Kiko Casilla Given 8-Game Ban for Racist Abuse Towards Jonathan Leko

[Stan]

 

[The Artful Dodger]

He will be an absolute hero to their fans for this. 

[Smiley Culture]

If we’re banning football fans for life for use of racist language, is eight games enough for a footballer found guilty of the same offence?

[Berserker]

Something always happen to Leeds, i bet someone has cast a curse on them.

[Bluebird Hewitt]

13 minutes ago, Berserker said:

Something always happen to Leeds, i bet someone has cast a curse on them.

This is more of a blessing as Casilla has been wank for Leeds recently. 

[Danny]

Leeds fans not happy because it’s based on probabilities rather than beyond reasonable doubt...some very poor takes across Twitter too

[Spike]

29 minutes ago, Danny said:

Leeds fans not happy because it’s based on probabilities rather than beyond reasonable doubt...some very poor takes across Twitter too

Well that is fair I suppose but would it ever be beyond reasonable doubt? Unlikely, unless all the players start wearing microphones.

[Lucas]

4 hours ago, Danny said:

Leeds fans not happy because it’s based on probabilities rather than beyond reasonable doubt...some very poor takes across Twitter too

To be fair, how can you ban someone with the maximum penalty when you are basing it on probability?

If there is an element of doubt, surely the penalty has to be less harsh if they aren't 100%, because essentially they are saying he is guilty without it being proven. The element of doubt is there.

Also, this has been handled terribly by the EFL and FA. This incident happened in September.

We have played 29 games since then. They charged Kiko in November. This has been hanging over his head for 4 months. Can't have been an easy time for him.

Why they have left this so late is beyond me. Is there a hidden agenda against Leeds? I don't know. I'm not going to be that guy. But we do always seem to be on the wrong side of these calls.

[Danny]

3 hours ago, Lucas said:

To be fair, how can you ban someone with the maximum penalty when you are basing it on probability?

If there is an element of doubt, surely the penalty has to be less harsh if they aren't 100%, because essentially they are saying he is guilty without it being proven. The element of doubt is there.

Also, this has been handled terribly by the EFL and FA. This incident happened in September.

We have played 29 games since then. They charged Kiko in November. This has been hanging over his head for 4 months. Can't have been an easy time for him.

Why they have left this so late is beyond me. Is there a hidden agenda against Leeds? I don't know. I'm not going to be that guy. But we do always seem to be on the wrong side of these calls.

Discrimination within the work place is often dealt with using civil law, so if a judgement can be made on whether or not a person was discriminated against in a civil court and the appropriate actions are then taken if they win (lump sum for example) then there’s no reason why balance of probabilities isn’t a good enough reason in this case. If his appeal doesn’t hold I think it’ll be very poor in general for the game, but this problem isn’t specific to Leeds.

Obviously they’ll release the written report this week but so far it’s a bad look to start mentioning a potential agenda against Leeds after your player has been found guilty of racially abusing another...

[The Artful Dodger]

4 hours ago, Lucas said:

To be fair, how can you ban someone with the maximum penalty when you are basing it on probability?

If there is an element of doubt, surely the penalty has to be less harsh if they aren't 100%, because essentially they are saying he is guilty without it being proven. The element of doubt is there.

Also, this has been handled terribly by the EFL and FA. This incident happened in September.

We have played 29 games since then. They charged Kiko in November. This has been hanging over his head for 4 months. Can't have been an easy time for him.

Why they have left this so late is beyond me. Is there a hidden agenda against Leeds? I don't know. I'm not going to be that guy. But we do always seem to be on the wrong side of these calls.

Because this is effectively a civil law case and not criminal. If you are found guilty then you are found guilty, there is no incremental 'little bit guilty'. 

The reason the standard of proof is higher in criminal cases is because of the prospect of prison, criminal record etc. The balance of probabilities is still a fairly high threshold, it's not just done on one person's word against each other. Look at John Terry, he clearly screams 'fucking black cunt' but got away with it in a court of law from his bullshit story. 

The reaction of Leeds fans is bad as Liverpool with Suarez, probably worse given the strong history of racism within Leeds' fanbase. 'Hidden agenda', jesus Christ, don't ever pretend to be against racism again.

[Lucas]

9 hours ago, Danny said:

Discrimination within the work place is often dealt with using civil law, so if a judgement can be made on whether or not a person was discriminated against in a civil court and the appropriate actions are then taken if they win (lump sum for example) then there’s no reason why balance of probabilities isn’t a good enough reason in this case. If his appeal doesn’t hold I think it’ll be very poor in general for the game, but this problem isn’t specific to Leeds.

Obviously they’ll release the written report this week but so far it’s a bad look to start mentioning a potential agenda against Leeds after your player has been found guilty of racially abusing another...

 

9 hours ago, The Artful Dodger said:

Because this is effectively a civil law case and not criminal. If you are found guilty then you are found guilty, there is no incremental 'little bit guilty'. 

The reason the standard of proof is higher in criminal cases is because of the prospect of prison, criminal record etc. The balance of probabilities is still a fairly high threshold, it's not just done on one person's word against each other. Look at John Terry, he clearly screams 'fucking black cunt' but got away with it in a court of law from his bullshit story. 

The reaction of Leeds fans is bad as Liverpool with Suarez, probably worse given the strong history of racism within Leeds' fanbase. 'Hidden agenda', jesus Christ, don't ever pretend to be against racism again.

Cheers for the reply lads.

I can sort of see what you are saying with regards to the law outside of Football, but in football terms, the yardstick I compare with is someone like Fernando Forestieri.

He got a 6 match ban and half the fine Kiko Casilla got and his was also judged on probability. I just don't understand why Kiko received an extra 5 games and double the fine.

Also, just to make this crystal clear, with regard to the Leeds agenda comment, that is more down to the fact it's continually felt like we've had an ongoing battle with the powers that be since we've been down here.

I think after the whole 'Spygate' thing recently and this, it's felt poorly handled by them to the detriment of us.

Not to mention we've had some appalling referee decisions continually go against us this year, one even resulting in the EFL apologising to us for a penalty at Fulham.

Or maybe we are just a bit precious. Who knows.

[Stan]

1 minute ago, Lucas said:

Or maybe we are just a bit precious. Who knows.

To be fair every single football fan in the world is precious when it comes to their own club at least. 

[Dave]

I actually think The EFL will do everything they can to keep Leeds United in The Championship due to their global reputation. Some of the decisions against them last season were ridiculous.

[Smiley Culture]

FA report released. Casilla’s defence was shocking. 

[Dr. Gonzo]

13 minutes ago, Smiley Culture said:

FA report released. Casilla’s defence was shocking. 

Was it worse than Wayne Hennazi's "I've never heard of this Hitler fellow and I would like to learn more information about the second world war?"

Because apparently that's a good defense, even though it's shockingly bad.

[Lucas]

Ok. So let's break this down. My honest thoughts.

For those who haven't read.

The FA have judged that they had sufficient evidence to suggest that Kiko Casilla called Jonathan Leko a f***ing n*****.

Kiko's defence claimed he had never heard the word until one month after the match.

I've read the whole transcript.

From what the Charlton players said in support of the arguement, what the referee was told, reactions from all parties after the game, when Leeds players had heard about the incident, Kiko's interview couple months after etc.

I've watched the video evidence used for the case (which is by no way clear at all and entirely based on people's reactions at the right moments in according to all statements) but nevertheless, reasonable evidence to back up Leko's case.

Got to be honest, I don't believe Kiko Casilla. Having read it all, it smells fishy to me and I do believe he knew that word prior to the incident, he's got to have surely, and he must also realise it is a derogatory term with negative connotations.

Look. The whole thing has been a farce. It has took far too long for the FA to reach a conclusion, and when he was banned last Friday night, about 16 hours before a big game with Hull away, and with such little info other than 'based on probability', it was always going to draw a negative reaction from our fanbase to support the player.

However, having read the whole transcript and been provided with in depth analysis, I think it gives Leeds fans more of an understanding, filled in the gaps and in total honesty, provided enough of a case to believe Casilla is guilty.

For me, we have to make an example of him. Zero tolerance. We cannot make the same mistakes Liverpool made with their reaction to Suarez getting banned.

Personally, I don't want someone like that connected to the club. If it was up to me, he goes.

Will we sack him? Probably not. Especially if it's going to cost us money. The club may feel sympathetic to him if they deem it to be out of character.

Will we look to move him on? I wouldn't be surprised to see him go back home to Spain given the flack he'll take.

Either way, I'm very disappointed in him and hope the club do not stand by him after this.

[Danny]

1 hour ago, Lucas said:

Ok. So let's break this down. My honest thoughts.

For those who haven't read.

The FA have judged that they had sufficient evidence to suggest that Kiko Casilla called Jonathan Leko a f***ing n*****.

Kiko's defence claimed he had never heard the word until one month after the match.

I've read the whole transcript.

From what the Charlton players said in support of the arguement, what the referee was told, reactions from all parties after the game, when Leeds players had heard about the incident, Kiko's interview couple months after etc.

I've watched the video evidence used for the case (which is by no way clear at all and entirely based on people's reactions at the right moments in according to all statements) but nevertheless, reasonable evidence to back up Leko's case.

Got to be honest, I don't believe Kiko Casilla. Having read it all, it smells fishy to me and I do believe he knew that word prior to the incident, he's got to have surely, and he must also realise it is a derogatory term with negative connotations.

Look. The whole thing has been a farce. It has took far too long for the FA to reach a conclusion, and when he was banned last Friday night, about 16 hours before a big game with Hull away, and with such little info other than 'based on probability', it was always going to draw a negative reaction from our fanbase to support the player.

However, having read the whole transcript and been provided with in depth analysis, I think it gives Leeds fans more of an understanding, filled in the gaps and in total honesty, provided enough of a case to believe Casilla is guilty.

For me, we have to make an example of him. Zero tolerance. We cannot make the same mistakes Liverpool made with their reaction to Suarez getting banned.

Personally, I don't want someone like that connected to the club. If it was up to me, he goes.

Will we sack him? Probably not. Especially if it's going to cost us money. The club may feel sympathetic to him if they deem it to be out of character.

Will we look to move him on? I wouldn't be surprised to see him go back home to Spain given the flack he'll take.

Either way, I'm very disappointed in him and hope the club do not stand by him after this.

Judging by reactions on Twitter I don’t think this will be something all Leeds fans agree with...people are really getting hung up on it being based on probability. Such a shame when people put club colours before actual real life issues (unfortunately something that’s not removed from Brentford either)

[Smiley Culture]

Now they’ve released the report, he’s got to be sacked today, surely?

[Pyfish+]

I'd expect him to be sacked based on all of that. Gave him the benefit of the doubt when it was down to 'probability' but after that report, I seriously do not believe he didn't know that word or similar.

[Devil-Dick Willie]

The grand arbiter says....

 

That's racist. 

[True Blue]

Just do the Kiko Casilla shirt for banter, if Liverpool did it then so can Leeds.

Saying all this i hate racists, would you say having a racist remark make you a racist? I know we are all angels and never done anything wrong, but does Kiko hate colored people? What he did was wrong and punishment is fair, but is he really a racist?

[Smiley Culture]

5 minutes ago, True Blue said:

Just do the Kiko Casilla shirt for banter, if Liverpool did it then so can Leeds.

Saying all this i hate racists, would you say having a racist remark make you a racist? I know we are all angels and never done anything wrong, but does Kiko hate colored people? What he did was wrong and punishment is fair, but is he really a racist?

Are any of the people who use racist language in stadiums actually racist? I think the point is, fans, rightly, get lengthy, often lifetime, bans and then must have repercussions in normal life but I’m digressing. Basically, is 8 games enough of a ban? 

[True Blue]

3 minutes ago, Smiley Culture said:

Are any of the people who use racist language in stadiums actually racist? I think the point is, fans, rightly, get lengthy, often lifetime, bans and then must have repercussions in normal life but I’m digressing. Basically, is 8 games enough of a ban? 

Yes that is what i am on about. Are they racist (probably some are) or just in general being cunts.

[Lucas]

1 hour ago, True Blue said:

Just do the Kiko Casilla shirt for banter, if Liverpool did it then so can Leeds.

Saying all this i hate racists, would you say having a racist remark make you a racist? I know we are all angels and never done anything wrong, but does Kiko hate colored people? What he did was wrong and punishment is fair, but is he really a racist?

I agree with you, he probably isn't.

By all accounts he's a lovely guy, family man, doesn't drink, good manners etc so it sounds very uncharacteristic of him.

He got caught up in the moment of a game we were losing, took offence to the tit for tat that followed after and *presumably* said what he said out of anger.

We've all said things when angry but I think there are some things we know not to ever say. There is an awareness around certain words and he should have known better.

And I think we need to do our duty and send out the message to others that racism cannot be tolerated under any circumstance, whether it was 'accidental' or whatever, especially given how high profile it's been in the last few years.

Whether that be sacking him or selling him, I personally wouldn't want him to tarnish our name further, much like as a Chelsea fan, you wouldn't want the one's banned for racism to tarnish Chelsea's reputation.

That doesn't mean he can't go somewhere else and rebuild his name.

[True Blue]

1 minute ago, Lucas said:

I agree with you, he probably isn't.

By all accounts he's a lovely guy, family man, doesn't drink, good manners etc so it sounds very uncharacteristic of him.

He got caught up in the moment of a game we were losing, took offence to the tit for tat that followed after and *presumably* said what he said out of anger.

We've all said things when angry but I think there are some things we know not to ever say. There is an awareness around certain words and he should have known better.

And I think we need to do our duty and send out the message to others that racism cannot be tolerated under any circumstance, whether it was 'accidental' or whatever, especially given how high profile it's been in the last few years.

Whether that be sacking him or selling him, I personally wouldn't want him to tarnish our name further, much like as a Chelsea fan, you wouldn't want the one's banned for racism to tarnish Chelsea's reputation.

That doesn't mean he can't go somewhere else and rebuild his name.

Liverpool had no problem to be fair