Fighting back

I was glad to hear that Clarence Hill was finally inducted into Bermuda's sporting Hall of Fame on Saturday evening. As the only Bermudian to have won an Olympic medal, there's no doubt in my mind that Mr. Hill deserves his place there, despite his subsequent problems with drugs and crime.

The decision to exclude him last year was the result of a requirement that all candidates be "of integrity and good character". At the time, Mr. Hill had only been drug-free for about nine months. But even so, his fall from grace should not have factored into the equation.

We should be able to separate the achievements of an athlete from his life. Recognising one need not be considered an endorsement of the other. If Bermuda had had a Hall of Fame back in 1976 when Mr. Hill won his medal, he would have been inducted immediately. We should hold up Mr. Hill as a role model for those seeking success in sport, while his post-Olympic life should serve as a warning to others who may find themselves heading down the same path.

“No matter what I have done personally in my life, the bottom line is that I am still the first Bermudian to bring an Olympic medal back to this country and automatically that should've been Hall of Fame material,” he said last year.

He was right. Last year's exclusion was a mistake. I'm pleased that it has now been corrected.

Comments

[Alan Partridge on 30.08.05 at 08:38]

Why don't we have two halls of fame, one for sporting achievement and one for alcoholic wife beating/ drug abuse. Some of our high profile only successful sports team could be fast tacked into the latter while we judge their sporting accomplishments over time.

[ace on 30.08.05 at 10:27]

"We should be able to separate the achievements of an athlete from his life. Recognising one need not be considered an endorsement of the other."

Not sure you can make a blanket statement like that.

Take Pete Rose as an example. He gambled on baseball and was excluded from that Hall of Fame on that basis, and righly so.

In Mr. Hill's case I think you are right though. I was really proud of him and Bermuda back when he won that bronze.

[Bill Cook on 30.08.05 at 10:35]

Limey,

We should separate sport from character in my opinion.

At present we can not take back a medal from an athlete who has been found guilty of taking drugs if he or she won that medal long before tested,which usually in my experience means they were probably lucky rather than honest.

Its tricky as where do you draw the line ?

If one was a convicted murderer or rapist would they still be eligible ?

At what level do we set the standard ?

Is it wise or even fair to make athletes role models anymore than bankers or lawyers for example ?

Every body was happy to see Clarence get inducted, so perhaps public opinion should be the only criteria we should use.

[Two Cents on 30.08.05 at 10:45]

I too was very proud of Clarence Hill when he won his medal, but perhaps they should have interviewed Tommy & Gina the tourists who were here on their honeymoon (Circa 1986) RE: Mr Hill's inclusion.

The poor guy was out celebrating with his wife at Rum Runners and while sitting on the toilet two hands come under the door and stole his trousers (along with his wallet and personal effects) and ran off. If it hadn't been for John the manager who recovered his trousers, and I.D'd Mr. Hill another "Bermuda Vacation" would have been ruined.

But because he won a bronze medal for boxing we honor him........ Hey if he had won the Gold that could be carte blanche to do what ever he wanted ( robberies, free crack maybe)

Exclusion from the Hall of Fame should be part of "doing his time" for doing the crime

[Bill Cook on 30.08.05 at 10:47]

Ace

In my opinion Pete Rose should not have been excluded.

They can not exclude his record and he was never charged with throwing a game.

An Olympic decathlon star Jim Thorpe had his medals taken away for accepting a few dollars for appearing in a baseball game I think.

Jim was an outstanding athlete and a fine human being from all reports and as native Americans began to get treated better his family later got his medals returned.

I hope Rose gets in but knowing the hyprocricy that exists in sport that may not happen.

[ace on 30.08.05 at 10:58]

"and he was never charged with throwing a game."

Bill, this is sort of an "unethical but not illegal" type argument.

Rose broke the rules of the sport.

Mr. Hill broke societal rules unrelated to the sport.

That is the difference for me at least.

[Bill Cook on 30.08.05 at 11:11]

Ace,

Fair comment,

But in my opinion he was just unlucky as there are plenty of inductees whose hands are grimy, and I dont personally think if one gambles it has to do with sport anyway,unless one throws a game.

Sport is very suspect take boxing as an example, we all know who runs that sport,at the professional it is probably the most corrupt of all.

[ace on 30.08.05 at 11:29]

Fair enough Bill.

I must say that I just read Two Cents' post and couldn't help but giggle. CH stole a guy's pants at Rum Runners while the guy was on the toilet? LOL..gotta give him credit for ingenuity.

Sorry...I have a weird sense of humour I guess.

[Guilden M. Gilbert, Jr. on 30.08.05 at 11:46]

Limey,

I agree that we have to separate the sport from the person.

Clarence Hill returned to Bermuda with a bronze medal around his neck after the Montreal Olympics and was completely ignored by his country.

He never received any recognition for his accomplishment. Clarence did not have the best of circumstances growing up and was always "at risk". Maybe if the country had treated him as a national hero for his accomplishments he would not have become what many expected him to become because of his up-bringing.

Bermuda is notorious for ignoring the achievements of its athletes.

I look at what is done here in the Bahamas for accomplished athletes. When the "Golden Girls" won the 4 x 100 world championships they were treated like royalty in the Bahamas. When they won gold in the Sidney Olympics, again they were treated like royalty.

Any Bahamian athlete that medals on the international stage is given a cash prize by the Government of the Bahamas. A gold medal brings a cash reward of $25,000 and a piece of property.

Not only that, the corporate community gets heavily involved by giving athletes $25,000 to $50,000 endorsement deals.

Bahamians athletes, once they have proven their ability, are afforded every opportunity to become the best athletes they can become.

Tonique Williams-Darling won Gold in the 400 metres at World Championships leading up to the last Olympics, then she won gold at the Olympics, then she shared the $1 million TDK Golden League Jackpot and she has again this year won the World Championships.

Sir Durward Knowles won a gold medal in sailing at the Olympics sometime in the early 1960's. He is now in his 80's and is still hailed a Bahamian Hero. There are school visits set up for him.

When you arrive at the Nassau International Airport, the first thing that greets you is not a picture of a politician but life-size pictures of the Bahamian athletes.

If we want our athletes to perform we have to appreciate their accomplishments. Its not different fromt he corporate world, if one excels and is not reward he/she will stop being productive because there is no reward for productivity.

If our at risk kids who excell are not rewarded and are made to feel as if their accomplishments are irrelevant then they will simply return to where they are made to feel appreciated. It may be negative for society but recognition is recognition.

[Martin on 30.08.05 at 11:54]

Guilden,

On a slightly lighter note, when I come into Bermuda Airport Immigration and see Alex's smiling face, I have always wondered which race he had won.

[Andrew on 30.08.05 at 12:15]

At issue is the reason behind the Hall of Fame. Is it merely to recognize great athletic accomplishments, or is it, as the World Golf Hall of Fame describes, "honor the history of (the sport) and achievements of its greatest individuals"?

If one looks at athletic accomplishments only, there is no question the man belongs in the hall of fame. If the scope of evaluation extends beyond athletic accomplishments, then Mr. Hill should be excluded from the Hall of Fame.

Unlike Pete Rose, Mr. Hill has done nothing to dishonour the sport, and his achievment in the sport was great. He should be proud of his induction and Bermudians should be proud of his athletic accomplishments.

[Triforce on 30.08.05 at 12:36]

I think Bermuda's trying to get better at it. Aranxta King recently received a grant after her successes at CAC.

It's important that our athletes get support throughout, not just when they do something big one year. We've had some good athletes coming up through the junior ranks but then it's like they disappear once they hit 20.

[on 30.08.05 at 13:37]

Shouldn't we be talking about something more important then who got put in Bermuda's pissy little sport hall of fame. How provincial.

[Two Cents on 30.08.05 at 13:51]

We are becoming an island of excuses. The Country didn't do enough for Clarence when he won his medal so he should be forgiven for his life of crime, drugs, etc since then? At what point should Mr. Hill be responsible for his actions.

As kids we looked up to athletes as heroes, now it seems that too many kids only heroes are some thug whose only contribution to life is having a hit record or screwing some actress or equally untalented female singer.

We need to start earlier with kids teaching them there's more to life than wearing a ton of gold, driving a expensive car, and sleeping with as many women as possible.

Kids need to be taught to look up to those who are truly deserving of their admiration.

Sorry for the possibly unrelated rant !!

[Triforce on 30.08.05 at 14:14]

TwoCents I think that comment is quite related to the topic at hand, that being Clarence Hill's deserving of a place in the Hall of Fame.

I'm in full agreement on what kids should be looking up to, and hopefully the Sports Hall of Fame will provide some examples to some of the youth out there, giving them something to aspire to instead of some thug.

(* and that is quite important *)

A National Heroes List should be promoted as well, for achievements outside the world of sports, but that's another issue.

[SmokingGun on 30.08.05 at 14:42]

"The poor guy was out celebrating with his wife at Rum Runners and while sitting on the toilet two hands come under the door and stole his trousers (along with his wallet and personal effects) and ran off." Posted by Two cents

That alone should get him in the hall of fame.
The "Not very sporting of him" one.

[Bill Cook on 30.08.05 at 15:27]

Clarence Hill,

Is not the only one to have it hard coming up.
I spent a lot of my early life with boxers some were world champions not just gold medal winners.
A tough childhood is no excuse for SUSTAINED criminal behaviour.
If that were the case there would be a great many more criminals.
One of my friends was one of the greatest fighters Ireland ever produced and not only did he have a tough childhood but when he was a success and opened a pub they blew it up! but he went on made progress.
Clarence Hill had only himself to blame for his downfall as there were plenty of people who were there to assist him inc the late Chummy Hayward.
If we were to catalogue a litany of Clarences violent attacks etc. it would take some time
If there are those who are apologists for his criminal behaviour it wont wash with me.
The best thing for all to do is to shut up and not encourage a counter attack by those who were possibly victims or people who simply are sick to their stomachs with this compulsion to defend criminal behaviour all the way up to murder.
Right now we owe Clarence nothing but he by comparison owes the people of Bermuda a lot as I see it.
I think in his new life he should be given every encouragement.
I went to see him in Montreal and am ON RECORD as picking him to win a medal Silver or Bronze and I had enornmous respect for his skills but he squandered them and that was his choice for which he must accept full responsibility and a good start would be to acknowledge that and apologise to the people of Bermuda for all the trouble and expense he has been to it, for so long and ask forgiveness, that would earn respect.

[jake on 30.08.05 at 15:31]

You cannot divorce a person's life from their academic or athletic achievement. The Unabomber should remind us of that. He went to Harvard.

If Clarence wants to be remembered for the good things, he should not follow a life a crime.

Part of the very real problem we have in Bermuda's sports is the belief that ability provides a built in excuse. Don't believe me?

How else do you explain a former captain of the national cricket team being a drug importer? How else do you explain xenophobic comments from leading sports players? Spitting? Fighting?

The violence in local sports is tolerated because of the local talent. It is our philosophy of tolerance (which I call babying) which has us forever excluded from the top achievement. Want a local hero? Look at Shawn Goater. At the highest level of his game he still takes instruction and guidance from the coaches. He still attends practice and does what he is told to. He remains positive even when things don't go his way.

Goater is a hero to me as well, even though athletically I am at best, challenged. I look at how he found his stride relatively late in life and with humility was able to rise to the top of Manchester City - the big leagues.

If we are going to overlook serious crime, drug abuse and violence because he did well back in the day, it does nothing but reinforce the belief that achievement on the field of play excuses all else. That is the message of today. See where it has us?

[Big Bad Wolf ^..^ on 30.08.05 at 15:59]

Sports Hall Fame now renamed Sports Hall of Shame!

[Bill Cook on 30.08.05 at 16:06]

Jake,

Sean Goater is of course a truly exceptional human being and one you would be very proud to call your son and Bermuda can consider itself lucky he was born here.

Before Sean there were other pioneers and it has always bothered me terribly that Clyde Best never really got the appreciation he deserved.

I had occasion to hand Clyde his first real football boots when he was about 10 yrs old that his dad left with me to give him.
He had no easy road in England but took the knocks and won the respect of the fans but on his return he was never accorded the respect he merited.

We tend to have shallow memories and I also think Mary Jane Tumbridge who beat the Olympic Gold Medal winner to win Gold at the Pan American Games,was not fully appreciated
You see she had to leave home and go live in England and work to pay for training to ride her horse in the Equestrian events.
It took literally years of hard work and little assist from Bermuda for this costly sport and as her first job was working for me I know her dad Ralph was not a wealthy man.

I reserve the right to select my own heroes and role models.

[Guilden M. Gilbert, Jr. on 30.08.05 at 16:12]

Bill,

Troy Douglas switched countries (I believe The Netherlands) in order to receive funding to train and compete because Bermuda did nothing for him.

It is sad that things like this happen because sports have a way of unifying a country.

[SmokingGun on 30.08.05 at 16:43]

It's a tough decision with valid arguments for or aginst giving Clarence a place in the Hall of Fame. I personally deplore any and all individuals who cheat, steal or act in a criminal manner and so it goes for Clarence. However, having said that, he did win the first Olympic medal for Bermuda, which I hope happened before his criminal activties began. If that is the case then maybe he should be allowed to have his name mentioned due to the significance of his feat. If he has been punished for his crimes and done the time then that should be treated seperately. After all, the hall of fame is merely a place where future generations can learn about those that went before who at some time in their life strived to be the best. They will also learn the lesson that winning a medal isn't everything.

[Ethiops on 30.08.05 at 16:49]

Can you really remove someone from history because later in their life they became a monster. In a society that we would like we are the answer would be no. The idea of not letting him into the hall of fame as a means to punish him has got to be one of the idiotic things i've heard today and what a long days its been. Ok so he robbed homosexual's in public toilets cause he knew they would never report him in fear of also being exposed. Whats that got to do with the medal he brought back to the rock.

[sandgrownan on 30.08.05 at 16:57]

Ethiops - please tell me I get the tone of your post wrong. "OK..so he robbed homosexual's in public toilets..."

If I'm right, you really are an offensive individual.

As for Hill. He's a criminal. How does his victim feel now that Bermuda honours him?

Retires with righteous indignation.......

[Onion on 30.08.05 at 16:58]

If Clarence Hill was still a drug user, thug, thief, robber etc, than I would now want him getting into the Hall of Fame at all. But we must look at people's progression and give them credit where it is due. This man has turned his life around and is a decent member of society now. he is our only Olympic medalist and we want to pin him down for crimes in his past? He did his time, he paid his debt to society now let the man receive what he is due.

As an aside, should Peter Bromby be in the Hall of Fame one day?

[Ethiops on 30.08.05 at 17:06]

Some of the people that hold titles in this island have past they would never wish to see bubble up to the surface. Positions much more estimable than sports too. What’s the problem will he make us look bad like Bermuda has problems? He don't have too we do and we've been that way for eons. I agree its pretty sad Troy had to move inorder to get some air to breath he is a good friend of mine. It’s not like the UBP in that day was trying to hear helping the sportive types. PLP needs to take some actions in that area, I’m waiting for them to splurge a few millions on youth. UBP built west gate, PLP should at least try to keep it empty as possible. I never liked c hill as a person. Can I take his stripe away though hell no.
But, I wouldn't go putting a mic in his hand though :)

[sandgrownan on 30.08.05 at 17:10]

The message this sends that it's OK to do "something wrong" because something you did right somehow cancels it out. Life isn't a bloody credit system. OK, I robbed an old lady, but I helped a blind man across the road so it's ok. What a load of tosh.

It's like that chap Curtis and his 10 year old "unpaid bills." It's OK, since they were 10 years ago andh e's kept his nose clean since.

The whole thing stinks.

[Ethiops on 30.08.05 at 17:27]

sandgrownan

yeah you got the tone of it wrong... my typo's surely didn't help.

[Phil on 30.08.05 at 17:35]

sandgrownan

The message this sends that it's OK to do "something wrong" because something you did right somehow cancels it out.

Why do you think it sends that message? Why does acknowledging someone's achievements have to imply endorsement of their crimes?

Clarence Hill was punished for what he did. Not only did he go to prison, he destroyed his career and his marriage and ruined 20 years of his life. He has paid his debt. He has started to get his life back on track. I don't understand the desire to keep punishing him.

[SmokingGun on 30.08.05 at 17:35]

LOL - you know it! ;)

[Ethiops on 30.08.05 at 17:45]

I don't think it sends out anything other than the fact that this individual won the Olympic bronze medal. People always wanna pick the marrow outta bones to see if they're organic or not. Ya'll bore me. It's like if you're a so called badman in the eyes of many it don't make sense doing good as you'll never been seen as so in the so called public view. Like the public view ain't the most distorted thing to begin with. Nothing is pardon yet you still have to recognize his efforts or be hypocrites that accept his efforts without acknowledging them. Not that hasn't been past practise.

[Bill Cook on 30.08.05 at 17:49]

Onion,

Precisely HOW did he or any other criminal with such a long track record PAY his debt to society ?

We the taxpayer paid his debt with the cost of his court cases his time in prison at $65,000 per criminal incarcerated.

Not to mention the countless hours of police work and the violent altercations plus the bad publicity caused by his many attacks on tourists so dont give me any of that pious bullshit.

[Guilden M. Gilbert, Jr. on 30.08.05 at 17:54]

Limey,

That is the very reason why criminals most are never reformed. As a society we use their criminal record to never allow them to succeed in life.

My view is if someone commits a crime(s) and pays his debt through prison or whatever the sentence is, he debt is repaid.

It does not remove the crime but he has to be able to move his life forward. The trouble is that most in our society still see the person as a criminal. This only prevents rehabilitation.

[SmokingGun on 30.08.05 at 18:02]

"Randy Benjamin’s widow Norma was left “belittled, slighted and insulted” after being left out of the Hall of Fame festivities on Saturday night."

Hall thing sounds a little hokey to me. If the organisers can't take care of that major gaf then I can't imagine having Clarence is that big of a deal.

He made history for Bermuda so let it be known but just don't go into what a wonderful person he was/is. He's not.

[loki on 30.08.05 at 18:52]

"As an aside, should Peter Bromby be in the Hall of Fame one day?"

Yes, because he (a) wasn't convicted; and (b) I don't believe he committed the acts of which he was accused.

Even if one doesn't accept (b), both he and his father were SEVERELY provoked by someone who has a history of provactively interfering with his neighbours' property rights and arrogantly ignoring planning regulations. I firmly believe that morality and legality do not always easily stand side by side.

[jake on 30.08.05 at 19:04]

Debt to society crap again.

We do more to hollar about the reform of criminals in Bermuda than we do any other thing.

I'm with Bill Cook on this one. You made your bed, and you have to sleep in it. You tarnished your hard work and success as an athelete when you became an attacker of the innocent (note: gay or not, no one should be attacked in a bathroom or anywhere else - what a stupid contribution).

Everyone is not a hero -ok?

If you want people to aspire to something, set the bar high and make no apologies for it. People who do not meet the bar have not earned the right to continued recognition. Where it is by way of an own goal - as is the case with C.Hill - then even more reason to say no.

I celebrate the humble sportsman who plays by the rules, does well, and through his or her example makes me want to live my whole life better. Goater does that. Alma Champ Hunt does that. How can you put people of integrity and talent - the heros - next to the athletically talented and morally bankrupt.

If it were me, I would withdraw my name from the list if my good name and character means nothing.

That is in effect what you are saying.

[jake on 30.08.05 at 19:14]

"That is the very reason why criminals most are never reformed. As a society we use their criminal record to never allow them to succeed in life."

With the greatest respect, that is crap too.

Society is not a fault when someone decides - after imprisonment - to return to crime. We are not at fault when grown men do not reform. How long are you going to make excuses for these guys?

News flash: If you have crapped on your name, and I don't want to deal with you - that is my fault?

I would be interested to know what you would find objectionable in an applicant's history. Jail time not being relevant, what is?

[Ethiops on 30.08.05 at 19:20]

I doubt Hill was chosen to box as a hero of Bermuda. I also doubt he was asked to morally represent Bermuda. The way people mix everything in one pot is STUPID. It’s a sporting hall of fame not best moral being hall of fame. One thing ain't got jake to do with the other. Funny how a people with not much moral fibre, make a moral issue out of everything.

no one should be attacked in a bathroom or anywhere else - what a stupid contribution)
no ish sherlock state the obvious...

[sandgrownan on 30.08.05 at 19:22]

I don't understand why the rest of us, who lead crime free lives, have to make excuses for a few boneheads.

Limey - Hill, as an athelete, is a role model. He more than anyone, should appreciate how his actions are viewed. It's not a question of continually punishing the man, he's been punished enough under the law, but he was a grown man. He knew right from wrong, and he was/is a public figure. Role models should be held to a higher standard. As Jake said, he made his bed, now he has to lie in it.

[Bill Cook on 30.08.05 at 19:29]

Ethiops,

Have you read and understand the criteria decided on by the administrative body that set the guidelines for induction into the Hall Of Fame ?

If so may we have your interpretation of them so we can better understand your viewpoint.

[Ethiops on 30.08.05 at 20:11]

Bill Cook

It doesn't appear understanding the criteria decided on by the administrative body that set the guidelines for induction into the Hall Of Fame is the issue. He is in the hall of fame. The issue on this forum is the public unacceptance of it, correct me if i'm wrong...

[jake on 30.08.05 at 20:20]

Ethiops,

Not the moral hall of fame?

What makes a sportsman great if not achieving success by playing the game according to the rules? Any fool can cheat and win. The better competitor is the one who respects his craft and his game. What is that if not morality? If there are to be no rules, how can you judge a competition? According to what terms?

He has the bronze medal which he won for the boxing. If he wants futher recognition - like being in the hall of fame - then we ABSOLUTELY have the right, and indeed the obligation to ask if he should be there.

Athletic achievement is more than scoring the goal or jumping the stick. It is on the court and off the court.

Obviously you don't know the difference. That is probably because like most Bermudians brought up in the current system to be a bunch of whining brats you feel you are entitled to something.

My family spent years in local cricket and tennis. They didn't have the opportunites we take for granted today, but they had integrity.

We have a whole generation of working men and women who built clubs (P.H.C. etc), institutions, and organizations that we assume have always been there. How do you think that happened?

Off the field, the integrity they displayed on the field was still evident, years after their playing days were done. They ran the business of the club in the same way that they ran the team - with honour.

Most of the folks today are content to sit outside the club selling drugs to each other and destroying the very talent the clubs are there to develop.

Don't make me laugh. Not the same thing?

How would you know?

You clearly don't know jake about it yourself!

[Ethiops on 30.08.05 at 20:29]

jake says

"Obviously you don't know the difference. That is probably because like most Bermudians brought up in the current system to be a bunch of whining brats you feel you are entitled to something".

jake you are a new fool you have no clue who I am, where I was brought up, what I’m into, what I believe, yet slander me so. I think you're an idiot for saying what you said and a bigger one to think I support his bad behaviour.

funny part is that it's a few here thats doing the whining hahahahaha

[Big Bad Wolf ^..^ on 30.08.05 at 21:10]

Hmmm many of the posts are not very sporting....We must remember in Bermuda people have nine lives just like cats.The reason Mr. Hill made it this year is because the selection committee ignored their own rules....Sounds pretty Bermudian to me."The truth is that we basically can't handle the truth!!!"

[jake on 30.08.05 at 21:25]

Actually, wolf you are right.

I am not being very sporting, since Limey's rules are to stick to the debate.

Foul acknowledged. Red Card accepted. I will enter the penalty box.

I withdraw my comments to Ethiops which caused offence, and I apologise.

Phil, feel free to delete the last post and the offending paragraph.

[Bill Cook on 30.08.05 at 21:54]

Ethiops

He was inducted into the Hall of Fame in SPITE of the rules not because he CONFORMED to the rules Ergo in my opinion they CHANGED the rules because of public pressure to do so ergo might is right.

Now that the rules are meaningless they should scrap them altogether (see my first post )

[Ethiops on 30.08.05 at 22:22]

Bill Cook

I like your first post to be honest. You ask a good question when asking is it right to make role models out of sports players. To put anyone on a pedestal is somewhere asking for fallen heroes. Why as you well know people are people and it takes all kinds to make a world, we'll never fit into the little slots people are forever busy designing for us. I don't know about public opinion being the only voice though. Sometimes the public can be more in the dark than anyone.

[Guilden M. Gilbert, Jr. on 30.08.05 at 22:58]

Jake,

Listen to yourself, are you one who believes that once one has committed a crime he should be banished from society for the rest of his life? That is what appears to be the case to me.

Basically what you are saying is the guy (can't remember his name), a former criminal, who was recently called to the Bar should not be given another opportunity to be productive.

Your comment:

"News flash: If you have crapped on your name, and I don't want to deal with you - that is my fault?"

Is that not the same as banishing them from society at large?

How many former inmates cannot find work because no one will give him a chance. I am not talking about those who do not make the effort. I am talking about those who make a concerted effort to put their negative pasts behind them and want to become productive citizens.

I do believe that Clarence Hill today is one of those persons. It took him a longtime to truly make the effort but he is definitely not the same person today as he was when he was committing the crimes for which he served jail time.

Further, if jail time is not paying your debt to society what is its purpose? Is it simply to lock people away?

My view is that crime is crime and the debt you pay should match the crime, if that is possible. However, a criminal is a criminal, is he not?

By your quote, above, you believe that after his conviction Charles Vocrausson should not have been allowed back into society when his prison sentence was over because he crapped on his name.

Basically you do not believe that society should forgive someone who has been found guilty of committing a crime. Would you feel this way if it were your flesh and blood who committed a crime and crapped on his name?

On the one hand you are saying that if you make your own bed you should lie in it then on the other hand you say,

"Most of the folks today are content to sit outside the club selling drugs to each other and destroying the very talent the clubs are there to develop."

If the talent decides to use drugs you can't blame the guy who sells it to him, now can you? Especially if you say we are making excuses for "these guys", convicted criminals, when society does not allow them to put their past behind them. If we are making excuses for "these guys", as you say, than you are making excuses for the guys with talent who end up on drugs. There is NO difference. Yet you appear to support one and not the other.

Bill,

"He was inducted into the Hall of Fame in SPITE of the rules not because he CONFORMED to the rules Ergo in my opinion they CHANGED the rules because of public pressure to do so ergo might is right."

You act as though there is something wrong with public pressure. We talk about public pressure being put on our politicians and you agree with that but you don't agree with public pressure being applied to the governing body of the Sports Hall of Fame.

If the public want Clarence Hill inducted shouldn't the will of the people prevail?

[Big Bad Wolf ^..^ on 30.08.05 at 23:10]

The will of the people should not prevail ...when its completely wrong.

[Onion on 31.08.05 at 00:05]

"As an aside, should Peter Bromby be in the Hall of Fame one day?"

Yes, because he (a) wasn't convicted; and (b) I don't believe he committed the acts of which he was accused.

Even if one doesn't accept (b), both he and his father were SEVERELY provoked by someone who has a history of provactively interfering with his neighbours' property rights and arrogantly ignoring planning regulations. I firmly believe that morality and legality do not always easily stand side by side.

Posted by: loki | 30.08.05 18:52

Loki, Peter Bromby was found guilty but given an absolute discharge. But he was found guilty! The courts did not find that he was provoked. You are inserting your personal opinion here. You must look at this objectively.