I think he should be able to, yes. People should be punished for their crimes, and Ched Evans already has been. After his punishment is complete, he's a free man, and should be able to do whatever he likes.
I can understand for example, not allowing convicted paedophiles to enter the teaching profession, or not allowing animal abusers to own any pets, or something like that; because it's feared that it might give them the opportunity to revert back to their criminal ways. But not allowing a convicted rapist to play football? I'm afraid I don't see the connection between rape and football. Of course the issue is whether or not any football club actually wants to sign him, rather than an actual enforced ban on playing football.
Having said that, I have some mixed views on whether or not the punishment he received is actually sufficient. I believe that the sentence for a convicted rapist should be much harsher than just a couple of years in prison, and then being let out again to play football or to do whatever else you want. However, should he have even been convicted in the first place? I don't necessarily think so. "Too drunk to consent" is always going to be a wishy-washy business.