mahgrassyshoes Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-12160952 NSS says that Dallas should be re-instated as it shows they have not judged impartially. Have to agree with them, Dallas should have been sacked for his part in the McDonald/Craven cover-up, but the SFA took the easy option and sacked him for this. I think the SFA will have to pay a bit of a hefty pay-out as I can't see them re-instating him. Dallas returning would be a backward step for Scottish football, but the SFA should have done it properly the first time and not left them exposed to this kind of scrutiny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThomasFlogel Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Agree with OP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
world_3 Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Dallas returning would be a backward step for Scottish football, but the SFA should have done it properly the first time and not left them exposed to this kind of scrutiny. Exactly, both him and McDonald should have been sacked for the report shenanigans. The Church can GTF too, none of their business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mahgrassyshoes Posted January 11, 2011 Author Share Posted January 11, 2011 Exactly, both him and McDonald should have been sacked for the report shenanigans. The Church can GTF too, none of their business. Definitely, think the NSS summed up their ability to comment on that quite succicntly tbh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redm Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 These religious/non-religious groups could do with keeping their noses out of football. Commenting like this doesn't reduce the influence of religion, it just flippin emphasises it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mysterion Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 My take - if taken to court the SFA will argue that Dallas had already been part of a major embarrassment to the organisation/business of the SFA with the cover up. The email scandal will be considered as a 2nd consecutive offence which further undermined the reputation of the SFA. He'll get no where. If it was just the standalone email and the media didn't know about it then a "fair" employer would rap his knuckles and tell him to behave. In this situation the email became a scandal and tainted Dallas with doubts over his impartiality towards a large proportion of Scottish society. The major problem with the email wasn't that it was a joke - it clearly was a form of satire. I would believe the majority of Scottish Catholics would believe that. It's the Celtic minded who have pursued an agenda out of one upmanship that Celtic and Rangers do from time to tim. What is truely sad is that there is still a requirement from both sides of the Old Firm to have impartiality since they can not leave their sectarian bile in the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest John Meurig Thomas Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 I want Dawkins to wade in to this subject again, throwing punches at anything that moves. That was phenomenal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tartofmidlothian Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Absolutely spot on, OP. Dallas was part of the problem in Scottish football, but the way he was sacked proves that the SFA are only too willing to cave in when confronted with the biggest problem. This quote from the article sums it up: "We note that the sackings appear to have followed the Catholic Church reportedly urging 'Scottish football's governing body to sack Dallas if it was proved he had passed on a 'tasteless message' relating to the Pope's visit to Scotland'. The church is in no position to lobby and deprive others of their jobs over such a trivial joke, given its own misdemeanours, conducted on a much larger scale for so long and so widely." Also well done to whoever made up that page, for including the 'offending' image on it. The dreadful Kearney shot himself in both feet if he wanted to stop people seeing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tartofmidlothian Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 I want Dawkins to wade in again to this subject again, throwing punches at anything that moves. That was phenomenal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Stinkfinger Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Only in Scotland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 I would guess he'll be paid money to go away. He couldn't do the job now, and be seen as neutral. In my view, we would be better with someone from abroad in any case, so I'd prefer if he didn't come back anyway. He was always a supporter of refs not being accountable and not having to explain decisions, which will never lead to them getting more respect. On the other hand, it's sad that the most important thing that the Catholic Church had to deal with at the time was trying to make sure that several people lost their jobs over a rather juvenile email. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
micole Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 HD is a lot of things (I know this through personal experience) but for the SFA to sack him over this is a complete sham. The artical is correct to state that the Catholic church was quick not to sack or spilt on those involved in child abuse but just move them on to other areas were they could carry on their despicable deeds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 HD is a lot of things (I know this through personal experience) but for the SFA to sack him over this is a complete sham. The artical is correct to state that the Catholic church was quick not to sack or spilt on those involved in child abuse but just move them on to other areas were they could carry on their despicable deeds. Seems likely to me that it was the easiest way to get rid of him without giving the refs an excuse to strike again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carnaby Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 At the time I read a good comparison with Al Capone being put away for tax evasion - the right outcome for the wrong reasons and that's exactly what happened with Dallas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mahgrassyshoes Posted January 11, 2011 Author Share Posted January 11, 2011 My take - if taken to court the SFA will argue that Dallas had already been part of a major embarrassment to the organisation/business of the SFA with the cover up. The email scandal will be considered as a 2nd consecutive offence which further undermined the reputation of the SFA. He'll get no where. If it was just the standalone email and the media didn't know about it then a "fair" employer would rap his knuckles and tell him to behave. In this situation the email became a scandal and tainted Dallas with doubts over his impartiality towards a large proportion of Scottish society. The major problem with the email wasn't that it was a joke - it clearly was a form of satire. I would believe the majority of Scottish Catholics would believe that. It's the Celtic minded who have pursued an agenda out of one upmanship that Celtic and Rangers do from time to tim. What is truely sad is that there is still a requirement from both sides of the Old Firm to have impartiality since they can not leave their sectarian bile in the past. I think it would have been made harder by the fact they re-instated some members and not others. I imagine they would have to prove some sort of disciplinary procedure took place with regards to the McDonald/Craven affair. Might be difficult as I doubt at any time he was handed a written warning. He will be given large payout to leave it alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maple Leaf Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 The NSS is correct, and Dallas should be reinstated. He perhaps should have been fired for other misdeeds, but not this one. The Catholic Church demanded that an employee of the SFA be fired for forwarding a joke about child abuse. But how many employees of the Catholic Church have been fired for child rape, even though it has been committed by countless Catholic priests? The Catholic church is in no position to be handing out advice, or making demands, to anyone on this matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinmaroon Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Exactly, both him and McDonald should have been sacked for the report shenanigans. The Roman Catholic Church can GTF too, none of their business. Corrected that for you! PS Dallas went for more than that email. If not, why is he even thinking about whether to go law or not? If it was just the email he would have an open and shut case in his favour for wrongful dismissal. The only two reasons that he hasn't immediately gone to law is, first, there's more that could come out, and second, such an airing might effect a possible future with EUFA! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinmaroon Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Only in Scotland. Obviously know nothing about Italian politics, football and anything else, LF! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunks Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 What's it got to do with them? How do they know the exact reason why Dallas was sacked? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 What's it got to do with them? How do they know the exact reason why Dallas was sacked? It has no more or less to do with them than it has to do with the Catholic Church. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topcat Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 I'm drifting towards signing up my ?2.50/month standing order and joining the NSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Stinkfinger Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Obviously know nothing about Italian politics, football and anything else, LF! Obviously, cheers for the heids up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinmaroon Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Obviously, cheers for the heids up. LF, hope that you understood the "anything else" was not meant in a general sense, but specifically to "anything else" where the Church of Rome has influence in Italy. Godfather III is quite good as an illustration! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Grimes Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 I want Dawkins to wade in to this subject again, throwing punches at anything that moves. That was phenomenal. except Dawkins' comments in this case were ****ing retarded. I'm normally on his side too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.