Re: Raynor??? : Sun Jan 03, 2010 9:31 pm  

berrigans bitch wrote:

Yes I agree every-one makes their own choices in their private life, and he will pay the price for his choices, I know he did a job on the field but as tolerant as I consider myself I lost all respect of him after the racist attack so I have no sympathy for him and I am glad he has got the boot if I be honest.

I do not condone what he has done nor support it for that idea but I personally have better things to do then criticize other peoples private life. I mean if we want to talk about big problems within the squad how about we start with the big gambling culture going on within it, if we are all going to analyse the players private life's.

Re: Raynor??? : Sun Jan 03, 2010 9:35 pm  

pmarrow wrote:

I do not condone what he has done nor support it for that idea but I personally have better things to do then criticize other peoples private life. I mean if we want to talk about big problems within the squad how about we start with the big gambling culture going on within it, if we are all going to analyse the players private life's.

Gambling isn't against the law, unlike racially aggravated assault and fraud.

Re: Raynor??? : Sun Jan 03, 2010 9:37 pm  

ComeOnYouUll wrote:

Gambling isn't against the law, unlike racially aggravated assault and fraud.

Neither is smoking and drinking but people hated Kingy for that.

Re: Raynor??? : Sun Jan 03, 2010 9:41 pm  

pmarrow wrote:

I do not condone what he has done nor support it for that idea but I personally have better things to do then criticize other peoples private life. I mean if we want to talk about big problems within the squad how about we start with the big gambling culture going on within it, if we are all going to analyse the players private life's.

I here what you are saying however they are professional sportsman and get paid as such, the nature of the beast is that their misdemeanour's do find there way into the public forum, I am not interested in their betting, boozing or even their handbag episodes however like I posted there are certain things I draw the line at and unfortunately Gareth crossed that line for me. If people commit crimes people are going to get criticized as most of us are law abiding citizens.

Re: Raynor??? : Sun Jan 03, 2010 10:02 pm  

There is a whole world of difference between the crime he has been found guilty of , ASSAULT and what he has been charged with recently. Selling computer and printing counterfeit through EBAY ..............

The two crimes are not connected and one will not have an effect on the other so people should not try and link them together, what he did in Blackpool has no bearing on this case. He has left the club now and I think that should be the end of it, he has served us well for a number of years and most of us recognise that.

Now whilst I agree that players should be held to account if they cross the line , it has to be uniform and at FC it has not been. I have seen this before at the club and it will always happen some players get pilloried for one thing and others get ignored for more serious offences. Thats the problem I have with all this the double standards, many of us know one of the present first team squad is one of the main offenders in the drinking culture stakes.

He is still there and so much for clearing the problem out

He is not the first and will certainly not be the last Hull FC player in the courts for something or other.

[Kosh]

Re: Raynor??? : Sun Jan 03, 2010 10:08 pm  

pmarrow wrote:

How could anything he do bring the club into disrepute ? Not as if we're going to get the blame for what he's done is it ? As a player he gave his all, he made a mistake big bloody deal. I doubt selling some cartridges or whatever it is (not being sad enough to read that into it) affected his playing ability all of a sudden. What would you do if the people who paid your wages told you, you can't drink in your free time as they thought it may affect your performance or said stop smoking because you may get cancer in the future which would "affect" your work. ATEOD this is all BS, he's made a mistake off the field and will be dealt with with the right authorites, it isn't an enxcuse for everyone on here to pretend there angels of all a sudden and are the upmost professionals themselves.

You're on a wind up, right? I mean, you can't actually believe what you typed here - can you?

Being a professional sportsman is not like other jobs. Anything a pro sportsman does reflects in some way on the club he plays for, as bad publicity if nothing else. And I would suggest that doing something that may well lead to a custodial sentence counts as compromising your ability to continue doing your job.

Your other points are equally laughable. If I had a job where drinking in my free time compromised my ability to do it I would either not drink or find another job. Simples. The smoking example isn't even worth responding to. It's just plain silly.

Get a grip.

pmarrow wrote:

Does it really matter how long it went on for ? The principle is no different. For people on here to be suggesting he was a bad apple at the club, he owes us everything bla bla is complete ridiculous. What he did in his private life is exactly that private and sweet FA to do with any of us.

I haven't condemned him on here. I've expressed my disappointment that he'd be daft enough to throw away his career for the sake of some extra cash, and that's as far as I'm prepared to comment in public. TBH I was much more concerned about his earlier conviction. But trying to trivialise what he's done is stupid, as is claiming that a pro sportsman's private life is completely private. It isn't. It never has been. And if any of them are unhappy with that they're free to find alternative employment.

Re: Raynor??? : Sun Jan 03, 2010 10:14 pm  

pmarrow wrote:

How could anything he do bring the club into disrepute ? Not as if we're going to get the blame for what he's done is it ? As a player he gave his all, he made a mistake big bloody deal. I doubt selling some cartridges or whatever it is (not being sad enough to read that into it) affected his playing ability all of a sudden. What would you do if the people who paid your wages told you, you can't drink in your free time as they thought it may affect your performance or said stop smoking because you may get cancer in the future which would "affect" your work. ATEOD this is all BS, he's made a mistake off the field and will be dealt with with the right authorites, it isn't an enxcuse for everyone on here to pretend there angels of all a sudden and are the upmost professionals themselves.

TBH if I (and I suspect) most others on here were found guilty of racially aggrivated assault, we'd find ourselves booted out of a job very quickly indeed.

Several companies I know say you can'd drink in your free time (one notable one being Network Rail for many positions you're not allowed to drink for IIRC 24 or 48 hourse before shift start). If you want the job you stick with the rules, its very simple really.

pmarrow wrote:

Does it really matter how long it went on for ? The principle is no different. For people on here to be suggesting he was a bad apple at the club, he owes us everything bla bla is complete ridiculous. What he did in his private life is exactly that private and sweet FA to do with any of us.

Given the figure banded about in the media is approx £100K I'd suggest its a bit beyond bringing a few ciggies over and passing them off in the pub.

Re: Raynor??? : Sun Jan 03, 2010 10:24 pm  

Ian P wrote:

There is a whole world of difference between the crime he has been found guilty of , ASSAULT and what he has been charged with recently. Selling computer and printing counterfeit through EBAY ..............

The two crimes are not connected and one will not have an effect on the other so people should not try and link them together, what he did in Blackpool has no bearing on this case.

Following the court case in July 2008 for the assault charge, Raynor was sentenced to six months in jail, suspended for 18 months. If the alledged fraud and counterfeiting offences took place in the 18 month period would the previous conviction be considered in any potential sentencing?

Re: Raynor??? : Sun Jan 03, 2010 10:51 pm  

ComeOnYouUll wrote:

Following the court case in July 2008 for the assault charge, Raynor was sentenced to six months in jail, suspended for 18 months. If the alledged fraud and counterfeiting offences took place in the 18 month period would the previous conviction be considered in any potential sentencing?

They are not connected.

If some one has an 18 month bender and in that time the person then commits another crime the same or similar then the bender may or may not be taken into account. A succesful prosecution for a different crime will not have an effect on the previous suspended sentence as this was given to correct one crime and one can and would argue that the sentence has been (thus far) succesful. Our prisons are there for correction not punishment, would justice be served by imposing a sentence to run concurrent with any other help anyone. Because that what would happen at the very worst, the courts do not want to fill our prisons up with criminals who pose little danger to the majority of us and let others roam the streets.

Besides this may not come to trial yet, a trial is very expensive both in time and money and the CPS will be talking as they do in cases to "cop a plea". This allows justice to be done and it does not cost a Kings ransom to proceed, the CPS pull many cases on costs alone. They will have case reviews and they decide it has an 70% chance of a succesful prosecution, they will try and bargain any lower and it gets dropped.

Tip, if you get caught at anything opt for trial by jury every time you have a very good chance of it getting dropped. If you end up in magistrates court you could well end up behind bars for urinating in the street or non payment of a speeding fine.

Re: Raynor??? : Mon Jan 04, 2010 9:52 pm  

could be offer a month to month contract with crusaders