pled guilty today and received a ?300 fine for possession of cocaine.  not too sure of all the details yet but the judge accepted that it was a one off and an error of judgement.  i'm sure this has been a big lesson for him - one that will never be repeated.

i for one hope the club stand by him....

Good post SP - but I am afraid that the venerable Caley hasnt got the intelligence or the patience to take it all in. There is no need fer personal remarks and savagery. Stick to the subject If ya get ma drift.  :023:

It was the beginning of close season when he did take them, so they would have been out of his system when he was playing, it was not a large amount of drugs and it was surley for personal use, the police would have recognised himn being a local public figure and thought that it would be there chance to create celebrity scandal.

Come on man you can't say the cops set out to create a celebrity scandal!  Police officers have to do their jobs.  If 2 cops witness blatant drug taking in public they have to act on it or its their job on the line.  The police are human beings too and I'll bet they were not happy about booking Richie.  They were probably hacked off that they found themselves in that position and probably more p*ssed off at him for being so stupid, given his circumstances in particular.  Its unlikely but also possible they didn't even know who he was!

Regards,

Richie's Buying a Motor Wi Blacked-Oot Windaes

No problem IHE. As I said, takes all kinds...!

If only Caley could give out his telephone number I could have  him check the postss for grammirr and punchewashun  and speelning too maybe.... :003:

He is dead right though.... S.P. is verbose, I keep talking to him about it but, as always, he's got a mind of his own, telling me that KISS means  Keep Independently Serene Silly instead of Keep it Simple Sam .

Dearie, dearie..as Rank Bajin in the Comic Strip Shuggy used to say..."Life get's tejious, don' it?" or was that Britney Spears...eh? :comp03:

S.P. is verbose, I keep talking to him about it but, as always, he's got a mind of his own, telling me that KISS means  Keep Independently Serene Silly instead of Keep it Simple Sam .

:comp03:

Sorry Scarl, it means Keep It Simple Stupid !

intresting link from bbc site this morning............

BBC

Aye, it's been on for a day or two....can't see him winning this one though and he may have to continue his career elsewhere.

Good article in Today's Herald

The Herald Clicky Thingie

Mrs PB

Thanks, Mrs P, excellent article.

"If Thistle had any wisdom, they would send Hart to a drug awareness course, paid for out of his own wages, order him before the media to apologise in public for his stupidity and give him the opportunity to reclaim his first-team status. Compassion might just save Hart's career, and prevent him from going towards an even darker place."

Couldn't agree more. There is no need for a witch hunt, or blowing this out of proportion in the way it has been.  Everyone deserves the appropriate punishment for their crimes, but tryin to destroy someone's career is just stupid. If he had a consisent drug problem, that's different, but there is no evidence for that. Everyone also deserves a chance to prove they have learned from their mistakes, and won't be doing it again. There's a lot of humbug about drug use, as if it was somehow infinitely worse than violence or alcohol abuse, both prevalent problems in Scotland, but ones which would be treated with some form of appropriate punishment/treatment. Of course  no-one wants anyone taking drugs, but like it or not, they are everywhere and easily obtained. Getting on your moral high horse about them won't make the situation any better, nor will pillorying Richie Hart in order to make you feel righteous.

Agree with the last post and sincerely hope the club read this article........especially that last paragraph.

Hart should not be forced to do anything.  The opportunities have been there all along for him to enroll in such a course and I'm certain their will have been no shortage of media hounds around only to willing to print his apology if he saw fit to make one.

That's what bugs me about situations such as this - if they were remorseful and sorry then the individuals would take it upon themselves to do these things and not be forced to go through the motions simply because their jobs depended on it.  By demanding someone makes an apology, regardless of whether they are sorry or not, makes it meaningless.

He had his opportunity when he spoke "exclusively" to the Highland News, but instead chose to concentrate on how hard done by he was by having to plead guilty to something he was caught doing red handed.

When I was growing up we were taught that an apology should actually mean something, and just because you apologised didn't mean you weren't punished....if you were lucky it might mean your punishment was reduced, and that was about it.

Broadfoot is a plum and I can't believe so many are buying in to the article.  Nowhere in the entire page does it place responsibility for events at the feet of Hart in any way shape or form.  It is just an endless list of nonsense excuses aimed at deflecting responsibility anywhere and everywhere apart from at the person ultimately responsible.

Granted their is a larger issue in society regarding it's mindset towards drugs, in fact, the problem lies in the mindset towards drink in comparison to drugs, but that is not the subject in question right here.  Just because society takes a more lenient view on drinking should not automatically conclude that they should take the same appraoch involving drugs.  And if we were going down the route of arguing that point then I would be more for increasing punishments for drinking than decreasing punishments for drugs....although as is often the case, the answer probably lies somewhere in between.

"If Thistle had any wisdom, they would send Hart to a drug awareness course, paid for out of his own wages, order him before the media to apologise in public for his stupidity and give him the opportunity to reclaim his first-team status. Compassion might just save Hart's career, and prevent him from going towards an even darker place."

Hart should not be forced to do anything.  The opportunities have been there all along for him to enroll in such a course and I'm certain their will have been no shortage of media hounds around only to willing to print his apology if he saw fit to make one......  He had his opportunity when he spoke "exclusively" to the Highland News, but instead chose to concentrate on how hard done by he was by having to plead guilty to something he was caught doing red handed.

I think there has to be a middle ground somewhere. I really have swayed on this whole thing since it was first talked about, thinking one day he should be sacked and on other days that he should be supported. I still dont know how I would handle it if I had to make the final decision and thats primarily because I like Richie Hart the ICT player, and dont think he needs to be crucified if he has exhibited remorse over the event.

I have read postings from both sides of the argument and even made postings on both sides of the argument and still I cant decide how I would handle it .... No matter what happens, its a hard decision for the club and whichever way they go they will get equal amounts of praise and condemnation from various sources as will the player.

I guess the final decision will depend on what he says internally to his bosses. We can all have our various opinions, some more factually based than others, but what matters most is what he says to the club and how much remorse and honesty they think he is displaying to them.

We all know that regardless of what he says to the media, that they can cherry pick comments to slant the article one way or another if they choose to do so so there are none of us that can say with any certainty that he is not showing remorse. The media, and even the club statement, have made it sound like he did not display total honesty when the incident was first reported but what matters is how honest and remorseful he has been to them since the event.

Has he apologised in private? has he himself offered to do any community work? has he offered to be part of any help or awareness groups? Has he actually accepted his wrongdoing? If he has answered yes to a few of those - especially accepting responsibility for his own actions - then maybe there is a way back for him .... As IHE said in an earlier post, he would still have a long road to travel, there is the issue of trust - both with the fans and the club, a quite probable increase in the number of times he would be "randomly" tested, abuse from opposition fans (and possibly some ICT ones), but if he has the balls to say he has made a mistake, learned from it and will not let it happen again then maybe, just maybe we can forgive him. Just remember .... To err is human, to forgive divine.

If on the other hand, he is not remorseful, does not accept his role in this incident, and hasnt displayed any remorse then the club have no option ........

Sadly an online poll in Highland News is 67% in favour of sacking Richie.

If that has more than 100 votes I'll eat Spiers' hats. All the sweaty-palmed, repressed, Wee Frees who really wish they could do a line or two before calling the premium rate lines in the personals are clearly online in puritanical force (as opposed to the vast majority of completely non-hypocritical Wee Frees, you understand).

That's what bugs me about situations such as this - if they were remorseful and sorry then the individuals would take it upon themselves to do these things and not be forced to go through the motions simply because their jobs depended on it.  By demanding someone makes an apology, regardless of whether they are sorry or not, makes it meaningless.

Oh god, not again... I hear what you're saying, however what applies to you and me does not apply in the same way to a professional footballer in Richie's position, whichever way you try to dress it up and whatever morality you sling at it. The points about difference in treatment for the unique job sportsmen these days find themselves doing have been made time and again on this thread, and I won't reiterate them. Suffice to say that if Richie came out and said he'd undertake to go round schools, enter the Priory and publicly birch himself in Falcon Square, there would be those who would pour scorn on the whole thing as a cynical publicity stunt designed to get himself out of a hole, followed by the conspiracy theorists and the 'had it from a reliable source' brigade who know that the board/sponsors/Pope-Elvis-Shergar (they're the same person, you know) have put him up to it. If he says nothing he's guilty, and if he says everything he's guilty - let alone what instructions he is under about what he can and cannot say.The lad can't win, at least not in this forum.

***RANT ALERT***

He can't win???  Why the feck should he be looking to "Win" anything?

Am I living in some kind of parallel universe whereby the guilty get treated as victims all of a sudden?

Your right about one thing...it is now a no-win situation, and every day that passes whereby no proper decision is made, either by Hart to make a proper apology, or by the club on whether he is allowed to stay or must go just makes the whole thing worse.

It's not like this happened out of the blue.  The club were aware of the situation 4 months ago.  They should have planned for whatever the outcome and the decision should have been an instant one.  About the only thing I agreed with in Broadfoots article was his view about the club closing their eyes and hoping it will go away.  It seems to be how they try and deal with everything until it gets to the point where they force themselves in to having to make snap decisions.

Likewise, Hart knew exactly the position he was going to find himself in.  If he's been living in denial for the last 4 months then more the fool him.  If I was in his shoes you can be sure that I would be going out of my way to let everyone know that I had made a mistake and I was sorry for it, regardless of the circumstances that led to it.

As for the mindset that footballers should be treated any different that anyone else....what a crock of chit.  The majority of professional footballers in this country lead very privileged lives as it is.  To suggest they should be further privileged by placing them above the law and above the same rules that govern many other professions is pure nonsense.

I'm not looking for the guy to be crucified or punished beyond what anyone else could/would expect.  What I am against though is this constant need for people to just keep piling on layer after layer after layer of BS.  If he's sorry then let him come out and say it himself....it may help his case, it may not.  If he's not sorry then he should not be forced into saying he is.  If he's not interested in attending drug awareness seminars or whatever, then he should not be forced in to doing that either....but again, he has to accept that if he takes that stance then it may impact on the clubs decision....rightly or wrongly.

The things that bother me......

1.  The lies that came from him following the events at Rock Ness which had many people believing it was all just a misunderstanding.

2.  His pleading not guilty after being caught red handed and stringing it out for 4 months.

3.  His attitude from the HN article which made it look like the only thing he was sorry about was getting caught.

4.  The fact he hasn't had the balls to appear in court for so much as 1 minute during all this in order to face the music.  His original plea was by letter and his subsequent plea was via his solicitor.....yet there's a statement from his solicitor saying how hard it was for him to face the courts!!!

5.  The clubs stalling tactics on having to make a decision and what appears to have been a rushed press statement which gives them little room to maneuver in terms of keeping him at the club.

6.  Those who deny in one sentence that youngsters look up to footballers and in the very next sentence say he should be sent out to schools to act as an example of the rehabilitated drug user....can't have it both ways!!!

7.  Those who generally want to turn the whole thing in to a circus.

8.  Those who see Hart as some kind of victim in all this.

9.  Those who use the "he's no worse than so and so" line in an attempt to justify his actions.

Lets just get rid of all this fecking about and skirting around the issue.  ICT....grow a spine and make a decision one way or the other -  lets move the whole thing along so we can put it behind us and get back to football...at least until the next drama!!!

***RANT ALERT***

Aye, ye're no kidding there.

o suggest they should be further privileged by placing them above the law and above the same rules that govern many other professions is pure nonsense

Mm, and to suggest that I suggested that suggests a failure to read properly; how did you term it -  a croc of chit?

If you're incapable, as it seems, of seeing the double (or at least differing) standards applied here and the near-impossible position faced by the player - most folk would have hired Max Clifford by now - then this is a waste of my typing.

however what applies to you and me does not apply in the same way to a professional footballer in Richie's position, whichever way you try to dress it up and whatever morality you sling at it. The points about difference in treatment for the unique job sportsmen these days find themselves doing have been made time and again on this thread, and I won't reiterate them.

:024:

If you're incapable, as it seems, of seeing the double (or at least differing) standards applied here and the near-impossible position faced by the player

Your spot on, there are double standards...those that you think should be applied to Footballers and those you think should be applied to everyone else...or have I simply misunderstood you  :017:

If Hart now finds himself in a "near-impossible position" then it is one of his own making.  Had he come straight out with a proper apology after pleading guilty then you may have still had a few who would have doubted whether he meant it or not, but the longer he leaves it the worse it gets.  I for one grow less and less likely to believe he is in any way remorseful the longer he leaves it and I'm sure I'm not alone in that.

I don't really care if he is sorry or not, so long as he can give the club assurances that he will not put himself in this position again then that's fine by me....whether it's fine by the club is their decision.

then this is a waste of my typing.

Nobody's holding a gun to your head and forcing you to reply  :016:

Let's not forget that the player has already been punished for the offence. It would seem that some people are not happy with that and would like to see him lose his job as well. That just doesn't seem fair given it was a 1st offence and the punishment was a small fine.

Please don't let this one incident ruin his career. He should be given a chance to prove that this was an isolated case that will not be repeated. Sure, drug taking in sports sends a bad message but forgiveness and support sends an even stronger one.

Use the carrot not the stick.

Nobody's holding a gun to your head and forcing you to reply  016

Now that's where you're wrong...

What I'm saying, if you stop taking me out of context for a moment  :016: is that, rightly or wrongly, the treatment of professional sportsmen, or celebrities, in these situations is significantly worse than anything you or I would be subjected to, because people take notice of the case. Everyone was talking about Richie being arrested within a day of it happening and there's been at least a steady murmur about it ever since. Very few people would give a toss if it were you or me caught in possession.

Because his profile is that much higher he gets that much more attention, including the unwelcome sort i.e. people calling for him to be hung out to dry. There's an ambiguity of attitude, too, towards entertainers who are (or are perceived to be) very well paid - they're respected or at least admired because they entertain and sometimes inspire, but there's a resentment of their success there. So when they finally slip up the schadenfreude is particularly vitriolic. And of course, we're far more likely to see them slip up precisely because we're looking out for it.

None of that is rocket science. It does, however, describe a double standard, in that you would receive significantly different treatment for making the same error as Richie, and there's practically nothing the guy can do to change that without being roundly boonigged for inaction or derided for making token gestures.

"the schadenfreude is particularly vitriolic"

And none more vitriolic that Heelan schadenfraude, as we know, vide "the curse" especially with our ex-managers.

I have no wish to add fuel to the fire, but RH has I believe an excessive fondness for the drink and maybe the fags too.

There is much to be gained from this whole experience, if it can be turned out to both the clubs and RH's advantage. "The wilderness" is not the answer.

According to today's P&J, the club's decision on Richie's future will be announced on wednesday.

The board appear to be divided on how to deal with the matter.

The fact Har didn't appear in court for the entire case makes me think he isn't quite ready to totally face up to what he has done to be honest. Most sheriffs would insist he had to stand in front of court to exlain himself as opposed to a soliciter seaking on his behalf he is lucky to get away with this and to be honest it makes me think he isn't man eough to stand up in court and admit his wrong-doings, this upsets me quite a lot. Added to that the fact he pled not guilty then changed his plea, and then on conviction he had an interview with the HN which hinted at the fact he only pled guilty because he felt he would be convicted either was and he was in fact not guilty of possession.

If he truely is rmorsful then i say he deserves a second shot for sure - send him off to the centre out of his own wages and give him a shot to start again, but if as i fear he's not leared his lesson then frankly i wouldn't welcome back at the club. So i say to Mr Hart - prove to us all tht you deeply regret it and want to stay a part of the club and rebuild your and the clubs reputation and Ifor oe wil support you all the way.

Richie, it is normal, under the Scottish legal system, for a defendant to plead not guilty at a first hearing of a case. This then allows time for the defence team to weigh up the evidence and advise the defendant accordingly. In this instance I woud say the defence solicitor has likely advised a plea of guilty. It is also normal, and indeed to speed up court proceedings in minor cases, for a defendant not to be required to appear. I believe his non appearance would have to have been agreed with the PF beforehand.

As for what is written in the papers, how much actually came from the mouth of Richie Hart and how much is journalistic licence to sensationalise?

Pedantic perhaps but in Scotland the person in the dock is known as the Accused. Defendant is an English term.

Whether a personal appearance is required is a matter for the sheriff. I have to say that it is a little surprising for someone even a first offender, pleading guilty to an offence involving a class A drug  not to appear personally but if the sheriff was happy to sentance Mr Hart in his absence who are we to quibble ?

Pedantic perhaps but in Scotland the person in the dock is known as the Accused. Defendant is an English term.

"....but if the sheriff was happy to sentance Mr Hart in his absence who are we to quibble ?

Is sentance an English term..?  :023: