Coco ban.

"be careful what you wish for.... you may get it" applies here. Many of us wanted a chance for Meslier and he's got 8 key games locked up. I think the lads up for it and hope he's a legend by the end of the season.

didn't even know about the contract provision but if he plays one more game (10 in total) we have to buy him at $5 million. If he's as good as I think he'll be that will be a bargain.

Anyone who thinks there was any stitch up in this decision needs to read the judgement in full. The arguments put forward by Kiko and Leeds were implausible in many cases. If you cba to read it then listen to the Phil Hay/Square Ball podcast on the subject.

The language found to be used was wrong and there was no other logical conclusion for the panel to reach. Any inconsistencies from the Charlton players were not in relation to the words said. The words were written down by the ref on the pitch having been told immediately after the incident.

We have many times were as a club we may have rightly felt victimised this shouldn’t be one of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hopelesslyoptimistic

Anyone who thinks there was any stitch up in this decision needs to read the judgement in full. The arguments put forward by Kiko and Leeds were implausible in many cases. If you cba to read it then listen to the Phil Hay/Square Ball podcast on the subject.

The language found to be used was wrong and there was no other logical conclusion for the panel to reach. Any inconsistencies from the Charlton players were not in relation to the words said. The words were written down by the ref on the pitch having been told immediately after the incident.

We have many times were as a club we may have rightly felt victimised this shouldn’t be one of them.

---

You know I'm no fan of Casilla, but....watch the video (referred to specifically in the panels judblgement, which I have read, in full), and it's clear that until Moone called to Leko he (Leko), hadn't reacted, no matter what the words Casilla may have used, and it was Lekos words to the referee that were noted "he called me a f*****g n*****r" being a quote from the judgement. I say again, Leko is/was a pawn in this, the "villlain" (if there is one) is/are Moone and Casilla.

Whatever was or wasn't said, given there is no objective observer (such as a match official etc) who can provide independent testimony, it seems harsh that Casilla is now likely to lose any future with Leeds and will suffer reputational damage wherever he goes ( and that's from me as not one of his most fervent supporters).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WTF11

You know I'm no fan of Casilla, but....watch the video (referred to specifically in the panels judblgement, which I have read, in full), and it's clear that until Moone called to Leko he (Leko), hadn't reacted, no matter what the words Casilla may have used, and it was Lekos words to the referee that were noted "he called me a f*****g n*****r" being a quote from the judgement. I say again, Leko is/was a pawn in this, the "villlain" (if there is one) is/are Moone and Casilla.

Whatever was or wasn't said, given there is no objective observer (such as a match official etc) who can provide independent testimony, it seems harsh that Casilla is now likely to lose any future with Leeds and will suffer reputational damage wherever he goes ( and that's from me as not one of his most fervent supporters).

---

Very well put mate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by george_kaplan

Very well put mate.

---

X2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WTF11

You know I'm no fan of Casilla, but....watch the video (referred to specifically in the panels judblgement, which I have read, in full), and it's clear that until Moone called to Leko he (Leko), hadn't reacted, no matter what the words Casilla may have used, and it was Lekos words to the referee that were noted "he called me a f*****g n*****r" being a quote from the judgement. I say again, Leko is/was a pawn in this, the "villlain" (if there is one) is/are Moone and Casilla.

Whatever was or wasn't said, given there is no objective observer (such as a match official etc) who can provide independent testimony, it seems harsh that Casilla is now likely to lose any future with Leeds and will suffer reputational damage wherever he goes ( and that's from me as not one of his most fervent supporters).

---

Yep, we’re in a coloured snowflake generation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WTF11

You know I'm no fan of Casilla, but....watch the video (referred to specifically in the panels judblgement, which I have read, in full), and it's clear that until Moone called to Leko he (Leko), hadn't reacted, no matter what the words Casilla may have used, and it was Lekos words to the referee that were noted "he called me a f*****g n*****r" being a quote from the judgement. I say again, Leko is/was a pawn in this, the "villlain" (if there is one) is/are Moone and Casilla.

Whatever was or wasn't said, given there is no objective observer (such as a match official etc) who can provide independent testimony, it seems harsh that Casilla is now likely to lose any future with Leeds and will suffer reputational damage wherever he goes ( and that's from me as not one of his most fervent supporters).

---

top post.

Something I have been wondering about, is that now because Kiko has been found guilty of using racist language, how will the FA/EFL protect him?

I mean, if he stays at the club, then he will obviously have the support of the club. However what action will the powers that be take when opposition supporters direct their abuse at him? I am suggesting Kiko will try and redeem himself but it shouldn't mean he becomes an acceptable target.

I think the FA/EFL will most likely do sweet F.A.

Goalkeeping protection nowadays is a constant talking point in my family as my son is a keeper albeit in junior national league .......... Sledging,pushing,holding,elbowing and shoving keepers in 6 yard box is just about acceptable,IMO,during his games but watching Leeds in the English Championship our keeper definitely has been roughed up far beyond the 'spirit of the game' deliberately.

I recently stated that Leeds had issues on this matter and had raised concerns you'll recall via a thread prior Xmas.
It would now appear that certain keepers (Kiko being one) have been targeted deliberately in most games to cause a detrimental reaction from them and sadly a stupid reaction.

Should this 'tactic' be part of the game and is it sportsman-like in the evolved game as it is played today ?
Is this premeditated intended physical/mental provocation acceptable ?
Does goalkeeper protection require a new look by the games authorities ?
For me it is cheating to gain unfair advantage by obvious targeting ?
Watching many games it's a total joke what goes on off ball at set pieces.

Was Kiko targeted deliberately to react/lose concentration ?

I have an open mind on what should & what should not be allowed but I DO think that players and match officials should take a long hard look at all goalmouth 'Shennanigans'.
Just because some may say it's always gone on does not make it acceptable - defending and goalkeeping skills are being eroded whilst attackers are given the benefit of doubt far to much nowadays,IMO particularly in the Championship.

Football has changed with Pitch surfaces,lighter footballs,the essence of 'spirit of the game' etc appears to be floundering weekly in the pursuit of success.This should be examined IMO,as today's game has become a psychological mine field to what is fair and acceptable today and very hard to officiate with VAR not really on ball to all incidents......................

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrsORichSenior

Goalkeeping protection nowadays is a constant talking point in my family as my son is a keeper albeit in junior national league .......... Sledging,pushing,holding,elbowing and shoving keepers in 6 yard box is just about acceptable,IMO,during his games but watching Leeds in the English Championship our keeper definitely has been roughed up far beyond the 'spirit of the game' deliberately.

I recently stated that Leeds had issues on this matter and had raised concerns you'll recall via a thread prior Xmas.
It would now appear that certain keepers (Kiko being one) have been targeted deliberately in most games to cause a detrimental reaction from them and sadly a stupid reaction.

Should this 'tactic' be part of the game and is it sportsman-like in the evolved game as it is played today ?
Is this premeditated intended physical/mental provocation acceptable ?
Does goalkeeper protection require a new look by the games authorities ?
For me it is cheating to gain unfair advantage by obvious targeting ?
Watching many games it's a total joke what goes on off ball at set pieces.

Was Kiko targeted deliberately to react/lose concentration ?

Have t

I have an open mind on what should & what should not be allowed but I DO think that players and match officials should take a long hard look at all goalmouth 'Shennanigans'.
Just because some may say it's always gone on does not make it acceptable - defending and goalkeeping skills are being eroded whilst attackers are given the benefit of doubt far to much nowadays,IMO particularly in the Championship.

Football has changed with Pitch surfaces,lighter footballs,the essence of 'spirit of the game' etc appears to be floundering weekly in the pursuit of success.This should be examined IMO,as today's game has become a psychological mine field to what is fair and acceptable today and very hard to officiate with VAR not really on ball to all incidents......................

---

Have to agree, Some keepers seem to be deliberately targeted - take Borough's keeper last Monday v Forest - no one can deny Grabban deliberately backed into him, effectively obstucting him from getting near the ball, before scoring, and it was a clear obstruction that the ref - not unusually - missed but everyone in the ground or on TV could clearly see.

Happens all too often and the Keeper is usually blamed and told to "Man up"