If Craig Thomson had sung The Billy Boys

[Sevvy too 2]

Calm down precious, I wasn't talking about your club or fans.

Craig Thomson the ex herts player who was convicted of grooming the wee girls remember?

Britney supported him at the time, called for leniency and to let him play on, he is now, for whatever reason, asking for us to forgive Thomson.

I have no idea why he is asking for us to forgive him, but it is his tweet and I have seen other tweets of his support for Thomson.

Brother 54 F&S is merely pointing out that the guy who called people various different insulting names and asked for prison sentences for singing songs is once again showing support for a convicted *** offender.

Which "crime" would you suggest is worthy of greater outrage?

I never thought for a minute that you were talking about my club,why would I? and I have never heard of the story before,and like my brother from another mother Jack, I thought you were talking about the ref.

[Rangersmandownunder]

I never thought for a minute that you were talking about my club,why would I? and I have never heard of the story before,and like my brother from another mother Jack, I thought you were talking about the ref.

It was in the news for over a month due to hearts refusal to sack him, during which Britney was calling for him to be allowed to continue and telling folk how he felt sorry for him.

But he is the yahoo darling journo cos he Rams it right up the hvns, right?

[Rangersmandownunder]

That wasn't the story though was it.
The story - and please feel free to correct me if I am wrong - is about a journalist in a Scottish newspaper saying that an 18 year-old ***ting two under-age girls 6 years ago should be rehabilitated.
I am sure if it were possible to go back 6 years on this forum I may well have commented at the time, since back then the story WAS about a professional footballer grooming two under-age girls - although it isn't something I have any sort of interest in really - but that was six years ago, and Craig Thomson grooming under-age girls wasn't the story today, nor was it the thrust of this thread, and nor was it the thrust of the comments under the story in the Herald. All the OP was moaning about - and the greetin-faced huns in the Herald - was pish about said journalist thinking that people singing a banned song was wrong but that rehabilitation of an offender who is off the SO register was okay.

I find it incredible that both you and sevvy claim to have never heard about this story, everyone who paid any attention to Scottish football knows about this story.

Spiers defended the *** offender back then and is doing it again, Thomson sent photos of his cock to 12 year old girls and asked for them to send naked photos of them to him, he also wanted to take them for a drive which wasn't for a f()kin picnic.
Britney's sectarian crusade is lorded by the yahoo because he only has one club in his sights, he campaigned to have songs banned and people put in prison for singing a song, an utterly contemptible act by someone with no love or connection with football fans, but the yahoo loves him cos he targets Rangers fans, except the occasional finger wagging at the yahoo.

What the OP is pointing out is Spiers is fine with *** offenders but finds Rangers fans songs so bad he wants them jailed, or are we to ignore his previous calls to let Thomson off with his offences to suit your agenda?

[spameater1]

I find it incredible that both you and sevvy claim to have never heard about this story, everyone who paid any attention to Scottish football knows about this story.

Spiers defended the *** offender back then and is doing it again, Thomson sent photos of his cock to 12 year old girls and asked for them to send naked photos of them to him, he also wanted to take them for a drive which wasn't for a f()kin picnic.
Britney's sectarian crusade is lorded by the yahoo because he only has one club in his sights, he campaigned to have songs banned and people put in prison for singing a song, an utterly contemptible act by someone with no love or connection with football fans, but the yahoo loves him cos he targets Rangers fans, except the occasional finger wagging at the yahoo.

What the OP is pointing out is Spiers is fine with *** offenders but finds Rangers fans songs so bad he wants them jailed, or are we to ignore his previous calls to let Thomson off with his offences to suit your agenda?

What is it wi' you and *** offenders Rolf,I'm beginning to see this as much more than Fitba banter,personally I think you need to seek Professional help.

[Sevvy too 2]

It was in the news for over a month due to hearts refusal to sack him, during which Britney was calling for him to be allowed to continue and telling folk how he felt sorry for him.

But he is the yahoo darling journo cos he Rams it right up the hvns, right?

Do you think I'm lying? Do you think I'm lying because Britney gets it up the Huns? Really?

[JackSnakes]

I find it incredible that both you and sevvy claim to have never heard about this story, everyone who paid any attention to Scottish football knows about this story.

Spiers defended the *** offender back then and is doing it again, Thomson sent photos of his cock to 12 year old girls and asked for them to send naked photos of them to him, he also wanted to take them for a drive which wasn't for a f()kin picnic.
Britney's sectarian crusade is lorded by the yahoo because he only has one club in his sights, he campaigned to have songs banned and people put in prison for singing a song, an utterly contemptible act by someone with no love or connection with football fans, but the yahoo loves him cos he targets Rangers fans, except the occasional finger wagging at the yahoo.

What the OP is pointing out is Spiers is fine with *** offenders but finds Rangers fans songs so bad he wants them jailed, or are we to ignore his previous calls to let Thomson off with his offences to suit your agenda?

Once again, you argue my point for me...

[mogwaiCSC]

Looks like Craig Thomson the ex herts player who was convicted of grooming two young girls and was fully supported by Britney at the time is once again receiving the full support of the stinky yahoo favourite.

Didn't understand the stance Britney took at the time in regards to Thomson, and am surprised he has decided to support him again, but then Britney doesn't have a clue when it comes to football and only uses the sectarian angle to get noticed, the yahoos lap it up right enough.

His opinion was far more nuanced than that but you probably know that anyway

The excruciating case of Craig Thomson, Heart of Midlothian’s Scotland Under-21 international who has been placed on the *** offenders’ register for inappropriate online relations with young girls, has underlined the growing unease there is over the misuse of new media by young footballers.

Thomson, who was recently fined £4,000 by Edinburgh Sheriff Court after pleading guilty to inappropriate online relations with two girls aged 12 and 14, was finally suspended by Hearts yesterday and will almost certainly be released by the club. In truth, his football career may be over.

It wouldn’t do to try to soft-soap what Thomson’s crimes were, despite three different people around Hearts, spoken to by The Times, yesterday, describing the young defender as “a decent lad” and “a highly liked and popular player” with the staff at the Edinburgh club.

It has transpired that, since he was 16, the now 20-year-old Thomson has built up a number of online relationships with girls, two of whom were in their early ****s. It involved the Hearts player sending graphic photographs of himself, as well as asking at least one of the young girls to reciprocate by revealing nude images of herself. Thomson was also found to have made explicit ***ual suggestions, and in one webcam chat to have asked one of the girls to reveal her breasts.

There has been a media firestorm over the story, with the Scottish tabloids in particular indulging their most vehement stock of “sick *****” and “*** pervert” terminology in their descriptions of the footballer. By yesterday we had reached Day 5 of a relentless moral eviscerating of Thomson, with front-page pictures of the player confronting him on every newsstand and billboard.

Hearts, who originally condemned Thomson’s actions while standing by his professional contract at the club, have slowly begun to wilt amid the onslaught. Yesterday they suspended Thomson pending a hearing later this week, but his contract at the Tynecastle club will almost certainly be ripped up. One Hearts source said: “It has reached the stage where the club has had to defend itself. Because Thomson is a popular figure at the club, and is well liked, Hearts originally wanted to stand by him, while condemning what he had done.

“But Hearts has always been a family-orientated club, which is why we have had to take this action [suspending Thomson].”

And yet, as deplorable as Thomson’s actions have been, the more you look at the circumstances, the story contains a blurry set of rights and wrongs, not all of which fit with swift and easy condemnation of the player. Every right-minded person deplores what Thomson did, though there is a wider context to his actions.

The rise of the internet, allied to the ***ual revolution among young people that has swept across Britain, means that online debates and activities such as those of Thomson are becoming more common. The instant, exciting, high-access nature of online means that ***ual exploration among young boys and girls today is far easier than it was for previous generations.

Thomson was just a kid — aged 16 — when he started getting caught up in all of this. He has only just turned 20 now. What he has done is utterly wrong, but in one sense he was an innocent lad who grew captivated by the online world of chat and dating and ***ual suggestiveness.

At the court case in Edinburgh the sheriff took stock of various statements about his character and decreed that he posed no threat to the community.

The sheriff, in serving a relatively trifling fine, also applied no restrictions on Thomson’s movement or access to young people, presumably because he believed the footballer had simply become transfixed with the ease of such online activity.

It has reached a stage where it is almost a criminal offence to express any sympathy for Thomson, yet many people around Hearts who know him have described his character in glowing terms.

One Hearts observer, who knows Thomson, said: “Craig seems to me to be a good kid who, in discovering ‘online’, took a dire wrong turning.”

Jim Jefferies, the Hearts manager, said: “The lad has simply made a grave error.”

The young girls whom Thomson is said to have “groomed” are not the only victims in this case. Thomson is a victim himself. His football career — that of a probable future Scotland international — is almost certainly over.

He will be released by Hearts, and who will touch him thereafter? Thomson is set to become a pariah for his misguided ****age ways.

There are grounds, indeed, for fearing for this young player’s wellbeing, given the excesses of this story so far.

[Rangersmandownunder]

Mog, Spiers calls Thomson a "victim" and claims he was just an "innocent lad" who got caught up in online "dating", he also stated on Twitter that he felt sorry for him and the public outcry about him was the only reason he was convicted.
The fact was Thomson was an adult and sent nude pictures of himself to a minor in an attempt to make her do the same, had the child not told her mother who knows how far this would have gone.

It is a completely valid argument that Spiers has no right to air views on Rangers fans singing when he has such "liberal" opinion on the grooming of children.

[JackSnakes]

Mog, Spiers calls Thomson a "victim" and claims he was just an "innocent lad" who got caught up in online "dating", he also stated on Twitter that he felt sorry for him and the public outcry about him was the only reason he was convicted.
The fact was Thomson was an adult and sent nude pictures of himself to a minor in an attempt to make her do the same, had the child not told her mother who knows how far this would have gone.

It is a completely valid argument that Spiers has no right to air views on Rangers fans singing when he has such "liberal" opinion on the grooming of children.

It is not a valid argument at all. Breaking the law is breaking the law and anyone has a right to comment on that. Spiers has not broken the law and is perfectly entitled to take issue with criminals who do.

[Sevvy too 2]

Does sound a bit of a dodgy basturt.