Shrewd signing or sloppy standards from the Sky Blues?
We do our best to tackle (some of) the big issues at CollinsBeans, and one of the more interesting pieces of football news from this week, aside from all the thrilling Carling Cup action of course, is Coventry’s decision to offer a one-year contract to recently released from prison Marlon King.
I have decided to debate against the following statement:
Coventry are right to sign Marlon King - he's a good player and deserves a second chance having served his punishment.
Firstly, I’d like to declare that my argument is not based on football logic. Marlon King is a decent striker, likely to score goals freely at Championship level. All other issues aside, King would be a good signing for any Championship side.
However, although we’re talking about football, and ultimately King’s job is to kick a ball around on a pitch, I believe other circumstances must be taken into account when you are a football club followed and worshipped by thousands of people.
Whatever you think of King’s on-field ability, his behaviour off the pitch is deplorable. It’s hard to argue against that. King has been convicted of 14 criminal offences in total, spanning a range of lamentable activity. This does not suggest a man who made one mistake, who let himself get out of control once and is truly sorry for his misdemeanour. The last thing I want to do here is sound like Richard Littlejohn, but King is a serial offender. Theft, criminal damage, drink driving, assault – this does not paint a picture of repentant, apologetic man.
King’s last offence, which most agree is his worst, is particularly grim. Persistently harassing a 20 year-old girl (don’t forget King is married with three children), sexually assaulting her, and then when she protested one time too many, punching her in the face and breaking her nose. He is now on the sex offenders register for the next seven years. It’s not exactly pleasant stuff.
Again, what I don’t want to do here is sound like a horribly clichéd Daily Mail reader, spouting lines like “the worst thing you can do in this world is hit a woman”. Yet this act from King is clearly shameful. What really wrangles is the sheer arrogance of a man who reportedly said to the girl: “Don’t you know who I am?”. Sorry King, but you’re a mediocre striker who made his name at Watford – I don’t think you can really expect every female in the country to recognise your face.
Anyway, the point I’m attempting to make here is that King is not what you would call a role model. He pretty much epitomises all the worst aspects of the current footballer. And I believe clubs have a responsibility to their fans and younger players to set some sort of example, to hold up some basic morals. Now clearly I’m not suggesting any transgression whatsoever should be brutally punished. Football players are human – they can all mistakes and do something stupid. People obviously deserve to be forgiven.
Yet King has offended so many times, and is clearly not remorseful. Coventry are sending out a message to everyone associated with the club that no matter what you do, no matter how many times you offend, if you’re good enough at football your crimes will always be brushed aside and conveniently overlooked.
Where you draw the line is obviously tricky. How many offences before you can’t be forgiven? How serious is the crime to warrant exile? I don’t have an answer to this. I don’t think anyone does. Often though, it comes down to gut feeling and common sense. And my feeling is that I wouldn’t want Marlon King playing for my football club. He may be a useful player, but clubs need to preserve some sort of decency and communal spirit. Put it this way, would you want your young child running around in your club shirt with the name Marlon King on the back?
A very controversial topic, that’s for sure, and it’s hard to sympathise. King’s personal CV of misdemeanours does not make pleasant viewing and as many (and James above) have pointed out, while we often hear the phrase ‘everyone deserves a second chance’, King has repeatedly proven that he has little regard for the law or others.
ReplyDeleteLike I think you, I am not one who goes in much for draconian punishments but it will stick in the throat a bit to see him cavorting round the pitch when he scores a goal. I suppose it’s because of the nature of his job that such an issue arises. If he was say a plumber or worked in a bank then it would perhaps be easier to say “well he’s served his time, that’s what he is trained and has experience in doing so let him earn a living”. In principle that’s fine, footballer is his profession so he should be allowed to go back to it, however because of the huge rewards on offer, it almost seems like he is still profiting despite what he has been found guilty of doing.
The other point, which was well made by John Ashdown in the Guardian a month or so back is what it means to be a fan; is it that we want our teams to win at all costs or do we see the team as an extension of ourselves? Deep I know, but what I think he was talking about is whether by turning up to cheer on a team with someone like King in it are we admonishing his behaviour? As Ashdown says (when it was rumoured he was joining QPR; “I think it probably boils down to the very nature of supporting a club, just to get pretentious for a moment, and the way in which we see our teams as an extension of ourselves. So close are the ties, that supporters fear being tainted by association. If King were to join QPR then to support Rangers, so the theory goes, would be to support King, to share a common purpose with someone with whom you'd rather not share a county. But should we not be able to separate the player from the person?”
Personally, and I don’t want to get deep into my political beliefs, I believe people have the right to earn a living, however would I want him playing for my club? No chance. Football clubs aren’t like companies in that they attract devotion and unyielding support. It makes it a very difficult moral issue.