comment by Afridi14... ( ليدز_يونايتد )You gotta love it!! (U2805)
posted 16 minutes ago
High,
Agreed that it states he’s not a racist, but a multicultural Goalkeeper played with all races, all of a sudden chooses the most racist term probably used in the English language, this stinks as far as I’m concerned. I’ve read the report and agree with the FA, only conclusion they could have come to.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Have to agree with this having now read the report. Thankfully your on field defence has less holes in it than Kiko's hearing defence or you'd probably have been relegated by Christmas.
Also agree with the 'out of character' assessment. Absolutely no way he's a full blown racist, nor should he now have to face any further club punishment, but in my eyes he definitely made a monumental f up that day. Don't see what else the FA could have done in this matter.
Whatever he’s now banned and we have to back the young kid to do his job.
Fortunately we have the best defence in the league so hopefully they will make sure his work load is reduced.
I’ve read almost all of the report but still feel that the way the FA find someone guilty on a “probability” basis is not right.
Who is to say that the 2 Charlton players didn’t concoct the story to derail Leeds’ season? If I remember correctly Charlton were up near the top of the table at the beginning of the season, as were West Brom. I’m not saying that is what happened, but their case cannot be proven. There is no video evidence for Casilla’s words to be lip-read, no-one else heard the alleged words.
Sorry, but I feel the FA have now made it possible for any player to discredit a player from another club by simply making up a racist slur and then that player will more than likely be found guilty on the basis of “probability”. It “probably” happened - not proven by facts - but “probably” said or did it!
I don’t like this at all.
comment by MaidinLeeds (U2464)
posted 9 minutes ago
I’ve read almost all of the report but still feel that the way the FA find someone guilty on a “probability” basis is not right.
Who is to say that the 2 Charlton players didn’t concoct the story to derail Leeds’ season? If I remember correctly Charlton were up near the top of the table at the beginning of the season, as were West Brom. I’m not saying that is what happened, but their case cannot be proven. There is no video evidence for Casilla’s words to be lip-read, no-one else heard the alleged words.
Sorry, but I feel the FA have now made it possible for any player to discredit a player from another club by simply making up a racist slur and then that player will more than likely be found guilty on the basis of “probability”. It “probably” happened - not proven by facts - but “probably” said or did it!
I don’t like this at all.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Have to say I agree. If a court or other body is to sit in judgement then balance of probability is simply not good enough. What has angered me about the high and mighty FA is stating that Kiko's decision to obtain and submit character references from some big names in football was shameful. Good God, what did the FA expect??? The man's reputation is on the line and whether he's guilty or not, who wouldn't seek to submit as strong a defence as possible?
To suggest Kilko was trying to influence proceedings and to hammer him for it is incredibly short-sighted by the FA considering the way they handle these cases. Wasn't Leko trying to influence proceedings by having Bonne support him as a witness? I'm not defending or judging Kiko here, just pointing out the absurd and unsatisfactory methods employed by the FA in arriving at their decisions. The FA might think they are paragons of virtue but their pronouncements leave them wide open to ridicule and accusations of inconsistency.
comment by Elland White (U8323)
posted 22 seconds ago
comment by MaidinLeeds (U2464)
posted 9 minutes ago
I’ve read almost all of the report but still feel that the way the FA find someone guilty on a “probability” basis is not right.
Who is to say that the 2 Charlton players didn’t concoct the story to derail Leeds’ season? If I remember correctly Charlton were up near the top of the table at the beginning of the season, as were West Brom. I’m not saying that is what happened, but their case cannot be proven. There is no video evidence for Casilla’s words to be lip-read, no-one else heard the alleged words.
Sorry, but I feel the FA have now made it possible for any player to discredit a player from another club by simply making up a racist slur and then that player will more than likely be found guilty on the basis of “probability”. It “probably” happened - not proven by facts - but “probably” said or did it!
I don’t like this at all.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Have to say I agree. If a court or other body is to sit in judgement then balance of probability is simply not good enough. What has angered me about the high and mighty FA is stating that Kiko's decision to obtain and submit character references from some big names in football was shameful. Good God, what did the FA expect??? The man's reputation is on the line and whether he's guilty or not, who wouldn't seek to submit as strong a defence as possible?
To suggest Kilko was trying to influence proceedings and to hammer him for it is incredibly short-sighted by the FA considering the way they handle these cases. Wasn't Leko trying to influence proceedings by having Bonne support him as a witness? I'm not defending or judging Kiko here, just pointing out the absurd and unsatisfactory methods employed by the FA in arriving at their decisions. The FA might think they are paragons of virtue but their pronouncements leave them wide open to ridicule and accusations of inconsistency.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How very dare he be acquainted with such successful individuals. It's disgraceful.
Having read the Report, I'm afraid I must agree with the ruling. Burden of proof seems to have been met and some. Leko got up Casilla's nose and he reacted badly. It doesn't seem like Casilla did himself any favours during the investigation process but there you go.
I can understand why everyone, including Bielsa, closed ranks because it's clear that his reaction was very out of character - but if you screw up, it's always best to come clean from the off, no?
It's completely unprofessional behaviour, and of course, the insult used is undoubtedly racist - maximum toxicity! What a very stupid, expensive, nasty mistake. It's very worrying that he has obviously been misadvised by the club.
Bloody disaster, really! Thank goodness Meslier looks confident and that they signed Caprile, who I notice was on the bench last week. At least we're not totally in the dog faeces, then.
Thanks but no thanks, Casilla. Sack him or sell him on, quietly?
Casilla shot himself in the foot by claiming he'd no idea that the n-word existed.
Matt Grice was a wholly unreliable witness which really gave the prosecution a good excuse to further disbelieve KC. Obviously thought he could lie to barristers and get away with it - silly man!
Grice should be posted to Siberia by the club for his part in the proceedings.
Personally, I think that KC may have said something that was misheard because of heightened sensitivities. Sadly, wriggling to get off the hook instead of being 100% truthful throughout probably resulted in the decision not going his way.
I accept that the decision was the right one given the way evidence was provided, but I don't think it's the correct one.
It's here this morning - a complete PR disaster.
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/mar/03/leeds-uniteds-kiko-casilla-was-banned-for-using-n-word
Thanks Casilla, dragging us back into the scheisse, just as we're in sight of the Promised Land ON MERIT and regenerating the global brand. Bet Radrizzani is ecstatic.
No wonder he was making more and more mistakes: he knew what was coming, that he'd be exposed. Suggesting the panel was biased is a complete nonsense - they accepted this was out of character.
Don't believe he's a fully paid-up racist mf but this sort of "casual racism" is worse than the mindless monkey noises because it's everywhere.
Wtf was he or the club thinking expecting anyone to believe he'd never heard the n-word before? That is off the stupid scale, frankly - and probably was the factor that persuaded the panel that he's LYING! Brice was another factor.
Kinnear was in there too, so this rot goes to the top: the club were hoping to further this lie. That is what stinks here.
We've got to take DRASTIC ACTION to kick racism out of football! If that means losing a good goalkeeper, as well as Angus Kinnear (we should be so lucky) and Matt Brice, then so be it.
Everyone is jumping on the attempts by KC to prove his innocence as bad. This is wrong. People claim many things in attempts to get out of being punished for a single irreversible bad action.
None of that matters.
And the balance of probabilities is the way all these things are done. It is not a criminal case.
KC more than likely did say it, in the heat of the moment - although a fair few seconds after the heat of the moment. He was riled, said something stupid like anyone can, and got caught.
He now takes his punishment.
The concern is if Leeds fans are abusing those who were abused or reported it. Let them be. We win on the pitch.
and just to clarify my position on racism: my kids had a granny from Burma and got called "chinks" at school. Even without that personal element, those three words and the club's response make my stomach turn.
Sack Casilla? That's the strongest position we could take, but judging by the club's response, not at all likely.
Sell him, then, probably making a massive loss. Tough. It could be a really expensive mistake, as it turns out.
I'm really disappointed in the club, to be honest. It's good that they have supported Casilla but not that they have sought to perpetuate the fiction that he'd never heard of the n-word. Might as well have turned up wearing a guilty-as-charged sign round his neck. How could they have accepted that so obviously false explanation?
I'm not massively convinced that your casual racism being worse than vehement and targeted racism is true.
Let’s be clear-
Criminal burden of proof = beyond reasonable doubt
All other courts (civil) burden of proof = balance of probabilities
It’s the balance taking into account all probabilities. The FA is not a criminal court.
comment by Smileybadge (U2904)
posted 2 minutes ago
Let’s be clear-
Criminal burden of proof = beyond reasonable doubt
All other courts (civil) burden of proof = balance of probabilities
It’s the balance taking into account all probabilities. The FA is not a criminal court.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Some of their decision making is pretty criminal!
I'm willing to accept their verdict as probably the case. Kiko probably isn't a racist, and we all say things that we regret in the heat of the moment. Don't know where we go from here, but hopefully it doesn't affect those players involved during the game against Huddersfield.
So, first thing, despite the system used ie probability, do people really think this is all some conspiracy? It looks like a thorough and proper investigations to me and a proper independent tribunal.
So, can one imagine people like James Mooney and Orta trying to influence what players say the same way they tried to influence the match recently and got punished for it?
Its quite damning hearing about the lengths gone to, in order to try and make Kiko seem blameless.
To hear that Grice's evidence was not seeking to assist the investigation but to most assist Kiko.
The fact we're not appealing it further tells you all you need to know about what Leeds really know about the case.
If a fan said what Kiko is meant to have said, he'd be banned for life.
If any of us said that at work, we'd be sacked.
The club have tried to weasel out of this, deflect blame onto FA and its mechanism, they really should be ashamed of this.
I would not be surprised if Bielsa doesn't pick Kiko again, but there's a part of me that wouldn't be surprised if he does pick him.
This is where leadership and the culture it creates, counts.
I believe that the club should be cancelling Kiko's contract and being clear internally that the way certain Leeds individuals conducted themselves is not acceptable.
"So, can one imagine people like James Mooney and Orta trying to influence what players say the same way they tried to influence the match recently and got punished for it?"
Your obsession is getting out of hand now, what a ridiculous take to drag Orta in to it
gelderd,there is clear track record of both Orta and Mooney attempting to interfere with due process ie the match officials.
There are not other at the club that I know of with this history and from the FA document its clear that the club have made things worse here. Someone sanctions this behaviour, it doesn't come out of thin air.
comment by gelderd82 (U6817)
posted 11 minutes ago
"So, can one imagine people like James Mooney and Orta trying to influence what players say the same way they tried to influence the match recently and got punished for it?"
Your obsession is getting out of hand now, what a ridiculous take to drag Orta in to it
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed.
The behaviour at the match in question was heat of the moment stuff based on a really bizarre performance from the ref (and as a rule I try to avoid blaming refs - but some of the stuff that day was bizarre I felt). I'm not condoning it, but it's a stretch linking it to this.
As for the outcome - I really don't agree, still, that balance of probability in a case such as this is sufficient. In modern life an accusation of racism in the workplace can have profound effects on the individuals concerned and accused. Loss of job, income, home etc... the list goes on. If found guilty by evidence, then you get what you ask for, but balance of probability I don't think is a sufficient burden of proof and actually never will think it is.
That said, it is the way civil law works, so if feeling truly aggrieved and unjustifiably treated, then it's up to Kiko and any legal representatives to take action against the decision. If he doesn't, then that above all tells me he's probably aware he's said something he shouldn't have.
comment by Jonty (U4614)
posted 3 minutes ago
gelderd,there is clear track record of both Orta and Mooney attempting to interfere with due process ie the match officials.
There are not other at the club that I know of with this history and from the FA document its clear that the club have made things worse here. Someone sanctions this behaviour, it doesn't come out of thin air.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
i mean insinuating that because they were angry we conceded a goal from a throw in and gave the officials a few words .... they would be willing bury to racism is probably a bit far mate.
one hell of a conclusion to jump to.
VOF, the comments about the club and Kiko's actions are damning. The shameless attempts to distract and paint flawless character, the feigning ignorance over the n word, the pretence that Casilla had no idea what he's been accused of saying when Roberts received text messages straight after the match.
I really hate it when club does stuff like this, trying to weasel out of things.
Part of Kiko's case and teh reason this all got delayed was because he denied using any abusive language, which even our own players admitted he had done. He completely undid his own credibility by this constant blanket protestation of complete innocence.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by LeedsRich - Bielsaball (U18097)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Jonty (U4614)
posted 3 minutes ago
gelderd,there is clear track record of both Orta and Mooney attempting to interfere with due process ie the match officials.
There are not other at the club that I know of with this history and from the FA document its clear that the club have made things worse here. Someone sanctions this behaviour, it doesn't come out of thin air.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
i mean insinuating that because they were angry we conceded a goal from a throw in and gave the officials a few words .... they would be willing bury to racism is probably a bit far mate.
one hell of a conclusion to jump to.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So, do you think Grice decided to do that by himself? Do you think Grice decided to issue a statement trying to paint the FA's decision making process as the real problem?
James Mooney is a complete c*** and yet Orta managed to get himself a higher sanction, not for having a few words, but for improper conduct.
Someone at the club has chosen to try and twist things here and its not come from Matt Grice, whom reports into Orta.
comment by Jonty (U4614)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by LeedsRich - Bielsaball (U18097)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Jonty (U4614)
posted 3 minutes ago
gelderd,there is clear track record of both Orta and Mooney attempting to interfere with due process ie the match officials.
There are not other at the club that I know of with this history and from the FA document its clear that the club have made things worse here. Someone sanctions this behaviour, it doesn't come out of thin air.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
i mean insinuating that because they were angry we conceded a goal from a throw in and gave the officials a few words .... they would be willing bury to racism is probably a bit far mate.
one hell of a conclusion to jump to.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So, do you think Grice decided to do that by himself? Do you think Grice decided to issue a statement trying to paint the FA's decision making process as the real problem?
James Mooney is a complete c*** and yet Orta managed to get himself a higher sanction, not for having a few words, but for improper conduct.
Someone at the club has chosen to try and twist things here and its not come from Matt Grice, whom reports into Orta.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I dont know mate, i do agree btw that it all stinks.
im not defending the club.
just saying that because they went mental at piece of poor refereeing dont mean that they did X
Rich, best indicator of future behaviour is past behaviour.
I do not see AR or Kinnear or Bielsa sanctioning this sort of behaviour.
fair enough mate, guess thats probably on the whole a fairly reliable hypothesis.
Sign in if you want to comment
FA Reasons re Casilla Ban
Page 2 of 3
posted on 3/3/20
comment by Afridi14... ( ليدز_يونايتد )You gotta love it!! (U2805)
posted 16 minutes ago
High,
Agreed that it states he’s not a racist, but a multicultural Goalkeeper played with all races, all of a sudden chooses the most racist term probably used in the English language, this stinks as far as I’m concerned. I’ve read the report and agree with the FA, only conclusion they could have come to.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Have to agree with this having now read the report. Thankfully your on field defence has less holes in it than Kiko's hearing defence or you'd probably have been relegated by Christmas.
Also agree with the 'out of character' assessment. Absolutely no way he's a full blown racist, nor should he now have to face any further club punishment, but in my eyes he definitely made a monumental f up that day. Don't see what else the FA could have done in this matter.
posted on 3/3/20
Whatever he’s now banned and we have to back the young kid to do his job.
Fortunately we have the best defence in the league so hopefully they will make sure his work load is reduced.
posted on 3/3/20
I’ve read almost all of the report but still feel that the way the FA find someone guilty on a “probability” basis is not right.
Who is to say that the 2 Charlton players didn’t concoct the story to derail Leeds’ season? If I remember correctly Charlton were up near the top of the table at the beginning of the season, as were West Brom. I’m not saying that is what happened, but their case cannot be proven. There is no video evidence for Casilla’s words to be lip-read, no-one else heard the alleged words.
Sorry, but I feel the FA have now made it possible for any player to discredit a player from another club by simply making up a racist slur and then that player will more than likely be found guilty on the basis of “probability”. It “probably” happened - not proven by facts - but “probably” said or did it!
I don’t like this at all.
posted on 3/3/20
comment by MaidinLeeds (U2464)
posted 9 minutes ago
I’ve read almost all of the report but still feel that the way the FA find someone guilty on a “probability” basis is not right.
Who is to say that the 2 Charlton players didn’t concoct the story to derail Leeds’ season? If I remember correctly Charlton were up near the top of the table at the beginning of the season, as were West Brom. I’m not saying that is what happened, but their case cannot be proven. There is no video evidence for Casilla’s words to be lip-read, no-one else heard the alleged words.
Sorry, but I feel the FA have now made it possible for any player to discredit a player from another club by simply making up a racist slur and then that player will more than likely be found guilty on the basis of “probability”. It “probably” happened - not proven by facts - but “probably” said or did it!
I don’t like this at all.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Have to say I agree. If a court or other body is to sit in judgement then balance of probability is simply not good enough. What has angered me about the high and mighty FA is stating that Kiko's decision to obtain and submit character references from some big names in football was shameful. Good God, what did the FA expect??? The man's reputation is on the line and whether he's guilty or not, who wouldn't seek to submit as strong a defence as possible?
To suggest Kilko was trying to influence proceedings and to hammer him for it is incredibly short-sighted by the FA considering the way they handle these cases. Wasn't Leko trying to influence proceedings by having Bonne support him as a witness? I'm not defending or judging Kiko here, just pointing out the absurd and unsatisfactory methods employed by the FA in arriving at their decisions. The FA might think they are paragons of virtue but their pronouncements leave them wide open to ridicule and accusations of inconsistency.
posted on 3/3/20
comment by Elland White (U8323)
posted 22 seconds ago
comment by MaidinLeeds (U2464)
posted 9 minutes ago
I’ve read almost all of the report but still feel that the way the FA find someone guilty on a “probability” basis is not right.
Who is to say that the 2 Charlton players didn’t concoct the story to derail Leeds’ season? If I remember correctly Charlton were up near the top of the table at the beginning of the season, as were West Brom. I’m not saying that is what happened, but their case cannot be proven. There is no video evidence for Casilla’s words to be lip-read, no-one else heard the alleged words.
Sorry, but I feel the FA have now made it possible for any player to discredit a player from another club by simply making up a racist slur and then that player will more than likely be found guilty on the basis of “probability”. It “probably” happened - not proven by facts - but “probably” said or did it!
I don’t like this at all.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Have to say I agree. If a court or other body is to sit in judgement then balance of probability is simply not good enough. What has angered me about the high and mighty FA is stating that Kiko's decision to obtain and submit character references from some big names in football was shameful. Good God, what did the FA expect??? The man's reputation is on the line and whether he's guilty or not, who wouldn't seek to submit as strong a defence as possible?
To suggest Kilko was trying to influence proceedings and to hammer him for it is incredibly short-sighted by the FA considering the way they handle these cases. Wasn't Leko trying to influence proceedings by having Bonne support him as a witness? I'm not defending or judging Kiko here, just pointing out the absurd and unsatisfactory methods employed by the FA in arriving at their decisions. The FA might think they are paragons of virtue but their pronouncements leave them wide open to ridicule and accusations of inconsistency.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How very dare he be acquainted with such successful individuals. It's disgraceful.
posted on 4/3/20
Having read the Report, I'm afraid I must agree with the ruling. Burden of proof seems to have been met and some. Leko got up Casilla's nose and he reacted badly. It doesn't seem like Casilla did himself any favours during the investigation process but there you go.
I can understand why everyone, including Bielsa, closed ranks because it's clear that his reaction was very out of character - but if you screw up, it's always best to come clean from the off, no?
It's completely unprofessional behaviour, and of course, the insult used is undoubtedly racist - maximum toxicity! What a very stupid, expensive, nasty mistake. It's very worrying that he has obviously been misadvised by the club.
Bloody disaster, really! Thank goodness Meslier looks confident and that they signed Caprile, who I notice was on the bench last week. At least we're not totally in the dog faeces, then.
Thanks but no thanks, Casilla. Sack him or sell him on, quietly?
posted on 4/3/20
Casilla shot himself in the foot by claiming he'd no idea that the n-word existed.
Matt Grice was a wholly unreliable witness which really gave the prosecution a good excuse to further disbelieve KC. Obviously thought he could lie to barristers and get away with it - silly man!
Grice should be posted to Siberia by the club for his part in the proceedings.
Personally, I think that KC may have said something that was misheard because of heightened sensitivities. Sadly, wriggling to get off the hook instead of being 100% truthful throughout probably resulted in the decision not going his way.
I accept that the decision was the right one given the way evidence was provided, but I don't think it's the correct one.
posted on 4/3/20
It's here this morning - a complete PR disaster.
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/mar/03/leeds-uniteds-kiko-casilla-was-banned-for-using-n-word
Thanks Casilla, dragging us back into the scheisse, just as we're in sight of the Promised Land ON MERIT and regenerating the global brand. Bet Radrizzani is ecstatic.
No wonder he was making more and more mistakes: he knew what was coming, that he'd be exposed. Suggesting the panel was biased is a complete nonsense - they accepted this was out of character.
Don't believe he's a fully paid-up racist mf but this sort of "casual racism" is worse than the mindless monkey noises because it's everywhere.
Wtf was he or the club thinking expecting anyone to believe he'd never heard the n-word before? That is off the stupid scale, frankly - and probably was the factor that persuaded the panel that he's LYING! Brice was another factor.
Kinnear was in there too, so this rot goes to the top: the club were hoping to further this lie. That is what stinks here.
We've got to take DRASTIC ACTION to kick racism out of football! If that means losing a good goalkeeper, as well as Angus Kinnear (we should be so lucky) and Matt Brice, then so be it.
posted on 4/3/20
Everyone is jumping on the attempts by KC to prove his innocence as bad. This is wrong. People claim many things in attempts to get out of being punished for a single irreversible bad action.
None of that matters.
And the balance of probabilities is the way all these things are done. It is not a criminal case.
KC more than likely did say it, in the heat of the moment - although a fair few seconds after the heat of the moment. He was riled, said something stupid like anyone can, and got caught.
He now takes his punishment.
The concern is if Leeds fans are abusing those who were abused or reported it. Let them be. We win on the pitch.
posted on 4/3/20
and just to clarify my position on racism: my kids had a granny from Burma and got called "chinks" at school. Even without that personal element, those three words and the club's response make my stomach turn.
Sack Casilla? That's the strongest position we could take, but judging by the club's response, not at all likely.
Sell him, then, probably making a massive loss. Tough. It could be a really expensive mistake, as it turns out.
I'm really disappointed in the club, to be honest. It's good that they have supported Casilla but not that they have sought to perpetuate the fiction that he'd never heard of the n-word. Might as well have turned up wearing a guilty-as-charged sign round his neck. How could they have accepted that so obviously false explanation?
posted on 4/3/20
I'm not massively convinced that your casual racism being worse than vehement and targeted racism is true.
posted on 4/3/20
Let’s be clear-
Criminal burden of proof = beyond reasonable doubt
All other courts (civil) burden of proof = balance of probabilities
It’s the balance taking into account all probabilities. The FA is not a criminal court.
posted on 4/3/20
comment by Smileybadge (U2904)
posted 2 minutes ago
Let’s be clear-
Criminal burden of proof = beyond reasonable doubt
All other courts (civil) burden of proof = balance of probabilities
It’s the balance taking into account all probabilities. The FA is not a criminal court.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Some of their decision making is pretty criminal!
I'm willing to accept their verdict as probably the case. Kiko probably isn't a racist, and we all say things that we regret in the heat of the moment. Don't know where we go from here, but hopefully it doesn't affect those players involved during the game against Huddersfield.
posted on 4/3/20
So, first thing, despite the system used ie probability, do people really think this is all some conspiracy? It looks like a thorough and proper investigations to me and a proper independent tribunal.
So, can one imagine people like James Mooney and Orta trying to influence what players say the same way they tried to influence the match recently and got punished for it?
Its quite damning hearing about the lengths gone to, in order to try and make Kiko seem blameless.
To hear that Grice's evidence was not seeking to assist the investigation but to most assist Kiko.
The fact we're not appealing it further tells you all you need to know about what Leeds really know about the case.
If a fan said what Kiko is meant to have said, he'd be banned for life.
If any of us said that at work, we'd be sacked.
The club have tried to weasel out of this, deflect blame onto FA and its mechanism, they really should be ashamed of this.
I would not be surprised if Bielsa doesn't pick Kiko again, but there's a part of me that wouldn't be surprised if he does pick him.
This is where leadership and the culture it creates, counts.
I believe that the club should be cancelling Kiko's contract and being clear internally that the way certain Leeds individuals conducted themselves is not acceptable.
posted on 4/3/20
"So, can one imagine people like James Mooney and Orta trying to influence what players say the same way they tried to influence the match recently and got punished for it?"
Your obsession is getting out of hand now, what a ridiculous take to drag Orta in to it
posted on 4/3/20
gelderd,there is clear track record of both Orta and Mooney attempting to interfere with due process ie the match officials.
There are not other at the club that I know of with this history and from the FA document its clear that the club have made things worse here. Someone sanctions this behaviour, it doesn't come out of thin air.
posted on 4/3/20
comment by gelderd82 (U6817)
posted 11 minutes ago
"So, can one imagine people like James Mooney and Orta trying to influence what players say the same way they tried to influence the match recently and got punished for it?"
Your obsession is getting out of hand now, what a ridiculous take to drag Orta in to it
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed.
The behaviour at the match in question was heat of the moment stuff based on a really bizarre performance from the ref (and as a rule I try to avoid blaming refs - but some of the stuff that day was bizarre I felt). I'm not condoning it, but it's a stretch linking it to this.
As for the outcome - I really don't agree, still, that balance of probability in a case such as this is sufficient. In modern life an accusation of racism in the workplace can have profound effects on the individuals concerned and accused. Loss of job, income, home etc... the list goes on. If found guilty by evidence, then you get what you ask for, but balance of probability I don't think is a sufficient burden of proof and actually never will think it is.
That said, it is the way civil law works, so if feeling truly aggrieved and unjustifiably treated, then it's up to Kiko and any legal representatives to take action against the decision. If he doesn't, then that above all tells me he's probably aware he's said something he shouldn't have.
posted on 4/3/20
comment by Jonty (U4614)
posted 3 minutes ago
gelderd,there is clear track record of both Orta and Mooney attempting to interfere with due process ie the match officials.
There are not other at the club that I know of with this history and from the FA document its clear that the club have made things worse here. Someone sanctions this behaviour, it doesn't come out of thin air.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
i mean insinuating that because they were angry we conceded a goal from a throw in and gave the officials a few words .... they would be willing bury to racism is probably a bit far mate.
one hell of a conclusion to jump to.
posted on 4/3/20
to bury*
posted on 4/3/20
VOF, the comments about the club and Kiko's actions are damning. The shameless attempts to distract and paint flawless character, the feigning ignorance over the n word, the pretence that Casilla had no idea what he's been accused of saying when Roberts received text messages straight after the match.
I really hate it when club does stuff like this, trying to weasel out of things.
Part of Kiko's case and teh reason this all got delayed was because he denied using any abusive language, which even our own players admitted he had done. He completely undid his own credibility by this constant blanket protestation of complete innocence.
posted on 4/3/20
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 4/3/20
comment by LeedsRich - Bielsaball (U18097)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Jonty (U4614)
posted 3 minutes ago
gelderd,there is clear track record of both Orta and Mooney attempting to interfere with due process ie the match officials.
There are not other at the club that I know of with this history and from the FA document its clear that the club have made things worse here. Someone sanctions this behaviour, it doesn't come out of thin air.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
i mean insinuating that because they were angry we conceded a goal from a throw in and gave the officials a few words .... they would be willing bury to racism is probably a bit far mate.
one hell of a conclusion to jump to.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So, do you think Grice decided to do that by himself? Do you think Grice decided to issue a statement trying to paint the FA's decision making process as the real problem?
James Mooney is a complete c*** and yet Orta managed to get himself a higher sanction, not for having a few words, but for improper conduct.
Someone at the club has chosen to try and twist things here and its not come from Matt Grice, whom reports into Orta.
posted on 4/3/20
comment by Jonty (U4614)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by LeedsRich - Bielsaball (U18097)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Jonty (U4614)
posted 3 minutes ago
gelderd,there is clear track record of both Orta and Mooney attempting to interfere with due process ie the match officials.
There are not other at the club that I know of with this history and from the FA document its clear that the club have made things worse here. Someone sanctions this behaviour, it doesn't come out of thin air.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
i mean insinuating that because they were angry we conceded a goal from a throw in and gave the officials a few words .... they would be willing bury to racism is probably a bit far mate.
one hell of a conclusion to jump to.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So, do you think Grice decided to do that by himself? Do you think Grice decided to issue a statement trying to paint the FA's decision making process as the real problem?
James Mooney is a complete c*** and yet Orta managed to get himself a higher sanction, not for having a few words, but for improper conduct.
Someone at the club has chosen to try and twist things here and its not come from Matt Grice, whom reports into Orta.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I dont know mate, i do agree btw that it all stinks.
im not defending the club.
just saying that because they went mental at piece of poor refereeing dont mean that they did X
posted on 4/3/20
Rich, best indicator of future behaviour is past behaviour.
I do not see AR or Kinnear or Bielsa sanctioning this sort of behaviour.
posted on 4/3/20
fair enough mate, guess thats probably on the whole a fairly reliable hypothesis.
Page 2 of 3