| Olympic teams - who is not eligible and why? 17:18 - Jul 22 with 823 views | saint901 |
There's a difference of opinion between the Netherlands and Australia about who could/should be picked as an Olympian.
The Dutch have selected a 29 year old volleyball player who as a 19 year old was convicted of travelling to the UK and raping as 12 year old girl he had groomed on the internet. He served 12 months of his 4 year sentence.
The Aussies have said that anybody with a conviction for a sexual offence will NEVER be selected by them for an Olympics.
So, do we believe in the power of prison to reform characters and trust that the individual has - as reported - completely changed his ways and in now a mature adult and not a callow youth of 19? As such he deserves his place on sporting merit.
Or do we think that the moral outrage of his crime is sufficient for him to be forever barred from representing his country, regardless of his ability? If so, is there any hope of such a person ever being a "useful member of society"?
For the avoidance of doubt, I stand with the Dutch and think the Aussies are being very hypocritical given that they regularly "poach" talent from other countries, brush poor behaviours of their touring teams under the carpet on the grounds that "boys will be boys" and are generally ready to bend any rules if the individual sportsman/woman has talent and a chance. (Other countries, including us, do the same of course). |  | | |  |
| Olympic teams - who is not eligible and why? on 19:45 - Jul 22 with 737 views | Bazza |
Think the Dutch guy should still be in prison. | | | |
| Olympic teams - who is not eligible and why? on 19:54 - Jul 22 with 728 views | kernow |
Do I think a 12 month stretch in a Dutch nick is going to reform a child rapist? No.
There are many cases of “useful « members of society committing heinous crimes.
Harold Shipman and that child murdering nurse for example.
Personally believe that such criminality is beyond redemption.
No, exclusion is the best antidote. | | | |
| Olympic teams - who is not eligible and why? on 20:28 - Jul 22 with 693 views | kingslandstand1 |
How on earth was he released after serving just 25% of his sentence! I thought this country was bad enough with serving only 50% - soon to be 40% ffs - but as said below how on earth can someone be rehabilitated after just a year with this conviction
But no doubt if it means they are in with a better chance of winning a medal they'll take him and fk any moral stance |  | | |
| Olympic teams - who is not eligible and why? on 20:39 - Jul 22 with 688 views | kernow |
No amount of articulate persuasion will convince me that this fekka should not have his volleyballs removed.
« Boys will be boys »? Cojones! | | | |
| Olympic teams - who is not eligible and why? on 09:02 - Jul 23 with 545 views | saint901 |
Without wishing to take sides, I understand that after a year in prison he was released on terms that required him undertake suitable therapy and further rehab.
Personally I'm not the same person now as I was at 19. However I can also see that the sort of behaviour for which he was jailed is deep rooted and perhaps immutable in his personality and I do wonder whether any period of rehab will ever prevent him reoffending.
The question is however, knowing all that, should a country select to represent them somebody who broke their societal rules and arguably brought shame upon them? | | | |
| Olympic teams - who is not eligible and why? on 09:15 - Jul 23 with 531 views | kernow |
As I said, personally, as a father of daughters, I would have this scheming rapist undertake his « rehabilitation and therapy « behind locked doors for many years with all the necessary « treatment « to ensure that he is no longer physically capable of recidivism. | | | |
| Olympic teams - who is not eligible and why? on 13:48 - Jul 23 with 461 views | Chesham_Saint |
I believe it used to be the case that any English player with a criminal conviction would not be selected for the country (or the "Three Lions" as the press now like call England - aka pretentious fvuckwittery). This loosened I think, when the likes of Tony Adams were "forgiven" out of expediency.
Bottom line for me though, is that I would not want a convicted rapist representing England or GB. I suppose you could argue different treatment for so called lesser crimes, but I'd say a custodial sentence should be terminal in terms of international participation. |  |
| |
| Olympic teams - who is not eligible and why? on 20:09 - Jul 23 with 402 views | DorsetIan |
| Olympic teams - who is not eligible and why? on 09:02 - Jul 23 by saint901 |
Without wishing to take sides, I understand that after a year in prison he was released on terms that required him undertake suitable therapy and further rehab.
Personally I'm not the same person now as I was at 19. However I can also see that the sort of behaviour for which he was jailed is deep rooted and perhaps immutable in his personality and I do wonder whether any period of rehab will ever prevent him reoffending.
The question is however, knowing all that, should a country select to represent them somebody who broke their societal rules and arguably brought shame upon them? |
Interesting philosophical question as to whether we're the same person as when we were 19.
This summer I was back in France at a place I'd worked when I was 19. It hadn't changed much and I'm not sure how much I have.
But at 19 I didn't travel to another country to have sex with someone that I knew to be 12 years old. And he did this only 10 years ago, at the height of all the Saville, Yew Tree stuff. He knew better. It was an extraordinarily serious thing to do, and I'm not sure it can put down to anything to do with his age. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.