orion

Just like you have I guess .

Of course your gloating ....otherwise there would be no need to go on about people being wrong all the time . As I said irony at it's best .

Gloating ..the irony .

Maybe they go down the pub with him to help him refuel ?

Yea for sure but there likely to know Evans as a person as well . You point about his value is going bring in another factor . A lower league club even non league might take him do well then sell him on for profit maybe .

Can be no doubt that the publics reaction is key . Sheff Ute board have always back him and wanted t let him train and then play but in the end the pressure was to great for them, A problem that he is going find in most places for a while at least Whatever the rights and the wrongs it's going to take someone with a lot of bottle to sign him .

Not a very good question ..it's a simple question of cost .. Test matches are not run anymore for the simple fact that the crowds don't make them pay .the same would apply to a World Cup trying to use a test match format with 7 riders .

if you read the forums there are plenty .. so far his agent has said not one club has come forward so intill so thus far he is not getting a second chance .

What people were they ? can you name them ? if Hart had done a crime and done his time I would more that happy for him to ride speedway again after all that is how are justice system is suppose to work . I understand that due to certain crimes people won't be able to do certain jobs but it's wonder people go back into crime if after being let out you can't work in a job you love and are good at ... And let's be honest we have got people in football who killed children while drink driving . .where are we drawing the line here ?

What ? when did admit that he had sex without her consent ? have you got the link ? I have a feeling you have little understanding of the case hence why you have to lie .

Just because a jury finds someone guilty does not mean they have done it . History is full of people who have found guilty and have not done the crime and even more who have got away with stuff who were guilty . It's up in the air if was in no position to refuse how do you judge that ? ...the expert witness on the effect of drink said that she had only drunk 2 and half times over the drink drive limit and said it's unlikely that she would had suffer the memory loss she claims . Also if she was in no position to say no as you claim how come Mcdonald was found not guilty ? You put some good point across on why Evans might be guilty but there are plenty to question that . Was there reasonable doubt ? . I would say there was plenty .

A Lot of people stuck up for him because they don't think there enough to convict him of rape it's not hard to follow ...Don't feel sorry for me as I will never have a problem standing up to what I feel it's an injustice . If you feel he is Guilty and reckon he should not play football again that is fair enough but try to respect others who don't feel the same way

Not at all the crowns case was pretty clear that in that hotel room was had no control of what she was doing ..so if that was the case one can't be guilty and the other not ... you can't have it both ways . if she was out her head as the crown say that it matters not if you were invited or not it's still rape . As we have seen on this forum it's very easy to argue with the conviction .

Y et again What happened with McDonald before means nothing .. as the crown and the woman story is that she could not remember anything . The fact remains it's all down to her consent in the bedroom and the case of the crown is that she was in no state to say no . thus making it impossible to find one Guilty and the other not . Mcdonald is not a convicted rapist thou he was found not Guilty .

When is she going to say sorry to McDonald and his family ? after all he was found not guilty ..No doubt her family have said plenty of bad things about him all the internet as well but I doubt we are to see her say saying sorry .

When you said you maintain you not Guilty you can't show any remorse ...Of all the things said on the subject I still can't understand how people get there heads round that

Just Like Ched Evans ..the bloke you said that should be allowed back in football on another topic .

I never said she was so out of it she could not say no ...the point was that they try to make out that was the case and as many have said in the media in the few days that makes it near enough impossible using that line to make one guilty and the other not . As someone on Sky news today the moment they found Mcdonald not guilty it meant they could not have believe she was out of her face hence meaning Evans must be not guilty as well .

I would say the word of a hard Drug user is unlikely to carry as much weight as say others in most peoples eyes . No one can say fore sure that she to drunk to say no in fact it's impossible to prove 100 %. so bearing that in mind and with one person found somehow not guilty of the same offence what is impossible if we take the line that the girl could not say no or defend herself in that hotel room I would say there is massive reasonable doubt .

Not really ..they showed cctv of the women of the falling over etc during the night at take aways etc that what used to show she was not in control of what she was doing that includes going to back to a hotel room .

The main point of the case is that and no time was the girl in any state to consent to sex ...so with that in mind how can one by guilty and the other not

And ? the old rule as has proved change more match results than double points ...it one thing saying that the old rule was better more fun etc ...but fairer it was never was . Of course that brings in the double standards of that everything was better in the old days gang who after saying they like the old tac rule also say the play offs are unfair .

I read plenty about the case ...I know that Evans friend was found not guilty and also said like Evans that she gave her consent to have sex with them both . So based on what the girl said how can they all agree what happened as you say ? as quite clearly they don't .. How did the jury find one guilty and the other not guilty ... Was she only out of head when she had sex with Evans and not with McDonald ? . Explain to me how if she was out of head and could not give consent how was Mcdonald found not guilty ? No one has or can prove 100 % she was to drunk not to consent and lets not forget that she was such a nice girl that they found traces of cocaine and other drugs that had been using the days before that night out ...it's a piss poor case based on the word a druggie .and you me or no one can prove it to be rape without reasonable doubt as the law asks .

So were the Brum 6 and Barry George etc and so have many others .. As I said it not a clear cut case so and a lot of public don't think he was guilty so Webster should have kept out it .