Eni Aluko / Mark Sampson (Merged)

[CHIPLEY RED]

She got dropped by Sampson and is just after him now. Most of the things she complained about were said when she wasn't there.

Give back the £80,000 if your not happy otherwise shut up and take the money.

[Super]

is this worse?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/41010324

[alexukhc]

3 minutes ago, Collis1 said:

That's borderline? If I heard my boss making a comment like that I would report him immediately.

Agree, I would too

[Sir Colby-Tit]

2 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said:

The other thing I think is worth saying here is that Aluko is not responsible for this story coming out and being publicised now and I think it unfortunate that she is taking flak for it. 

Now I'm confused, the link to the Guardian article states:

Quote

Aluko, who was born in Nigeria but moved to England with her family as a young child, was paid £80,000 by the FA to sign a confidentiality agreement but has now obtained consent to tell her side of the story and in an interview with the Guardian she alleges that Sampson made the comment to her about Ebola before England played Germany in November 2014.

So who is responsible for the story coming out if not Aluko?

[Mike Hunt-Hertz]

4 minutes ago, Super said:

is this worse?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/41010324

He likes what he says, and he says what he bloody well likes!

[handsofclay]

I am quite frankly shocked that she accepted £80,000. It is a blatantly racist figure. In 1775 during the War of Independence, Dunmore, on the side of the Brits, offered freedom to any slave in America who joined the side of the Brits. 80,000 black slaves accepted this offer and joined the Brits. This figure is synonymous with slavery. How very racist of her to accept it.

[LondonBristolian]

1 minute ago, Sir Colby-Tit said:

Now I'm confused, the link to the Guardian article states:

So who is responsible for the story coming out if not Aluko?

Surprisingly, it seems to be the Daily Mail.

This from 7 August before Aluko spoke, but when the Mail got hold of Aluko's letter about it from the time...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-4769252/FA-ordered-come-clean-Eni-Aluko-investigation.html

As you will see from the article, Aluko had not made a public statement at that point. 

Aluko's confidentiality agreement was that she could not talk about it UNLESS it became public knowledge. It became public knowledge a few days ago and, for obvious reasons, the FA have waived their request for her to keep it confidential. Frankly if there was an existing story about me in the press - which there was - and various people speculating about what that story was - which their was - then I'd probably want to explain my side of it. 

It seems there are a lot of people getting upset with her basically for having the temerity for being present when someone decided to direct an inappropriate remark to her.

[Monkeh]

4 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said:

Surprisingly, it seems to be the Daily Mail.

This from 7 August before Aluko spoke, but when the Mail got hold of Aluko's letter about it from the time...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-4769252/FA-ordered-come-clean-Eni-Aluko-investigation.html

As you will see from the article, Aluko had not made a public statement at that point. 

Aluko's confidentiality agreement was that she could not talk about it UNLESS it became public knowledge. It became public knowledge a few days ago and, for obvious reasons, the FA have waived their request for her to keep it confidential. Frankly if there was an existing story about me in the press - which there was - and various people speculating about what that story was - which their was - then I'd probably want to explain my side of it. 

It seems there are a lot of people getting upset with her basically for having the temerity for being present when someone decided to direct an inappropriate remark to her.

and who do you think leaked the letter.....once the case had be lost

[Mike Hunt-Hertz]

My boss could deride me as the son of a Forest of Dean pit pony and a Sudanese clap doctor`s goat, if I could get £80000 out of it.

[LondonBristolian]

2 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

and who do you think leaked the letter.....once the case had be lost

Honestly? I would guess absolutely anyone but Aluko. I am not at all clear what motivation she would have to want to go through all the shit that is going to follow in public as a result of it. I would imagine it was someone upset that Sampson had not been punished but I would be absolutely amazed if that was Aluko.

On top of which, she had already known the case was lost when she accepted the money. If she leaked it, it would be likely to come out eventually and she would lose the money. Why take that risk?

As much as anything, I think it was journalists who were investigating why she was not in the squad...

[RedRaw]

4 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said:

Surprisingly, it seems to be the Daily Mail.

This from 7 August before Aluko spoke, but when the Mail got hold of Aluko's letter about it from the time...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-4769252/FA-ordered-come-clean-Eni-Aluko-investigation.html

As you will see from the article, Aluko had not made a public statement at that point. 

Aluko's confidentiality agreement was that she could not talk about it UNLESS it became public knowledge. It became public knowledge a few days ago and, for obvious reasons, the FA have waived their request for her to keep it confidential. Frankly if there was an existing story about me in the press - which there was - and various people speculating about what that story was - which their was - then I'd probably want to explain my side of it. 

It seems there are a lot of people getting upset with her basically for having the temerity for being present when someone decided to direct an inappropriate remark to her.

£80,000 for an inappropriate remark?.........I'll have some of that.

Inappropriate at worst, racist....never.

Now take your dirty money and STFU

 

 

[LondonBristolian]

1 minute ago, RedRaw said:

£80,000 for an inappropriate remark?.........I'll have some of that.

Inappropriate at worst, racist....never.

Now take your dirty money and STFU

 

 

1) I don't believe Aluko influenced the FA in deciding to offer £80, 000. If you think £80, 000 is too much fine but I'd be blaming the FA for that decision. 

2) It appears Aluko was going to take the money and keep quiet until it ended up in the newspapers anyway...

[Monkeh]

8 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said:

Honestly? I would guess absolutely anyone but Aluko. I am not at all clear what motivation she would have to want to go through all the shit that is going to follow in public as a result of it. I would imagine it was someone upset that Sampson had not been punished but I would be absolutely amazed if that was Aluko.

On top of which, she had already known the case was lost when she accepted the money. If she leaked it, it would be likely to come out eventually and she would lose the money. Why take that risk?

As much as anything, I think it was journalists who were investigating why she was not in the squad...

and why should he be punished if he's done nothing wrong which as it stands after an independent investigation is the truth, someone with an axe to grind IE aluko, its a witch hunt,

We got to the semi's in the euro's and lost to the winners with and england forward finishing as the tournaments top scorer so it would appear her being dropped is justified 

[Super]

Sad thing is everyone now will jump on the bandwagon and he will probably lose his job.

[DaveInSA]

As a privileged white male, it is all too easy to laugh these so-say innocent comments off and be ignorant.

Living in South Africa I see racism every day, it is inherent in the culture and so too is it in England. I too challenge myself - am I a racist. It's a question we should all ask ourselves.

The comment about Ebloa was ignorant as was the arrest comment. Some say that ignorance is bliss, but in this case it was offensive. I believe it was demeaning to the Nigerian family who were going to watch. It is not a blatantly racist statement. But it was a discriminatory statement against the Nigerian capacity to manage the Ebola outbreak. And according to the article it wasn't the first such instance. So, I can see how a hearing would have found this comment racist.

The criminal statement is linked to the belief that all black people are criminals - this is a stereotype and is racist.

If you're a stand up comic, well that's another story because, well, they seem to say anything and take the urine out of everything and we think it's OK and we laugh. But is it? Really?

[RedRaw]

13 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said:

1) I don't believe Aluko influenced the FA in deciding to offer £80, 000. If you think £80, 000 is too much fine but I'd be blaming the FA for that decision. 

2) It appears Aluko was going to take the money and keep quiet until it ended up in the newspapers anyway...

She's a lawyer......she knows what she's doing

[spudski]

33 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said:

I think you have explained the difference yourself. Your friend is your friend. You choose who you want to be friends with and whatever the **** friends want to say to you is entirely between you and them. Mark Sampson is not Aluko's friend but her boss. I have no idea whether this is racist or not because I don't know Mark Sampson's intention when he said it but what it very clearly is is a stupid and inappropriate thing for anyone to say to someone they are managing. 

The other thing I think is worth saying here is that Aluko is not responsible for this story coming out and being publicised now and I think it unfortunate that she is taking flak for it. 

Unprofessional... Maybe. Racist it is not. 

[LondonBristolian]

1 minute ago, Monkeh said:

and why should he be punished if he's done nothing wrong which as it stands after an independent investigation is the truth, someone with an axe to grind IE aluko, its a witch hunt,

We got to the semi's in the euro's and lost to the winners with and england forward finishing as the tournaments top scorer so it would appear her being dropped is justified 

Not sure what that has to do with anything I posted. And you are making a lot of assumptions there. As far as I can see the facts are:

1) Aluko felt Sampson had made a comment she found upsetting.

2) She followed the appropriate process for reporting it.

3) A decision was made no further action would be taken.

4) The FA decided to nonetheless make an £80, 000 payment to Aluko.

5) Newspapers were confused as to why Aluko was suddenly dropped.

6) Newspapers found evidence of the payment and investigated why.

7) Newspapers found out about the investigation.

8) Newspapers reported on the investigation.

9) Once it was already in the public domain, Aluko got permission from the FA to explain her side.

Whether the remark was or was not deemed to be racist and whether or whether or not Sampson should or will be processed, I'm absolutely perplexed at what you are angry with Aluko about or blaming her for. 

[LondonBristolian]

2 minutes ago, RedRaw said:

She's a lawyer......she knows what she's doing

Following the appropriate internal process to report a complaint by the looks of it. I don't think lawyers have the magical powers you seem to believe they do. 

[Andy082005]

I particularly like the crocodile tears 

******* pathetic and sums up modern society. People like her, Sol Campbell and Jason Roberts....will forever throw the race card about if they don't get what they want 

[BigTone]

41 minutes ago, phantom said:

Did he actually say it though?

Getting tired of hearing about this case, he was found not guilty but she just won't let it go

The lure of the almighty £ I think Phants.

[MarkRed!]

Because we live in a politically correct society where anyone who takes offence (however minor) responds either with a claim of harassment or discrimination in order to secure attention.  It actually impacts on those who are really prejudiced against. This player is clearly playing the "race" card because she has been dropped by Sampson and this is her way or attempt to damage his reputation and career. Nasty stuff.  

[chipdawg]

Yay. Another forum for (largely) white men to tell black people what they can and can't find offensive. Goody. It's free speech you know?

If we assume that MS did say what is reported (as the OP seems to have done), at best Sampsons remarks to Aluko were grossly insensitive and ignorant (Ebola, which didn't significantly effect Nigeria, killed thousands of people), at worst it was straight up racism. His remarks to the unnamed mixed-race player are racial profiling. Look it up, people don't like it

Some people seem to insist that 'the race card' is being played unless they see a body swinging from a tree surrounded my men in pointy white hats. Racism takes many forms

[Sir Colby-Tit]

5 minutes ago, DaveInSA said:

As a privileged white male, it is all too easy to laugh these so-say innocent comments off and be ignorant.

Living in South Africa I see racism every day, it is inherent in the culture and so too is it in England. I too challenge myself - am I a racist. It's a question we should all ask ourselves.

The comment about Ebloa was ignorant as was the arrest comment. Some say that ignorance is bliss, but in this case it was offensive. I believe it was demeaning to the Nigerian family who were going to watch. It is not a blatantly racist statement. But it was a discriminatory statement against the Nigerian capacity to manage the Ebola outbreak. And according to the article it wasn't the first such instance. So, I can see how a hearing would have found this comment racist.

The criminal statement is linked to the belief that all black people are criminals - this is a stereotype and is racist.

If you're a stand up comic, well that's another story because, well, they seem to say anything and take the urine out of everything and we think it's OK and we laugh. But is it? Really?

I think racism is probably inherent in all cultures, to differing extents, not just in SA, England, or other predominantly white cultures. For example, I took a train journey in Thailand a couple of weeks ago, with two Thais. They boarded for free, and I had to pay, as I was "farang".

Ultimately, we are a tribal species, and I believe this is the root cause i.e. a distrust of "outsiders". But I also believe the world is changing, it's becoming a "global community", and nearly all areas of population are becoming more racially mixed.

As far as comedians are concerned, offense is entirely subjective, and if you choose to go and see a comedian you can always get up and leave if the humour is not to your taste.

And what is the end result of someone being offended? What is the terrible outcome that we must avoid at all costs?

My personal worry is that free speech is constantly being eroded in the name of "sexism/homophobia/racism" etc, and people are nodding their heads and lapping it up.

[LondonBristolian]

6 minutes ago, BigTone said:

The lure of the almighty £ I think Phants.

This makes no sense. She has more of a financial incentive to keep it quiet. 

[LondonBristolian]

2 minutes ago, Sir Colby-Tit said:

I think racism is probably inherent in all cultures, to differing extents, not just in SA, England, or other predominantly white cultures. For example, I took a train journey in Thailand a couple of weeks ago, with two Thais. They boarded for free, and I had to pay, as I was "farang".

Ultimately, we are a tribal species, and I believe this is the root cause i.e. a distrust of "outsiders". But I also believe the world is changing, it's becoming a "global community", and nearly all areas of population are becoming more racially mixed.

As far as comedians are concerned, offense is entirely subjective, and if you choose to go and see a comedian you can always get up and leave if the humour is not to your taste.

And what is the end result of someone being offended? What is the terrible outcome that we must avoid at all costs?

My personal worry is that free speech is constantly being eroded in the name of "sexism/homophobia/racism" etc, and people are nodding their heads and lapping it up.

Again, it has to be pointed out this happened in a work context. I don't think expecting people not to say offensive or appropriate things when they are managing someone or when working in professional roles is so much a threat to free speech as simple common sense in a professional environment. 

[BigTone]

7 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said:

This makes no sense. She has more of a financial incentive to keep it quiet. 

How so ?  Did she take the original payment ?

[RedRaw]

6 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said:

Not sure what that has to do with anything I posted. And you are making a lot of assumptions there. As far as I can see the facts are:

1) Aluko felt Sampson had made a comment she found upsetting.

2) She followed the appropriate process for reporting it.

3) A decision was made no further action would be taken.

4) The FA decided to nonetheless make an £80, 000 payment to Aluko.

5) Newspapers were confused as to why Aluko was suddenly dropped.

6) Newspapers found evidence of the payment and investigated why.

7) Newspapers found out about the investigation.

8) Newspapers reported on the investigation.

9) Once it was already in the public domain, Aluko got permission from the FA to explain her side.

Whether the remark was or was not deemed to be racist and whether or whether or not Sampson should or will be processed, I'm absolutely perplexed at what you are angry with Aluko about or blaming her for. 

 

5 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said:

Following the appropriate internal process to report a complaint by the looks of it. I don't think lawyers have the magical powers you seem to believe they do. 

 

I would imagine most people of whatever colour, creed or race would have taken the throw away comment as a little inappropriate and nothing else without going down some formal complaint process. Her comments in the guardian article suggests she can give and take comments/jokes and is not sensitive or precious...........

"I’ve been at Chelsea five years and been the butt of many jokes. And I give it back sometimes. That is the beauty of team spirit in a healthy dressing room. I’m not a sensitive, precious person. I’ve been in the [England] team for 11 years, I’ve been through ups and downs. I’ve played for boys’ teams. I’ve played for Chelsea, at the top level, and I’ve been dropped by Chelsea before but I can recognise something toxic when I see it".

Sounds to me like she is the one with a personal vendetta, taking a comment and calling it "toxic" and, being a lawyer, no doubt knew she could get some mileage by using the old race card......as I say, she knew what she was doing. 

[BigTone]

2 minutes ago, cynic said:

And is apparently free from the "confidentiality agreement - which is key..

and is now free to exploit the issue. I'm sorry but £80k compo for what was an ill judged and stupid comment is quite a result. Accepting this was also a sign that she was happy with the apology and was happy that the issue was over and she would move on ............... yeah right !!

[BobBobSuperBob]

17 minutes ago, MarkRed! said:

Because we live in a politically correct society where anyone who takes offence (however minor) responds either with a claim of harassment or discrimination in order to secure £££££££.  It actually impacts on those who are really prejudiced against. This player is clearly playing the "race" card because she has been dropped by Sampson and this is her way or attempt to damage his reputation and career. Nasty stuff.  

Amended for you