' FA facing backlash as Moody/Mackay to escape punishment '
Wed Oct 29, 2014 9:33 am
FA facing backlash with Malky Mackay and Iain Moody set to escape punishment for sexist, racist and homophobic messages
- Malky Mackay and Iain Moody sent a number of offensive texts and emails
- Sportsmail exclusively revealed the messages back in August
- The FA are not expected to charge them as their communication was private
- But others have been punished for sending private messages
- Mackay missed out on a job at Crystal Palace and Moody resigned from his role as sporting director at Selhurst Park
- The messages were uncovered during an investigation by Cardiff City owner Vincent Tan
Senior FA figures are braced for a furious backlash if, as expected, they fail to charge Malky Mackay and Iain Moody over their exchange of sexist, racist and homophobic texts and emails.
The FA will leave themselves open to accusations of inconsistency and weakness if they do not take action against the former Cardiff City manager and the head of recruitment who worked alongside him in south Wales. Particularly when the correspondence was passed to the FA by Cardiff City, having been obtained through a search order of Moody's house granted by a High Court judge.
The FA insist the matter is ongoing despite the fact that Sportsmail first revealed the details of the texts and emails on August 21. But it appears to be reaching a conclusion with the belief being that the FA will not charge Moody and Mackay.
It is understood the FA will cite their policy is not to act on 'private communications'; a position they adopted earlier this year when sexist emails sent by Premier League chief executive Richard Scudamore from his work inbox were leaked to the media.
FA officials realise there is likely to be uproar if they fail to act on the Mackay and Moody messages that included deeply offensive remarks about players — Korean midfielder Kim Bo-kyung and his representatives were referred to as 'Fkn chinkys' by Mackay — as well as their own employers at Cardiff and football agents.
The FA is also expected to announce a review of the organisation's policy on private communications.
Mackay has apologised for sending messages that were 'disrespectful of other cultures', while Moody resigned as director of football at Crystal Palace in a week when he hoped to appoint Mackay as manager at the club.
If there is no charge there is expected to be a detailed, written explanation from the FA's governance department, outlining the efforts they went to in an attempt to bring charges against Mackay and Moody.
This, Sportsmail understands, included requesting a statement from former Cardiff City player Ibrahim Farah, who responded to the original revelations by tweeting and then deleting that Mackay would call him the 'Wee Egyptian' during their time together at the club.
Whether a written explanation and review would appease those who feel Mackay and Moody should be punished remains to be seen. Cardiff City are sure to be unimpressed. But senior figures at the FA already fear the organisation could be accused of double standards when players like Rio Ferdinand have been charged with misconduct for an alleged breach of FA rules; in Ferdinand's case for referring to a Twitter follower's mother as a 'Sket', a Caribbean word for a promiscuous woman.
The FA could point to the fact that Ferdinand communicated on a social media platform. But senior football officials see a major weakness in that particular 'private-public' argument when last year Paul Elliott was condemned by the FA for using the 'n' word in a private text to another black former footballer, Richard Rufus.
The FA accepted the resignation of anti-racism campaigner Elliott from all his positions within the organisation after he made 'discriminatory abusive comments'.
Elliott, now back at the FA as a member of the Inclusion Advisory Board, also stepped down as a trustee of the Kick It Out campaign, and was criticised by then FA chairman David Bernstein.
'The use of discriminatory language is unacceptable regardless of its context and in effect has made Paul's position untenable,' said Bernstein.
Now, however, context seems to be the central issue, even if other senior officials would argue that there is even an important distinction that should be recognised between the Scudamore case and the Moody and Mackay case. As one observer put it, there is a 'clear work context' in the communication between Moody and Mackay.
The fear, claims another senior official, is that players will think there is one rule for them and another for people in positions of authority.
The Scudamore case, and the decision under the leadership of chairman Greg Dyke not to act on private communication, led to calls from within the FA to look at the policy of private and public accountability.
This process was ongoing when the Mackay-Moody story broke and the FA governance department appear to have been struggling with the issue as a consequence. Particularly when they know an attempt to charge Mackay — and possibly even hit him with a ban that would come into effect the moment he lands a new managerial role — could face a serious legal challenge, perhaps even with the support of the League Managers' Association.
The LMA also came in for serious criticism in August when they initially attempted to defend Mackay by dismissing his comments as 'friendly text message banter', and had to then apologise for the wording of the apology.
There is nothing in the FA rules on discrimination exempting private correspondence but the controversial policy of not prosecuting such cases also recently benefited referees chief David Elleray, who made racist remarks to Robert McCarthy, a black non-League referee coaching manager. Elleray was ordered by the FA to attend an equality and diversity training course but that was seen as little more than a slap on the wrists.
The view of many within football is that the FA's current policy is not sustainable in the digital age. 'Having taken a stance on Scudamore it was not long before the Moody and Mackay case put the FA in a very uncomfortable position,' said another insider.
Legal experts argue that there is no basis for why the FA could not bring a misconduct charge for private communication. As John Cooper QC explained: 'Whether or not the alleged remarks are made in private or in public does not matter. The fact is they were made and the reality is the FA have a choice what to do about it.'
- Malky Mackay and Iain Moody sent a number of offensive texts and emails
- Sportsmail exclusively revealed the messages back in August
- The FA are not expected to charge them as their communication was private
- But others have been punished for sending private messages
- Mackay missed out on a job at Crystal Palace and Moody resigned from his role as sporting director at Selhurst Park
- The messages were uncovered during an investigation by Cardiff City owner Vincent Tan
Senior FA figures are braced for a furious backlash if, as expected, they fail to charge Malky Mackay and Iain Moody over their exchange of sexist, racist and homophobic texts and emails.
The FA will leave themselves open to accusations of inconsistency and weakness if they do not take action against the former Cardiff City manager and the head of recruitment who worked alongside him in south Wales. Particularly when the correspondence was passed to the FA by Cardiff City, having been obtained through a search order of Moody's house granted by a High Court judge.
The FA insist the matter is ongoing despite the fact that Sportsmail first revealed the details of the texts and emails on August 21. But it appears to be reaching a conclusion with the belief being that the FA will not charge Moody and Mackay.
It is understood the FA will cite their policy is not to act on 'private communications'; a position they adopted earlier this year when sexist emails sent by Premier League chief executive Richard Scudamore from his work inbox were leaked to the media.
FA officials realise there is likely to be uproar if they fail to act on the Mackay and Moody messages that included deeply offensive remarks about players — Korean midfielder Kim Bo-kyung and his representatives were referred to as 'Fkn chinkys' by Mackay — as well as their own employers at Cardiff and football agents.
The FA is also expected to announce a review of the organisation's policy on private communications.
Mackay has apologised for sending messages that were 'disrespectful of other cultures', while Moody resigned as director of football at Crystal Palace in a week when he hoped to appoint Mackay as manager at the club.
If there is no charge there is expected to be a detailed, written explanation from the FA's governance department, outlining the efforts they went to in an attempt to bring charges against Mackay and Moody.
This, Sportsmail understands, included requesting a statement from former Cardiff City player Ibrahim Farah, who responded to the original revelations by tweeting and then deleting that Mackay would call him the 'Wee Egyptian' during their time together at the club.
Whether a written explanation and review would appease those who feel Mackay and Moody should be punished remains to be seen. Cardiff City are sure to be unimpressed. But senior figures at the FA already fear the organisation could be accused of double standards when players like Rio Ferdinand have been charged with misconduct for an alleged breach of FA rules; in Ferdinand's case for referring to a Twitter follower's mother as a 'Sket', a Caribbean word for a promiscuous woman.
The FA could point to the fact that Ferdinand communicated on a social media platform. But senior football officials see a major weakness in that particular 'private-public' argument when last year Paul Elliott was condemned by the FA for using the 'n' word in a private text to another black former footballer, Richard Rufus.
The FA accepted the resignation of anti-racism campaigner Elliott from all his positions within the organisation after he made 'discriminatory abusive comments'.
Elliott, now back at the FA as a member of the Inclusion Advisory Board, also stepped down as a trustee of the Kick It Out campaign, and was criticised by then FA chairman David Bernstein.
'The use of discriminatory language is unacceptable regardless of its context and in effect has made Paul's position untenable,' said Bernstein.
Now, however, context seems to be the central issue, even if other senior officials would argue that there is even an important distinction that should be recognised between the Scudamore case and the Moody and Mackay case. As one observer put it, there is a 'clear work context' in the communication between Moody and Mackay.
The fear, claims another senior official, is that players will think there is one rule for them and another for people in positions of authority.
The Scudamore case, and the decision under the leadership of chairman Greg Dyke not to act on private communication, led to calls from within the FA to look at the policy of private and public accountability.
This process was ongoing when the Mackay-Moody story broke and the FA governance department appear to have been struggling with the issue as a consequence. Particularly when they know an attempt to charge Mackay — and possibly even hit him with a ban that would come into effect the moment he lands a new managerial role — could face a serious legal challenge, perhaps even with the support of the League Managers' Association.
The LMA also came in for serious criticism in August when they initially attempted to defend Mackay by dismissing his comments as 'friendly text message banter', and had to then apologise for the wording of the apology.
There is nothing in the FA rules on discrimination exempting private correspondence but the controversial policy of not prosecuting such cases also recently benefited referees chief David Elleray, who made racist remarks to Robert McCarthy, a black non-League referee coaching manager. Elleray was ordered by the FA to attend an equality and diversity training course but that was seen as little more than a slap on the wrists.
The view of many within football is that the FA's current policy is not sustainable in the digital age. 'Having taken a stance on Scudamore it was not long before the Moody and Mackay case put the FA in a very uncomfortable position,' said another insider.
Legal experts argue that there is no basis for why the FA could not bring a misconduct charge for private communication. As John Cooper QC explained: 'Whether or not the alleged remarks are made in private or in public does not matter. The fact is they were made and the reality is the FA have a choice what to do about it.'
Re: ' FA facing backlash as Moody/Mackay to escape punishmen
Wed Oct 29, 2014 10:28 am
