Marc Bola

[PeteG_1984]

I’m pleased to see so many on here agree this is ridiculous.

 

Who are these people that trawl through someone’s tweets though? It’s not a quick thing to do going that far back 

[Whitechapel Owl]

He'll only get a slap on the wrist.

 

The FA have to do it sadly, as lots of people would accuse them of "being part of the problem" if they didn't.

 

It's all just for appearances to cover their own backs.

 

Annoying, but with social media now, organisations can't win. Damned if they do, damned if they don't. 

[Utah Owl]

6 hours ago, Willow Owl said:

Can’t believe some low life is actually going through children’s accounts and then passing to the FA to charge. He’s obviously made a silly comment but there is nothing to suggest it’s the norm as they have had to go back that far to find it. 

The kid was 14 with no idea about life and life skills. 
Surely there should be a rule about searching kids media accounts. It doesn’t sit right with me 
 

Is there any truth in the rumour that the FA are changing their name next year to the Geheimes Stadt Polizei?

[Willie Henderson]

22 hours ago, T Hardy said:

Normally you get the odd person saying it’s absolutely the right decision, but I’ve not seen one person saying the FA are correct here 

I think it's absolutely the right decision by the FA, these children need to learn about the consequences of their actions and the damage they are doing.

 

There are potentially hundreds of young adults, children and toddlers that risk the total destruction of football as we know it.

 

They may think they're being big and clever but their harsh words shake the very foundations of the football association, a long standing and respectable establishment, and one we must protect at all costs.

 

They should absolutely throw the book at Bola, but which one? Maybe The Gruffalo? or The Very Hungry Caterpillar?

 

[Ellis Rimmer]

2 hours ago, Whitechapel Owl said:

He'll only get a slap on the wrist.

 

The FA have to do it sadly, as lots of people would accuse them of "being part of the problem" if they didn't.

 

It's all just for appearances to cover their own backs.

 

Annoying, but with social media now, organisations can't win. Damned if they do, damned if they don't. 

Nobody would have known if they just left it 

[Whitechapel Owl]

10 minutes ago, Ellis Rimmer said:

Nobody would have known if they just left it 

 

But we don't know how they became aware of it.

 

It could have been a member of the public that found it.

[Ellis Rimmer]

11 minutes ago, Whitechapel Owl said:

 

But we don't know how they became aware of it.

 

It could have been a member of the public that found it.

Yeh and then that member of the public would go “look what he said” and everyone would go “get a life he was 14”

[Whitechapel Owl]

1 minute ago, Ellis Rimmer said:

Yeh and then that member of the public would go “look what he said” and everyone would go “get a life he was 14”

 

Sadly not, as referred to in my post near the top of the page.

[Ellis Rimmer]

20 minutes ago, Whitechapel Owl said:

 

Sadly not, as referred to in my post near the top of the page.

I don't think lots of people would accuse the FA as being part of the problem

 

something a 14 year old said wouldn't gain traction 

[Whitechapel Owl]

1 minute ago, Ellis Rimmer said:

I don't think lots of people would accuse the FA as being part of the problem

 

something a 14 year old said wouldn't gain traction 

 

Well you've got a lot more faith in social media than I have then.

[scram]

I've been to some academy media training and there is not a single person on here that would not be amazed at what goes on

 

The guy doing the training is an adviser and manages the SM accounts of many world famous artists and sports stars

 

Firstly he asked the group who had SM accounts - all the hands go up. Are their accounts private - most were

 

Then he proceeds to present every account that is supposed to be "private" - and some of the things are horrific that they have posted

 

It's extremely uncomfortable, embarrassing and tortuous for those who have the results of their posts up on the screen for all to see - it's tough but it's for a reason - to show how brutal the world of professional life can be and how to avoid pitfalls

 

He also said that on average around 25-30% of "followers" will be journalists who will save things and produce them if/when they generate headlines - and he reeled of several examples.

 

Every club will (should!) have a SM policy which will preclude posting anything that could be deemed contentious or damaging

 

Should somebody have their nonsense posted as 14yr old be dragged up years later?

 

It's a moot point but depending on how bad the posts were then damage limitation is probably the best policy - it may also help others check themselves and think about what they are posting and how the engage with SM

 

I'd say anybody who has had the training and workshops as described above literally has no excuse if they continue to post hateful things on SM and therefore would deserve all they get 

[Owls2k]

2 hours ago, scram said:

I've been to some academy media training and there is not a single person on here that would not be amazed at what goes on

 

The guy doing the training is an adviser and manages the SM accounts of many world famous artists and sports stars

 

Firstly he asked the group who had SM accounts - all the hands go up. Are their accounts private - most were

 

Then he proceeds to present every account that is supposed to be "private" - and some of the things are horrific that they have posted

 

It's extremely uncomfortable, embarrassing and tortuous for those who have the results of their posts up on the screen for all to see - it's tough but it's for a reason - to show how brutal the world of professional life can be and how to avoid pitfalls

 

He also said that on average around 25-30% of "followers" will be journalists who will save things and produce them if/when they generate headlines - and he reeled of several examples.

 

Every club will (should!) have a SM policy which will preclude posting anything that could be deemed contentious or damaging

 

Should somebody have their nonsense posted as 14yr old be dragged up years later?

 

It's a moot point but depending on how bad the posts were then damage limitation is probably the best policy - it may also help others check themselves and think about what they are posting and how the engage with SM

 

I'd say anybody who has had the training and workshops as described above literally has no excuse if they continue to post hateful things on SM and therefore would deserve all they get 

 

Illuminating to say the least. But it makes sense.

 

I know a lot of agents have their players either cleanse or delete their previous accounts to create new ones. But even that doesn't account for screenshots etc.

 

The bigger question is should we be penalising offenses of this nature? Most would say absolutely not. If it's during their playing days, then absolutely.

 

Imagine if the FA had investigated this tweet, spoke with the player. Announced it had since been deleted and that the player knows he made a big error in his teens. That would have been far more understanding and would actually have one more to 'fight the fight' of equality. 

 

The FA's approach is draconian - and wreaks of straight white men trying to show they're being reactive. 

 

 

[Owls2k]

5 hours ago, Whitechapel Owl said:

He'll only get a slap on the wrist.

 

The FA have to do it sadly, as lots of people would accuse them of "being part of the problem" if they didn't.

 

It's all just for appearances to cover their own backs.

 

Annoying, but with social media now, organisations can't win. Damned if they do, damned if they don't. 

 

This is the problem. This is exactly how the FA are thinking, it's a sledgehammer approach which helps nobody.

 

In reality most of us think, 'Oh, he was a bit of a nob at 14, what's he thinking now'?

 

It should be spun into something positive with the player talking about it all - now that would be compelling and make a real impact. 

 

(I am of course assuming here that he still isn't a massive homophobe )

[Big Malc]

16 hours ago, sheffield_dave said:

Using the terms “virtue signalling”, “cancel culture” and “political correctness gone mad” are going to get Jordan the usual flak from some quarters

And rightly so.  It appears on the face of it that this is a daft (at best) decision, so he doesn’t need to cheapen the point by using terms that resonate with the angriest, dumbest portions of society.

 

I don’t know what Bola tweeted, but it was nearly half his life ago and he was literally a child.  Surely the best way to approach this it to have a conversation with him and find out if he still holds the same views.  If not, as someone mentioned earlier, a statement of self-reflection would be sufficient.

[Plonk]

9 hours ago, ANDY said:

What gets me is that the FA are charging him over alleged homophobic comments posted when he was 14

 

Yet turn a blind eye to the World Cup being hosted in Qatar where homosexuality is punishable by death. 
 

 

This. Absolute hypocrisy but do we expect anything else?

[owlinexile]

12 hours ago, Willie Henderson said:

I think it's absolutely the right decision by the FA, these children need to learn about the consequences of their actions and the damage they are doing.

 

There are potentially hundreds of young adults, children and toddlers that risk the total destruction of football as we know it.

 

They may think they're being big and clever but their harsh words shake the very foundations of the football association, a long standing and respectable establishment, and one we must protect at all costs.

 

They should absolutely throw the book at Bola, but which one? Maybe The Gruffalo? or The Very Hungry Caterpillar?

 

 

A couple of weeks ago my five year old was excitedly telling me all the ways that one of his new friends from football training was just like him.

 

'He likes dinosaurs like me, he's got the same colour hair as me, he has the same colour skin as me...'

 

I think I may have muttered something in sheepish embarrassment about how that's interesting but it really isn't important and we are all the same on the inside etc etc.

 

(And then later made a private joke to my wife about them both liking to dress up as 'ghosts' with pillowcases over their heads).

 

But now I wonder if I should have turned them both in to the FA for bringing the game into disrepute?

 

[owlinexile]

15 hours ago, ANDY said:

What gets me is that the FA are charging him over alleged homophobic comments posted when he was 14

 

Yet turn a blind eye to the World Cup being hosted in Qatar where homosexuality is punishable by death. 
 

 

 

If they don't have the balls to boycott a World Cup in a nation that has just been caught red handed sending assassins to murder someone on British soil resulting in the actual death of a British citizen, there is no chance of them doing it over appalling human rights issues.

 

 

[Plonk]

Didn’t they also block Newcastle’s takeover by Saudis due to their human rights record?