Mark1968 wrote:

---

KK wrote:

---

Jeff Stelling wrote:

---

Bizarre decision on Evans. Everyone one this forum must have done the same at some point in their lives, so this hypocrisy is baffling.

---

 Wrong.  I haven't.  I am shocked that you think that everyone has.  We must live in very different worlds.

Baroness Newlove (whose husband Gary was stabbed to death by strangers outside their house in Warrington) spoke recently of those middle class self-righteous who buy their freetrade coffee in disposable cups, but whose use of cocaine is fuelling the drugs war which has caused so many stabbings in London this year.   It was not widely reported, but then I suppose a lot of the media fall into this bracket!

 

---

 Spot on and well said KK, the majority of people (like myself) have never tried drugs and certainly not cocaine.  The pro drugs lobby have the loudest voice these days.  I pointed out weeks ago that Evans was fuelling an industry that is responsible for huge levels of violence throughout the world and as you can imagine it did not go down well...lol.  There are certainly people on here with plenty to feel guilty about - not that they probably do.

As for the decision re Evans, most non tennis fans I know do not want him representing our country again in Davis Cup.  As for tennis fans the general consensus is that he has served his punishment, albeit to lenient and should now be treated like any other player with his ranking, NONE are outraged at him having to play pre qualifiers unlike those on here who like it not just need to accept the decision ( it won't change ), and get on with enjoying the tennis.

Certain players seem to gain cult status on here amongst a minority of very loud (they will be here again after this post) board members.  Marcus Willis was once someone who could do no wrong despite doing very little right and now Evans is flavour of the month.  It will be someone else soon.

---

 What a patronising post. If I want to be lectured to, I will go somewhere else thanks . 

hoots wrote:

---

Mark1968 wrote:

---

KK wrote:

---

Jeff Stelling wrote:

---

Bizarre decision on Evans. Everyone one this forum must have done the same at some point in their lives, so this hypocrisy is baffling.

---

 Wrong.  I haven't.  I am shocked that you think that everyone has.  We must live in very different worlds.

Baroness Newlove (whose husband Gary was stabbed to death by strangers outside their house in Warrington) spoke recently of those middle class self-righteous who buy their freetrade coffee in disposable cups, but whose use of cocaine is fuelling the drugs war which has caused so many stabbings in London this year.   It was not widely reported, but then I suppose a lot of the media fall into this bracket!

 

---

 Spot on and well said KK, the majority of people (like myself) have never tried drugs and certainly not cocaine.  The pro drugs lobby have the loudest voice these days.  I pointed out weeks ago that Evans was fuelling an industry that is responsible for huge levels of violence throughout the world and as you can imagine it did not go down well...lol.  There are certainly people on here with plenty to feel guilty about - not that they probably do.

As for the decision re Evans, most non tennis fans I know do not want him representing our country again in Davis Cup.  As for tennis fans the general consensus is that he has served his punishment, albeit to lenient and should now be treated like any other player with his ranking, NONE are outraged at him having to play pre qualifiers unlike those on here who like it not just need to accept the decision ( it won't change ), and get on with enjoying the tennis.

Certain players seem to gain cult status on here amongst a minority of very loud (they will be here again after this post) board members.  Marcus Willis was once someone who could do no wrong despite doing very little right and now Evans is flavour of the month.  It will be someone else soon.

---

 What a patronising post. If I want to be lectured to, I will go somewhere else thanks . 

---

 I don't think it's patronising - it's just his view and he obviously feels it strongly - the majority of this board don't agree so it takes a bit of chutzpah to be so strong about it.

My problem is that the majority of MY non-tennis fan friends actually think Dan should have been given a wildcard  - a couple for the very simple reason that it's grossly unfair on Evan Hoyt etc. otherwise and that overrides the yes/no debate re Dan. After all, for many, the wimbly play-offs is a huge deal. (I did have to explain the system to the first ! And I tried not to be biased) 

Edit

christ wrote:

---

Mark1968 wrote:

---

Yes CD, whilst I'm not bothered that his is playing pre qualies I did say in an earlier post that this has cost someone else a place in the draw, he should walk through.
The majority here ( the few that post, most just read ) may not agree with me but this board is no way a reflection on the opinions of the wider society whatever our opinions are.

---

 Odd again. I see no reason to assume that this board is not "a reflection on the opinions of the wider society" - it seems to have people on both sides of the argument, just like the real world, and people that are totally unprepared to listen to other people that hold opposing views, again just like the real world.

It appears that your view is that "wider society" agrees with you, and not with the "pro-Evans" faction (that don't) - I am not sure that this is true, but if so it is a sorry reflection on the way the the "wider society" view rehabilitation and forgiveness.

-- Edited by christ on Thursday 21st of June 2018 11:02:37 AM

---

 For the simple reason that this board has a few thousand members where as the country has 70 million people, hope this helps.

Edit

Also, from what I have seen on comments on websites (eg newpaper columns with comments sections), many of those who perhaps don't follow tennis, also don't understand the situation. Comments like "drug cheats shouldn't be given favours" shows a lack of understanding. Dan took cocaine. Stupid ? Yes. But out of competition it is not even banned by the tennis authorities. But whatever your opinion on the rights or wrongs of the situation, it was clearly NOT an attempt to cheat. Those that don't follow tennis as closely as we do, just hear the words "drugs ban" and jump to the conclusion that this was PEDs and an attempt to cheat.

Here are a couple of examples of the comments I have seen from the Mail and the Telegraph comments section

"Right decision. He had chances in his life that most people do not get and he chose to do drugs. His choice, his loss. All drug cheats should feel lucky to have a another chance to compete at their sport."

"I have no idea the background to his case but he was banned and is now making his way back up. By actively helping people get back up you're projecting that the ban wasn't so terrible, we'll pretend it didn't happen and treat you the same as all those who didn't cheat."

Dan was guilty of being an idiot, but he was NOT a cheat.

christ wrote:

---

Odd. I would have thought that the majority of non-tennis fan folk wouldn't give a stuff about which tennis players get which positions in which tournaments. Certainly most of my non-tennis fan friends haven't really heard of Dan Evans, and had no idea that qualification wild cards even existed (I'm fairly sure that they didn't really appreciate that "qualifying tournaments" were even a thing).

The justice system in this country is fairly clear: serve your punishment and the slate is wiped clean (except for certain politically charged things like sex crimes). In most walks of life it is even illegal to discriminate against someone on the basis of their history. But here we have a player (if we consider the "debt" paid) that has consistently outperformed his ranking and his peers over the last few weeks, and yet the AELTC is unswayed, and the hang-em and flog-em brigade cannot bring themselves to consider time-served as an acceptable principle.

---

yes. The majority of my non-tennis fans (who fall into the first para you describe) believe strongly in the second half and so, without really knowing much more, say that if you've done the crime and served the time, it's over.

And completely agree with Bob - the lack of understanding of 'cheating' is fine is you're a Joe public member but unforgivable from press members who ought to know better.