Bolton Wanderers Forum The-Wanderer.co.uk

Bruce Rioja wrote:No. That wasn't, nor isn't the point at all. Don't try to fudge the issue. Your grief was, although isn't now for some reason, the way in which the issue was investigated. Not the severity of the crime itself, or whether or not it is one, but the way by which it was investigated.

Using "investigation" for what Tan did is completely inapt. Did Kim Bo-Kyung say that Mackay had treated him unfairly because he's Korean? Did Tal Ben Haim claim he wasn't signed because he's Jewish? Was there any suggestion that the opinions expressed in the texts influenced how Mackay did his job as manager?

Or did Tan just want to ruin Mackay's chances of getting the Crystal Palace job?

H. Pedersen wrote:

thebish wrote:just to be clear... are you actually saying that Tan illegally hacked Mackay's personal phone - or merely that he found material on his work-based equipment?

I'm aware that Tan didn't do anything illegal. I think that trying to ruin a man's life six months after he's left your club is much worse than saying "not a lot of white faces."

so what was all the guff about Tan hacking Mackay's phone, then? why write that when you KNOW it isn't what happened?

also - what new thing did Tan do that means those who criticise Mackay are giving employers the power to terminate their employment??

it seems to me that:

1) Tan is quite vindictive and possibly spiteful and a bit of a nut-ball - yet operated entirely properly and legally
2) Mackay is a cock who wrote offensive texts outside of the the codes of the sport's governing body

I'm struggling to see why people can't simply hold both 1 and 2 to be true - and also all the bigger and more important things in the world - all at the same time. I fail to see why anyone has to choose one or the other...

thebish wrote:

H. Pedersen wrote:

thebish wrote:just to be clear... are you actually saying that Tan illegally hacked Mackay's personal phone - or merely that he found material on his work-based equipment?

I'm aware that Tan didn't do anything illegal. I think that trying to ruin a man's life six months after he's left your club is much worse than saying "not a lot of white faces."

so what was all the guff about Tan hacking Mackay's phone, then? why write that when you KNOW it isn't what happened?

also - what new thing did Tan do that means those who criticise Mackay are giving employers the power to terminate their employment??

I offered the hypothetical hacking question because I'm annoyed that people are ignoring how and why these texts were released. So I'm asking the question, does it matter how this came out? If Tan hacked Mackay's personal phone, do other clubs have to treat Mackay as a pariah? If Tan sat outside Mackay's window recording his personal calls, does Mackay get banished for life?

How about the statute of limitations? Let's say Mackay gets fired from Cardiff, decides to travel the world for 10 years, then comes back and wants another crack at football. Would we all be fine with Tan digging up Mackay's now-ancient cell phone records to try to stop him from joining Wigan in the Conference North?

How far is Tan allowed to go to get revenge on this guy before we say, you know what, employers really shouldn't be doing this to ex-employees who left on bad terms.

H. Pedersen wrote:

thebish wrote:just to be clear... are you actually saying that Tan illegally hacked Mackay's personal phone - or merely that he found material on his work-based equipment?

I'm aware that Tan didn't do anything illegal. I think that trying to ruin a man's life six months after he's left your club is much worse than saying "not a lot of white faces."

...and some stuff about 'chinkies', which in Mackay's catch-all definition, would include Tan.

Having said that, I agree with your wider point. Tan has won, he should move on.

Vincent Tan is very much the innocent party in all of this. He's seen a opportunity since to get back at the guy who spread lies about him in the national media, racially abused him behind his back, made him a laughing stock and 'helped' cost him hundreds of millions of pounds.

Yet hear people are, saying that Tan should move on!!! Fvckin incredible!

What's the view like up there ladies?

boltonboris wrote:Vincent Tan is very much the innocent party in all of this. He's seen a opportunity since to get back at the guy who spread lies about him in the national media, racially abused him behind his back, made him a laughing stock and 'helped' cost him hundreds of millions of pounds.

Yet hear people are, saying that Tan should move on!!! Fvckin incredible!

What's the view like up there ladies?

Yes, pity the poor millionaire. I don't think it was Mackay who made Tan a laughing stock. I think it was probably the ludicrous outfits, the shitting on the club's history, the public criticism of the manager, the "resign or be sacked" ultimatum, and the hiring his son's 23 year old buddy as the head of recruitment.

"Fit and proper" indeed.

H. Pedersen wrote: Yes, pity the poor millionaire. I don't think it was Mackay who made Tan a laughing stock. I think it was probably the ludicrous outfits, the shitting on the club's history, the public criticism of the manager, the "resign or be sacked" ultimatum, and the hiring his son's 23 year old buddy as the head of recruitment.

"Fit and proper" indeed.

none of which makes MacKay's texts any more palatable - does it??

If the FA decided they wanted nothing to do with either man I'd be perfectly fine with that.

Reactionary comments about Whelan not being a fit and proper person to run a Football club. I'm sure the majority of fans around the UK might disagree.

Mar wrote:Reactionary comments about Whelan not being a fit and proper person to run a Football club. I'm sure the majority of fans around the UK might disagree.

77 Year Old Man In Racism Shocker

I can, with full confidence, tell you that there's no statute of limitations on being a massive prick.

As an aside! Just watching sat,day kitchen where Ken Hom is Speaking about chicken and he says! Oh we Chinese eat the dark meat which is nice+juicy and serve the dry white meat to white people! Would that sentence be ok if it was reversed and uttered by a white person! Mmmmmm,not too sure!

jonnycooper wrote:As an aside! Just watching sat,day kitchen where Ken Hom is Speaking about chicken and he says! Oh we Chinese eat the dark meat which is nice+jupresenceserve the dry white meat to white people! Would that sentence be ok if it was reversed and uttered by a white person! Mmmmmm,not too sure!

The simple fact is that it wouldn't be. There'd be a shitstorm and whoever said it hounded and attacked mercilessly IF anyone noticed.

The current situation of social media and mainstream media simply hunting out opportunity to be insulted can't continue. Maybe these are early days of what is a new presence and things will mature over time.Right now it's crazy.

I reckon there's a huge difference between stereotyping and racism. Calling Welsh people sheepshaggers, does not mean I think any less of them. I couldn't possibly think any less of them, whatever I called them. It's just stereotyping. Oh and yes, I have on occasion ordered a Chinese meal from the Chinkies down the road. Have me fcuking whipped.

Worthy4England wrote:I reckon there's a huge difference between stereotyping and racism. Calling Welsh people sheepshaggers, does not mean I think any less of them. I couldn't possibly think any less of them, whatever I called them. It's just stereotyping. Oh and yes, I have on occasion ordered a Chinese meal from the Chinkies down the road. Have me fcuking whipped.

A couple of years ago I asked #2 son if he "fancied a Chinkie" takeaway.

He looked at me like I was Jimmy Savile.

Generations change.

I'd have pointed him at the cooker, whilst I ordered.

H. Pedersen wrote:

boltonboris wrote:Vincent Tan is very much the innocent party in all of this. He's seen a opportunity since to get back at the guy who spread lies about him in the national media, racially abused him behind his back, made him a laughing stock and 'helped' cost him hundreds of millions of pounds.

Yet hear people are, saying that Tan should move on!!! Fvckin incredible!

What's the view like up there ladies?

Yes, pity the poor millionaire. I don't think it was Mackay who made Tan a laughing stock. I think it was probably the ludicrous outfits, the shitting on the club's history, the public criticism of the manager, the "resign or be sacked" ultimatum, and the hiring his son's 23 year old buddy as the head of recruitment.

"Fit and proper" indeed.

His wealth has feck all to do with it. Changing the teams colours does not make him a bad guy, or deserving of racial abuse.

The head of recruitment. You seen moneyball? Also, who did he replace?? You guessed it....... Moody, the other party involved in the texts. Also I've heard there's more to it and it involves criminality on the part of this bloke, but that's another story.

Prufrock wrote:I can, with full confidence, tell you that there's no statute of limitations on being a massive prick.

Aye, you'd know all about that.

he didnt win his first game.

even coyle mr. freedman did that

boltonboris wrote: Changing the teams colours does not make him a bad guy

Yes, it does.

This has really been the year of the scumbag owner, from the "Hull Tigers" clown to the Leeds owner who changes managers every three days, to QPR ignoring their FFP fine, to Blackpool starting the season with a half dozen players. Plus all of Tan's offenses. Clearly an overhaul of "fit and proper" is needed.