FA make £80,000 payment to Eni Aluko after bullying complaint

I can't access it without paying?

 

I'd do them for being moneyist if I were you.

 

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/eni-aluko-hits-apos-selfish-063500977.html

Independent is going out to trash her by the looks of it. The stock image chosen is priceless.

Her tweet:

 

Haha what a shambles. Useless FA.

 

Something about his previous job, apparently.

 

Discussing it on Sky at the moment.
He's been sacked and it's not the Aluko thing but they're not saying what if is but it's not criminal.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/41326806

 

It whiffs a bit to me. They're not suggesting he's an unfit manager, just not fit to manage England

 

The FA are a joke. Chief exec has said "Mark is absolutely clear to work as a coach in football"

But not for them. Bizarre.

 

Until we find out - if we do - what he did that's inappropriate, I have no idea about the rights and wrongs of his defenestration, but I hope that the next manager won't play hoofball. The England Women are better than that.

Great article by Matthew Syed, as noted above.

 

Just a note that people should be careful what they say. There may or may not be legal proceedings.

 

Just been reading more about this. It's a weird one. One part of me says if they are all consenting adults (which they were) then play on.

The other side wonders how I'd feel if it came out that Silva was hanging out of the back of half our squad, although in some ways it would explain some of the signings (Gray).

 

You Sir are hairist. Kindly take your alopecism elsewhere.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...-heads-roll-Mark-Sampson-s-abuse-scandal.html

I feel incredibly dirty for posting a Daily Mail link that is written by that odious Samuel character. But it must be said, for me, it hits the nail firmly on the head of the whole situation.

As for the ‘discussion’ about what racism means to different people. Isn’t it the fact that racism takes on many forms in many different situations and has evolved in this country whilst many people in power were putting up a pretense that it was being eroded?

Upon reading ZZ/Annoying Noise’s discussion, it’s a great debate. I’d say that you can’t really argue against different people’s interpretation of racism. And you certainly can’t argue people’s personal accounts where they may have encountered their interpretation of racism up close and personal. That’s a dangerous road to go down.... I just wish you’d both leave Kenny ‘Sansome’ out of it, he has enough problems with being dragged into an argument about racism!

Sampson’s ‘joke’ was crass, in bad taste and potentially racially obnoxious. Whether he meant it to be loaded as such, we may never know. But it’s certainly discriminatory, however much he meant it to be or not. It’s no different from making a joke about ‘aids’ to a homosexual. However funny he may have found it for a split-second, it was a poor piece of judgment for someone who was paid handsomely and no doubt trained to not be in those types of encounters. Your the manager, not one of the ‘lads/lasses’.

Whatever way you approach it, the FA have dropped another absolute whopper here. And they are totally unfit for purpose.

 

the fact they approached aluko specifically to contribute to an anonymous report about the working culture in the england team, but somehow still allowed sampson to send her away from a camp a week later for "un-lioness behaviour" also reflects poorly on their ability to govern properly. the fact that they then buried the report, were blind-sided when aluko went public as a result and had also been sitting on the other allegations for 2 years suggest no one should be giving them the benefit of the doubt about anything anytime soon

 

It's interesting that the media are on the FA's back about this and referring to Sampson as hired because he was a 'yes man'.

Shame they never do the same for the men's side.

 

The FA would appoint Medea to run their childcare facilities.
Useless.

 

I struggle with Samuels article as he seems very short on knowledge of what actually went on at Bristol, yet he concludes that it was "abuse". Have I missed a description of what happened somewhere?

I would not believe that absolutely any relationship between a manager/supervisor and an employee is necessarily abuse. Obviously, if it goes against Company rules, then there is grounds for dismissal, but that doesn't necessarily mean there has been any abuse of an individual, or abuse of power as many such relationships continue with no sense of abuse at all, including one I had with my line manager in my first job after leaving school at 19.

Abuse is a very strong word and shouldn't be used lightly in this context.

 

Agreed. Sensationalist click-bait terminology just to get page impressions, which at best may affect any disciplinary or legal action, at worst could unjustifiably wreck a career, lives etc. and make if more difficult for prosecutions in future cases involving other people due to the cry wolf effect.
Remember those Aussie radio show hosts that phoned the royal hospital when Kate was pregnant?

Cases like this need to be reported factually without opinion or ideally not reported at all until the results of investigations are concluded.

 

Well I'm shocked, that is a very frank admission to make on a football forum.

How is Jim nowadays?

 

And it's not always top down driven either. I have experience of one of my staff trying to tip the balance when a better job came up.
At least I expect that was her motivation as I'm an ugly ****er. Huge **** though.

 

You or her?

assuming **** was ****.

 

A really informative Q&A with Anita Asante https://m.facebook.com/jonathannort...e_internal&refsrc=http://t.co/TkgWiVZwfx&_rdr

Looks like there are lots of aspects to the FA set up and culture that need to be improved.

 

Not that it proves anything to some, but it seems that the FA agree that Sampson's remark/joke was racist.

 

I think they struggle to agree on football matters - it doesn't give them too much credibility on social issues.

 

The FA were ripped apart by the DCMS select committee today. Eni Aluko had the courage to speak out and has been vindicated.

 

The FA have dealt with this horrendously and I actually think that has continued today with this apology to Eni Aluko. They haven't apologised because they felt compelled to - they have apologised because it was all coming out in the wash today and they had no chance to sweep it under the carpet, which is being shown as their preferred method of action. The statement of apology is worded terribly and the last paragraphs of it still has an element of victim-blaming in it, saying the whole thing would have gone better if Aluko had co-operated more to begin with or certain parties had come forward to be interviewed.

It all just confirms what many within the game have said for a long-time. That FA practices are far out-dated and the establishment as a whole isn't fit for purpose. How Glenn and Clarke could sit there today and defend their actions, words and practices was ridiculous. They should have apologised far more contritely and then resigned. And taken that Dan Ashworth guy with them.

 

Some people think that this all helps the anti racist cause. It doesn't.

Sampson - in the words of the independent lawyer Katherine Newton, had made “ill-judged attempts at humour” and “appears to have difficulty judging the appropriate boundaries when engaging in ‘banter’ with the players." but she said several times that this did not mean he was a racist.

So she says they were bad jokes. When most people hear bad jokes, they just don't laugh.

The way some people carry on, including Aluko, it just trivializes the serious movement against real racist behaviour and racial discrimination - and does no good at all.

 

But what is clear, is that it was handled badly by the FA.

They, and every other employers, have to understand that some employees cannot tell the difference between "poor attempts at jokes and banter" and real racism, sexism and any other type of 'ism. So when an allegation is made, it must be dealt with properly, no matter how trivial the offence appears to be. Because, as sure as eggs are eggs, there will be hell to pay if you don't.

Offers to pay for silence just makes things worse, and even £40,000 and £80,000 is not sufficient to silence a bitter employee who is determined to make a noise, even after a mere "poor joke". It would need to be far more than that.

Lessons to be learnt for everyone. Including, don't attempt a joke about almost anything, and certainly don't defend one. It isn't worth it, you'll end up on the tele giving evidence in front of some Parliamentary committee, and probably lose your job.

 

Regardless of this shenanigans, the FA haven't been fit for purpose for a long time. Unfortunately they are from an era when peopel had a cigarette & pie at half time and went down the pub after the match.
It's a business now and FIFA have taken advantage of their naivety, the sooner they catch up the better. The only good thing that will come out of this **** is that there may well be wholesale change at the top and an institutional reshuffle.

 

One of the damning things that was said was when Greg Clarke almost tried to defend himself by saying that no one else wanted his job - ‘there was only one other applicant’. He’s basically fundamentally saying that he’s not qualified but was a result of the job being a poisoned chalice. Reminds me of Graham Simpson - ‘I’ve got a few quid but I’m first and foremost a football fan and I’ll sort this mess out’ - if you don’t have the skills, you shouldn’t get the job, regardless of if you are the only person who wants it.

The reason no one applied for the job is because it’s in an outdated pyramid. Rip the whole lot up and streamline it.

It needs ex-players, PFA representatives, Sports and Culture ministers, Kick it out, and successful businessmen with an English football background involved (eg. Alan Sugar? Theo Paphitis?).

(Sugar and Paphitis are just the first two I thought of! I’m not saying they are or aren’t suitable - just those types of people!)

 

Yeah but that's not the case at all is it? His comment doesn't reflect on him at all, particularly when you look at where he came from immediately before. He's actually one of the more qualified people to get the job in recent years.

 

The whole thing sounds like something from The Thick of it.