Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
CJ

Malky issues

Recommended Posts

[quote user="T"]The board never claimed to scour Europe so that is just false.

That MM was the preferred choice and he turned us down is just the usual accusations based on speculation rather than fact.

That NA rather than MM is a better appointment is a matter of fact not opinion.

There were concerns about MMs involvement in player purchases and style of play. There were concerns about NAs lack of experience. The board with their greater experience and knowledge made the right call. The critics as usual think they know better and do not have enough integrity to acknowledge that their criticisms are based on speculation and less knowledge and that they were wrong and the board was right.

Apologies if any poster on here actually a board member, conducted interviews or performed due diligence but otherwise you attempting to criticise the board based on pure ignorance.[/quote]that would be a novelty on here !otherwise spot on

ps what were Cardiff trawling through the texts to find  ?offensive remarks so that they could sack him ?I doubt Cardiff could make a claim for fair dimissal on the basis of believing that a future search would show offensive textsor, maybelooking for evidence of ''shenanigans'' relating to transfers and questionable payments ................... and why might that be ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well yes City 1st, that is no mystery, it has been stated in the articles about the case. Cardiff believe improper dealings regarding Moody and Mackay and had hired investigators to look into it. In doing this they came across these messages and submitted them to the FA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="AJ"]The LMA statement suggests only two items related to Malky so the reports floating around are rather unclear.[/quote]As I read it all the offensive texts quoted by the Mail in its online edition are from Moody, bar one reply - about Chinese people - from Mackay.I did post earlier, more about the financial stuff, which is what is at the heart of this, that there are two people under investigation. But what might be true about one, for the sake of argument about fees for agents, might not be true of the other. And nothing has been proven about either, let alone about both. People do need to exercise a bit of caution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That''s the issue you have using company provided hardwear....Skype messaging or emails on company property....are monitored as long as you are made aware by the company then they have the right to do so City 1st. So all the more reason to be careful of texting or emailing such comments.

It''s all a bit sad and I feel that everything should be known before we can make any comments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
These messages clearly weren''t on company-provided hardware as Cardiff required a court order to obtain them. They were private text messages and clearly not criminal in nature. We don''t know the full facts yet but compared to the antics of Alan Pardew, I don''t think this should be career ending for Malky. It might end up being though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
err, they won''tthey are a minor matterit is the alleged payments that are the real concern

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just how many offensive comments are acceptable. Even if not sent most people know that you should point out unacceptable comments to others.

Regardless of who payments were made to MM was still being accused of being party to exceeding his authorised expenditure which is an issue in itself.

It seems some are more concerned with being right than knowing the difference between right and wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="PurpleCanary"]I did post earlier, more about the financial stuff, which is what is at the heart of this, that there are two people under investigation. But what might be true about one, for the sake of argument about fees for agents, might not be true of the other. And nothing has been proven about either, let alone about both. People do need to exercise a bit of caution.[/quote]It is only one report but according to The Guardian the raid on Moody''s

home, the purpose of which was to find incriminating documents on

transfers at Cardiff, drew a complete blank:"No evidence of financial wrongdoing was found among

his [Moody''s} records...it was not the financial paper trail that [Vincent] Tan and the investigators were hoping for."
If

so, the situation about transfers hasn''t changed from when Moody and

Mackay were fired last winter. Not that they somehow spent

misappropriated money but that the oversight from Tan himself ("I gave our  football management too much authority.") and an inexperienced CEO (Tan: "I sent Simon Lim from Malaysia. He doesn''t really know a lot about football.") was way too lax.Perhaps the long-term financial implications of deals were not

scrutinised closely enough by the non-football CEO. Which would in part explain Tan''s

claim that M&M spent £15m above the originally (note the

"originally") authorised £35m. The CEO signed off on deals that took the

figure beyond £35m.Which would leave M&M as wily football people taking advantage of a chump, but not crooks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that is nonsense of stilts as the phrase goes - and well you know it pcjust because no evidence was found at Moodys office does not mean there were no ''illegal payments''the situation has changed - Moodys office has been turned over, and that is most likely just part of the investigation, not how it was last Januaryperhaps you could explain what this ''taking advantage '' actually means in financial termsbecause signing a 20 year old for a huge sum then only playing him for a couple of games suggests far, far more than bad judgement from ''football people'' and far more than taking advantage ether

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="City1st"]that is nonsense of stilts as the phrase goes - and well you know it pcjust because no evidence was found at Moodys office does not mean there were no ''illegal payments''the situation has changed - Moodys office has been turned over, and that is most likely just part of the investigation, not how it was last Januaryperhaps you could explain what this ''taking advantage '' actually means in financial termsbecause signing a 20 year old for a huge sum then only playing him for a couple of games suggests far, far more than bad judgement from ''football people'' and far more than taking advantage ether

[/quote]Of course if the investigation goes on proof of illegality (footballing or criminal) may emerge. I gather such things do happen in football and I have never discounted that possibility. But I prefer to deal with facts as known rather than innuendo and conspiracy-theory supposition. And as things stand the known situation, with the raid on Moody''s home having produced nothing and with those revealingly self-incriminatory comments from Tan, is as I described it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
According to this logic presumably PC is absolutely fine with anyone taking his property agaisnt his wishes if he leaves it unlocked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...