Wray explains McCormick decision (From The Wiltshire Gazette and Herald)

aeg1955 wrote:
The McCormack issue is bound to be sensative in some quarters but the facts are simple in my mind- 1.The sentence he received for this very sad crime right or wrong has been served 2.Everybody has a right to work after completing their sentence, just so happens this guys talent is football.3 For those thinking of not turning up because of it i have a question-would they boycott Tescos or any other business that may employ ex offenders?

bivver wrote:
I'm not at all comfortable with this, especially as I was a Smithy fan. This really rubs Smithy's nose in it.

ICDeadpeople wrote:

aeg1955 wrote: The McCormack issue is bound to be sensative in some quarters but the facts are simple in my mind- 1.The sentence he received for this very sad crime right or wrong has been served 2.Everybody has a right to work after completing their sentence, just so happens this guys talent is football.3 For those thinking of not turning up because of it i have a question-would they boycott Tescos or any other business that may employ ex offenders?

Shelf stackers don't earn thousands of pounds per week! . If everybody deserves a second chance, what about the two young lads he killed? . Do they get a sceond chance? . Reading this article made my skin crawl. If the board sign this tosser, it will be no more STFC for me until he goes. . How many Town fans were singing the praises of Notts County's Lee Hughes when he played against us? Ans = None. . Get a grip STFC. Don't sign him. . He didn't get found guilty of handling stolen cars or printing dodgy money like other players have done in the past. . He killed two young innocent lads with their whole life ahead of them. Not to mention destroying the lives of the other family members.

Bully1974 wrote:
Firstly Swindon are a club with values. First is performance. The second is performance. Beneath this the values that come over to me are caring as if it were a family, concern for its community. That Swindon are prepared to take this step is a reflection of all these values in balance. They clearly take their social responsibilities seriously. I have watched the scenes of this mans arrest and it is truly devastating him. He now has an opportunity to rebuild his life and also show remorse. Indeed he can be a role model of virtues in the future to put right his wrongs by working to help stfc perform even better and highlighting the devastating effects of drink driving. So he has two roles to play in the future and I think he should be given this opportunity

I agree with this. Once you have served your time you should be given a second chance but also, in such a high profile job, he has to highlight issues with drink driving and be a good role model. If I had lost my child in the same circumstances I would of course be vying for his blood and would never forgive but everyone needs to try and move on. I hope where ever he goes when released, he does more than just play football! He has a duty to do more in the community!

grove red wrote:
This person killed two innocent children due to his drink driving and stupidity what if it was one of your children who had there young life taken away from them because some jumped up arrogant axxxxxx. If we sign this person I shall think about cancelling my season ticket.

KeithMorganRules wrote:
We should remember here that Luke was not "a tad over the limit". He was absolutely legless and driving flat out in a fast car. The length of the sentence reflected this.
The Law says that serving his time means he pays the debt. The bigger question is whether society at large will feel the same. I don't think it will. The goalkeeper is the player most exposed to abuse and I can't believe that he will last more than a few games at most. It will be best for him to look for a new career.

Lanky wrote:
I don't condone what he did whatsoever. In fact to be honest, I would rather he wasn't at this club and this was all happening elsewhere. But at the same time, everyone is saying "what if it was your/JWs son" - but what if this guy was your son? A moment of madness (brought on himself) has ruined the life of 3 other people, along with his own. He has served the time that the justice system has allocated (that is the courts decision of the punishment so whatever your view, that won't be changed). What do you expect him to do when he gets out? Stay indoors all day? The bloke will need to make a living, so if someone is giving him the chance to do what he is actually good at, he should take it. I saw a good tweet earlier that a percentage of his wages for the rest of his career should go to the families of the victims - so his "luxury" wage is reduced and put to good use. But what is also interesting is that every is assuming what the family must think? For all we know, they may have forgiven in order to gain closure and would want him to get on with his life. Its dangerous to put words into their mouths based on how you think they should react. So as I said, I do think this isn't a great idea and wish it was happening at another club, but I think JW makes very valid points.

Lanky wrote:
I don't condone what he did whatsoever. In fact to be honest, I would rather he wasn't at this club and this was all happening elsewhere. But at the same time, everyone is saying "what if it was your/JWs son" - but what if this guy was your son? A moment of madness (brought on himself) has ruined the life of 3 other people, along with his own. He has served the time that the justice system has allocated (that is the courts decision of the punishment so whatever your view, that won't be changed). What do you expect him to do when he gets out? Stay indoors all day? The bloke will need to make a living, so if someone is giving him the chance to do what he is actually good at, he should take it. I saw a good tweet earlier that a percentage of his wages for the rest of his career should go to the families of the victims - so his "luxury" wage is reduced and put to good use. But what is also interesting is that every is assuming what the family must think? For all we know, they may have forgiven in order to gain closure and would want him to get on with his life. Its dangerous to put words into their mouths based on how you think they should react. So as I said, I do think this isn't a great idea and wish it was happening at another club, but I think JW makes very valid points.

mrwoo wrote:
Sanctimonious lot arn't you. Yes the outcome of his actions were tragic and I'm sure he regrets them, however are you lot suggesting that he should never work again? How many of us have ever driven after a pint or two, I have and I suspect most others have. How many of us have ever been involved in an accident? An interesting and true stat, 80% of all fatal accidents are caused by SOBER drivers!

Lanky wrote:
I don't condone what he did whatsoever. In fact to be honest, I would rather he wasn't at this club and this was all happening elsewhere.

But at the same time, everyone is saying "what if it was your/JWs son" - but what if this guy was your son? A moment of madness (brought on himself) has ruined the life of 3 other people, along with his own. He has served the time that the justice system has allocated (that is the courts decision of the punishment so whatever your view, that won't be changed). What do you expect him to do when he gets out? Stay indoors all day? The bloke will need to make a living, so if someone is giving him the chance to do what he is actually good at, he should take it.

I saw a good tweet earlier that a percentage of his wages for the rest of his career should go to the families of the victims - so his "luxury" wage is reduced and put to good use. But what is also interesting is that every is assuming what the family must think? For all we know, they may have forgiven in order to gain closure and would want him to get on with his life. Its dangerous to put words into their mouths based on how you think they should react.

So as I said, I do think this isn't a great idea and wish it was happening at another club, but I think JW makes very valid points.

mrwoo wrote:
Sanctimonious lot arn't you. Yes the outcome of his actions were tragic and I'm sure he regrets them, however are you lot suggesting that he should never work again?
How many of us have ever driven after a pint or two, I have and I suspect most others have. How many of us have ever been involved in an accident?
An interesting and true stat, 80% of all fatal accidents are caused by SOBER drivers!

Stratton Red wrote:
JW - if you want to take the morale high ground and use phrases such as rehabilitation and integration, then give him a job in the ticket office or helping the groundsman. Not as a player thrust into the limelight earning thousands of pounds.
*
I don't care whether this is PDCs decision or not, it's offensive and will tarnish the family reputation of our club.
*
As for Lee Hughes, he should never have played professional football again and there are plenty of decent Notts County fans I know who were and are still appauled that their chairman signed him.

Oi Den! wrote:

Lanky wrote: I don't condone what he did whatsoever. In fact to be honest, I would rather he wasn't at this club and this was all happening elsewhere. But at the same time, everyone is saying "what if it was your/JWs son" - but what if this guy was your son? A moment of madness (brought on himself) has ruined the life of 3 other people, along with his own. He has served the time that the justice system has allocated (that is the courts decision of the punishment so whatever your view, that won't be changed). What do you expect him to do when he gets out? Stay indoors all day? The bloke will need to make a living, so if someone is giving him the chance to do what he is actually good at, he should take it. I saw a good tweet earlier that a percentage of his wages for the rest of his career should go to the families of the victims - so his "luxury" wage is reduced and put to good use. But what is also interesting is that every is assuming what the family must think? For all we know, they may have forgiven in order to gain closure and would want him to get on with his life. Its dangerous to put words into their mouths based on how you think they should react. So as I said, I do think this isn't a great idea and wish it was happening at another club, but I think JW makes very valid points.

Lanky, I've thought long and hard before commenting on this matter. Your post is the one that comes closest to my own thoughts. . McCormick made a selfish, irresponsible, reckless and, as it turned out, tragic, mistake. But to call him a murderer is ridiculous. Murder is a deliberate act. If he had drunk exactly the same amount of alcohol and the crash had not happened, i.e. if he had been caught by the police or perhaps crashed into a lamppost or wall (which Tony Adams did, I think) in time to prevent it happening, I doubt there would be anywhere near this level of hostile comments about him. But his wrongdoing would have been exactly the same. . The consequences of McCormick's actions are desperately sad. But there are many people who can count themselves lucky that their drink-driving has not led to a similar outcome. There are probably thousands of these people who not only have been fortunate not to have caused anyone's death but have not suffered any punishment for their recklessness. Are they really any different from Luke McCormick? . As uncomfortable as I feel about all this happening at our club, I think Jeremy Wray deserves great credit for recognising that McCormick is a human being who made a dreadful mistake, and not a callous murderer. As you say, Lanky, people have to be given the chance of rehabilitation and reintegration. If not, what is the alternative?

EastleazeRed wrote:
Lot of new posters on here all of a sudden ? Anyway if we dont sign him another club will , he will get back into football as did lee hughes wether anybody likes it or not.

Swindon1984 wrote:

EastleazeRed wrote: Lot of new posters on here all of a sudden ? Anyway if we dont sign him another club will , he will get back into football as did lee hughes wether anybody likes it or not.

Have to agree, a lot of the posts on here seem not to come from Town fans (it's their right to post of course but should be noted). Personally I don't like the idea a) cause of the stigma it would attach to the club - although I wouldn't go so far as to say I'd boycott the club because of it and b) how good is he really going to be to be worth the hassle having not played professionally for four years? Interesting the posted who quoted about the 80% of caraccidents being caused by sober drivers - true, but what a stupid way of trying to make a point - by that logic you're safer driving drunk than sober - stats can be twisted any way you want them to. Yes, the bloke should be allowed to work and earn a living, but for such a high profile offence it naturally reflects badly on anyone associated with him. Gut feeling says it won't be a good idea signing him, but the decision rests with the club, and they'll have to stick by that decision.

alynsmith wrote:
I understand all the reasoning and there is a great deal of sense and intelligence in the statement but I can't help feeling that this will only reflect on the club in a negative way and will add fuel to the fire of rivals who hate Di Canio and the club generally - not that it makes any difference to Swindon Town FC, but it is controversial and a brave move, which on reflection is what Di Canio is all about. As for the first comment above about the car accident being a 'mistake'... there are mistakes...and mistakes.

SeanG92 wrote:
We should be after Owen and Heskey

mrwoo wrote:
Sanctimonious lot arn't you. Yes the outcome of his actions were tragic and I'm sure he regrets them, however are you lot suggesting that he should never work again?
How many of us have ever driven after a pint or two, I have and I suspect most others have. How many of us have ever been involved in an accident?
An interesting and true stat, 80% of all fatal accidents are caused by SOBER drivers!

Davidsyrett wrote:
"I would also like to point out that driving while using a mobile phone is far more common and far more danagerous than drink driving"

Don't believe this at all, I've always respected your views LR but this is the most ridiculous you have come up with, Is this supposed to be a defence of drink driving? Even if he was on the phone he's still breaking the law, but being drunk in charge of a vehicle is still a far more reckless offence.

Sorry but the club have made a big mistake in my opinion. We don't need this publicity and the vast majority of the fans are against it. Please get rid of him JW.

Tonyblairisthedevil wrote:
This is a guy who got steaming drunk after a night on the beers and a few hours sleep. He knew he wasnt fit to drive but chose to anyway. Then drove his car and destroyed the lives of so many people.
4 years in prison and then to get a high profile well paid job is disgusting.. My season ticket is going back if they give this "murderer" a position.

We have a racist manager and now posibily and a drunk driver who does hardly any time in a cushy prison.. good grief..

London Red wrote:
Like Den I have waited all day before commenting - and in fact what he posted is pretty much along the lines I am thinking
.
I would also like to point out that driving while using a mobile phone is far more common and far more danagerous than drink driving
.
Now can every single person on here who has slated Luke - honestly say they have never got behind the wheel while drunk or used their mobile phone?
.
If not then you are EXACTLY the same as him - you were just lucky not to have caused an accident!
.
Now I can say that as I grew during a time where education over drink driving was dominant
.
Now if it is happening to creep back up again - then if someone like Luke can use his "profile" to educate kids to not do it surely as JW says that is a good thing
.
You can't change the past but you can change the future

ellory wrote:

Davidsyrett wrote:
"I would also like to point out that driving while using a mobile phone is far more common and far more danagerous than drink driving"

Don't believe this at all, I've always respected your views LR but this is the most ridiculous you have come up with, Is this supposed to be a defence of drink driving? Even if he was on the phone he's still breaking the law, but being drunk in charge of a vehicle is still a far more reckless offence.

Sorry but the club have made a big mistake in my opinion. We don't need this publicity and the vast majority of the fans are against it. Please get rid of him JW.

The fact that using a mobile phone whilst driving is as (or indeed more) dangerous than drink driving is pretty much a fact.

EastleazeRed wrote:
Lot of new posters on here all of a sudden ? Anyway if we dont sign him another club will , he will get back into football as did lee hughes wether anybody likes it or not.

erihstliw wrote:
* Re my comment at 2.21 I do not know if he is entitled to work in any profession.

Further more the guilt of killing the two children will live with him forever. If he is a truly decent person then that is a horrible thing to live with.

Davidsyrett wrote:

ellory wrote:

Davidsyrett wrote:
"I would also like to point out that driving while using a mobile phone is far more common and far more danagerous than drink driving"

Don't believe this at all, I've always respected your views LR but this is the most ridiculous you have come up with, Is this supposed to be a defence of drink driving? Even if he was on the phone he's still breaking the law, but being drunk in charge of a vehicle is still a far more reckless offence.

Sorry but the club have made a big mistake in my opinion. We don't need this publicity and the vast majority of the fans are against it. Please get rid of him JW.

The fact that using a mobile phone whilst driving is as (or indeed more) dangerous than drink driving is pretty much a fact.

No, using a mobile phone distracts your concentration, just like staring at a women walking down the round or admiring another car, not right I know, but it does not dull your reflexes or how you react to a situation in the same way as being drunk does. Drink driving is far more dangerous FACT

Davidsyrett wrote:

ellory wrote:

Davidsyrett wrote:
"I would also like to point out that driving while using a mobile phone is far more common and far more danagerous than drink driving"

Don't believe this at all, I've always respected your views LR but this is the most ridiculous you have come up with, Is this supposed to be a defence of drink driving? Even if he was on the phone he's still breaking the law, but being drunk in charge of a vehicle is still a far more reckless offence.

Sorry but the club have made a big mistake in my opinion. We don't need this publicity and the vast majority of the fans are against it. Please get rid of him JW.

The fact that using a mobile phone whilst driving is as (or indeed more) dangerous than drink driving is pretty much a fact.

No, using a mobile phone distracts your concentration, just like staring at a women walking down the round or admiring another car, not right I know, but it does not dull your reflexes or how you react to a situation in the same way as being drunk does. Drink driving is far more dangerous FACT

super red wrote:

Lanky wrote:
I don't condone what he did whatsoever. In fact to be honest, I would rather he wasn't at this club and this was all happening elsewhere. But at the same time, everyone is saying "what if it was your/JWs son" - but what if this guy was your son? A moment of madness (brought on himself) has ruined the life of 3 other people, along with his own. He has served the time that the justice system has allocated (that is the courts decision of the punishment so whatever your view, that won't be changed). What do you expect him to do when he gets out? Stay indoors all day? The bloke will need to make a living, so if someone is giving him the chance to do what he is actually good at, he should take it. I saw a good tweet earlier that a percentage of his wages for the rest of his career should go to the families of the victims - so his "luxury" wage is reduced and put to good use. But what is also interesting is that every is assuming what the family must think? For all we know, they may have forgiven in order to gain closure and would want him to get on with his life. Its dangerous to put words into their mouths based on how you think they should react. So as I said, I do think this isn't a great idea and wish it was happening at another club, but I think JW makes very valid points.

No I don't expect he will stay indoors, however I'd expect him to stay out of the public eye/limelight!!

And in regards to your comment in what the family "may" think about forgiving him and letting him get on with his life.... Best we don't advocate your theory, unless reported otherwise they may be thinking the exact opposite!!

London Red wrote:
Like Den I have waited all day before commenting - and in fact what he posted is pretty much along the lines I am thinking
.
I would also like to point out that driving while using a mobile phone is far more common and far more danagerous than drink driving
.
Now can every single person on here who has slated Luke - honestly say they have never got behind the wheel while drunk or used their mobile phone?
.
If not then you are EXACTLY the same as him - you were just lucky not to have caused an accident!
.
Now I can say that as I grew during a time where education over drink driving was dominant
.
Now if it is happening to creep back up again - then if someone like Luke can use his "profile" to educate kids to not do it surely as JW says that is a good thing
.
You can't change the past but you can change the future

CBCred wrote:
Whilst this was a terrible and avoidable tragedy, there isn't a person on earth who hasn't made a mistake.

hobodan wrote:
Rehabilitation & integration

This is exactly what we need to do: this young man will get a contract elsewhere if we do not give him the chance.

Yes he did a very stupid thing and no doubt will regret it for the rest of his life & our thoughts will always be with those who lost their lives in theses circumstances

I can't think of a better place to "rehabilitate & integrate" any person under the guidance of Mr Wray & Paolo & the decent people of Swindon.
ANYONE of us could have potentially done something stupid that this young man DID. I know as a youngster I myself did some stupid things - and like many others who have done stupid thing the consequences didn't turn out as severe.

Let's give him a chance & judge him on his attitude at being given that chance

London Red wrote:
Like Den I have waited all day before commenting - and in fact what he posted is pretty much along the lines I am thinking
.
I would also like to point out that driving while using a mobile phone is far more common and far more danagerous than drink driving
.
Now can every single person on here who has slated Luke - honestly say they have never got behind the wheel while drunk or used their mobile phone?
.
If not then you are EXACTLY the same as him - you were just lucky not to have caused an accident!
.
Now I can say that as I grew during a time where education over drink driving was dominant
.
Now if it is happening to creep back up again - then if someone like Luke can use his "profile" to educate kids to not do it surely as JW says that is a good thing
.
You can't change the past but you can change the future

hobodan wrote:
Rehabilitation & integration

This is exactly what we need to do: this young man will get a contract elsewhere if we do not give him the chance.

Yes he did a very stupid thing and no doubt will regret it for the rest of his life & our thoughts will always be with those who lost their lives in theses circumstances

I can't think of a better place to "rehabilitate & integrate" any person under the guidance of Mr Wray & Paolo & the decent people of Swindon.
ANYONE of us could have potentially done something stupid that this young man DID. I know as a youngster I myself did some stupid things - and like many others who have done stupid thing the consequences didn't turn out as severe.

Let's give him a chance & judge him on his attitude at being given that chance

adver jurnolist wrote:

Tonyblairisthedevil wrote: This is a guy who got steaming drunk after a night on the beers and a few hours sleep. He knew he wasnt fit to drive but chose to anyway. Then drove his car and destroyed the lives of so many people. 4 years in prison and then to get a high profile well paid job is disgusting.. My season ticket is going back if they give this "murderer" a position. We have a racist manager and now posibily and a drunk driver who does hardly any time in a cushy prison.. good grief..

knob....You don't even have a season ticket??....Racist manager?? why would you have a season ticket, hypocrite!!

umpcah wrote:

hobodan wrote:
Rehabilitation & integration

This is exactly what we need to do: this young man will get a contract elsewhere if we do not give him the chance.

Yes he did a very stupid thing and no doubt will regret it for the rest of his life & our thoughts will always be with those who lost their lives in theses circumstances

I can't think of a better place to "rehabilitate & integrate" any person under the guidance of Mr Wray & Paolo & the decent people of Swindon.
ANYONE of us could have potentially done something stupid that this young man DID. I know as a youngster I myself did some stupid things - and like many others who have done stupid thing the consequences didn't turn out as severe.

Let's give him a chance & judge him on his attitude at being given that chance

ANYONE of us could have potentially done something stupid that this young man DID. What a sweeping statement to make ! At the risk of seeming to be smug I can hand on heart claim that I wasn`t that stupid when I was young - so there ! Furthermore I hope he doesn`t get signed up by Swindon Town even if he would make a reasonable No.2 goalie.

London Red wrote:
Like Den I have waited all day before commenting - and in fact what he posted is pretty much along the lines I am thinking . I would also like to point out that driving while using a mobile phone is far more common and far more danagerous than drink driving . Now can every single person on here who has slated Luke - honestly say they have never got behind the wheel while drunk or used their mobile phone? . If not then you are EXACTLY the same as him - you were just lucky not to have caused an accident! . Now I can say that as I grew during a time where education over drink driving was dominant . Now if it is happening to creep back up again - then if someone like Luke can use his "profile" to educate kids to not do it surely as JW says that is a good thing . You can't change the past but you can change the future

hobodan wrote:
Rehabilitation & integration

This is exactly what we need to do: this young man will get a contract elsewhere if we do not give him the chance.

Yes he did a very stupid thing and no doubt will regret it for the rest of his life & our thoughts will always be with those who lost their lives in theses circumstances

I can't think of a better place to "rehabilitate & integrate" any person under the guidance of Mr Wray & Paolo & the decent people of Swindon.
ANYONE of us could have potentially done something stupid that this young man DID. I know as a youngster I myself did some stupid things - and like many others who have done stupid thing the consequences didn't turn out as severe.

Let's give him a chance & judge him on his attitude at being given that chance

International Robin2 wrote:
I can't help but have mixed thoughts on this. The truth to all is, yes he done wrong. He admitted he was guilty to the charges and served his time regardless is you agree or not with the length of the sentence - that's not what is in question here. As much as it is incredibly sad to the tragic incident which saw two young boys depart this world far too early, I do believe that punishment in the eyes of the law has been served and should be given all the support possible to re-integrate with society. To what degree does someone who has committed such a crime allowed to return to work? Honestly, I don't see how we or anyone can be a judge of that. Let's not forget that despite the pain he has caused to the family of the two boys, he too will have been deeply affected by the incident and I have no shadow of a doubt that he would be equally as sad as the parents. In addition to the punishment he has already rightly received, he will have to live with the facts of the incident for the rest of his life and no doubt, if he plays every week, be reminded and hounded by opposing fans constantly.

I for one hope that if Swindon do sign him, he makes good use of the money he earns and spare time he has to re-build his life and actively support anti drink driving campaigns, calling on his experience to make himself an example. For Luke, I have no doubt, if he get's a contract or not (he is on trial with Swindon), he won't be playing week in week out as we already have a great goalkeeper. In addition, he will need a lot of time and therapy to come to terms with his own actions for years to come. He won't be able to lose the stigma but as long as he publicly shows remorse for his actions and does what he can to try make amends, as I have said before, I believe that prisoners who have done their time should have the opportunity to re-build their life. I have no problems with him playing in a Swindon shirt. As least it won't be David James!

Wilesy wrote:

Swindon1984 wrote:

EastleazeRed wrote: Lot of new posters on here all of a sudden ? Anyway if we dont sign him another club will , he will get back into football as did lee hughes wether anybody likes it or not.

Have to agree, a lot of the posts on here seem not to come from Town fans (it's their right to post of course but should be noted). Personally I don't like the idea a) cause of the stigma it would attach to the club - although I wouldn't go so far as to say I'd boycott the club because of it and b) how good is he really going to be to be worth the hassle having not played professionally for four years? Interesting the posted who quoted about the 80% of caraccidents being caused by sober drivers - true, but what a stupid way of trying to make a point - by that logic you're safer driving drunk than sober - stats can be twisted any way you want them to. Yes, the bloke should be allowed to work and earn a living, but for such a high profile offence it naturally reflects badly on anyone associated with him. Gut feeling says it won't be a good idea signing him, but the decision rests with the club, and they'll have to stick by that decision.

A lot of new posters maybe, but the same message.....

Oi Den! wrote:
Stratton: "Not getting caught or not killing anyone is no excuse." Exactly. That is the whole point I was making.

swindon30 wrote:
I broke this news last Wednesday but no one commented on it as you prob all thought I was making it up.

Oi Den! wrote:
When Tony Adams crashed his car into a wall, his alcohol level was at least twice McCormick's, yet Adams was welcomed back to the game with open arms and is fondly thought of as a man who eventually beat the booze. That wall could easily have been a group of kids on their way home from school. It seems to me that most people are not judging McCormick on his actions, but on the very sad consequences of his actions.
.
If McCormick is a moron / poor excuse for a human being, then so are Adams, Peter Shilton, Jimmy Greaves (woke up in his car when it was dark and didn't know whether it was morning or night), Michael Pook, Jermaine Pennant, Peter Beagrie, Jodie Morris, James Beattie, Rio Ferdinand and countless others. But how many of those are football outcasts? And what about Jimmy Davis? All I remember being said about him was what a tragic loss it was when he died after driving while way over the limit. Fortunately the other driver involved was not badly hurt. The Town even dedicated a match to Davis.

redjet wrote:

Oi Den! wrote:
When Tony Adams crashed his car into a wall, his alcohol level was at least twice McCormick's, yet Adams was welcomed back to the game with open arms and is fondly thought of as a man who eventually beat the booze. That wall could easily have been a group of kids on their way home from school. It seems to me that most people are not judging McCormick on his actions, but on the very sad consequences of his actions.
.
If McCormick is a moron / poor excuse for a human being, then so are Adams, Peter Shilton, Jimmy Greaves (woke up in his car when it was dark and didn't know whether it was morning or night), Michael Pook, Jermaine Pennant, Peter Beagrie, Jodie Morris, James Beattie, Rio Ferdinand and countless others. But how many of those are football outcasts? And what about Jimmy Davis? All I remember being said about him was what a tragic loss it was when he died after driving while way over the limit. Fortunately the other driver involved was not badly hurt. The Town even dedicated a match to Davis.

You have a good point, they should not have had that good treatment either.

oldandwise wrote:
Not been on here for a while but could not resist this one.I agree with Den and London Red about all the drinkers who have been welcomed back into the fold because they didnt kill any body and lucky old Jimmy Davis only killed himself but it could easily have been other people.I personally would have loved Lee Hughes to come here or any other offender,my only reservation would be that they learned by their mistake and showed some kind of remorse.By the way all you people putting yourselves in the childrens parents shoes,how would you feel being in Lukes parents shoes?

mrwoo wrote:
Sanctimonious lot arn't you. Yes the outcome of his actions were tragic and I'm sure he regrets them, however are you lot suggesting that he should never work again?
How many of us have ever driven after a pint or two, I have and I suspect most others have. How many of us have ever been involved in an accident?
An interesting and true stat, 80% of all fatal accidents are caused by SOBER drivers!

worley wrote:
a great signing and as a No 1!
not gonna sit on the bench,he was one of the best young keepers around prior to this. what he did was very wrong, with disasterous consequences. but of course you lot have never made mistakes...or maybe you have but not been so unlucky.
yes you cry...unlucky...no he was, he made the stupid naive mistake of drink driving...that was a stupid thing to do...but he did not set out to hurt or kill anyone. sign him on and all you moral people....go and watch Oxford!
if we don't, someone will, look at lee hughes, he was short of offers. this should be is he good enough , and nothing else. Well Done board and Paolo, sign him on, and watch him repay us!

BorisIsTheSpider wrote:
Unless I have missed it, noone has commented on the fact that he has ben training with the club since January. So clearly the club and the players have come to terms with this. Perhaps time for us as fans to wonder how they have managed it. After all, and as we know, many of the players have young families.

mr_flibble wrote:
Lets get some perspective on this based on FACT rather than emotions that are running high on here.

Firstly anyone who followed his trial and seen footage on You tube will know that he admitted his guilt and showed remorse straight away on the M6. He said ‘I fell asleep, I’m so sorry’. At least he admitted his crime unlike Hughes, who was probably drunk, but did not stop at the scene and only handed himself in once the alcohol was out of his system.

We live in the most tolerant society in the world, which we should be proud about. Encapsulated within that is that a decent society doesn’t just turn its back on offenders. It should help reform and rehabilitate. Luke McCormick deserves the same. Least not forget Nelson Mandela was once a terrorist.

As for the people saying he shouldn’t play football, comes from the pure jealously that this lad’s talent is football. If he can earn good money, he should be allowed to. It’s an option available to all human beings, to make the best of yourselves.

Why should STFC differentiate and separate themselves from any other employer who takes on people who have come out of prison?

For the record Luke McCormick is a very good keeper and I saw him play for PAFC many times. Should he win us a penalty shootout against Man U in the FA Cup next year, the first people to praise him will be those on this site mocking him.

To those threatening to tear up their season tickets, haven’t we heard this all before when PDC joined and many liberalities said the same? I don’t hear people complaining about his political views now? I wonder how many actually carried out their promise last year, and then kept it.

Also to those who’ve threatened to tear up their season tickets, you should also apply your code to all other moral instances. Do you wear clothes that were made in a sweat shop by 6 year olds, is any of your furniture made from wood from the Amazon, do you shop at stores or do business with companies who employ past offenders?
Can any of you also claim you’ve never driven under the influence, even the morning after? There would be very few people who can actually claim ‘I am holier than thou’.

Were any of you publically outraged with the recent case of the asylum seeker who killed that girl but then wasn’t deported?

Our club should be rewarded for taking this stance on this issue. He has paid his debt to society, if you don’t like it, stand to be an MP and campaign to have higher prison sentences. You can also turn your back on all other offenders and bring back corporal punishment.

I am not downplaying what Luke McCormick did: he killed two young boys and thankfully I don’t have to say this to the faces of the boys’ family. But a decent, democratic, moral and tolerant society should help Luke McCormick back into this society. We also have no right to dictate to Luke McCormick should do.

redjet wrote:

mr_flibble wrote:
Lets get some perspective on this based on FACT rather than emotions that are running high on here.

Firstly anyone who followed his trial and seen footage on You tube will know that he admitted his guilt and showed remorse straight away on the M6. He said ‘I fell asleep, I’m so sorry’. At least he admitted his crime unlike Hughes, who was probably drunk, but did not stop at the scene and only handed himself in once the alcohol was out of his system.

We live in the most tolerant society in the world, which we should be proud about. Encapsulated within that is that a decent society doesn’t just turn its back on offenders. It should help reform and rehabilitate. Luke McCormick deserves the same. Least not forget Nelson Mandela was once a terrorist.

As for the people saying he shouldn’t play football, comes from the pure jealously that this lad’s talent is football. If he can earn good money, he should be allowed to. It’s an option available to all human beings, to make the best of yourselves.

Why should STFC differentiate and separate themselves from any other employer who takes on people who have come out of prison?

For the record Luke McCormick is a very good keeper and I saw him play for PAFC many times. Should he win us a penalty shootout against Man U in the FA Cup next year, the first people to praise him will be those on this site mocking him.

To those threatening to tear up their season tickets, haven’t we heard this all before when PDC joined and many liberalities said the same? I don’t hear people complaining about his political views now? I wonder how many actually carried out their promise last year, and then kept it.

Also to those who’ve threatened to tear up their season tickets, you should also apply your code to all other moral instances. Do you wear clothes that were made in a sweat shop by 6 year olds, is any of your furniture made from wood from the Amazon, do you shop at stores or do business with companies who employ past offenders?
Can any of you also claim you’ve never driven under the influence, even the morning after? There would be very few people who can actually claim ‘I am holier than thou’.

Were any of you publically outraged with the recent case of the asylum seeker who killed that girl but then wasn’t deported?

Our club should be rewarded for taking this stance on this issue. He has paid his debt to society, if you don’t like it, stand to be an MP and campaign to have higher prison sentences. You can also turn your back on all other offenders and bring back corporal punishment.

I am not downplaying what Luke McCormick did: he killed two young boys and thankfully I don’t have to say this to the faces of the boys’ family. But a decent, democratic, moral and tolerant society should help Luke McCormick back into this society. We also have no right to dictate to Luke McCormick should do.

I am sorry but you are totally misguided in your view on this. without going into the detail, the instances you sight are very much more complicated than making the choice of getting in a car being twice over the limit. As a quick example if I didn't buy clothes made by 6 year olds in sweatshops, those 6 year olds would probably starve, I am not saying that is acceptable but its the way it is, and until there is a way to give these kids a decent life in another way its the best of a bad thing. There really is a simple answer unlike shall I get in my car drunk or shouldn't I.

Blazing Riff wrote:
It doesn't matter one toss what Mr. Wray or Oi Den thinks the majority of posters on here do not want McCormick at our club and that's a plain fact. It doesn't matter what your interpretations of the tragic circumstances surrounding this case are or, what your opinions are regarding his reintegration to society. Pro. football is high profile, well supported and under a continuous spotlight. McCormick and Wray are showing incredible naivety if they think he will be a welcome sight on any football pitch in the land. Focusing on Swindon alone, signing this player will alienate many supporters both home and away and really the question, as some have already intimated is, 'Is it really worth it or indeed necessary?'

EastleazeRed wrote:
Lot of new posters on here all of a sudden ? Anyway if we dont sign him another club will , he will get back into football as did lee hughes wether anybody likes it or not.

jontyg wrote:
The judicial system in this country is quite simply a joke by giving out punitive sentences for major crimes.
I believe that JW, PdC and the Board should approach the severely injured Father who lost his two children and ask HIS opinion on this subject and go from there.

mikek wrote:

EastleazeRed wrote:
Lot of new posters on here all of a sudden ? Anyway if we dont sign him another club will , he will get back into football as did lee hughes wether anybody likes it or not.

Exactly that mate as much as many fans may see this as taboo and should never go there, truth is some club will give him a go so why not us. Whatever happens in life and its a fact we all do things we regret and sometimes many things can be with us for the rest of our lives and in Luke's circumstances do people really think not a day goes by where he would wish he could turn the clock back. I say let the Town decide whats best and I will support them through and through. Blimey this time last year the board were getting slated for signing a Fascist as a manager and the rest of that is now history and was the right decision. My only worry for the lad is opposing fans who will tear this guy to shreds and could impact the Town and its players and results. I certainly do feel for the family destroyed by this guys actions and may be it simply is just far too complex to even contemplate.

redjet wrote:

mr_flibble wrote:
Lets get some perspective on this based on FACT rather than emotions that are running high on here.

Firstly anyone who followed his trial and seen footage on You tube will know that he admitted his guilt and showed remorse straight away on the M6. He said ‘I fell asleep, I’m so sorry’. At least he admitted his crime unlike Hughes, who was probably drunk, but did not stop at the scene and only handed himself in once the alcohol was out of his system.

We live in the most tolerant society in the world, which we should be proud about. Encapsulated within that is that a decent society doesn’t just turn its back on offenders. It should help reform and rehabilitate. Luke McCormick deserves the same. Least not forget Nelson Mandela was once a terrorist.

As for the people saying he shouldn’t play football, comes from the pure jealously that this lad’s talent is football. If he can earn good money, he should be allowed to. It’s an option available to all human beings, to make the best of yourselves.

Why should STFC differentiate and separate themselves from any other employer who takes on people who have come out of prison?

For the record Luke McCormick is a very good keeper and I saw him play for PAFC many times. Should he win us a penalty shootout against Man U in the FA Cup next year, the first people to praise him will be those on this site mocking him.

To those threatening to tear up their season tickets, haven’t we heard this all before when PDC joined and many liberalities said the same? I don’t hear people complaining about his political views now? I wonder how many actually carried out their promise last year, and then kept it.

Also to those who’ve threatened to tear up their season tickets, you should also apply your code to all other moral instances. Do you wear clothes that were made in a sweat shop by 6 year olds, is any of your furniture made from wood from the Amazon, do you shop at stores or do business with companies who employ past offenders?
Can any of you also claim you’ve never driven under the influence, even the morning after? There would be very few people who can actually claim ‘I am holier than thou’.

Were any of you publically outraged with the recent case of the asylum seeker who killed that girl but then wasn’t deported?

Our club should be rewarded for taking this stance on this issue. He has paid his debt to society, if you don’t like it, stand to be an MP and campaign to have higher prison sentences. You can also turn your back on all other offenders and bring back corporal punishment.

I am not downplaying what Luke McCormick did: he killed two young boys and thankfully I don’t have to say this to the faces of the boys’ family. But a decent, democratic, moral and tolerant society should help Luke McCormick back into this society. We also have no right to dictate to Luke McCormick should do.

I am sorry but you are totally misguided in your view on this. without going into the detail, the instances you sight are very much more complicated than making the choice of getting in a car being twice over the limit. As a quick example if I didn't buy clothes made by 6 year olds in sweatshops, those 6 year olds would probably starve, I am not saying that is acceptable but its the way it is, and until there is a way to give these kids a decent life in another way its the best of a bad thing. There really is a simple answer unlike shall I get in my car drunk or shouldn't I.

smirg kcab wrote:
Just wondered if this saga is a ploy for jwray to stand down as interim? After all the adver will go back to him and say everyone apart from about 4 don't want him here.and feel the fans are now against him?
Just a thought but watch this space
Onwards and upwards

smirg kcab wrote:
Just wondered if this saga is a ploy for jwray to stand down as interim? After all the adver will go back to him and say everyone apart from about 4 don't want him here.and feel the fans are now against him?
Just a thought but watch this space
Onwards and upwards

the wizard wrote:

smirg kcab wrote:
Just wondered if this saga is a ploy for jwray to stand down as interim? After all the adver will go back to him and say everyone apart from about 4 don't want him here.and feel the fans are now against him?
Just a thought but watch this space
Onwards and upwards

Grim,

I'll bet he has been monitoring it all day, or somebody else has for him.


PS: How the wife's boy friends third cousins aunty these days ? I heard you two were seen in a tryst at B&Q the other day, or was that your twin ? LOL

the don69 wrote:

smirg kcab wrote:
Just wondered if this saga is a ploy for jwray to stand down as interim? After all the adver will go back to him and say everyone apart from about 4 don't want him here.and feel the fans are now against him?
Just a thought but watch this space
Onwards and upwards

Well he should have known the hassle this would cause Grim!it just ain't worth it,for a run of the mill number two keeper,bad mistake by J-Wray!!!!!!!!

Wessex Warrior wrote:

London Red wrote: Like Den I have waited all day before commenting - and in fact what he posted is pretty much along the lines I am thinking . I would also like to point out that driving while using a mobile phone is far more common and far more danagerous than drink driving . Now can every single person on here who has slated Luke - honestly say they have never got behind the wheel while drunk or used their mobile phone? . If not then you are EXACTLY the same as him - you were just lucky not to have caused an accident! . Now I can say that as I grew during a time where education over drink driving was dominant . Now if it is happening to creep back up again - then if someone like Luke can use his "profile" to educate kids to not do it surely as JW says that is a good thing . You can't change the past but you can change the future

I usually agree with what Den says, but your remarks just show what a complete **** you are. But then, everyone on here already knows that.

Blazing Riff wrote:
It doesn't matter one toss what Mr. Wray or Oi Den thinks the majority of posters on here do not want McCormick at our club and that's a plain fact. It doesn't matter what your interpretations of the tragic circumstances surrounding this case are or, what your opinions are regarding his reintegration to society. Pro. football is high profile, well supported and under a continuous spotlight. McCormick and Wray are showing incredible naivety if they think he will be a welcome sight on any football pitch in the land. Focusing on Swindon alone, signing this player will alienate many supporters both home and away and really the question, as some have already intimated is, 'Is it really worth it or indeed necessary?'

graham81 wrote:
This is crazy as far as I'm concerned and the fact he is training already with us? We don't need him that badly. Poor Phil Smith !!! What's happened to mr wray, he was making brilliant decisions up until this point. As far as those who are talking about other drink drivers in the league?!? Who cares, they are not at STFC. We are doing brilliantly at the moment at the club, we do not need to dip into this HEAVILY controversial signing. NOT NEEDED !!!

graham81 wrote:
This is crazy as far as I'm concerned and the fact he is training already with us? We don't need him that badly. Poor Phil Smith !!! What's happened to mr wray, he was making brilliant decisions up until this point. As far as those who are talking about other drink drivers in the league?!? Who cares, they are not at STFC. We are doing brilliantly at the moment at the club, we do not need to dip into this HEAVILY controversial signing. NOT NEEDED !!!

CBCred wrote:
Whilst this was a terrible and avoidable tragedy, there isn't a person on earth who hasn't made a mistake.

Malkym wrote:

Wessex Warrior wrote:

London Red wrote: Like Den I have waited all day before commenting - and in fact what he posted is pretty much along the lines I am thinking . I would also like to point out that driving while using a mobile phone is far more common and far more danagerous than drink driving . Now can every single person on here who has slated Luke - honestly say they have never got behind the wheel while drunk or used their mobile phone? . If not then you are EXACTLY the same as him - you were just lucky not to have caused an accident! . Now I can say that as I grew during a time where education over drink driving was dominant . Now if it is happening to creep back up again - then if someone like Luke can use his "profile" to educate kids to not do it surely as JW says that is a good thing . You can't change the past but you can change the future

I usually agree with what Den says, but your remarks just show what a complete **** you are. But then, everyone on here already knows that.

WW harsh and unfair on LR I think ...and goodness knows I've slated him in the past. He makes some valid points - I take my hat off to anybody who has never driven after drinking..but you can bet your sweet bippy they're in the minority. I've only ever once driven when totally legless and believe me its scary when you try to recollect it because you can't. I remembered the start and end but the inbetween has a complete blur - I would'nt have known if I'd have taken out a bus queue.

I'm no God squad person but doesn't the 'bible say "let he without sin cast the first stone"

As several have said he did the crime he's done his time and deserves a chance to rehabilitate himself.

Does that mean I'm in favour of him being taken on?

I'm with the NO's JW & Paolo, and I don't want to see him in a Town shirt at any price thank you.

Oi Den! wrote:

Blazing Riff wrote:
It doesn't matter one toss what Mr. Wray or Oi Den thinks the majority of posters on here do not want McCormick at our club and that's a plain fact. It doesn't matter what your interpretations of the tragic circumstances surrounding this case are or, what your opinions are regarding his reintegration to society. Pro. football is high profile, well supported and under a continuous spotlight. McCormick and Wray are showing incredible naivety if they think he will be a welcome sight on any football pitch in the land. Focusing on Swindon alone, signing this player will alienate many supporters both home and away and really the question, as some have already intimated is, 'Is it really worth it or indeed necessary?'

Who said my opinion matters any more than anyone else's?
.
For the record, perhaps I need to add that I do not defend or condone McCormick's behaviour for one second. It is the double standards that puzzle me. Getting behind the wheel of a car when you are double the drink driving limit is a serious offence. But I get the impression that McCormick's actions would have gone largely unnoticed if he had crashed into a motorway bridge instead of another car. If you think McCormick should be banned from football for life, fair enough - it's a valid point of view. Let's ban all the others too.
.
And Wiz, if you think McCormick's crime equates to murder, then presumably all the other drink driving footballers are guilty of the equivalent of attempted murder? I'd wager that's never stopped you watching them, live or on the TV.

Oi Den! wrote:

graham81 wrote:
This is crazy as far as I'm concerned and the fact he is training already with us? We don't need him that badly. Poor Phil Smith !!! What's happened to mr wray, he was making brilliant decisions up until this point. As far as those who are talking about other drink drivers in the league?!? Who cares, they are not at STFC. We are doing brilliantly at the moment at the club, we do not need to dip into this HEAVILY controversial signing. NOT NEEDED !!!

Somebody said there were Town players drinking heavily at the Party on the Pitch before driving home? I have no idea whether that's true, but if it is, should we kick them out now? No warnings, summary dismissal?

ellielfc wrote:

CBCred wrote: Whilst this was a terrible and avoidable tragedy, there isn't a person on earth who hasn't made a mistake.

the thing being how many of us have made a mistake that takes the lives of two innocent little boys and wrecks a family?

Blazing Riff wrote:

Oi Den! wrote:

Blazing Riff wrote:
It doesn't matter one toss what Mr. Wray or Oi Den thinks the majority of posters on here do not want McCormick at our club and that's a plain fact. It doesn't matter what your interpretations of the tragic circumstances surrounding this case are or, what your opinions are regarding his reintegration to society. Pro. football is high profile, well supported and under a continuous spotlight. McCormick and Wray are showing incredible naivety if they think he will be a welcome sight on any football pitch in the land. Focusing on Swindon alone, signing this player will alienate many supporters both home and away and really the question, as some have already intimated is, 'Is it really worth it or indeed necessary?'

Who said my opinion matters any more than anyone else's?
.
For the record, perhaps I need to add that I do not defend or condone McCormick's behaviour for one second. It is the double standards that puzzle me. Getting behind the wheel of a car when you are double the drink driving limit is a serious offence. But I get the impression that McCormick's actions would have gone largely unnoticed if he had crashed into a motorway bridge instead of another car. If you think McCormick should be banned from football for life, fair enough - it's a valid point of view. Let's ban all the others too.
.
And Wiz, if you think McCormick's crime equates to murder, then presumably all the other drink driving footballers are guilty of the equivalent of attempted murder? I'd wager that's never stopped you watching them, live or on the TV.

It's not a question of whether or not he should be banned and I never suggested he should. I'm just trying to make the point that by going by the reactions on here, there will be hostility from lots of supporters both home and away if he should ever get on the pitch. Frankly, I also think there will be more hostility than plaudits towards our club from outside and a possible loss of support from within our own ranks if he's signed. So, again, is it worth it or necessary? One other thing, I can't imagine how McCormick himself could possibly cope with the inevitable abuse and he would probably be better off seeking a new, low profile career where he can remain pretty much anonymous.

graham81 wrote:

Oi Den! wrote:

graham81 wrote:
This is crazy as far as I'm concerned and the fact he is training already with us? We don't need him that badly. Poor Phil Smith !!! What's happened to mr wray, he was making brilliant decisions up until this point. As far as those who are talking about other drink drivers in the league?!? Who cares, they are not at STFC. We are doing brilliantly at the moment at the club, we do not need to dip into this HEAVILY controversial signing. NOT NEEDED !!!

Somebody said there were Town players drinking heavily at the Party on the Pitch before driving home? I have no idea whether that's true, but if it is, should we kick them out now? No warnings, summary dismissal?

We are talking about a player who is not already signed at the club, apart from my personal reaction to this guy and what he did (which I will keep to myself) we do not need him, a lot of the fans will hate him which will have implications all over the club. As for the players who drove home after drinking of course there should be implications for them. A ban at the minimum.This guy was twice over the limit. I'm really hoping that u can see this is not a beneficial signing one bit. Besides the personal reasons but for the good and support of STFC. If not god help me

Oi Den! wrote:

Blazing Riff wrote:

Oi Den! wrote:

Blazing Riff wrote: It doesn't matter one toss what Mr. Wray or Oi Den thinks the majority of posters on here do not want McCormick at our club and that's a plain fact. It doesn't matter what your interpretations of the tragic circumstances surrounding this case are or, what your opinions are regarding his reintegration to society. Pro. football is high profile, well supported and under a continuous spotlight. McCormick and Wray are showing incredible naivety if they think he will be a welcome sight on any football pitch in the land. Focusing on Swindon alone, signing this player will alienate many supporters both home and away and really the question, as some have already intimated is, 'Is it really worth it or indeed necessary?'

Who said my opinion matters any more than anyone else's? . For the record, perhaps I need to add that I do not defend or condone McCormick's behaviour for one second. It is the double standards that puzzle me. Getting behind the wheel of a car when you are double the drink driving limit is a serious offence. But I get the impression that McCormick's actions would have gone largely unnoticed if he had crashed into a motorway bridge instead of another car. If you think McCormick should be banned from football for life, fair enough - it's a valid point of view. Let's ban all the others too. . And Wiz, if you think McCormick's crime equates to murder, then presumably all the other drink driving footballers are guilty of the equivalent of attempted murder? I'd wager that's never stopped you watching them, live or on the TV.

It's not a question of whether or not he should be banned and I never suggested he should. I'm just trying to make the point that by going by the reactions on here, there will be hostility from lots of supporters both home and away if he should ever get on the pitch. Frankly, I also think there will be more hostility than plaudits towards our club from outside and a possible loss of support from within our own ranks if he's signed. So, again, is it worth it or necessary? One other thing, I can't imagine how McCormick himself could possibly cope with the inevitable abuse and he would probably be better off seeking a new, low profile career where he can remain pretty much anonymous.

Is it worth it or necessary? Given the inevitable hostility, probably not. But I applaud Wray for having the courage of his convictions. He has met McCormick, clearly believes he is fundamentally a decent person and has given him an opportunity to restart his life and put something back into society. Whatever happens to McCormick from now on, Jeremy Wray can rest easy in the knowledge that he has tried to do something he believes is worthwhile.

Oi Den! wrote:

graham81 wrote:

Oi Den! wrote:

graham81 wrote: This is crazy as far as I'm concerned and the fact he is training already with us? We don't need him that badly. Poor Phil Smith !!! What's happened to mr wray, he was making brilliant decisions up until this point. As far as those who are talking about other drink drivers in the league?!? Who cares, they are not at STFC. We are doing brilliantly at the moment at the club, we do not need to dip into this HEAVILY controversial signing. NOT NEEDED !!!

Somebody said there were Town players drinking heavily at the Party on the Pitch before driving home? I have no idea whether that's true, but if it is, should we kick them out now? No warnings, summary dismissal?

We are talking about a player who is not already signed at the club, apart from my personal reaction to this guy and what he did (which I will keep to myself) we do not need him, a lot of the fans will hate him which will have implications all over the club. As for the players who drove home after drinking of course there should be implications for them. A ban at the minimum.This guy was twice over the limit. I'm really hoping that u can see this is not a beneficial signing one bit. Besides the personal reasons but for the good and support of STFC. If not god help me

I haven't said it would be a beneficial signing. What I am trying to get at is that I think we need to be consistent. Twice the legal limit is about 4 pints. On that basis, I think football probably has a lot more people guilty of "attempted murder" than it would care to admit. The ones who don't actually kill anyone are no better than those who do.

bowralbob wrote:
Done the crime and now done the time. I doubt any of us are fault free and many may have had a time when they were "over the limit" and should not drive. We were just lucky, he was not. Of course the death of a family is terrible, but it can not be changed, it has happened. This young man should be helped he is going to live forever with this shocking guilt. I say if he is good enough give him a chance of getting on with the rest of his football career.

BorisIsTheSpider wrote:
Unless I have missed it, noone has commented on the fact that he has ben training with the club since January. So clearly the club and the players have come to terms with this. Perhaps time for us as fans to wonder how they have managed it. After all, and as we know, many of the players have young families.

Oi Den! wrote:

Blazing Riff wrote:

Oi Den! wrote:

Blazing Riff wrote:
It doesn't matter one toss what Mr. Wray or Oi Den thinks the majority of posters on here do not want McCormick at our club and that's a plain fact. It doesn't matter what your interpretations of the tragic circumstances surrounding this case are or, what your opinions are regarding his reintegration to society. Pro. football is high profile, well supported and under a continuous spotlight. McCormick and Wray are showing incredible naivety if they think he will be a welcome sight on any football pitch in the land. Focusing on Swindon alone, signing this player will alienate many supporters both home and away and really the question, as some have already intimated is, 'Is it really worth it or indeed necessary?'

Who said my opinion matters any more than anyone else's?
.
For the record, perhaps I need to add that I do not defend or condone McCormick's behaviour for one second. It is the double standards that puzzle me. Getting behind the wheel of a car when you are double the drink driving limit is a serious offence. But I get the impression that McCormick's actions would have gone largely unnoticed if he had crashed into a motorway bridge instead of another car. If you think McCormick should be banned from football for life, fair enough - it's a valid point of view. Let's ban all the others too.
.
And Wiz, if you think McCormick's crime equates to murder, then presumably all the other drink driving footballers are guilty of the equivalent of attempted murder? I'd wager that's never stopped you watching them, live or on the TV.

It's not a question of whether or not he should be banned and I never suggested he should. I'm just trying to make the point that by going by the reactions on here, there will be hostility from lots of supporters both home and away if he should ever get on the pitch. Frankly, I also think there will be more hostility than plaudits towards our club from outside and a possible loss of support from within our own ranks if he's signed. So, again, is it worth it or necessary? One other thing, I can't imagine how McCormick himself could possibly cope with the inevitable abuse and he would probably be better off seeking a new, low profile career where he can remain pretty much anonymous.

Is it worth it or necessary? Given the inevitable hostility, probably not. But I applaud Wray for having the courage of his convictions. He has met McCormick, clearly believes he is fundamentally a decent person and has given him an opportunity to restart his life and put something back into society. Whatever happens to McCormick from now on, Jeremy Wray can rest easy in the knowledge that he has tried to do something he believes is worthwhile.

M-Y-O-B wrote:
This will generate more hassle than worth for a second string keeper.
There are going to be varied opinions but the point is this bloke was well over the limit so wasn't unlucky with an extra half,also hasn't actually done the time because as we know in this country nobody does. 7 years and 4 months should have been exactly that!!!!
On the same token in the eyes of the law he has served what they wanted him to and should be allowed to continue with his life.
The real loser here is the mother/wife of the boys/husband who hasn't got another chance and has missed out on so much for one person's stupidity and that is a terrible shame.

billbst wrote:
This has seriously challenged me today but I felt it was necessary to make a decision about what I should do. I checked to see how the family, Phil and Amanda Peak might be feeling. Reading an article from last year in the Manchester Evening Post told me. "It is absolutely disgraceful. We lose our sons and are sentenced to a lifetime of heartache and McCormick is sentenced to bed and breakfast in jail. My lads are missing out on their lives while he gets to watch Sky TV in prison. "He is even allowed to do his training in there." That was when he started to get his day release from the prison and it is not the most emotive comment. I think their view will dictate the majority reaction on this. Consequently I have to say it will be impossible for Luke McCormick to play without enormous abuse towards him personally and any club he is at. The thoughts about Luke McCormick being able to act as an ambassador to deter others from drinking is plausible. Given some of the comments above about the demerits of drinking or using the phone whilst driving are interesting. Luke McCormick was used in a campaign against using mobiles and driving. (mobile in one hand and trying to save shots from players) Did it work? Was the club right to give him a second chance? Yes. In doing so however they pass the challenge on to us the paying public. To quote JWray " “We did not go courting this. I did not go looking for sensationalist headlines. It was presented to us." Much as I love my football and STFC it is only entertainment. IF Luke McCormick is signed up I will simply not take advantage of my season ticket. No threat to go anywhere else because STFC will always be my club. Would it be different if he worked at my local supermarket? Yes, I would still go there because it is not about my choice of entertainment.

Oi Den! wrote:

graham81 wrote:

Oi Den! wrote:

graham81 wrote:
This is crazy as far as I'm concerned and the fact he is training already with us? We don't need him that badly. Poor Phil Smith !!! What's happened to mr wray, he was making brilliant decisions up until this point. As far as those who are talking about other drink drivers in the league?!? Who cares, they are not at STFC. We are doing brilliantly at the moment at the club, we do not need to dip into this HEAVILY controversial signing. NOT NEEDED !!!

Somebody said there were Town players drinking heavily at the Party on the Pitch before driving home? I have no idea whether that's true, but if it is, should we kick them out now? No warnings, summary dismissal?

We are talking about a player who is not already signed at the club, apart from my personal reaction to this guy and what he did (which I will keep to myself) we do not need him, a lot of the fans will hate him which will have implications all over the club. As for the players who drove home after drinking of course there should be implications for them. A ban at the minimum.This guy was twice over the limit. I'm really hoping that u can see this is not a beneficial signing one bit. Besides the personal reasons but for the good and support of STFC. If not god help me

I haven't said it would be a beneficial signing. What I am trying to get at is that I think we need to be consistent. Twice the legal limit is about 4 pints. On that basis, I think football probably has a lot more people guilty of "attempted murder" than it would care to admit. The ones who don't actually kill anyone are no better than those who do.

madterrier wrote:

Malkym wrote:

Wessex Warrior wrote:

London Red wrote: Like Den I have waited all day before commenting - and in fact what he posted is pretty much along the lines I am thinking . I would also like to point out that driving while using a mobile phone is far more common and far more danagerous than drink driving . Now can every single person on here who has slated Luke - honestly say they have never got behind the wheel while drunk or used their mobile phone? . If not then you are EXACTLY the same as him - you were just lucky not to have caused an accident! . Now I can say that as I grew during a time where education over drink driving was dominant . Now if it is happening to creep back up again - then if someone like Luke can use his "profile" to educate kids to not do it surely as JW says that is a good thing . You can't change the past but you can change the future

I usually agree with what Den says, but your remarks just show what a complete **** you are. But then, everyone on here already knows that.

WW harsh and unfair on LR I think ...and goodness knows I've slated him in the past. He makes some valid points - I take my hat off to anybody who has never driven after drinking..but you can bet your sweet bippy they're in the minority. I've only ever once driven when totally legless and believe me its scary when you try to recollect it because you can't. I remembered the start and end but the inbetween has a complete blur - I would'nt have known if I'd have taken out a bus queue. I'm no God squad person but doesn't the 'bible say "let he without sin cast the first stone" As several have said he did the crime he's done his time and deserves a chance to rehabilitate himself. Does that mean I'm in favour of him being taken on? I'm with the NO's JW & Paolo, and I don't want to see him in a Town shirt at any price thank you.

Malkym - he's p****d me right off because of his holier than thou, arrogant, offensive attitude to me on another post. And as he stands on the opposite side of this particular argument to me, I'll say what I think about him. I can't stand him. In any event, I don't think this discussion should stray too much into the overall moral arguments of drink driving, or second chances, or 'right to work'. No one is saying he shouldn't have a right to work - but I am saying that football is an entertainment business, supporters pay the entertainers' wages, and I don't want him at our club. Image and publicity is important in the entertainment business. Let him go somewhere else if other fans don't mind paying his wages. But I'm against him coming here and would not go to a game if he was in the squad.

EastleazeRed wrote:
Although i dont condone what he did , he made a spur of the moment decision that will haunt him for the rest of his life. At sometime in our lives we will all make a bad mistake or error of judgement , but most of the time the consequences are not so dire. He has served his time and must be allowed to move on with his life.

Lanky wrote:
I don't condone what he did whatsoever. In fact to be honest, I would rather he wasn't at this club and this was all happening elsewhere.

But at the same time, everyone is saying "what if it was your/JWs son" - but what if this guy was your son? A moment of madness (brought on himself) has ruined the life of 3 other people, along with his own. He has served the time that the justice system has allocated (that is the courts decision of the punishment so whatever your view, that won't be changed). What do you expect him to do when he gets out? Stay indoors all day? The bloke will need to make a living, so if someone is giving him the chance to do what he is actually good at, he should take it.

I saw a good tweet earlier that a percentage of his wages for the rest of his career should go to the families of the victims - so his "luxury" wage is reduced and put to good use. But what is also interesting is that every is assuming what the family must think? For all we know, they may have forgiven in order to gain closure and would want him to get on with his life. Its dangerous to put words into their mouths based on how you think they should react.

So as I said, I do think this isn't a great idea and wish it was happening at another club, but I think JW makes very valid points.

mrwoo wrote:
Sanctimonious lot arn't you. Yes the outcome of his actions were tragic and I'm sure he regrets them, however are you lot suggesting that he should never work again?
How many of us have ever driven after a pint or two, I have and I suspect most others have. How many of us have ever been involved in an accident?
An interesting and true stat, 80% of all fatal accidents are caused by SOBER drivers!

abbotboy wrote:
swindon1984, he was drunk, he got in his car and drove like a madman, he hit the other car, which killed the two lads and put the father in a wheelchair for life, if you think that should be regarded as a minimal crime, then your out of order, he didnt even serve his sentence, was that for good behaviour !!!!!!!
he should go away and craWL UNDER THE NEAREST TABLE.......

ssr wrote:
He's a MURDERER!!!!!!
Made a decision to drink drive!!!
Has not served his sentence as only half way through.
SHOULD HAVE GOT LIFE
Swindon Town bosses are prats if they think it won't affect attendance and therefore club income!!!!

The Patrician wrote:
What he did and why are in the past. Point is he hasn't played for 4 years and he's likely to cause hassle from the opposition every time he steps on the pitch. Questions is is he worth it to the club ?

Rebel_phish wrote:
I am not condoning for one minute what LM has done. It was totally out of order. The length of the sentence and time served is not of our, the general publics making. That is for the courts. For the record- He has not committed murder, he has not committed manslaughter, he has been sentenced for causing death by dangerous driving and driving with excess alcohol. The result is still the same though, 2 young boys died and the father seriously injured, however it is wrapped. With all the out-pouring on this and other threads, it shows just how far we, as a modern society, have come since the time of the Romans. It sounds that most people wont be happy till we get public flogging of all the wrong do'ers. Perhaps it could be done prior to kick-off on a Saturday. If we go back to the days of An Eye For An Eye ... a Life for a Life ... There will be no need for rehabilitation, social workers, prisons etc as the offenders will either be maimed, dis-figured or dead. That is not a society I want to be part of, thank-you. You may not like it, may totally disagree with it. But the mark of a moral and just society is one that does not have the death penalty. Once sentence is served and the courts deem the ex-offender is fit to be released and to be re-intergrated back into society through parole and rehabilitation, the wider community has to play their part. If Only It Was That Simple. Mr Wray, I admire your good intentions towards this offender, but I wonder if you really thought that it would cause such a voracious back-lash.

Rebel_phish wrote:
Swindon1984

I have meticulously read all the posts on this and the other threads before I answered. I have seen your comments and you must feel like a voice in the wilderness.

I was not going to comment at all, though I did post one the other day giving an experience a colleague of mine went through about 25 years ago. He killed 4 people in a head-on crash. He killed himself 6 years later because he could not live with the guilt.

My parents lost a son at the age of 8, in tragic curcumstances, just before I was born. Not going into details here, not the right place.

The pain, anger, anguish is all very real, and lasts a very long time, but does not change the facts. Nothing will bring my brother back. The boy who killed him (he was of similar age) was not branded a murderer, but he too has to live with the same fact that he killed another person. Does he not have a human right to fulfil his life even though my brother never will.

The only difference is imo is that LM would be in the public eye.

Amberflame wrote:

Rebel_phish wrote:
Swindon1984

I have meticulously read all the posts on this and the other threads before I answered. I have seen your comments and you must feel like a voice in the wilderness.

I was not going to comment at all, though I did post one the other day giving an experience a colleague of mine went through about 25 years ago. He killed 4 people in a head-on crash. He killed himself 6 years later because he could not live with the guilt.

My parents lost a son at the age of 8, in tragic curcumstances, just before I was born. Not going into details here, not the right place.

The pain, anger, anguish is all very real, and lasts a very long time, but does not change the facts. Nothing will bring my brother back. The boy who killed him (he was of similar age) was not branded a murderer, but he too has to live with the same fact that he killed another person. Does he not have a human right to fulfil his life even though my brother never will.

The only difference is imo is that LM would be in the public eye.

A very heartfelt post. Your last part is the sticking point for me. In Mr McCormick's case yes he does have the right according to the law to continue with his life but i feel to even contemplate coming back to professional football knowing he will be in the public eye smacks of arrogance and callousness.

And the point some have made that he probably knows nothing but football is a weak argument. Retrain, do something out of the public eye. As i said in a previous post the family of the two boys he killed should have some solice.

abbotboy wrote:
No swindon 1984, he is not a murderer, but he did kill those two boys and left their dad in a wheelchair for life. hows that for the truth, not bellendrey..........

abbotboy wrote:
my opinion, he was driving the car, which he was using as a weapon, he likked those two lads as sure as day is day. so in mymind that makes him the murderer. my problem is the legal system that let him off with 3 and half years for the offence. do you have any brothers or father?.