Zouma

jay_in_cpt

OldCastleSwift said:

jay_in_cpt said:

Horse racing and whipping a horse V kicking, chasing, slapping and throwing objects to a small cat.
Sorry no comparison IMO.

I believe they are comparable, in the broader sense. Both involve animals suffering pain through no choice of their own.

As a society we seem to accept some animals being hurt, but not others.

Horse racing has been around for how long and
while I don't watch or enjoy it, it's been going on for ages.
Whether it's right or wrong that the horses get a whip to run faster, I'm not an expert on that field.

But for me, the way a small cat was treated is somewhat different to a horse in a race...If a jockey is doing it excessively are they not pulled up for it?.

I'm sure they have stewards watching that limits are not broken etc etc...and I'm not agreeing it's right, but it is controlled from what I understand, whether that's right or wrong, I'm not approving but seeing a grown man kicking, throwing, slapping and chasing a small pet cat....well....

I just see it totally different, but hey, each to their own.

I also don't think Zouma's actions need comparing to other issues, we are looking at a player currently at our club and the sick and violent actions he imposed on his families pet cat.

yoyo

The horse racing argument. I can see it doesn't sit well with some people but Spurs have been flogging a dead horse for years and they get away with it!

Lukerz

Wait so horse-racing is fine? What, making a horse sprint as fast as it biologically can whilst dangerously mounting high fences, in front of paying punters who laugh, bet & consume drinks? That’s a necessary sporting experience.

I’m sure the countless horses who have had to be put to sleep after falling awkwardly & breaking their necks would agree.

I completely support Zouma being held accountable for his actions & facing severe consequences through a fair & thorough process. What I don’t agree with is the trial by social media, & the slightly laughable inconsistencies of animal cruelty definitions.

jay_in_cpt

Luke, the whole point is though West Ham are a football club, we are talking about a player who plays for us...
I'm not sure why other sports are even being mentioned or brought up.

I am not a fan of any forms of animal cruelty and have done my fair share of volunteering at a animal protection league from time to time here in Cape Town and have witnessed very sad things....

But IMO we should soley be focussing our thoughts on the actions of a player of our club, not trying to compare other people or other sports to the actions of a current West Ham player towards his pet cat...Just my opinion of course.

jay_in_cpt

Adidas have dumped Zouma.....

https://www.goal.com/en-ie/news/adidas-drop-zouma-video-west-ham-defender-hitting-cat/bltb048ac1226a5372a

WHU_Champo_league_in_7_years

jay_in_cpt said:

Adidas have dumped Zouma.....

https://www.goal.com/en-ie/news/adidas-drop-zouma-video-west-ham-defender-hitting-cat/bltb048ac1226a5372a

Good

WHU_Champo_league_in_7_years

Why is horse racing being used

Whether you think its animal cruelty or not doesn't change anything

What zouma did was wrong and deserves punishment irrespective of whether horse racing is or isn't animal cruelty (which for the record I think it is but its a completely different scenario to booting a domestic pet because its funny)

alderz

I don’t like it when another, unrelated societal wrong is used as an example because it feels a bit like saying “yeah this is bad, but other things are bad too, sooo……”

I’m not sure what I think should happen. I think the fine, the RSPCA investigation, cats being taken away, public condemnation and apology is probably about right, but I’m not sure. I still don’t like the idea of supporting and cheering him.

Animal abuse is often associated with other violent or cruel behaviour, and I think the club (and Zouma himself) needs to do something like therapy for him, because if someone can kick a family pet, what’s to say in 2/3 years time we don’t hear about some escalation in violence?

yoyo

West Ham have lost one sponsor ( Vitality) and another is considering their position ( Kissimmee)

WHU_Champo_league_in_7_years

yoyo said:

West Ham have lost one sponsor ( Vitality) and another is considering their position ( Kissimmee)

Once again, good

The club can't complain really

They have a clear and obvious allegation against a player that has shown obvious animal abuse and in less than 24 hours we decided the apology enough was enough to warrant him playing because 'he's one of our best players'

thornburyiron

Nobody knows why what happened happened. It’s being assumed, even on here, that Zouma had the idea of let’s kick the cat around because it will be a laugh and why not film us doing it and post it on Snapchat.
I’m sure the RSPCA and police investigation will find out the circumstances and dish out whatever punishment they see fit.
I haven’t read anywhere that City and Utd sponsors have all pulled out because of what Mendy and Greenwood did which in my opinion are far more serious crimes than what Zouma did as despicable as it was.
I also can’t understand the clamour from our own supporters for the club to be punished and for some to even hope we go out of cups and fall down the league.

claretandbluesky

I think once comparisons enter the argument it's usually an attempt at negotiating the degree of anger others feel we are entitled to experience.

WHU_Champo_league_in_7_years

The second they decided to play Zouma the club made their bed on where they stand

What United/City players did was massively worse but they also cut all ties immediately and suspended those players

We didn't, we backed Zouma and we should be held accountable

The club acted in an unethical manner imo and they could have very easily done what 99.9% of people were saying and drop zouma but we didn't and now we pay the consequences and I'm glad we have

jay_in_cpt

While I hear your thoughts Thornburyiron, the only thing I feel that should have happened differently was the club with the evidence they had should have taken the decision away from Moyes to play him..

They should have been more proactive, that's my thoughts...But then again it was new terrirtory for all I guess and perhaps didn't know what was best.....

At the end of the day Moyes won't be around forever and he was left to make the choice.... He must live with that, he seems thick skinned enough to do just that.

Perhaps the owners with the obvious evidence they already had should have acted far quicker and more responsible and taken the decision away from Moyes to make...Perhaps that's why sponsers are running away....

There were posters on here, Luke and Iron Herb that would disagree, Luke stated if fit he should play and fair enough, as I always state we are all entitled to our own thoughts, there perhaps is no right or wrong answer...

I guess that the people you read about that would not be concerned us going into decline was not on here, more on other social media sites etc.

thornburyiron

The decision for City and Utd was really taken out of their hands as it was easy to take considering their players were in police custody.
Maybe Moyes, in the interest of the club and the player, should have dropped him from the squad. I’m not sure how easy it is for a club to ban and/or fine a player just like that as I think that normally fines for misdemeanours and discipline issues are written into contracts or club rules lodged with the PL, FA and PFA.
What players like Mendy, Greenwood and possibly others we don’t know about did is clear cut but I’ve never come across something like this and I expect the club were at a loss to know what to do. I guess, and it is only a guess, that over the last couple of days that they’ve been in consultation with various bodies and have taken the maximum action that they’re allowed to do. Any further action is dependent on what the RSPCA and the police find and decide but as Mrs G alluded to earlier it is very rare for them to bring a prosecution for animal cruelty especially if this is a one off and some form of recompense is or has been dealt with.
I would imagine that a £250,000 fine paid to animal charities is probably way above anything that is normally set in the vast majority of cases.

WHU_Champo_league_in_7_years

All I hear are excuses

The club should have dropped him and avoided all this trouble

It's as simple as that

You have to be judged by your actions, they decided to back a animal abuser and the club should be ready to deal with the backlash it brings (and they knew it would)

yoyo

At the end of the day I think he played due to lack of options, wrong call. The club would have looked much better in public eyes if they'd acted straight away. Anything now will, to some, be too late.
Another PR disaster.

MrsGrey

claretandbluesky said:

I think once comparisons enter the argument it's usually an attempt at negotiating the degree of anger others feel we are entitled to experience.

I brought some comparisons in earlier. I did ponder it, because I'm not a big fan of whataboutery (mentioned by alderz in a previous post). In the end I posted not in any way to try to tell people what they should or shouldn't feel. Your feelings are your own.

But I think that the argument that he should be subject to some extra punishment ( more than what an ordinary member of the public would be given) is wrong. And I don't think the way the RSPCA have applied their powers to cat kickers in the past should change now just because it's a footballer. The job someone does is irrelevant. The law should apply to all equally and law enforcement agencies should apply their policies and standards to all, no matter who they are or when they did what they did.

The comparison I brought in was specifically to challenge the view some cruelty is worse than other cruelty depending on what kind of animal you are abusing. This is predicated on the idea of a heirarchy of animal worth. Also I don't think it's right that some kinds of cruelty brings the club into disrepute while other kinds of cruelty don't. ( For the record, I don't think Zoumas actions reflect on the club at all.)

Brother_Sledge

What Zouma did was disgusting. He did it in his home. It is all on him, not the club. I have not heard the club 'back' him as such. They stated they were against animal cruelty. They have investigated and given him the maximum fine they can. Would dropping him from the game and allowing him to lay low actually have been a punishment for him?
It clearly suited the club to complete their investigation/response after the game and I was disappointed to see the players hugging him prior to the kick off (very poor PR).
I was hoping to see some youngsters in the crowd with placards saying 'Zouma I don't want your shirt'.

alderz

I don’t think his actions reflect on the club either, but I think the clubs actions - ie playing him on the day of the story because he’s one of the better players - are what the club are being judged on. The sponsors that withdrew didn’t do so because of Zouma, they cited the handling of the situation by the club.

nychammer66

I think dropping zouma would be a cat-astrophy.

Jorderz_Moyes_will_be_Moyes

Sponsors are backing off from the club because they see a chance to be seen taking the moral high ground, get themselves in the news and enjoy some free advertising.

Let's not pretend they're doing so out of some moral stance. Decision makers at big companies only care about one thing and it isn't cats.

ianbishoplegend

He’s paid to play football, not sit out games and reflect on kicking a cat. He can do that in his own time

EXETERHAMMER

He should not have played. The club should have acted immediately to distance themselves from the situation.
I absolutely do not buy the football decision that he is one if our best players as a reason to play him. It makes Moyes and our club look bad. I just don't get it.

yoyo

On the flip side of public anger, Let's be clear I am against Zoumas action and the "nieve" decision to pick him, ( I'm being perhaps too kind ) the club are being slammed for him being picked and classed as uncaring. Newcastle owner jails and executes homosexuals. A different argument, granted, but the public seemed to have suddenly forgotten that.

ClaretandBlueforLife

For our club to say they were dealing with it internally like that was the end of the matter was ridiculous quite frankly. For Moyes to select him for last nights game was poor from him and I have lost some respect for his judgement.
I hope that Zouma has played his last game for us , I never want to see him in our colours ever again, nor do I want to see him play in the PL ever again, he is a disgrace to football.

ScotHammer

Something like this has ever happened before as has been said earlier,and I’ve read umpteen different thoughts on here over 24 hours? How can we judge the club for making a call after only a couple of hours, for something unprecedented?

I think we all agree that what happened was abhorrent. But how can you blame a club for not interfering with an employee’s personal life. Yes, West Ham probably were better for playing him, but perhaps boos from 50,000 people, making it clear it is totally wrong in the UK, will affect him more than a slap on the wrist from the RSPCA. Not an excuse, just another possible view

Although I don’t agree with it, unfortunately this may be forgotten by the time of our next home game when the media have another target. If he didn’t play and stayed at home, he wouldn’t necessarily know how we all felt.

Moojor

MrsGrey

This is from the daily mail but this teacher was sacked from her job after being filmed kicking and slapping a horse

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10439445/Primary-school-teacher-filmed-kicking-horse-hunt-prosecuted.html

So should Zouma be sacked for kicking and slapping a cat?

Fortuneseeker

Moojor, No because the teacher shouldn’t have been sacked.

Bazshuayi

nychammer66 said:

I think dropping zouma would be a cat-astrophy.