Marlon King?

[Kenilworth]

Thinking back to the Beattie return that we had 2 seasons ago, ok it ended badly for all concerned, but Beattie was never really vilified by the fans. If this ends in the same way, what will it be like? Horrendous I think.

Yep. I can see that scenario panning out. It's a big risk.

However, where we are positioned at the moment is more serious that a lot of people are prepared to believe.
Weir's insistence on the RS interview last night that we are creating enough chances and that we have been very unlucky is quite baffling and very disconcerting. Pretty sure he is looking for King to play the bully-boy, ruthless striker role that Porter plainly cannot and Ironside is not equipped to do and also looking to bring in a winger to replace the inept performances of Flynn and Murphy.

 

[alcoblade]

Not happy with the King signing - listening to his interview last night he doesn't give a sh!t about the fans he said he is here to do a job.

OK, so that's something new. A bit of honesty from a footballer.

Personally I wish he'd gone one further...."to be honest, I didn't want to drop to the 3rd, but this was the best offer on the table. You won't see me kissing my badge because I'm here for the cash".

The bollocks spouted by most footballers about why they sign is quite irritating.

UTB

 

[alcoblade]

but why have we sunk so low as to sign garbage like King ?

I'm more concerned with what we have to do to get away from being sunk so low.

UTB

 

[axel smeets]

Yep. I can see that scenario panning out. It's a big risk.

However, where we are positioned at the moment is more serious that a lot of people are prepared to believe.
Weir's insistence on the RS interview last night that we are creating enough chances and that we have been very unlucky is quite baffling and very disconcerting. Pretty sure he is looking for King to play the bully-boy, ruthless striker role that Porter plainly cannot and Ironside is not equipped to do and also looking to bring in a winger to replace the inept performances of Flynn and Murphy.

It is extremely serious as you say. We only lost 9 league games out of 46 last season. We're on 5 from 7 now. Lose on Saturday and the klaxons will be ringing.

 

[Darren]

Yep. I can see that scenario panning out. It's a big risk.

However, where we are positioned at the moment is more serious that a lot of people are prepared to believe.
Weir's insistence on the RS interview last night that we are creating enough chances and that we have been very unlucky is quite baffling and very disconcerting. Pretty sure he is looking for King to play the bully-boy, ruthless striker role that Porter plainly cannot and Ironside is not equipped to do and also looking to bring in a winger to replace the inept performances of Flynn and Murphy.

Indeed. Put it this way. Who would you rather be the lone striker Weir insists on? 19 year old Ironside, of exemplary character but with no goals to his credit or experienced 33 year old bully boy and criminal King with 166 career goals to his credit?

 

[Pinchy]

Yeah well thanks Worksop II ! Luckily King hasn't actually terminated anyone.

Seriously though with 2 separate hit and run charges (I believe) hanging over his head from earlier in the year, isn't it fairly likely that he might get sent to prison quite soon? I'm out of my depth here, I call on my learned friend Pinchy.

Also if you have an ounce of common sense and you've been in a serious crash, wouldn't you catch the bus for a bit?

Pinchy where are you?

I have to work occasionally!

We have insufficient detail to give an informed opinion really. If MK is still on police bail then he may or may not be charged with an offence or offences. We should bear in mind that an arrest is an executive act by a Police Officer, not a judicial finding of guilt. Many people are arrested each day who are not subsequently charged at all. I suspect at least one of these has already bitten the dust, though I may be wrong. The Police and CPS are highly inefficient organisations when it comes to case preparation.

It gets even more complicated. The potential offences include:

Causing Serious Injury by Dangerous Driving - Maximum 5 years
Dangerous Driving - 2 years
Failing to stop - 6 months
Failing to report - 6 months
Careless Driving - Not imprisonable

Either of the top two, with Marlon's previous, would lead to a sentence of immediate imprisonment.

A word about the sex offender stuff. Sexual assault is the lowest level of non-consensual, non-penetrative offence under the 2003 Act. It is typically used for 'groping' whether beneath or on top of clothing. In Marlon's case it was feeling a woman's arse in a nightclub. Not clever; not pleasant; not elegant; not to be condoned but certainly not Jimmy Savile. He has no previous or subsequent sexual offences on his record. His 18 month gaol term was undoubtedly imposed for striking the victim a powerful blow, fracturing her nose. The sexual offence alone would NOT have lead to a prison sentence. The Notification Requirements under the Sexual Offences Act are unforgiving and strict. Marlon King is not a rapist (unlike Ched), child abuser or a predatory danger to women. He's a million miles away. He once groped a woman in a club. That's it. Have none of our members ever done that?

Some of the sanctimonious, ill-informed, high-handed, moralistic nonsense I have heard and read in the last 24 hours absolutely beggars belief. I hope it is born out of a lack of understanding rather than prejudice or stupidity.

14 offences? Many of those, such as drink driving, no insurance etc will stem from the same incident. He will have been sentenced about 5 times, at a guess; certainly not 14. That, of course, is 5 times too often, but it's strictly non-league compared to some of the records one sees in practice. Lowest of the low? Scum of the Earth? Not even close! Lee Hughes, on the other hand.......

I prescribe a course of perspective - 10 mgs - 3 times a day and just before bedtime.

I'm going tomorrow. I hope MK scores a hat-trick. I shall applaud him generously if he does. The rest is irrelevant.

 

[Bladesway]

I'm with you on this fella, personally I think we've got desperate and I won't set foot at the lane whilst King is at our club.

I'm sure those at the club will be saying "the fans will change their views when he bangs the goals in" personally I won't.

Lets be fair, the club haven't broken any rules and are totally entitled to do what they have done. My beef isn't that fans are fickle and we are all entitled to go or not to go. My beef is that my 4 year old son deserves to have role models who haven't done time and broken laws repeatedly. What sort of hypocrite would I be if I jumped up and down when King scored and my son wants to put his name on the back of his shirt. "No son, he isn't a very nice bloke". "But Dad, you jumped up and down and sang his name when he scored that goal that won us promotion".

For these reasons Bramall Lane is out of grounds for me until he leaves. My son will now see his first game at either Huddersfield Town or his grandad will take him to see Hull City. That hurts me greatly but I cannot take him to watch a player who has broken numerous laws and gone to prison for it.

If we get promotion then thats great, but I don't think we can call ourselves a "Family Club" when players like him play.

It will make no difference I know, but I will be writing to Kevin McCabe and telling him the same.

 

[Bladesway]

14 offences? Many of those, such as drink driving, no insurance etc will stem from the same incident. He will have been sentenced about 5 times, at a guess; certainly not 14. That, of course, is 5 times too often, but it's strictly non-league compared to some of the records one sees in practice. Lowest of the low? Scum of the Earth? Not even close! Lee Hughes, on the other hand.......

You and I rarely disagree Pinchy but I am the polar opposite to this. He has no respect for the law and it has been proven on numerous occasions. Thus I have no respect for the man. You make your choice, I respect that but please allow me to make mine without telling me I need medication for it.

 

[Bladesway]

I'm more concerned with what we have to do to get away from being sunk so low.

UTB

Thats a sad statement from an intelligent individual in my book.

 

[Pinchy]

You and I rarely disagree Pinchy but I am the polar opposite to this. He has no respect for the law and it has been proven on numerous occasions. Thus I have no respect for the man. You make your choice, I respect that but please allow me to make mine without telling me I need medication for it.

Of course you can. Nothing wrong with a difference of opinion. Just pointing out that, from the hysterical reaction, you'd think we'd signed Manson, Brady, Neilsen, Huntley and Bin Laden rolled into one. We haven't.

 

[Darren]

I have to work occasionally!

We have insufficient detail to give an informed opinion really. If MK is still on police bail then he may or may not be charged with an offence or offences. We should bear in mind that an arrest is an executive act by a Police Officer, not a judicial finding of guilt. Many people are arrested each day who are not subsequently charged at all. I suspect at least one of these has already bitten the dust, though I may be wrong. The Police and CPS are highly inefficient organisations when it comes to case preparation.

It gets even more complicated. The potential offences include:

Causing Serious Injury by Dangerous Driving - Maximum 5 years
Dangerous Driving - 2 years
Failing to stop - 6 months
Failing to report - 6 months
Careless Driving - Not imprisonable

Either of the top two, with Marlon's previous, would lead to a sentence of immediate imprisonment.

A word about the sex offender stuff. Sexual assault is the lowest level of non-consensual, non-penetrative offence under the 2003 Act. It is typically used for 'groping' whether beneath or on top of clothing. In Marlon's case it was feeling a woman's arse in a nightclub. Not clever; not pleasant; not elegant; not to be condoned but certainly not Jimmy Savile. He has no previous or subsequent sexual offences on his record. His 18 month gaol term was undoubtedly imposed for striking the victim a powerful blow, fracturing her nose. The sexual offence alone would NOT have lead to a prison sentence. The Notification Requirements under the Sexual Offences Act are unforgiving and strict. Marlon King is not a rapist (unlike Ched), child abuser or a predatory danger to women. He's a million miles away. He once groped a woman in a club. That's it. Have none of our members ever done that?

Some of the sanctimonious, ill-informed, high-handed, moralistic nonsense I have heard and read in the last 24 hours absolutely beggars belief. I hope it is born out of a lack of understanding rather than prejudice or stupidity.

14 offences? Many of those, such as drink driving, no insurance etc will stem from the same incident. He will have been sentenced about 5 times, at a guess; certainly not 14. That, of course, is 5 times too often, but it's strictly non-league compared to some of the records one sees in practice. Lowest of the low? Scum of the Earth? Not even close! Lee Hughes, on the other hand.......

I prescribe a course of perspective - 10 mgs - 3 times a day and just before bedtime.

I'm going tomorrow. I hope MK scores a hat-trick. I shall applaud him generously if he does. The rest is irrelevant.

Thats what gets me about the sex offender stuff. In any sane world breaking a woman's nose would be a far bigger deal than feeling her arse. But, oh no, no one mentions the former, yet we all hysterically scream "sex offender!!!!" because of the latter.

 

[alcoblade]

Thats a sad statement from an intelligent individual in my book.

Why so? The well being of Sheffield United is more important to me than the way we are viewed by the wider public.

He's served his time. I don't buy the role model argument. In short, I don't care much because I don't know why I should care much.

And as I've suggetsed before, there's a distinct correlation between those that don't actually go for various reasons, who are more concerned by the club's image, and those who do go who are more concerned about the absolute shite they have to watch. Gross generalisation I accept, but true none the less I suspect.

And Marlon King will earn a healthy living, whatever we do.

UTB

 

[SouthEssexBlade]

I work with ex-offenders on a daily basis. Not that my work is exclusively with this group but a high number are coming out of the criminal justice system. Not surprised at any of the comments on here.

 

[Darren]

Why so? The well being of Sheffield United is more important to me than the way we are viewed by the wider public.

He's served his time. I don't buy the role model argument. In short, I don't care much because I don't know why I should care much.

And as I've suggetsed before, there's a distinct correlation between those that don't actually go for various reasons, who are more concerned by the club's image, and those who do go who are more concerned about the absolute shite they have to watch. Gross generalisation I accept, but true none the less I suspect.

And Marlon King will earn a healthy living, whatever we do.

UTB

Re the role model thing. You give young men who have known little but football since the age of about 8 loads of money and adulation from thousands of people every week and you are surprised when they behave like immature egomaniacs? Who really expects footballers to provide role models to kids?

Really, if I was drawing up a list of groups of people whom I expected kids to look up to, footballers would come below purveyours of payday loans and slightly above brothel keepers.

 

[Pinchy]

Why so? The well being of Sheffield United is more important to me than the way we are viewed by the wider public.

He's served his time. I don't buy the role model argument. In short, I don't care much because I don't know why I should care much.

And as I've suggetsed before, there's a distinct correlation between those that don't actually go for various reasons, who are more concerned by the club's image, and those who do go who are more concerned about the absolute shite they have to watch. Gross generalisation I accept, but true none the less I suspect.

And Marlon King will earn a healthy living, whatever we do.

UTB

And there's even the occasional oddball who's more concerned about our reputation for Hoof than for sexual offending.

It takes all sorts, I suppose.

Sighs wistfully........

 

[Rodders]

I said it earlier when the prospect of payday lender sponsorship reared it's head but it's this whole race to the bottom that football and football fans are all a part of that depresses me the most about this.

Career criminal that is capable of breaking a woman's nose if she turns down his advances, anyone? Hey, if he can bang a couple in against the likes of Port Vale and Crawley sign him up!!

Utterly depressing.

 

[Pinchy]

Re the role model thing. You give young men who have known little but football since the age of about 8 loads of money and adulation from thousands of people every week and you are surprised when they behave like immature egomaniacs? Who really expects footballers to provide role models to kids?

Really, if I was drawing up a list of groups of people whom I expected kids to look up to, footballers would come below purveyours of payday loans and slightly above brothel keepers.

Merchant Bankers!

 

[Pinchy]

I said it earlier when the prospect of payday lender sponsorship reared it's head but it's this whole race to the bottom that football and football fans are all a part of that depresses me the most about this.

Career criminal that is capable of breaking a woman's nose if she turns down his advances, anyone? Hey, if he can bang a couple in against the likes of Port Vale and Crawley sign him up!!

Utterly depressing.

A career criminal is, by definition, one who makes his or her living solely or primarily from crime. That is not Marlon King.

 

[Rodders]

A career criminal is, by definition, one who makes his or her living solely or primarily from crime. That is not Marlon King.

Going by his previous, he must be part-time at least!

 

[true99blade]

Marlon King deserves no respect whatsoever for what he has done criminally and I cannot respect the man at all. But then again I have no respect for the vast majority of footballers for many reasons.

I didn't know much about what he had done in the past but after listening to Football Heaven last night and hearing many callers including 1 woman complaining we had signed a sex offender then I decided to. But after reading he only touched the woman's arse I don't understand why he has the identity everywhere of being called a rapist. The punching of the face I admit is something far more extreme but it was never mentioned last night?

 

[Darren]

I said it earlier when the prospect of payday lender sponsorship reared it's head but it's this whole race to the bottom that football and football fans are all a part of that depresses me the most about this.

Career criminal that is capable of breaking a woman's nose if she turns down his advances, anyone? Hey, if he can bang a couple in against the likes of Port Vale and Crawley sign him up!!

Utterly depressing.

I would say the crucial difference is that SUFC being sponsored by a payday loan company has the purpose of getting people to get payday loans, hence SUFC then become implicated in that industry.

Employing King does not imply any condoing of his criminal past. In my view, it would be more immoral and narrow minded for someone to refuse to employ an ex-crim who has served his time.

And for the millionth time, all the evidence suggests King is indeed a nasty piece of work, but he is not being imployed for his charm and his take on sexual politics. He is being employed to score goals. No more, no less.

 

[Pinchy]

Marlon King deserves no respect whatsoever for what he has done criminally and I cannot respect the man at all. But then again I have no respect for the vast majority of footballers for many reasons.

I didn't know much about what he had done in the past but after listening to Football Heaven last night and hearing many callers including 1 woman complaining we had signed a sex offender then I decided to. But after reading he only touched the woman's arse I don't understand why he has the identity everywhere of being called a rapist. The punching of the face I admit is something far more extreme but it was never mentioned last night?

Quite. The debate has lacked any perspective at all. I blame the presenters, who should (but don't because they are hack local reporters) know better, rather than the contributors.

Sadly, a lynchmob mentality has developed. That is unhealthy from any point of view. If Walker, Foster and the other numpties troubled to do a little homework then we might achieve more balance. They won't. They have neither the desire nor the intellect.

 

[MobileBlade]

In my view, it would be more immoral and narrow minded for someone to refuse to employ an ex-crim who has served his time.

And illegal as a footballer is not regarded as an exempt role for which previous sex offenders cannot be employed.

 

[StarBlade]

Regarding the sexual offences;

I'm sorry that we dumb it down to a lesser offence to make it more justifiable. I've just read the bulleted-point legislation, basically it's;

- sexual
- not consensual

Sure, it's not as bad as Jimmy Saville, but it's still bad.

Bad enough that the woman objected, to which Marlon King, our new star player, broke the woman's nose as he punched her to the ground. Yes he's a twat, but he's now our twat demeaning our shirt and our club.

The more I think about it, the more I object.

(Right, this is the last post for sure on the subject, I promise)

 

[BladeFisher]

Re the role model thing. You give young men who have known little but football since the age of about 8 loads of money and adulation from thousands of people every week and you are surprised when they behave like immature egomaniacs? Who really expects footballers to provide role models to kids?

Really, if I was drawing up a list of groups of people whom I expected kids to look up to, footballers would come below purveyours of payday loans and slightly above brothel keepers.

Cynthia Payne being employed as a party hostess?

 

[Darren]

Quite. The debate has lacked any perspective at all. I blame the presenters, who should (but don't because they are hack local reporters) know better, rather than the contributors.

Sadly, a lynchmob mentality has developed. That is unhealthy from any point of view. If Walker, Foster and the other numpties troubled to do a little homework then we might achieve more balance. They won't. They have neither the desire nor the intellect.

Its also a symptom of the mass hysteria around sex offences. How on earth someone gets the reputation of a rapist of one non-consensual grope of one woman's bottom whilst no-one ever mentions that he caused the same woman a serious facial injury is the subject of a whole Ph.D

 

[oldblade]

It seems to me that what some people are saying is that although we have a system of justice in this country which deals out penalties to people found guilty of breaking the law, that is not enough. Even though a person has carried out the punishment handed out to him by society via the justice system, when it suits our personal views we must carry on punishing him some more. Rather defeats the object of having a justice system in the first place.

 

[Rodders]

I would say the crucial difference is that SUFC being sponsored by a payday loan company has the purpose of getting people to get payday loans, hence SUFC then become implicated in that industry.

Employing King does not imply any condoing of his criminal past. In my view, it would be more immoral and narrow minded for someone to refuse to employ an ex-crim who has served his time.

And for the millionth time, all the evidence suggests King is indeed a nasty piece of work, but he is not being imployed for his charm and his take on sexual politics. He is being employed to score goals. No more, no less.

Being sponsored by a payday-loans company and employing a man such as King are all part of the same thing though - as long a Club can earn a bit of cash or get a few goals out of it, it's utterly irrelevant how we go about doing things.

I am also aware of what the Club are employing King for - I just don't like being asked to pay to watch him, that's all.

 

[oldblade]

Being sponsored by a payday-loans company and employing a man such as King are all part of the same thing though - as long a Club can earn a bit of cash or get a few goals out of it, it's utterly irrelevant how we go about doing things.

I am also aware of what the Club are employing King for - I just don't like being asked to pay to watch him, that's all.

You do have a choice.

 

[Darren]

Regarding the sexual offences;

I'm sorry that we dumb it down to a lesser offence to make it more justifiable. I've just read the bulleted-point legislation, basically it's;

- sexual
- not consensual

Sure, it's not as bad as Jimmy Saville, but it's still bad.

Bad enough that the woman objected, to which Marlon King, our new star player, broke the woman's nose as he punched her to the ground. Yes he's a twat, but he's now our twat demeaning our shirt and our club.

The more I think about it, the more I object.

(Right, this is the last post for sure on the subject, I promise)

Groping someone's bottom , in terms of sexual assaults, bears the same relation to Jimmy Saville as nicking a penny chew from the corner shop does to a multi million pound armed robbery does in terms of thefts.