Club statement regarding Barry Bennell's conviction

Ric said:
Surely you must think it’s slightly alarming though if City chose to ignore warnings that an alleged (at the time) paedophile was working on their behalf with young boys?

As @Prestwich_Blue says, the precise nature of the relationship between Bennell and City isn’t clear yet, and I’m sure the truth will out over the coming months, but I find it odd when people seek to absolve City of any blame in this.
Click to expand...

I'm not absolving City of any blame. I have no idea who at City knew what & what guidelines they would follow in those days.

I don't know what the rules would be as regards employing or not employing someone on the strength of hearsay.

I do know that if a bunch of people in football knew that City were about employ a terrorist, I would expect them to go straight to the police, irrespective of whether City believed them or not rather than waiting til he blew the place up, then mentioning it 20 years later.
 
There's an article in the Guardian concerning Micky Fallon who was abused by Bennell whilst at Crewe, seemingly wherever Crewe played in the North West they were referred to as "the paedophile team". Now, if the kids at City, United, Liverpool and Everton were all aware of the rumours surrounding Barry Bennell then the people responsible for running the youth teams at those clubs must surely have also been aware. Crewe presumably played teams from Stafford and the Midlands and again, presumably, those teams were also aware of the rumours and, because of that, it's difficult not to think that someone in the FA had to be aware of it. So who should have reported those suspicions and to whom?
 
Bozzie said:
There's an article in the Guardian concerning Micky Fallon who was abused by Bennell whilst at Crewe, seemingly wherever Crewe played in the North West they were referred to as "the paedophile team". Now, if the kids at City, United, Liverpool and Everton were all aware of the rumours surrounding Barry Bennell then the people responsible for running the youth teams at those clubs must surely have also been aware. Crewe presumably played teams from Stafford and the Midlands and again, presumably, those teams were also aware of the rumours and, because of that, it's difficult not to think that someone in the FA had to be aware of it. So who should have reported those suspicions and to whom?
Click to expand...

I have a feeling the Crewe situation might become clearer over time.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
But we don't know for sure at this stage what the true relationship was between all the parties. There was a football club where these kids played, that seems to have had some sort of association with City. What that involved we don't really know at this stage. It's not clear what relationship Bennell had with City on a personal level. I'm not saying we don't have some responsibility here but we really don't know.

Had Bennell been directly employed by us and working at the CFA, then it's clear we would have that responsibility without question. But to prove we were negligent you'd had to show that (a) we had a clear duty of care towards the affected boys and (b) we were negligent in the way we undertook that duty. Let's not forget that Baconface ordered Bennell out of Carrington/The Cliff. He must have known something to have done that but did he approach the police or voice his concerns to the FA or another relevant authority?
Click to expand...

Ric said:
Surely you must think it’s slightly alarming though if City chose to ignore warnings that an alleged (at the time) paedophile was working on their behalf with young boys?

As @Prestwich_Blue says, the precise nature of the relationship between Bennell and City isn’t clear yet, and I’m sure the truth will out over the coming months, but I find it odd when people seek to absolve City of any blame in this.
Click to expand...

It is clear to me that most of the men who have talked about what he did describe a man who had the keys to making them a successful footballer at City. He was given status by the club one way or another even if they didn't employ him.

Whilst none of us really now what evidence city had, they knew that his kudos came from his role as starmaker, they were aware of allegations and it also seems improbable that the club didn't know he was acting at the very least inappropriately, for instance having boys sleeping over at his house.

For whatever cultural reason, the club moved him on and brushed it under the carpet.

Irrespective of the legal position , human decency says the club has some responsibility to now be open and apologetic and put things right.

I am uncomfortable with some posters' focus on pr (not anyone I've quoted, by the way) and seeing a conspiracy against city. It's a shocking catalogue of abuse of young boys , many of whom dreamt of playing for city and they were let down, and that is far more important than whether city can argue he wasn't technically employed by the club.
 
Bozzie said:
There's an article in the Guardian concerning Micky Fallon who was abused by Bennell whilst at Crewe, seemingly wherever Crewe played in the North West they were referred to as "the paedophile team". Now, if the kids at City, United, Liverpool and Everton were all aware of the rumours surrounding Barry Bennell then the people responsible for running the youth teams at those clubs must surely have also been aware. Crewe presumably played teams from Stafford and the Midlands and again, presumably, those teams were also aware of the rumours and, because of that, it's difficult not to think that someone in the FA had to be aware of it. So who should have reported those suspicions and to whom?
Click to expand...

A friend of mine, who played in the same junior football team as me and was an exceptional player, was scouted by Crewe and was on their books in the late 80s/early 90s. Even back then I can vividly recall a lot of talk/innuendo of inappropriate behaviour going on at the club. It seems unfathomable to me that the authorities were completely oblivious to it.
 
Bluster said:
It is clear to me that most of the men who have talked about what he did describe a man who had the keys to making them a successful footballer at City. He was given status by the club one way or another even if they didn't employ him.

Whilst none of us really now what evidence city had, they knew that his kudos came from his role as starmaker, they were aware of allegations and it also seems improbable that the club didn't know he was acting at the very least inappropriately, for instance having boys sleeping over at his house.

For whatever cultural reason, the club moved him on and brushed it under the carpet.

Irrespective of the legal position , human decency says the club has some responsibility to now be open and apologetic and put things right.

I am uncomfortable with some posters' focus on pr (not anyone I've quoted, by the way) and seeing a conspiracy against city. It's a shocking catalogue of abuse of young boys , many of whom dreamt of playing for city and they were let down, and that is far more important than whether city can argue he wasn't technically employed by the club.
Click to expand...
A lot of bluster there
 
Bluster said:
It is clear to me that most of the men who have talked about what he did describe a man who had the keys to making them a successful footballer at City. He was given status by the club one way or another even if they didn't employ him.

Whilst none of us really now what evidence city had, they knew that his kudos came from his role as starmaker, they were aware of allegations and it also seems improbable that the club didn't know he was acting at the very least inappropriately, for instance having boys sleeping over at his house.

For whatever cultural reason, the club moved him on and brushed it under the carpet.

Irrespective of the legal position , human decency says the club has some responsibility to now be open and apologetic and put things right.

I am uncomfortable with some posters' focus on pr (not anyone I've quoted, by the way) and seeing a conspiracy against city. It's a shocking catalogue of abuse of young boys , many of whom dreamt of playing for city and they were let down, and that is far more important than whether city can argue he wasn't technically employed by the club.
Click to expand...
Perhaps they should dump the experienced lawyer and QC heading their extensive investigation and get you in instead. It'd save a lot of time & money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.