the end of a constructive dismissal case by disclosing a spent conviction, it wouldn’t be much of a defence to say that fans were unhappy with the signing of (in the view of the law) a rehabilitated player.. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In what bizarre alternative universe would the club be disclosing a spent conviction? It's already in the public domain. That's what happens when you are prosecuted and found guilty in a high profile case splashed across the red top newspapers. 

Not entertaining such utter claptrap presumably explains why previous employers/football clubs have been willing to address the elephant in the room. And oh look, the vast majority of the controversy dissipated when they did so, as opposed to GMFC's wonderful handling of the situation so far. 

The site is supposed to be a place for the extended 'family' of Morton supporters - having an affinity with people that you don't know, because you share a love of your local football club. It's not supposed to be about point scoring and showing how 'clever' or 'funny' you are, or just being downright rude and offensive to people you don't know, because you can get away with it. Unfortunately, it seems the classic case of people who have little standing/presence in real life, use this forum as a way of making themselves feel as if they are something. It's sad, and I've said that before..

 

So, having been on Morton forums for about 15 years I guess, I've had enough... well done t*ssers, another Morton supporter driven away. You can all feel happy at how 'clever' you are

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you sign a serial sex offender who was previously booted out of the club due to the backlash from supporters and don't offer any acknowledgment of that fact at all, plus all all the shite that's followed, then it's simply not an acceptable or suitable way to handle the situation.

This isn't even a question of Lithgow's conviction as such, it's a question of his previous flirtation with the club. Whilst admitting I have no legal expertise, I find it very hard to believe that a little bit of skilful writing couldn't have briefly acknowledged the situation whilst offering a defence of the player without flouting any employment laws. 

I also think if the player objected to that, it'd say a lot about how he really views his offences and none of it would be positive. Again, even if it was from a genuine desire to move on rather than the "and whit?" shite he spouted the only time he's publicly acknowledged it, the fact is that he's in a very fortunate job and that having to put up with a generic sentence or two along with signing announcement (and and extremely fuckin generous 2 year contract) at a club that previously chased him is just something that should have had to happen. You simply can't drive about wanking at women and children on multiple occasions then expect such a public arena to just forget about it and if he doesn't like that then tough shite.

It may not be particular ideal, but it's ultimately not a huge price to pay to be able to continue such a privileged career...and is surely better than the situation that's been festering as a failure to make any acknowledgment of it.

 

AWMSC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, vikingTON said:

In what bizarre alternative universe would the club be disclosing a spent conviction? It's already in the public domain. That's what happens when you are prosecuted and found guilty in a high profile case splashed across the red top newspapers. 

Not entertaining such utter claptrap presumably explains why previous employers/football clubs have bee  willing to address the elephant in the room. And oh look, the vast majority of the controversy dissipated when they did so, as opposed to GMFC's wonderful handling of the situation so far. 

This universe. His conviction is spent. He is entitled to be treated in law - including by his employer - as though the offence/conviction never took place. I don't know for sure, but I think we might be the first club that he has signed for since his conviction was spent, which creates a different context. Regardless, when a conviction is spent there is a "reasonable expectation of privacy" and the fact that a conviction was reported on at the time won't be enough in itself undo that. Fans don't have to take this into account but employers absolutely do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, EanieMeany said:

If you sign a serial sex offender who was previously booted out of the club due to the backlash from supporters and don't offer any acknowledgment of that fact at all, plus all all the shite that's followed, then it's simply not an acceptable or suitable way to handle the situation.

This isn't even a question of Lithgow's conviction as such, it's a question of his previous flirtation with the club. Whilst admitting I have no legal expertise, I find it very hard to believe that a little bit of skilful writing couldn't have briefly acknowledged the situation whilst offering a defence of the player without flouting any employment laws. 

I also think if the player objected to that, it'd say a lot about how he really views his offences and none of it would be positive. Again, even if it was from a genuine desire to move on rather than the "and whit?" shite he spouted the only time he's publicly acknowledged it, the fact is that he's in a very fortunate job and that having to put up with a generic sentence or two along with signing announcement (and and extremely fuckin generous 2 year contract) at a club that previously chased him is just something that should have had to happen. You simply can't drive about wanking at women and children on multiple occasions then expect such a public arena to just forget about it and if he doesn't like that then tough shite.

It may not be particular ideal, but it's ultimately not a huge price to pay to be able to continue such a privileged career...and is surely better than the situation that's been festering as a failure to make any acknowledgment of it.

 

Strongly disagree generally and here especially. The whole point of rehabilitation in law is that an offence doesn't follow a rehabilitated person throughout their life. That's his right - and inferring a negative attitude because he enjoys the benefit of that right undermines the idea of rehabilitation. Also, the context has changed since his previous trial with us because his conviction is now spent - that creates different rights for the individual and different obligations for the employer. These things might not impress fans, but that's the context that the club and player are operating in. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, cmdc said:

Strongly disagree generally and here especially. The whole point of rehabilitation in law is that an offence doesn't follow a rehabilitated person throughout their life. That's his right - and inferring a negative attitude because he enjoys the benefit of that right undermines the idea of rehabilitation.

So how often does an accountant who gets done for fraud on the job return to their chosen career after being rehabilitated under the law? 

In the real world 'negative attitudes' to spent offences still apply when it comes to any position of authority, seniority or public scrutiny. The system of disclosure also exists to flag up previous offences wherever vulnerable individuals are placed at potential risk, whether those convictions are 'spent' or not. 

You may argue that being a professional footballer does not fall into any of those categories. As a position under public scrutiny and a representative of a community football club though, others will disagree. Multiple previous employers have at least recognised the latter position and have made their position clear. None of them have been dragged over the coals for impinging on this sacred right to rehabilitation, that does not exist in practice. 

The site is supposed to be a place for the extended 'family' of Morton supporters - having an affinity with people that you don't know, because you share a love of your local football club. It's not supposed to be about point scoring and showing how 'clever' or 'funny' you are, or just being downright rude and offensive to people you don't know, because you can get away with it. Unfortunately, it seems the classic case of people who have little standing/presence in real life, use this forum as a way of making themselves feel as if they are something. It's sad, and I've said that before..

 

So, having been on Morton forums for about 15 years I guess, I've had enough... well done t*ssers, another Morton supporter driven away. You can all feel happy at how 'clever' you are

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, vikingTON said:

So how often does an accountant who gets done for fraud on the job return to their chosen career after being rehabilitated under the law? 

In the real world 'negative attitudes' to spent offences still apply when it comes to any position of authority or public scrutiny. The system of disclosure also exists to flag up previous offences wherever vulnerable individuals are placed at potential risk, whether those convictions are 'spent' or not. 

You may argue that being a professional footballer does not fall into any of those categories. As a position under public scrutiny and a representative of a community football club though, others will disagree. Multiple previous employers have at least recognised the latter position and have made their position clear. None of them have been dragged over the coals for impinging on this sacred right to rehabilitation, that does not exist in practice. 

This isn't really the point. Whether people agree or not, the law tells us when spent convictions are relevant and employment as a professional footballer is not one of those circumstances. Therefore his spent conviction, as a matter of law, is irrelevant to any decision whether or not to employ him and how he should be treated by his employer.

And yes, negative attiudes absolutely will endure - that's why the law intervenes to create rights and obligations, effectively a "right to be forgotten" as an aspect of a right to privacy, in this area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A spent conviction is still not being 'disclosed' by a football club responding to the fanbase's negative attitudes. 

Meanwhile, back in the land of reality, the legal profession's concern trolling about obligations and rights will almost inevitably lead to a spent conviction now being, err, the matter of hot topic debate as well as direct personal abuse on a football terrace from one or both sets of fans on a weekly basis. An outcome that is demonstrably much worse for all parties involved, but at least it's trebles all round for the lawyers! 

The site is supposed to be a place for the extended 'family' of Morton supporters - having an affinity with people that you don't know, because you share a love of your local football club. It's not supposed to be about point scoring and showing how 'clever' or 'funny' you are, or just being downright rude and offensive to people you don't know, because you can get away with it. Unfortunately, it seems the classic case of people who have little standing/presence in real life, use this forum as a way of making themselves feel as if they are something. It's sad, and I've said that before..

 

So, having been on Morton forums for about 15 years I guess, I've had enough... well done t*ssers, another Morton supporter driven away. You can all feel happy at how 'clever' you are

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, vikingTON said:

A spent conviction is still not being 'disclosed' by a football club responding to the fanbase's negative attitudes. 

Meanwhile, back in the land of reality, the legal profession's concern trolling about obligations and rights will almost inevitably lead to a spent conviction now being, err, the matter of hot topic debate as well as direct personal abuse on a football terrace from one or both sets of fans on a weekly basis. An outcome that is demonstrably much worse for all parties involved, but at least it's trebles all round for the lawyers! 

Well, here we are. It might be that player and club agree that a statement would be appropriate but I hope not. It would be a shame to undermine the principle of rehabilitation because of public pressure. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, the principle of rehabilitation is really being served here by the club and a bunch of lawyers turning it into a white-hot discussion and abuse point within the fanbase. Nobody is discussing that private spent conviction now - trebles all round for the crack legal team behind this strategy! 

The site is supposed to be a place for the extended 'family' of Morton supporters - having an affinity with people that you don't know, because you share a love of your local football club. It's not supposed to be about point scoring and showing how 'clever' or 'funny' you are, or just being downright rude and offensive to people you don't know, because you can get away with it. Unfortunately, it seems the classic case of people who have little standing/presence in real life, use this forum as a way of making themselves feel as if they are something. It's sad, and I've said that before..

 

So, having been on Morton forums for about 15 years I guess, I've had enough... well done t*ssers, another Morton supporter driven away. You can all feel happy at how 'clever' you are

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, capitanus said:

Are sexual offences ever considered to be 'spent convictions'?  

Yes, though there might be a period of overlap where a conviction is spent but the individual remains on the register and depending on length of sentence or specific court order (which don’t seem to apply here) then the conviction might never be spent. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, vikingTON said:

Yes, the principle of rehabilitation is really being served here by the club and a bunch of lawyers turning it into a white-hot discussion and abuse point within the fanbase. Nobody is discussing that private spent conviction now - trebles all round for the crack legal team behind this strategy! 

It not so much about the club or the fan base. In fact, as far is the club is concerned, any spent convictions should be irrelevant to the decision to sign him or their treatment of him having done so. It’s about the individual who has a right in law to be considered rehabilitated and treated as such, including by his employer. You talk about a strategy but the whole point is, there shouldn’t be one because a spent conviction is one that (in law) is treated as though it never happened. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, cmdc said:

Yes, though there might be a period of overlap where a conviction is spent but the individual remains on the register and depending on length of sentence or specific court order (which don’t seem to apply here) then the conviction might never be spent. 

Is the player concerned still on the sex offenders register at this current point in time?

*insert signature here*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, cmdc said:

Well, here we are. It might be that player and club agree that a statement would be appropriate but I hope not. It would be a shame to undermine the principle of rehabilitation because of public pressure. 

In the real world, operating outside the confines of a strict legalese interpretation of the issue, the principle of rehabilitation is being undermined far more by the continued silence of the club. That silence is the reason the conviction is still a frequent topic of discussion among the support.

I appreciate that the club have to be sure they meet their legal obligations as an employer, but the idea that this makes it impossible to acknowledge the situation in any way is quite ridiculous. They have after all alluded to it in two other statements regarding the behaviour of fans at games, in two incidents which may even have been avoided had they made that statement first.

The reality is that their silence is doing more harm than good from literally every perspective, even if you want to come at this with the utmost sympathy for any party.

Best for the employee who feels he's rehabilitated and wants to move on from his conviction? No, as the club's silence is what's making it an active topic of discussion among the support, meaning it's all over the internet where he may see it and some of that will inevitably spill into matchdays where he may hear it. He can't move on in that scenario where he's frequently reminded of it, far more than he would be with one statement.

Best for the club who feel maintaining silence is the right thing to do? No, because they're unable to maintain a silence about it anyway and have made statements related to it twice (albeit they stuck one out under the MCT banner rather than the club, which was itself a bizarre and cowardly move).

Best for fans who don't care and want to move on? No, because the issue will continue rearing its head as long as the fans who do care are ignored.

Best for fans who do care? No, because they're being told the club doesn't give a fuck what they think and will happily stick their fingers in their ears and pretend they haven't heard any questions. This is an especially damaging look when some of the fans in question are MCT members.

Best for the relationship between the club and player? No, because senior figures at the club will inevitably be forced to have discussions with the player whenever the player hears those comments and wants the club to do something about it.

Best for the relationship between the club and support? No. We're in a season where an awful lot of damage is already being done to MCT's credibility with pretty much nothing going well on or off the park, to the extent that the genuinely magnificent achievement of delivering a debt-free fan-owned club with ownership of Cappielow just over two years after being formed is rapidly being forgotten in discussions of their competence, and this issue is casting a continual shadow over everything they do.

In a time where they're constantly talking about the club and MCT being open and transparent but don't actually have much evidence of doing it, fans are taking the complete absence of openness and transparency about this issue as indicative of their general attitude to both their own members and the wider fanbase. They try to engage with the support via Q&As, but they're filing a dozen questions about this issue straight into the bin every time and leaving everyone asking feeling ignored. They can allude to the issue without directly identifying the player or the nature of the crime in statements regarding fan behaviour, but they can't do the same to give a brief statement addressing concerns of fans while stating their belief in rehabilitation.

The impression this creates is that they're simply running and hiding from anything difficult. Fairly or unfairly, when you look at other issues of the club through that perspective then the boot fits.

This will only go away when the club make it go away. They have the opportunity to draw a line under it all with nothing more than a few sentences and they're choosing not to.

Brian Wake my Lord, Brian Wake

Brian Wake my Lord, Brian Wake

Brian Wake my Lord, Brian Wake

Oh Lord, Brian Wake

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, cmdc said:

You talk about a strategy but the whole point is, there shouldn’t be one because a spent conviction is one that (in law) is treated as though it never happened. 

And you talk about the club nor 'disclosing a spent conviction', when that is already in the public domain and the only thing that has guaranteed non-stop discussion of it is the club's disastrous wagon-circling exercise. 

No right to full rehabilitation or individual privacy has been achieved in practice then, but at least the lawyers are happy that their useless work is done. 

The site is supposed to be a place for the extended 'family' of Morton supporters - having an affinity with people that you don't know, because you share a love of your local football club. It's not supposed to be about point scoring and showing how 'clever' or 'funny' you are, or just being downright rude and offensive to people you don't know, because you can get away with it. Unfortunately, it seems the classic case of people who have little standing/presence in real life, use this forum as a way of making themselves feel as if they are something. It's sad, and I've said that before..

 

So, having been on Morton forums for about 15 years I guess, I've had enough... well done t*ssers, another Morton supporter driven away. You can all feel happy at how 'clever' you are

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dunning1874 said:

In the real world, operating outside the confines of a strict legalese interpretation of the issue, the principle of rehabilitation is being undermined far more by the continued silence of the club. That silence is the reason the conviction is still a frequent topic of discussion among the support.

I appreciate that the club have to be sure they meet their legal obligations as an employer, but the idea that this makes it impossible to acknowledge the situation in any way is quite ridiculous. They have after all alluded to it in two other statements regarding the behaviour of fans at games, in two incidents which may even have been avoided had they made that statement first.

The reality is that their silence is doing more harm than good from literally every perspective, even if you want to come at this with the utmost sympathy for any party.

Best for the employee who feels he's rehabilitated and wants to move on from his conviction? No, as the club's silence is what's making it an active topic of discussion among the support, meaning it's all over the internet where he may see it and some of that will inevitably spill into matchdays where he may hear it. He can't move on in that scenario where he's frequently reminded of it, far more than he would be with one statement.

Best for the club who feel maintaining silence is the right thing to do? No, because they're unable to maintain a silence about it anyway and have made statements related to it twice (albeit they stuck one out under the MCT banner rather than the club, which was itself a bizarre and cowardly move).

Best for fans who don't care and want to move on? No, because the issue will continue rearing its head as long as the fans who do care are ignored.

Best for fans who do care? No, because they're being told the club doesn't give a fuck what they think and will happily stick their fingers in their ears and pretend they haven't heard any questions. This is an especially damaging look when some of the fans in question are MCT members.

Best for the relationship between the club and player? No, because senior figures at the club will inevitably be forced to have discussions with the player whenever the player hears those comments and wants the club to do something about it.

Best for the relationship between the club and support? No. We're in a season where an awful lot of damage is already being done to MCT's credibility with pretty much nothing going well on or off the park, to the extent that the genuinely magnificent achievement of delivering a debt-free fan-owned club with ownership of Cappielow just over two years after being formed is rapidly being forgotten in discussions of their competence, and this issue is casting a continual shadow over everything they do.

In a time where they're constantly talking about the club and MCT being open and transparent but don't actually have much evidence of doing it, fans are taking the complete absence of openness and transparency about this issue as indicative of their general attitude to both their own members and the wider fanbase. They try to engage with the support via Q&As, but they're filing a dozen questions about this issue straight into the bin every time and leaving everyone asking feeling ignored. They can allude to the issue without directly identifying the player or the nature of the crime in statements regarding fan behaviour, but they can't do the same to give a brief statement addressing concerns of fans while stating their belief in rehabilitation.

The impression this creates is that they're simply running and hiding from anything difficult. Fairly or unfairly, when you look at other issues of the club through that perspective then the boot fits.

This will only go away when the club make it go away. They have the opportunity to draw a line under it all with nothing more than a few sentences and they're choosing not to.

The Rehabilitation of Offenders Act, the right to privacy etc aren't works of literary fiction. They are actual laws that create actual rights and obligations here in the real world. And they begin not with the club and not with fans' concerns but with the principle that the individual is rehabilitated, has the right to be treated as though no offence has been committed, and has a reasonable expectation of privacy that extends to spent convictions.  And they would be pretty flimsy rights if a small number of people in a football club fan base can undermine them (not all unreasonably - though some of it clearly is) by talking about it on terraces or on a forum. In fact, that's a significant part of the reason why the law is necessary in the first place. Some of this I'm sure is inevitable, but the individual's rights first, and the the employer’s obligations second, are the most important factors here. Indeed, from the club's perspective in law there should be nothing to say because he is entitled to be treated by them as though no conviction occurred. That might put them in an awkward spot but it is what it is.         

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...