15 July ~ The rest of us tutted disapprovingly at Manchester City fans for accepting Thaksin Shinawatra as their owner in 2007, vowed we wouldn’t want Lee Hughes playing for our club, no matter how many goals he scored for Oldham and Notts County, and shook our heads in despair at Chelsea supporters holding up “Team Terry” banners in support of their disgraced captain last season. But are we capable of making objective moral judgements when one of our own sins?

For Bradford City supporters, such a dilemma occurred this week after the revelation new striker Jake Speight had been convicted of assault, just nine days after signing from Mansfield Town for £25,000. Instead of spending pre-season getting to know his team-mates and the tactics manager Peter Taylor wants to employ, Speight will be locked up in prison on a three-month sentence.

Neither Bradford nor Mansfield had any idea Speight was facing criminal proceedings following an incident last February. The 24-year-old had kept details of the charges secret because he feared it would scupper his chances of completing a move to the Football League. The first Taylor knew about the situation came after Speight’s agent called him Friday morning to explain his client couldn’t take part in a friendly that evening as he was due in court.

Speight will miss the start of the season and a clearly angry Taylor has declared he will go without pay while behind bars. Given it will take time to gain fitness upon release, Speight may also have his wage capped until he is considered ready for first-team selection. But Taylor has promised to welcome him back to the club – he is likely to only serve half the sentence – and displayed some compassion for his deception: “I should have been told but I do understand a little bit why I wasn’t.”

Which is where the moral judging begins. Bradford fans are split about whether the club should sack the former Sheffield United trainee, with some even suggesting they sue the player for the £25k paid to the Stags for his services. Meanwhile winger Gavin Grant, signed on a non-contract basis last season, is currently on trial at the Old Bailey for alleged murder in 2004. While Grant is unlikely to earn a proper contract, the negative publicity City are receiving from this, and now from Speight, has left many supporters fearing the good image the club tries to uphold in the local community has been badly damaged.

But others reason that while Speight has clearly made serious errors of judgement, he deserves a second chance to prove himself. They point out that some of City’s most popular figures of recent times – such as Jamie Lawrence, Peter Beagrie, Robbie Blake and Chris Kamara – all received criminal convictions either prior to or when playing for the Bantams. It’s also argued that Speight’s crime is relatively minor compared to other well-known players’ transgressions. After all, we’re not talking about a Lee Hughes situation.

What is clear is that Speight has a lot to prove to a sceptical Bradford public. We’ve yet to see him play, but some have already suggested they’ll boo him when he eventually makes his debut. Others believe he’ll be quickly forgiven if he goes on to do the business for City, but that’s perhaps where we football supporters in general show our hypocrisy. If a moral judgement has to be made over the off-the-field behaviour of players who represent our club, surely is shouldn’t be based on their performances on the field? But as Man City, Chelsea and Notts County fans would probably acknowledge, for Bradford fans, ultimately only other clubs’ supporters will be able to form an unprejudiced view of Speight’s misdemeanour. Jason McKeown

Comments (2)
Comment by caleyi 2010-07-15 11:43:41

I have grave concerns when there's a moral outrage over yet another player's off-field behaviour, particularly one-off offences such as I recall Hughes' was. We don't expect to live and work alongside convicted criminals but most of us do at some point in our lives - but usually don't know. Surely players have the chance of rehabilitation and to continue their careers once punishment has been served? If you drunkenly got into a fight one night and was convicted of assault, would you expect to never have your job back?
However when Boro signed the useless thug Marlon King I was appalled at our lack of standards. Mind if he'd scored more often than he hit the roof of the stand I would be more ambiguous about his stay. Oh this is the moral judgement you're talking about isn't it?

Comment by sowe2boro 2010-07-15 17:23:49

Well, we managed to have our cake and eat it - "she said no, Marlon, said she no, oh Marlon she said no" both celebrates and vilifies at the same time, but is ultimately a bit shit.

Related articles

There’s always last year ~ League One 2016-17
Fleetwood make an impact at the top, while off-field issues hampered some big clubs at the bottom – what WSC contributors got right and wrong...
On this day in history ~ Premier League, 2001
Man Utd lead from the front as Man City go the other way with Coventry and Bradford 13 January ~ Manchester United led the table from the beginning...
Weekly Howl 09-10-15
A small portion of despair and enlightenment delivered to your inbox every Friday9 October 2015 ~ Michel Platini's bid to be FIFA president received...