The comparison holds, Gerrard’s reputation is fine despite his ties to organised crime and his own historic offence(s).
Henderson’s hypocrisy vis-a-vis Saudi Arabia does not outweigh that in most people’s estimation.
And if you think insincerely milking a bit of positive PR is worse than assaulting someone, then you need to get out more.
But Henderson hasn’t done ‘A’. He’s just sold out to people who do ‘A’.
Whereas Gerrard has done ‘B’. Which is bad regardless of whether or not he’s publicly denounced it previously. Because organised crime and physically attacking people is bad by default.
That’s the comparison. Gerrard’s reputation is intact because barely anyone gives a shit about the moral dimension of his character. By this same measure, Henderson’s will be fine also.
Your logic is astoundingly moronic. It’s like saying Adam Johnson never spoke out against pumping kids so doesn’t belong in the same conversation as Henderson.