http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/28904368 Unless you've been living under a rock this week, you've heard or read news about Malky Mackay's sticky situation and his employability challenges despite a very solid record at Cardiff. I was waiting on Dribbles opening salvo on this matter, or at least DR's (as he usually likes this ticklish stuff), but our board has been too busy fending off formidable roaches like Tobes and UIR to pay much attention to important events unfolding outside our yard. Recap: Vincent Tan, little vindictive t*at of man, sends dossier to FA quoting private text messages between Malky and Moody of a sometimes racist, homophobic and misogynistic nature. The information prevents Malky from getting the nod for CP's managerial vacant job, and already leaked allegations of the same may have hindered his bid for the Norwich and West Brom seats at the end of last season. The LMA tries to assist his rehabilitation by apologising on his behalf, however does this while using the excusing clause of friendly "banter" - thus planting themselves too, firmly in hot water. Does Mackay deserve being shut out of football management? Is he a bad man or just a poor doomed inflexible dinosaur manager? Or neither? Would you employ him if you were the owner of Palace? Or of Lokomotiv Moscow? Is Harry Redknapp right? Is it a case of PC brigade and false moral indignation rearing its sick and scaly head again? And importantly, What is still morally acceptable within the confines of "banter" among mates? Is pub bar banter on its slow way out to angry fringes as the old punk bastards die off? Will you cursing out "oh you C**t!" at Glen Johnson's son missing a sitter for LFC in the year 2029 get you thrown out of your local pub?
1. Probably not but will find it hard to get a job and will rightfully never be able to command respect from a black footballer again, or an Asian one. 2. Not a bad man maybe, just a typical working class man that clings to traditional notions of acceptable banter. Am I judging him for it? No. Have I said worse? Absolutely. Would I do it using a work phone with a work colleague in relation to fellow coworkers, employees, and employers? Absolutely not. 3. I wouldn't employ him simply because if he holds those stereotypes about foreigners, what other stereotypes does he believe? That the Italians are lazy? So maybe he won't sign a promising Italian striker. He'd cause unrest amongst the squad and I wouldn't have that. Any club with black players or any club with aspirations higher than local pub team should not want someone like that. 4. It is a case of PC brigade when it comes to whether or not he is allowed to think/say these things privately. He is, and it's his opinion. Perhaps it's uneducated and crass, and incorrect, but I don't want someone monitoring what I say to my friends. I reserve the right to say what I want, but I understand that other people reserve the right to accept or reject my opinions/statements. Freedom of speech doesn't guarantee that anyone will listen or agree. I trust that if I say something over the line, people are intelligent enough to say "that's over the line". I don't need anyone policing that for them. In terms of this specific case, it's not PC brigade..ing because he did it and there is no doubt it affected his employees and employers. Ibrahim Farrah spoke out and said he felt abused and neglected by Mackay because of racism and no matter how inconsequential a player, no one deserves that. Any type of banter is acceptable among mates. I can make holocaust or genocide or rape jokes if I please, as is my right. HOWEVER - the people I'm with will hopefully recognize me for a ****ing idiot and refuse to listen to me anymore. There is no limit to what I can say, only what I feel I want to listen to. Basically if someone wants to spew garbage on the corner of the street they can do that. But I don't have to listen or agree. I can judge them on it. If I have kids, I will teach them right and wrong, and give them the skills to identify what is ignorant and what isn't for themselves. Censorship isn't the answer, education is. If more people recognize behaviour that is unacceptable, less people will listen to unacceptable speech, and less bigotry will be spread. This method doesn't involve shutting anyone up or forcing people to adapt to changing cultural values. Let them do that on their own. As for banter, you can do what you like. Certain types of banter will never be inappropriate. Calling Johnson (he'll still be playing for us in 2029) a **** won't cross the line. Calling him a black **** will . And people will laugh when you say ****, and frown when you say black ****. And that's the way it should be.
Take a bow my son. This is one of the most sensible posts I've read here on this delicate topic. Mackay and Moody are allowed of course to have their banter and even their views on the chinese owners, on women, on gays and any other topic. But it isn't banter. He himself recognised that. It was about his job. His players, his owners, his agents. He wasn't in a pub talking to his mate about the latest film or the latest actress. Now that his views are widely known and even his friend Moody actually ribbbed him about his stance on ethnic minorities ("Good thing they haven't met you"). He cannot get away from the consequences. You keep these nasty thoughts private and if they do come out you are found out. These were not views that came under pressure. When you are stressed do you suddenly say racist or antisemitic things? It must have been views already strongly held by him. His "mistake" really was to write them down and not even believing that one day these will be made public. He will always be viewed with suspicison by black, chinese and other minority players. So as an owner will I employ him? May be if he is the last manager available.
I think if someone genuinely harbours sexist or racist views or has publicly published something offensive, it can make them unsuitable for a high profile job. Now obviously we don't know exactly what was said, but texting something to your mate should not affect your job prospects. Me texting RHC saying that Gerez's Mrs has a cracking pair of knockers would be sexist, but should not affect job prospects. It sounds like Malky sent a jokey text to a mate, an audience of one, and some bitter little t**t is using it to ruin his career. Edit: having read the above it sounds like what he said is worse than I thought and I didn't realise he had used a work phone. Makes him a bit more stupid than I thought!
Does Mackay deserve being shut out of football management? NO, maybe another season out but he should come back Is he a bad man or just a poor doomed inflexible dinosaur manager? Or neither? Neither Would you employ him if you were the owner of Palace? Or of Lokomotiv Moscow? Is Harry Redknapp right? Wouldn't employ him while this is all so fresh Is it a case of PC brigade and false moral indignation rearing its sick and scaly head again? Possibly And importantly, What is still morally acceptable within the confines of "banter" among mates? Pretty much anything, all depends on how good mates they are Is pub bar banter on its slow way out to angry fringes as the old punk bastards die off? It's not quite like it was, but it's still there to an extent - also depends on the boozer Will you cursing out "oh you C**t!" at Glen Johnson's son missing a sitter for LFC in the year 2029 get you thrown out of your local pub? No as the barman probably said it too
You think this is good, you wanna see some of his other posts. Danilo is probably the most unbiased poster on the forum and his posts are sometimes like essay's. The type that are well worth reading. He's a credit to our board #arselicking
Ah but if you said or texted " that woman I work with is a dog eating chnk **** with nice falsies" and it came out you just might get into trouble especially if you job involves liaison with other people...
And especially if those 'other people' happen to include surgically enhanced girls from Beijing who might have a penchant for munching on the occasional Beagle baguette . . .
1. Tan is obviously running to an agenda. That is a clear as day 2. McKay should just go up to Scotland where he belongs 3. Supposedly 3 texts in 10,000??? Hmmm not so sure about that. But that's what the guy says anyway. If say there are only 3 one insulting tan, one insulting a Jewish agent and then one being homophobic or something where does this sit
That is why it was so stupid of Mackay. Unless his views were so ingrained these texts came naturally to him..
It's okay, he'll get his comeuppance eventually. One day he'll be found beaten to within an inch of his life in an alley. The perpetrator will be a gay Chinese woman hailing from Pakistan. #itsawonderfulwonderfulworld #black
Aah. What a huge humiliation that would be for him... He would have preferred to be beaten black and blue by a pure white straight macho male...
that is a good point... I would say it'll be interesting to see the results of investigation and while the texts released are indefensible given I have no such texts on my phone at all or received either.... its so obviously a big agenda to ruin a guy out of pure spite by tan. In short cardiff now i reckon are on a hiding to nothing till that guy is gone. NO manager with any sense would run his club for him and no player would want him pulling this **** on them. I do wonder how the guy got away with siezing phones etc in the firs tplace then leaking detials. I know it was done to investigate bungs but you'd wonder what warrant was used
What also surprised me somewhat was the stance taken by the LMA. Of course they had to defend their member. But there are occasions when it is better for them to accept that the member may have done something not right and needed to apologise with no caveats or excuses. Instead they went into some rant, which sought to explain and excuse and to also impugn the club too. They gave the story legs instead of killing it stone dead. They should probably have learnt the lessons from us and Suarez. In that in matters of race, trying to defend this type of action brings you even more flak than the original incident itself. Liverpool as a club got more aggro and blame by trying to defend Suarez than the actual original transgression. In matters of race, gender, sexual orientation, it is an absolute minefield and for the LMA not to recognise that was pretty poor. They had to apologise for a poor apology. That convinced people that the apology was not sincere. It was a self inflicted wound. Now the LMA is viewed as an institution itself needing edcation and retraining in these matters.
I think this is all bollox. Fine they shouldn't have said what they said but it was also private between two people so where's the uproar about data protection or privacy laws?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...scovered-by-Cardiff-chairman-Vincent-Tan.html The damning evidence: On the arrival of South Korean international Kim Bo-Kyung: 'Fkn chinkys. Fk it. There's enough dogs in Cardiff for us all to go around.' On Phil Smith, football agent: 'Go on, fat Phil. Nothing like a Jew that sees money slipping through his fingers' On a list of transfer targets: 'Not many white faces amongst that lot but worth considering.' On a player's female agent: 'I hope she's looking after your needs. I bet you'd love a bounce on her falsies.' On an official at another club: 'He's a snake, a gay snake. Not to be trusted' ...and sent to members of Cardiff's staff A picture entitled Black Monopoly - where every square was a "Go to Jail" square
There's a lot of moralistic bombastic rubbish being spouted above that hides (for me) the real truths in this situation. Macay's real crime was not deleting his emails. What he say's to a mate either verbally or electronically is between them and should stay between them. We all work (or have worked) with people that we didn't chose. We all have our individual feelings about those people BUT that does not/should not stop us working effectively with them. It's exactly the same in this situation. Tan clearly has an agenda here and does not mind who he hurts or to what level in pursuing it. Perhaps it's now time to focus the spotlight on him and publically expose his shadier comments and dealings. When we can all prove ourselves to be cleaner than the driven snow, then we can all take the moral high ground and form the basis of the thought police that many appear to want to represent.
