No singing in the east strand of any song at the Reading game so I am not surprised by the OP.
Good post, Peacock.
I think it would have been way better for the Board to have made a strong statement on "kicking racism out of football" from the off, or at least prepared the ground to make such a strong statement at the appropriate time - when the FA's decision and deliberations had been published.
They could have done this by dropping Casilla from the first team from the time of the incident. This would have enabled the club to support Casilla during the outrageously overlong period between incident and judgement.
The FA's judgement was that Casilla is not a racist redneck type, that this was out of character, that he only used a very powerful racist slur casually, without thinking, in the heat of the moment. I can accept that - Casilla's only human and we all screw up sometimes.
Casilla and the club could have followed this line of argument, focusing on the fact that he tried to apologise to Leko after the game.
But they didn't.
Instead, they supported his attempt to wriggle out of the charge. They have therefore become complicit in Casilla's "casual racism."
You could even argue that not coming clean from the off is itself a racist strategy, because it puts the club's/Casilla's interests above the interests of the public - the much more important need to kick racism, even "casual racism," out of football.
If they'd dropped Casilla for the duration and gone in pleading guilty with mitigating circumstances, Casilla could have been "rehabilitated."
As it is, this is now a divisive issue. Peacock's words above are proof that the fans are divided on this issue. I wonder how the players feel about playing with someone who has used the n-word in anger. I'm pretty sure there are some who are also feeling uncomfortable about this.
So, in short, from the top, there has been an absence of leadership on this issue. Bielsa has shown great humanity and compassion towards Casilla, but he has also extended his support to Leko and more importantly, to the need to kick racism out of football.
I'm really sorry to lose Casilla, and I'm sorry we have to lose money on Casilla, and I'm particularly sorry that we have to go through the final push to promotion without our experienced ex-Real Madrid goalkeeper, whom we pay 35k a week. An injury to Meslier, who has played only three times for the club to date, will see Caprile, who has not yet played, in goal.
This club is lacking leadership. I do hope Bielsa will not pick Casilla again when the ban is exhausted. I want to believe that someone at the club has some integrity.
I sincerely hope we are not currently paying him 35k a week. At the very least the club the player himself should refuse to be paid. Not heard anything about internal fine and I know there are rules in place for maximum weeks fines. He really should not be getting paid anything until he is available for selection.
East stand was a lot noisier yesterday joining in with several songs but no one in the upper around me joined in Kiko. The south stand should have reverted the song back to Pablo only but generally speaking there are a lot of idiots in that stand - object throwers / not giving the ball back
The song was sung yesterday by some fans but didn't catch on and very quickly drowned out by another. Then no one sang it again all game. I'm going to Cardiff next Sunday and I'm really hoping it's not sung there.
Fans and club were right to support their player during this allegation. He was adament he didn't do it and innocent until proven guilty. But now we've seen all evidence and the effect on Leko, he shouldn't get our support. I expect him to leave in the summer.
Great comments Jaz.
If Meslier has great run that should make the decision easier with a couple of matches to go...actually it already is an easy decision.
Very poor leadership from the club.
I feel Casilla will play those last couple but hope that by then we will have the points in the bag that we can persist with Illan, and there appears to be a refusal by the club to acknowledge that he transgressed at all.
However, I have read the transcript and whilst I abhor racism, I feel that, the bar of proof that the FA have set, is too low. I think, because this is such a serious matter it should be that the same level as in a court of law. I am uncomfortable with this and feel that the FA had nothing to lose by ensuring that all parties went away feeling the hearing wasn't biased against them. I wonder whether that is why the club have not made a more strongly worded statement that the feeling is that it wasn't proven beyond reasonable doubt and the club are being advised, by their legal team, against such action.
On Meslier, I noticed that the commentators kept dropping the "s" from his name. Melier not Meslier, I presume that is the correct pronunciation.
“They could have done this by dropping Casilla from the first team from the time of the incident. This would have enabled the club to support Casilla during the outrageously overlong period between incident and judgement.”
Hindsight.
If the club had dropped Kiko and replacement(s) leaked goals, we could have been mid-table by now. Add to that the possibility that Kiko might have been cleared after such a long investigation and fans on here would have been frothing at the mouth for Radz to be strung up.
Even though KC was less than convincing in denying knowledge of the n-word, he may still not have said anything racist, but just grasped at any straw early in proceedings to try to establish his innocence.
Not saying he is innocent - just that we need to keep a sense of proportion rather than going all “hire the firing squad” on him.
The club, in my eyes, has attempted to support their player and took him at his word. Whether or not that was a mistake depends on something none of us (including the FL) will ever be sure of - what KC actually said in that moment.
Any other action by the club would have severely prejudiced KC’s case and potentially wrecked our season.
You could squeeze Illan Meslier into the song instead. It works.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
People having a go at the club!..
The FA basically said that Leeds Players had talked crap at the hearing, so, if Kiko has given his story to the board and the crap the players have given made it out Kiko was innocent, than how can the club not back him?..
Same as anyone here going to court and having mates as witnesses, the court will listen and then try and work out who's telling the truth!..
In a civil court if your mates are found to be lying for you they will be charged and could go to jail!..
I wonder why if the FA say the Leeds players had lied they didn't face charges, seems that's something the FA find ok!..
Or cant do much against!..
If Kiko had come clean from the start and players had kept quite than the club might have had another way of thinking and done what it seems most here wanted doing, but the way they've done things is supported their player with what evidence they have put in front of them, which is what Kiko and Co have said!..
Not really much else they could do!..
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
FA have fined Casilla, banned him and ordered that he goes on some form of re-education course. Pretty sure if I was found guilty of racially abusing someone at my place of work my feet wouldn't touch the ground but that is by the by.
The FA haven't imposed their toughest sanction which puzzles me (could have been a longer ban), if not why not, seems they have a doubt as to his guilt, which indicates that if they had tried him fairly (beyond reasonable doubt), he may have got off. The fact they used the lesser standard indicates to me that the FA knew they didn't have as strong a case as they should have when you are talking about someone's reputation and potentially their livelihood.
However, the FA have set a sanction, which, if Casilla adheres to it, will be the end of the matter, as long as he doesn't reoffend.
People on here baying for blood and expecting the club to tear up his contract are effectively wanting a tougher sanction than even the FA have imposed.
That to me seems fundamentally unfair, especially as it relates to something that wasn't proved beyond reasonable doubt.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
"You mixing up a Criminal Court and a Civil Court again."
No Cal, I'm only saying if your mates lied for you in court they would be charged and could even go to jail!..
FA said Leeds players had lied, so, if they did why cant they be charged?..
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
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.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
"Well the same applies because it is not a criminal proceeding."
Cal, I know!..
I think that is the reason for players not being charged, a civil court they would be but the FA,(not being a civil court!)cant do it!..
I think it should be a case where if proven than people lying should face a charge!..
There is no place for racism in any part of life. Casilla has been punished on the balance of probability. People are suggesting he should now lose his job, again on the balance of probability.
If the club decide to sack him having backed him through the process I would deem that harsh. Nonetheless I would respect that decision. Equally, if they continue his employment and provide "direction" in terms of his "rehabilitation" I would support that too.
Convicted criminals are given rehabilitation whatever their crime. Are we saying, given the circumstances, Kiko is a worse case? This is NOT a criminal conviction and he was NOT found to be 100% guilty.
Not the time to jump on the PC bandwagon in my opinion.
Feeling strongly about such "casual racism" - however you feel about calling someone a f...ing n.....r in anger, in public - is not "jumping on the PC bandwagon", Stevie.
Of course Casilla should be forgiven and "rehabilitated," as per Bielsa's intentions. If Bielsa plays him again, then I will even accept that.
But the other point outside of the issue of racism and what to do about it is whether Casilla can be forgiven for leaving us without an experienced keeper during this the final stretch of the campaign. I'm rooting for Meslier, believe me, and as far as it goes, the signs look good - he seems very confident and competent.
Nothing to do with political correctness - that's too easy. Everything to do with doing the right thing, setting the right example, showing leadership and responsibility.
Think there are 2 parts to Kiko
He has been found guilty. Its comical for our fans to chant his name in some kind of loyal protest. Just leave it be and focus on the league. Reminds me a bit of the Suarez Liverpool Tshirt incident that time.
Secondly and less relevant to the original point. His form arguably cost us promotion last season and hampered us massively after Christmas.
For his wage and the two points above I think its time to move on
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Just to be clear, the Commission did not say that the Leeds players lied, just that their evidence was found to be unreliable.
Even in criminal courts, evidence of witnesses is disregarded by the court (magistrates, judges, juries, etc.) if found to be unreliable - and that is not considered perjury (where action can be taken when witnesses lie and are proven to do so).
I wonder what standard the FA would have use, if the shoe had been on the other foot. If it was alleged that Leko had called Casilla a f'ing dago or similar. It seems the FA used to lesser standard because it made a guilty verdict easier to achieve.
middlesex, I know the FA said the Leeds players evidence was unreliable and ignored it, but, if they're saying unreliable its the same as saying they didn't believe it!..
If they don't believe it than its a lie whichever way you look at it!..
Sign in if you want to comment
Inappropriate!
Page 1 of 2
posted on 8/3/20
No singing in the east strand of any song at the Reading game so I am not surprised by the OP.
posted on 8/3/20
Good post, Peacock.
I think it would have been way better for the Board to have made a strong statement on "kicking racism out of football" from the off, or at least prepared the ground to make such a strong statement at the appropriate time - when the FA's decision and deliberations had been published.
They could have done this by dropping Casilla from the first team from the time of the incident. This would have enabled the club to support Casilla during the outrageously overlong period between incident and judgement.
The FA's judgement was that Casilla is not a racist redneck type, that this was out of character, that he only used a very powerful racist slur casually, without thinking, in the heat of the moment. I can accept that - Casilla's only human and we all screw up sometimes.
Casilla and the club could have followed this line of argument, focusing on the fact that he tried to apologise to Leko after the game.
But they didn't.
Instead, they supported his attempt to wriggle out of the charge. They have therefore become complicit in Casilla's "casual racism."
You could even argue that not coming clean from the off is itself a racist strategy, because it puts the club's/Casilla's interests above the interests of the public - the much more important need to kick racism, even "casual racism," out of football.
If they'd dropped Casilla for the duration and gone in pleading guilty with mitigating circumstances, Casilla could have been "rehabilitated."
As it is, this is now a divisive issue. Peacock's words above are proof that the fans are divided on this issue. I wonder how the players feel about playing with someone who has used the n-word in anger. I'm pretty sure there are some who are also feeling uncomfortable about this.
So, in short, from the top, there has been an absence of leadership on this issue. Bielsa has shown great humanity and compassion towards Casilla, but he has also extended his support to Leko and more importantly, to the need to kick racism out of football.
I'm really sorry to lose Casilla, and I'm sorry we have to lose money on Casilla, and I'm particularly sorry that we have to go through the final push to promotion without our experienced ex-Real Madrid goalkeeper, whom we pay 35k a week. An injury to Meslier, who has played only three times for the club to date, will see Caprile, who has not yet played, in goal.
This club is lacking leadership. I do hope Bielsa will not pick Casilla again when the ban is exhausted. I want to believe that someone at the club has some integrity.
posted on 8/3/20
I sincerely hope we are not currently paying him 35k a week. At the very least the club the player himself should refuse to be paid. Not heard anything about internal fine and I know there are rules in place for maximum weeks fines. He really should not be getting paid anything until he is available for selection.
East stand was a lot noisier yesterday joining in with several songs but no one in the upper around me joined in Kiko. The south stand should have reverted the song back to Pablo only but generally speaking there are a lot of idiots in that stand - object throwers / not giving the ball back
posted on 8/3/20
The song was sung yesterday by some fans but didn't catch on and very quickly drowned out by another. Then no one sang it again all game. I'm going to Cardiff next Sunday and I'm really hoping it's not sung there.
Fans and club were right to support their player during this allegation. He was adament he didn't do it and innocent until proven guilty. But now we've seen all evidence and the effect on Leko, he shouldn't get our support. I expect him to leave in the summer.
posted on 8/3/20
Great comments Jaz.
If Meslier has great run that should make the decision easier with a couple of matches to go...actually it already is an easy decision.
Very poor leadership from the club.
posted on 8/3/20
I feel Casilla will play those last couple but hope that by then we will have the points in the bag that we can persist with Illan, and there appears to be a refusal by the club to acknowledge that he transgressed at all.
However, I have read the transcript and whilst I abhor racism, I feel that, the bar of proof that the FA have set, is too low. I think, because this is such a serious matter it should be that the same level as in a court of law. I am uncomfortable with this and feel that the FA had nothing to lose by ensuring that all parties went away feeling the hearing wasn't biased against them. I wonder whether that is why the club have not made a more strongly worded statement that the feeling is that it wasn't proven beyond reasonable doubt and the club are being advised, by their legal team, against such action.
On Meslier, I noticed that the commentators kept dropping the "s" from his name. Melier not Meslier, I presume that is the correct pronunciation.
posted on 8/3/20
“They could have done this by dropping Casilla from the first team from the time of the incident. This would have enabled the club to support Casilla during the outrageously overlong period between incident and judgement.”
Hindsight.
If the club had dropped Kiko and replacement(s) leaked goals, we could have been mid-table by now. Add to that the possibility that Kiko might have been cleared after such a long investigation and fans on here would have been frothing at the mouth for Radz to be strung up.
Even though KC was less than convincing in denying knowledge of the n-word, he may still not have said anything racist, but just grasped at any straw early in proceedings to try to establish his innocence.
Not saying he is innocent - just that we need to keep a sense of proportion rather than going all “hire the firing squad” on him.
The club, in my eyes, has attempted to support their player and took him at his word. Whether or not that was a mistake depends on something none of us (including the FL) will ever be sure of - what KC actually said in that moment.
Any other action by the club would have severely prejudiced KC’s case and potentially wrecked our season.
posted on 8/3/20
You could squeeze Illan Meslier into the song instead. It works.
posted on 8/3/20
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 8/3/20
People having a go at the club!..
The FA basically said that Leeds Players had talked crap at the hearing, so, if Kiko has given his story to the board and the crap the players have given made it out Kiko was innocent, than how can the club not back him?..
Same as anyone here going to court and having mates as witnesses, the court will listen and then try and work out who's telling the truth!..
In a civil court if your mates are found to be lying for you they will be charged and could go to jail!..
I wonder why if the FA say the Leeds players had lied they didn't face charges, seems that's something the FA find ok!..
Or cant do much against!..
If Kiko had come clean from the start and players had kept quite than the club might have had another way of thinking and done what it seems most here wanted doing, but the way they've done things is supported their player with what evidence they have put in front of them, which is what Kiko and Co have said!..
Not really much else they could do!..
posted on 8/3/20
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 8/3/20
FA have fined Casilla, banned him and ordered that he goes on some form of re-education course. Pretty sure if I was found guilty of racially abusing someone at my place of work my feet wouldn't touch the ground but that is by the by.
The FA haven't imposed their toughest sanction which puzzles me (could have been a longer ban), if not why not, seems they have a doubt as to his guilt, which indicates that if they had tried him fairly (beyond reasonable doubt), he may have got off. The fact they used the lesser standard indicates to me that the FA knew they didn't have as strong a case as they should have when you are talking about someone's reputation and potentially their livelihood.
However, the FA have set a sanction, which, if Casilla adheres to it, will be the end of the matter, as long as he doesn't reoffend.
People on here baying for blood and expecting the club to tear up his contract are effectively wanting a tougher sanction than even the FA have imposed.
That to me seems fundamentally unfair, especially as it relates to something that wasn't proved beyond reasonable doubt.
posted on 8/3/20
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 8/3/20
"You mixing up a Criminal Court and a Civil Court again."
No Cal, I'm only saying if your mates lied for you in court they would be charged and could even go to jail!..
FA said Leeds players had lied, so, if they did why cant they be charged?..
posted on 8/3/20
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 8/3/20
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.
posted on 8/3/20
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 8/3/20
"Well the same applies because it is not a criminal proceeding."
Cal, I know!..
I think that is the reason for players not being charged, a civil court they would be but the FA,(not being a civil court!)cant do it!..
I think it should be a case where if proven than people lying should face a charge!..
posted on 8/3/20
There is no place for racism in any part of life. Casilla has been punished on the balance of probability. People are suggesting he should now lose his job, again on the balance of probability.
If the club decide to sack him having backed him through the process I would deem that harsh. Nonetheless I would respect that decision. Equally, if they continue his employment and provide "direction" in terms of his "rehabilitation" I would support that too.
Convicted criminals are given rehabilitation whatever their crime. Are we saying, given the circumstances, Kiko is a worse case? This is NOT a criminal conviction and he was NOT found to be 100% guilty.
Not the time to jump on the PC bandwagon in my opinion.
posted on 8/3/20
Feeling strongly about such "casual racism" - however you feel about calling someone a f...ing n.....r in anger, in public - is not "jumping on the PC bandwagon", Stevie.
Of course Casilla should be forgiven and "rehabilitated," as per Bielsa's intentions. If Bielsa plays him again, then I will even accept that.
But the other point outside of the issue of racism and what to do about it is whether Casilla can be forgiven for leaving us without an experienced keeper during this the final stretch of the campaign. I'm rooting for Meslier, believe me, and as far as it goes, the signs look good - he seems very confident and competent.
Nothing to do with political correctness - that's too easy. Everything to do with doing the right thing, setting the right example, showing leadership and responsibility.
posted on 8/3/20
Think there are 2 parts to Kiko
He has been found guilty. Its comical for our fans to chant his name in some kind of loyal protest. Just leave it be and focus on the league. Reminds me a bit of the Suarez Liverpool Tshirt incident that time.
Secondly and less relevant to the original point. His form arguably cost us promotion last season and hampered us massively after Christmas.
For his wage and the two points above I think its time to move on
posted on 8/3/20
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 8/3/20
Just to be clear, the Commission did not say that the Leeds players lied, just that their evidence was found to be unreliable.
Even in criminal courts, evidence of witnesses is disregarded by the court (magistrates, judges, juries, etc.) if found to be unreliable - and that is not considered perjury (where action can be taken when witnesses lie and are proven to do so).
posted on 8/3/20
I wonder what standard the FA would have use, if the shoe had been on the other foot. If it was alleged that Leko had called Casilla a f'ing dago or similar. It seems the FA used to lesser standard because it made a guilty verdict easier to achieve.
posted on 8/3/20
middlesex, I know the FA said the Leeds players evidence was unreliable and ignored it, but, if they're saying unreliable its the same as saying they didn't believe it!..
If they don't believe it than its a lie whichever way you look at it!..
Page 1 of 2