Inappropriate!

Comment Deleted by Site Moderator

Leeds asked for the delays. Should the FA have rejected the clubs requests?

I don’t think the club put a reasonable defence. I think it looks like the club deliberately delayed the process as long as possible and just have had a pretty good idea what the verdict would be.

Comment Deleted by Site Moderator

comment by HaveFaithInLeeds (U8688)
posted 2 hours, 31 minutes ago
I definitely think fans were partisan to defend him. There was no evidence out there to judge. I thought he was innocent but realised that was based on hope more than knowledge.

Look at the amount of abuse Leko got from Leeds fans on Twitter. It’s quite clear that most of the reaction to the verdict was defending Leeds come hell or high water. The reaction was not based on knowledge or fairness. And a lot of the reaction was a disgrace actually. And the reason for such a shocking reaction is that club loyalty clouds judgement.

Certainly flaws in the Fa process. The biggest was no releasing the findings at the same time of the verdict. I think that most fans agree Casilla should have been found guilty on the basis of probability now that we have read the evidence. Had this been released at the same time Leko could have avoided a vast majority of the abuse he got. The timing of the decision was also stupid and unfair on the club.

I do not blame the FA for how long it toook because generally it was our club that was delaying the process in an effort to collate evidence and produce as many witnesses as possible.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Any abuse directed at either party is unwelcome and juvenile. The delays/timetables are managed by the FA. Any request for more time has to be agreed by them. The "balance of probability" suggests that they took their time to make a final decision.

Asi said before, no party comes out of this with their heads held high.

That said, if evidence presented to Leeds United suggested Casilla wasn't guilty then I would expect them to support him. Wouldn't you?

The defence was considered unreliable. Does that mean the witnesses were lying or they weren't as compelling as the witnesses acting on Leko's behalf?

I don't condone Leko either coming out with his public frustrations. These conversations should take place behind closed doors.

He certainly shouldn't get abuse though, moronic behaviour of certain fans is not reflective of the whole.

comment by Jaz63 (U8369)
posted 21 hours, 23 minutes ago
No Germany, I'm not having a go at the club. I love the club as much as anyone. I'm having a go at the Board, and more specifically the major shareholder. Have we heard from him on this? Does he need to make a statement? Should actions reinforce his words?

Yes, I agree, Leeds45, hindsight is a wonderful thing but the whole episode was whiffy from the off.

Yes, we have an uneasy resolution, I would say, to this situation. I don't want to run the club down. I want promotion on merit - particularly on the pitch. Bielsa has given us the chance of that, after all these years. I just want to enjoy it without reservation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Very well said.

I cannot believe you are finding Leko at fault here. He was racially abused. Has reported it, and because of that has received a boat load more abuse.

Of course I would expect the club to support him if they believe he is innocent.

With regards to the unreliable defence though, I think it was quite obvious that Matt Grice and Kiko Casilla were lying, and the FA deemed that to be the case.

Do you think Kiko should have been found innocent or guilty?

comment by Cal Neva (U11544)
posted 14 hours, 59 minutes ago
comment by JonnyLosAngeles (My Dad was made in Leeds) עם ישראל חי (U9756)
posted 1 hour, 28 minutes ago
Totally in the FA’s control, timing was all on them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you think the club put up a reasonable defence ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

How do you define "reasonable?"

comment by HaveFaithInLeeds (U8688)
posted 8 hours, 56 minutes ago
I cannot believe you are finding Leko at fault here. He was racially abused. Has reported it, and because of that has received a boat load more abuse.

Of course I would expect the club to support him if they believe he is innocent.

With regards to the unreliable defence though, I think it was quite obvious that Matt Grice and Kiko Casilla were lying, and the FA deemed that to be the case.

Do you think Kiko should have been found innocent or guilty?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not sure you're understanding what I've actually said, instead you appear to be saying something different.

I've not said KC was innocent. I've not directed abuse at JL. I don't think it's appropriate for Leko to be complaining about the process, lack of support, KC being allowed to play whilst the FA contemplated the evidence.

You shouldn't put words in my mouth, I'm more than capable of airing my own views.

Where have I put words in your mouth?

I asked a question. Just answer it.

And read before respond maybe.

Can't be ar5ed mate. I have more important issues to attend to plus my position is entirely clear.