Ryan Giggs charged with assaulting two women...

[OL29]

His domestic violence charges have nothing to do with his 8 year long affair with his brother’s wife.
I have always been amused at the Caf’s moral police about this. Like they take it personally, as if Giggs has had an affair with their own wife.
Giggs’ affair has as much to do with the football player as Ronaldo’s history with surrogacy for example: Nothing.
You could write books about the moral aspects of both “events” but as far as I am concerned this is their private / family life.

That’s a very strange comparison. I’m surprised at the lengths people are willing to go to defend Giggs’ affair. It’s fair enough to hold back on passing judgement with his current pending case, but people are well with in their rights to dislike a man that slept with his brother’s wife for 7 years. It’s indefensible.

 

[united_99]

That’s a very strange comparison. I’m surprised at the lengths people are willing to go to defend Giggs’ affair. It’s fair enough to hold back on passing judgement with his current pending case, but people are well with in their rights to dislike a man that slept with his brother’s wife for 7 years. It’s indefensible.

It’s not a strange comparison at all. Both things can be morally questionable with people / family and money involved in both events and their lives being affected.
And again I am not defending Giggs’ affair. I don’t need to as it’s none of my business. It’s his private life. A moral issue, but not a crime and not a football or United issue.

 

[adexkola]

His domestic violence charges have nothing to do with his 8 year long affair with his brother’s wife.

I have always been amused at the Caf’s moral police about this. Like they take it personally, as if Giggs has had an affair with their own wife.

Giggs’ affair has as much to do with the football player as Ronaldo’s history with surrogacy for example: Nothing.

You could write books about the moral aspects of both “events” but as far as I am concerned this is their private / family life.

This is it right here.

 

[adexkola]

That’s a very strange comparison. I’m surprised at the lengths people are willing to go to defend Giggs’ affair. It’s fair enough to hold back on passing judgement with his current pending case, but people are well with in their rights to dislike a man that slept with his brother’s wife for 7 years. It’s indefensible.

No one is defending it. It's just a huge stretch IMO to link it to the current charges, unless some correlation has been established between people who have horrible family dynamics and people who commit serious crimes.

You can simultaneously dislike him and not project that dislike onto an evaluation of whether he did this crime or not.

 

[Gehrman]

Lets just say legendary player - terrible human being.

 

[OL29]

No one is defending it. It's just a huge stretch IMO to link it to the current charges, unless some correlation has been established between people who have horrible family dynamics and people who commit serious crimes.

You can simultaneously dislike him and not project that dislike onto an evaluation of whether he did this crime or not.

There’s people defending it in this very thread.
And as I said, it’s fair enough to hold back on passing judgement with regards to his current charge, but sleeping with your brothers wife for over 7 years is an objectively scummy act. You and the poster I quoted seem to think that holding this opinion is acting as the ‘moral police’ or ‘taking it personally’. It’s hardly bemusing that people dislike someone capable of that.

 

[OL29]

It’s not a strange comparison at all. Both things can be morally questionable with people / family and money involved in both events and their lives being affected.
And again I am not defending Giggs’ affair. I don’t need to as it’s none of my business. It’s his private life. A moral issue, but not a crime and not a football or United issue.

It’s a very strange comparison. One act is pretty much indefensible. The other is a lot more subjective.
With regards to the bolded, that’s fair enough, it his his private life, but unfortunately being one of the most high profile players of the premier league era means the ability to lead a private life is non existent, and Giggs new this when he decided to embark on an affair with his sister-in-law, so my sympathy is limited.

 

[adexkola]

There’s people defending it in this very thread.
And as I said, it’s fair enough to hold back on passing judgement with regards to his current charge, but sleeping with your brothers wife for over 7 years is an objectively scummy act. You and the poster I quoted seem to think that holding this opinion is acting as the ‘moral police’ or ‘taking it personally’. It’s hardly bemusing that people dislike someone capable of that.

Being scummy does not equate to being more culpable of serious criminal activity, is my point.

If Giggs had slept with someone else's wife for 8 years the amount of emotion and projection onto his current case would be several levels lower.

 

[OL29]

Being scummy does not equate to being more culpable of serious criminal activity, is my point.

If Giggs had slept with someone else's wife for 8 years the amount of emotion and projection onto his current case would be several levels lower.

I think we’re discussing two different points, but just to be clear, his affair has no bearing on his current charge, as far as I’m concerned. I don’t have much an opinion on that, as the information is limited.
I do take issue with the following quote though:

I have always been amused at the Caf’s moral police about this. Like they take it personally, as if Giggs has had an affair with their own wife.

I don’t think calling him out for his previous acts is acting like the moral police at all. Public figure or not, anyone who does something like that is a cnut, plain and simple. Me saying this isn’t taking it personally, it’s just stating the obvious.

 

[Jippy]

There's nothing new to discuss until there are any updates, so this debate is going round in circles.