Random ideas for ELT people, plus guest blogs & travel notes

Alex Higgins, with Jimmy White in the background

Former snooker world champion Alex Higgins died last month after, as the newspapers routinely and rather predictably put it, ‘a long battle with throat cancer’. This is a rather odd way of expressing it, since Higgins carried on smoking tobacco and drinking copious amounts of Guinness during his chemotherapy treatment. It’s a mystery how the battle managed to last so long.

Higgins soared like a meteor across the world of snooker in the 70s and early 80s. Some say he was the greatest player ever, despite the fact that he won very few major tournaments. With his audacious style, astonishing ability and frantic high-speed approach to this sedate game, he was big box office at the time when the sport was becoming a TV attraction.

I learnt to play snooker at university and was reasonably good at it by the time I started watching Higgins on TV in the 1970s. When you can play a bit, you recognise gob-smacking talent. He was the kind of player who brought crowds to their feet.

A unique showman and genius has therefore passed away.

And yet…

Higgins was a compulsive gambler and alcoholic, famous for his temper tantrums and violent behaviour towards other players (and to his various partners). He even threatened to have an opponent shot.

Here are some of the details of his tempestuous life, as related by Clive Everton in The Observer and The Guardian.

In 1986, when asked to take a drugs test during the UK Championship, Higgins head-butted the official who made the request, which earned him a £12,000 fine and five-tournament ban as well as a court appearance, where he was handed a £250 fine for assault and criminal damage.

Money worries were escalating as Higgins’s gambling continued unchecked, and he was banned for an entire season after punching another official in the stomach in 1990 after losing a second-round match in the World Championship. Around the same time, he threatened to have his Northern Irish Catholic rival Dennis Taylor killed, saying: “I come from Shankill and you come from Coalisland, and the next time you are in Northern Ireland, I will have you shot.”

On his return from suspension, he was again in the news after a row with his girlfriend, Siobhan Kidd, a psychology graduate he had met while she was working as a waitress. When she locked him inside her flat, he attempted to crawl round her building on a ledge, only to plunge 25 feet to the pavement, breaking bones in his foot.

A couple of weeks later, on crutches, he displayed farcical courage in getting through a round of the 1989 European Open and, as his condition improved, won the Irish Championship shortly afterwards. No longer hopping but limping, he won the Irish Masters by beating Stephen Hendry, who was to win seven world titles in the 1990s, 9-8 in the final. It was the last title he ever won.

His last match on the circuit was in August 1997 in a qualifying event in Plymouth. He lost 5-1, became truculent, was escorted from the venue by police and was found at 4am sprawled on the ground outside a nightclub, the victim, so he claimed, of an unprovoked assault with an iron bar. Quickly discharging himself from hospital, he made his way to the Manchester home of a girlfriend, Holly Hayse, who stabbed him with a kitchen knife when an altercation broke out. Higgins declined to give evidence against her.

Many people have compared Higgins to another Protestant Northern Irishman, Manchester United footballer George Best, the greatest-ever football player from these islands.

George Best, on one of his bad hair/bad sideburns days..

As someone who grew up marveling at Best’s talents (despite the fact I supported the other Manchester team), I find the comparisons between Best and Higgins a bit of a problem.

Best was certainly troubled and had alcohol and relationship problems, but as far as I know, he only resorted to violence on the field, and against other players who had tried to maim him with a crippling tackle.

Reading the obituaries about Higgins, I fear that we’re in another of those ‘let’s forgive him – after all, he was a genius’ situations. The fact is, Alex Higgins was a violent alcoholic and gambler, who caused mayhem to people around him, including his close family. If he hadn’t been one of the best snooker players in the world, what would people have thought about him?

Unfortunately, the comparison that comes to my mind is not with George Best, but with Roman Polanski, guilty of a terrible crime against a young girl, but ‘forgiven’ by all and sundry. Yet another ‘flawed genius’.

If you want to read a candid report of the Polanski case, the following link is journalist Johann Hari’s article about it.

http://johannhari.com/2010/07/13/congratulations-polanski-defenders-now-the-child-rapist-walks-unpunished

Comments on: "Death of another ‘flawed genius’" (21)

  1. Hi Ken and thank you for this post.

    My dad is a great snooker fan so he will be quite sad when I tell him Alex Higgins died, but he will be even more sad about the life Higgins led.

    That is what always worries me when kids say they admire so-and-so the singer or so-and-so the football player, who may be excellent and talented, but lacks in something much more imprtant to me – character. Because for me talented and good character are an inseparable package. Of course not all talented people have the ideal life which sets an example for others, but still I can’t help feeling frustrated and sorry for them (how can those two be combined? I do not know!) for not being able to combine their genius with a normal life.

    About Polanski, what can I say? Apart from the fact (and I am repeating myself here, have mentioned it multiple times in conversations and on Twitter) that I think any crime against children and especially molestation is the worst kind of crime for me. Is house arrest in a chalet in Gstaad the punishment for a child-molester?

    Sorry if my thoughts are not very coherent, Ken. It’s an issue I often think of – what role models children and young people have. It is a shame that these geniuses are “flawed”, as you very well put it.

    Thanks for another great post – as I have said, your posts always make me think and thank you so much for that!

    Many thanks,
    Vicky

    • Ken Wilson said:

      Thanks, Vicky,

      I suppose for the sake of balance, we should start a list of people of prodigious talent who also exhibit more stable and admirable life-styles.

      Two cricket examples come to mind immediately, the Indian batsman Sachin Tendulkar, the highest run-scorer of all time, and Muttiah Muralitharan, the brilliant Sri Lankan bowler who retired last week, having taken his 800th wicket.

      Those of you stifling yawns at the mention of cricket might be more interested to know that Muralitharan (usually known as Murali) is a Tamil who has taken a hands-on attitude to helping the beleaguered Sri Lankan Tamil community. He accompanied convoys of aid to the Tamil areas, and managed to prevent truck-loads of essential supplied being syphoned off by the authorities in non-Tamil areas. Soft and gentle in interview, Murali has proved himself tough as old boots when it was necessary to be.

  2. Hi Ken,

    I think that another question would be why these ‘genii’ always seem to self-destruct or come to lead such flawed lifestyles. Is it because such adoration makes them think they are somehow better or more worthy than the rest of us? Perhaps.

    Personally, I don’t disregard the life anyone has lead just because they are a genius. George Best would never be the best footballer for me as I’ll always think of the drinking and womanizing. However, I have to say that I never saw him in his heyday (before my time).

    I wonder if the same will be said of Paul Gascoigne, Amy Winehouse (to throw a musical example into the mix) et al when they leave this world. I somehow doubt it.

    • Ken Wilson said:

      Mike,

      I sort of agree, and my attitude to Best is probably flawed (but see my answer to Gavin’s post below). As for Gascoigne, I suppose the best you can say is that, willingly or unwillingly, he has allowed himself to get treatment, and hopefully finding out about the sad results of his dysfunctional behaviour might have an effect on how people see these kinds of thing.

      Amy is another good example – and the problem at the moment is that the abuse she inflicts on herself is not as yet visible to the general public. I hope she cleans up before we see pictures of her looking as wasted as those last pictures of Higgins.

  3. Ken,

    Perhaps this article will help in terms of attitudes:

    http://www.journallive.co.uk/lifestyle-news/newcastle-features/2010/06/09/world-cup-sees-increase-in-domestic-violence-61634-26614809/

    It looks to be all about virile young men and their amazing talent with balls – which appears to be able to overcome any ‘little’ issues of domestic abuse or violence to others. In terms of George Best, note the wonderful and colourful quote:

    “I think we all like to give the wife a smack.”

    I don’t see much of a difference between dealing out violence on the football field (even in retaliation) or dealing it out off the pitch (or threatening to, at least). It’s all little boys who never grew up, were paid too much money, given too much adulation and told they were so special they could do what they liked.

    Best is as bad as Higgins and anyone else who uses power, money or talent to cause harm (physical or mental) to anyone else because they think they can.

    Gavin

    • Ken Wilson said:

      Hi Gavin,

      I didn’t know that quote from George Best and am monumentally depressed to hear it.

      My awareness of Best is more or less the same as any Mancunian growing up during his ‘glory years’ at Manchester United. However, I did know a girl who worked in his clothes shop in the centre of Manchester. She said he was absolutely lovely, just a piss-poor business person, always seeing the best (no pun intended) in the people he did business with, and being constantly let down.

      And (hate to admit this) I quite enjoyed listening to what his hapless wife Alex said about him on I’m A Celebrity, Get Me Out Of This Sodding Jungle, or whatever that programme was called. Alex said that he could barely tie his own shoelaces, but she seemed to enjoy her years with him.

      And while I agree with you that retaliatory violence is still violence, I somehow understand when people turn round and punch someone who tackles them. Did it myself during a school rugby match and got sent off. I remember seeing Best playing at Chelsea, when a tackle catapulted him off the pitch and onto the running track that went around the pitch in those days. In addition to the pain of the tackle, Best had bleeding shale burns on his leg.

      He got up and even shook hands with the man who tackled him. The fact that on other occasions, he thumped someone is reprehensible but understandable.

      • Ken,

        To be honest, if two grown men who are famous for kicking or potting balls want to also kick the hell out of each other, then (even though I don’t find the idea particularly acceptable) I’d let natural selection take its course and hope the sporting gene pool climbs out of the cess pool as a result…

        I’m not sure I’d think the same about ‘giving the wife a smack’ – and thus, as gentlemanly as he may have sometimes been when he was tackled, Best can only remain a brutish, violent boor in my eyes.

        Gavin

  4. Thanks, Ken.

    Snooker has a special place in my heart. I also marveled at what Higgins, Hendry, Davis et al could do on the green felt.

    I spent most of my high school days hovering over the number 1 table at Charlie’s Pool Hall in a small town in Nova Scotia. I learned so much from the old guys who beat me for years, then thanked them as I began to beat the other young guys around me.

    How does this even remotely connect to my life as an EFL teacher now? Well, I’ve shared my love of snooker (back then), and my recent love of golf (now) with many students over the years. I guess talking about effort, passion and determination through any metaphor is useful for young people.

    Thanks for your post, and the good memories it brought back.

    • Ken Wilson said:

      Hi Steven,

      where in Nova Scotia? I’m off for my customary break on Prince Edward Island next week.

      The one expression I love about snooker, is that being good at it is indicative of a ‘mis-spent youth’. What nonsense! Spending hours honing those wonderful skills is better than hanging around street corners, isn’t it?🙂

  5. I know this is a very serious topic… so I hope you’ll forgive me. But I was under the impression you were a Fulham fan Ken. Don’t tell me that you at some point (gasp) switched allegiance?!

    • Ken Wilson said:

      Born in Salford, Darren, surrounded by Manchester United fans, but me and my best mate at primary school decided to support City. They flattered to deceive around 1970 and it’s been downhill ever since…

      Lived near Stamford Bridge when I first moved to London, but never felt any affinity with that place, over-run as it was at the time by London’s best hooligans. Moved to Fulham, and have now lived here for almost twice as long as I ever lived in Salford.

      Was seduced by the bucolic charm of Craven Cottage as soon as I set foot in the place, and have been a season ticket holder since they arrived in the Premiership ten years ago.

  6. I’m gonna move on from Snooker and Football players and the um, idea that somehow the sports gene is somehow the root of the problem or even um, going to er die out

    (ya what???)

    And I’m going to instead hone in on the issue of how men like to talk a lot about the equality and yet somehow go on ahead and support the men who do these crimes, who spout that as we live in “equal age” we should put women and children in further danger from these men.

    We do not live in an equal age.

    There are not 50% or even 30% of women in top management positions.

    What percentage of the population do females make?

    But yes, that would be because women are genetically programmed, of course, to be at home instead.

    We simply, bottom-line, do not live in an age where a woman’s voice is respected.

    The idea that the greater majority of men respect women and their opinions is a complete illusion. Whether it’s the player on the dating scene doing his “thang,” the husband who smacks his wife a bit or the man in the office who slaps up his mates for a promotion because surely “x” is just gonna go have babies anyway, we do not live in a world where a woman is a man’s peer.

    I don’t know if you know this, but when Angela Merkel was running for Chancellor here, I can not even begin to count how many men I heard say

    “yeah, she’s bright but I wouldn’t f*** her”

    As if, somehow, whether or not said by the most disgusting bald, fat men – whether or not they could get into a woman’s bed made some kind of difference on whether or not she should or could be elected to lead a country.

    We do not live in an equal age.

    Making a gentle nod and/or gentle sigh towards the female of the species does not make women equal.

    It does not give her the rights and privileges as being male.

    Saying that men shouldn’t hit women does not mean – does not equate to men thinkng that women should be equal.

    And the proof is all around us, in every aspect of our society.

    What is the sentence for raping a woman?

    What is the sentence for robbing a bank?

    What is the sentence for abusing a 13 year old girl?

    We do not leave in an equal age.

    well… better wrap this up, Ken, sorry about getting on my high horse on yer blog, what can I say – I did really think twice about adding my thoughts here, especially having spent the morning with a senior level female director of an international company yet being mobbed (a German term), having spent the evening with another powerful woman whose husband can’t take her success or ambition, knowing another woman who was callously, emotionally abused by a DonJuan – and all I can do, really, is sigh and sigh… and think no, oh no, this world has not made any of the changes the suffrogrates and bra-burners fought for.

    All that has been created in the last 50 years is an illusion – a permission to display women openly in sexual positions on common advertising billboards and we all know it.

    We do not live in an age of female equality.

    • Ken Wilson said:

      Karenne…

      little acorns…

      Sometimes blogs spark off something at a tangent and very important, which is what you’ve done here.

      I would like to paste this in as a new blog and get people talking about this wider topic. What do you think?

      And as an ancillary topic – how do you think this wonderful business that you and I work in rates on the equality scale? I know you’ve talked about this before, but how does it rate in terms of the things you’ve just said?

      • It depends on where you are🙂
        It depends on what you’re doing…
        It depends on whether or not you’ve got a great ‘male” mentor helping

        (that sounds awful… but no, um, it’s simply like that in life today, it’s not an equal world unless someone decides to help.

        And that by the way, tends to be right across the board, in all industries (re my note above about international company, I just had this discussion!)

        But anyway, re your request – hmm, perhaps I shouldn’t have been so passionately high-horsey, it happens to have been a particularly long and tiring 10 days but of course, Ken, not a problem.

        And while I am back here, I’ve been meaning to do this for sometime –

        I want to applaud you, Ken, seriously and sincerely as I’ve noticed your amazing line-up of featured posts over the last year

        – posts which happen to often be written by women

        – it is really an amazing thing you have done and are doing: inviting and listening to the voices of so many incredible, authentic, intelligent, articulate female writers.

        And it is so, so, so much more than so many others are doing: there are many who “talk” through life while doing something else entirely and it’s not so common to find those who “walk” so even I don’t always comment, I am always impressed.

        Thank you for sharing your space online, as someone who has a significant voice, a presence in our field so who could have very easily chosen to create a blog that was only about himself – you didn’t and my hat doffs – thank you for making your blog about the community you are a part of.

        K

  7. p.s if you do post up comments, do do a wee bit of editing on the typos!
    K

  8. Peter Whiley said:

    Thanks, Ken, for posting another superb, open, heartfelt blog article, which states your position clearly, but also provokes lots of comments from the likes of me and others. You are not afraid to show Higgins for what he was, and raise the spectre of Polanski and others, too.

    Here in Poland, few people express disgust or disapproval of Polanski and his appalling behaviour. A Polish actress did come forward recently, and state that he had demanded she come to bed with him, for the price of a starring role in a film of his, several years ago. Further evidence of his immorality and worse, but still no negativity in Polish society about him. Only a Polish doctor, a friend of mine, has said that Polanski’s sick.

    ‘Flawed geniuses’ indeed, but why? Who is to blame? Certainly the press who build them up, only to knock them down, and then pay generous tribute when they die, perhaps because they feel guilty about what they previously wrote. Why are so few articles written in the newspapers, that deal objectively with the star/celebrity’s lifestyle, as your article does, Ken?

    One amazing fact about Higgins is that he had 48 operations on his mouth/throat region. He battled to the last, and that is what I liked about him. He was a battler in the heroic sense, there. Ronnie O’Sullivan is my favourite player in the snooker world, yet I know that one day, there willl be some horrible news about his behaviour. He is another ‘flawed genius’, who finds the World Championships boring. Why do I and others allow ourselves to be enchanted by such players? I don’t know.

    Tonight, I read a headline in an online news journal about rising domestic violence in Poland, and when I looked closely at the article, I got a shock; it referred to violence by women on their husbands. So, Karen, abuse cuts both ways sometimes! In my own life, the majority of people who have cheated or abused me in some way have been women. However, like Ken, I adore women – they are fascinating, charming, intelligent, usually far superior to men in many, many ways. I have always fought for their rights, so, don’t be harsh on all men out there, Karen. There are many like Ken, and dare I say it, myself!

    • Sorry, Ken… back on my high horse and whoops because I have cleaning to do🙂

      Sorry Peter,

      I was not being harsh on men.

      I think this is one of the biggest problems.

      Whenever a woman stands up and say “hello” no, we are not equal, we are not treated equally, we are not given the same opportunities ever – a quick look at corporate statistics and leading positions globally will tell you that – I’m not making this up and basically, bottom line, men more often treat women badly than the other way around.

      On top of that, when a woman rises sufficiently in bravery to call out her attacker, she is then abused by the male-run courts who hand out light sentences.

      And whenever a woman on the outside of this issue, makes a clarion call regarding it then she is somehow relegated to the “she must hate men” pile or “what a troublemaker.”

      This is not the case.

      Yet it is this particular prevalent cry that stops the majority of women who feel this way from raising their voices. Who wants to be known as a bra burner…? Especially when these days a good one costs so darn much!

      I love men🙂 In all their various shapes, sizes, forms & multiples of intelligence… to make light a little, I have more male friends than I do female friends and when I was a little girl wished I was a little boy instead so that it wouldn’t be so “shocking” that I preferred climbing trees, making treasure maps and going to search for pirate treasure than playing with barbie dolls.

      But not being “girly” on the inside (no matter what you look like) either gets you labeled as “too strong” or “lesbian.” So why would any woman want to come out and say out loud: I, and my fellow woman, are not treated equally?

      You talked of the domestic abuse of women done to men and how that is on the rise and you were shocked.

      Shocked because a “woman doesn’t fight” – if you (*sorry, this isn’t meant to be a personal you) thought of women as equal then the rise of domestic violence would be the issue and not the gender performing it.

      I am sorry that you (the personal you and other men who feel the same way) have been abused emotionally by women: there are many, many, many women who have been abused physically, spiritually and emotionally by both men and women.

      Abuse is not gender specific – you have no doubt been betrayed and treated as callously by the men in your life as well (perhaps not on such a personal level though) and unquestionably because it is a human condition within relationships done your own abusing… (humans are harsh to each other).

      But I am sincerely glad that men like you and Ken are doing what you can to address the balance (in many respects what Ken has done in his series has been so much more effective than the series I set out to host about females in my field) so honestly, this is not a personal attack against either you or he or the “general man” nor a suggestion that there aren’t men who do commit the same value to their female colleagues as they do their male ones.

      It’s more a call to end the general public hypocrisy, performed by both men and women that women are treated the same across the board and to say, no, we do not live in a time of gender equality.

      50 years ago, if a woman was presented publicly then it was de riguer to have her wearing an apron and seen as a mother. That did not fit the reality of who all women are – throughout any time – (this concept is a religion driven idea but history and evolution does not support it).

      It mostly only fit the reality of what a great deal of men wanted (want) from women: a slave to clean up after them.

      The pressure, today, on young girls to make-up, dress and look like porn stars is unbelievably enormous.

      Giving the women the pill has helped us enormously but at the same time it has opened us up to being dressed up in tiny items of clothing and then stuck up on billboards to sell products via flesh.

      And so now the association between a female as a merely sexual object made to satisfy male needs rather a human of equal possibility (and not a woman who would like to be a mother for those who do want this) all boils down to how she is seen within society.

      It lowers the position of defense when issues of rape or child abuse come up: she was asking for it (all women want it, really) – is all too too too often provided as some kind of excuse.

      And equally, too often, those women who do fight back, who defend themselves or who retaliate (whether physically or emotionally) now become the source of problem rather than having actually been the victim in the first place.

      It’s a funny world, except no one’s laughing.

  9. I don’t think it’s all about the gender. Personality is the problem sometimes.

  10. This is a tough one, Ken!

    As my brain begins to wind down at this time of year I haven’t really given this the amount of thought it deserves. But, for what it’s worth here are my ramblings on the question of flawed genii.

    Although (like Mr Dudeney) I have never really been a sporty type, I too was mesmerised by Alex Higgins’s swanky 70’s snooker. I only found out about his taste for gratuitous violence and general nastiness much later.

    … But, to the point!

    Generally speaking, I think I’d go along with Mike (Harrison) when he says “I don’t disregard the life anyone has lead just because they are a genius”. Let’s face it, Higgins was, as they say, a nasty piece of work and it is right to keep this in mind. I don’t know whether “the Hurricane” was ever a guest of Her Majesty’s, but if he wasn’t he probably should have been … and what’s more without his cue, he could have wrapped it round somebody’s neck!

    But, what form should this “not disregarding the life anyone has lead” take? Does it mean merely taking a genius’s flaws into account and carrying on, or does it mean boycotting, dismissing or otherwise deleting their life’s work? How much can or should be salvaged from the moral wreck of characters like Higgins or Polanski (mentioned in previous comments)? Put another way, to what extent do we feel comfortable inverting Mike’s statement (“I don’t disregard anyone’s genius because of the life they’ve lead”?) and turning a blind eye to the “off-piste” flaws of our favourite genii? I don’t really have a very good answer to these questions, I’m afraid.

    At the end of the day, how people deal with this dilemma will no doubt depend on the emotional/intellectual relationship they have with the genius in question, the relative heinousness of their flaws and (arguably the most important factor) how much time has past since said flaws were committed. Obviously, everyone will draw their lines in different places.

    Here’s my line! In most cases, I think whether or not I am prepared to overlook flaws and concentrate on genius depends on the degree to which I see evil embedded in the “art” itself. In other words, it is when the genius puts their art at the service of their flaws that I begin to feel distinctly uncomfortable. A couple of months ago I had a bit of a head to head with a colleague of mine over the lovely Leni Riefenstahl. He did his best to convince me that Riefenstahl was without any doubt the best female film director of 20th Century. He extolled her originality and innovative genius, and then went on to explain how she had made revolutionary use of cranes, rails and God knows what else to achieve dramatic never-seen-before effects … etc … etc … To cut a long story short, I brought the conversation to an abrupt end (which I don’t normally do) by stating quite simply that the reaction from my guts rendered me incapable of appreciating Leni’s ground-breaking genius. As you no doubt already know, her most emblematic obra, “Triumph of the Will”, is an unashamedly propagandistic documentary on the 1934 Nazi Party Congress in Nuremberg. In this film she does her utmost to glorify the greatness of both her friend/Führer and a jaw-jutting master-race which a decade later would commit industrial genocide by attempting to wipe out Jews, homosexuals, gypsies, the mentally-handicapped and a myriad of other “sub-humans” … On a personal level I sent Leni to Coventry a long long time ago and have argued against all the periodic attempts to rehabilitate her (including her Nuban adventures). The nub is that I “disregard” her genius because it is stained in blood.

    In contrast, and to get back to the flawed snooker genius in question, I find that my guts do allow me to appreciate the aesthetic value of Higgins’s manic potting. I think this is because when he was playing snooker that’s basically all he was doing. What he got up to when he wasn’t playing snooker was undeniably reprehensible and deserving of condemnation and/or punishment, but it had little to do with his “art”! There was no other agenda!

    Sh*t! Is that the time? Would love to warble on but gotta go! Will let you off the hook! … Anyway, thanks for provoking thoughts, Ken!

    Chocks away!

    Ian James | @ij64

    P.S. By the way and for the record, I didn’t choose Leni Riefenstahl because she’s a woman. I feel the same way towards Albert Speer, Hitler’s architect and obscenely titled “Good Nazi”.

    • Ken Wilson said:

      If that is an example of your brain beginning to wind down, then you have brain capacity to spare, Ian. But I must say I really love the way your ideas are condensed into the one line:

      “I think this is because when he was playing snooker that’s basically all he was doing.”

      Very simple and yet strangely profound!🙂

  11. Peter Whiley said:

    I agree with you, Karenne, that women are far more victimised than men. I raised the reverse issue to show/remind people that such situations can also occur, and that women can also sometimes behave as badly as men. I was being something of an ‘agent provocateur’.

    I was angry, a few days ago, when professional footballer, Marlon King was released from prison, after serving only 9 months of an eighteen-month sentence for visciously assaulting a young lady who rejected his physical advances in a night club. Why was he released so quickly? For ‘good behaviour’ in prison, of course. Sick? Yes. Now, some football clubs are chasing his services as a footballer. Several club chairmen have said that he should never play professional football again. Good for them, but I’m still left feeling very angry, though. This is one ‘flawed’ sportsman we can do without.

    As Vicky Loras said in her contribution, crimes of rape, molestation, etc, are the worst type, and this is why I am disgusted by the Polanski issue, which I thought was apparent in my original statement.

    Your reply was passionate and powerful, Karenne, and yet kind of politely put me in my place. Keep fighting the good fight, but keep recruiting the Ken Wilsons of this world – they are definitely worth having on your side!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: