| Kane or Kakay 13:27 - Apr 19 with 36207 views | QPR99 |
Not the biggest fan of Kane for obvious reasons, but looking at Kakay's recent games I wonder if he should be back starting.
Apparently Kakay lost the ball 'once every 2.5 touches and once every 4.5 minutes' against Boro. Completed only 57% of his 37 passes. I remember hearing Warbs say something before that this is how it works when building a team from younger players, that they do make mistakes but it gives experience and creates a better team. Which is so evident from Willock who i think has become one of our best players from his game time this season.
So... Kakay or Kane? |  | | |  |
| Kane or Kakay on 16:33 - May 4 with 2853 views | BrianMcCarthy |
Definitely.
P.S. Can I borrow your matches and possibly a pitchfork? [Post edited 4 May 2021 16:34]
|  |
| |
| Kane or Kakay on 16:37 - May 4 with 2808 views | E15Hoop |
Let's be honest, Bosh - The FA is not going to waste their time pursuing this if there isn't enough evidence to convict him.
I'd love to say I'm surprised, but I would respectfully suggest that would be a little naive.. | | | |
| Kane or Kakay on 16:38 - May 4 with 2807 views | Ashdown_Ranger |
| Kane or Kakay on 16:33 - May 4 by BrianMcCarthy |
Definitely.
P.S. Can I borrow your matches and possibly a pitchfork? [Post edited 4 May 2021 16:34]
|
Phew, glad your spelling of 'definitely' was right - you're not the fourth man then... |  | | |
| Kane or Kakay on 17:05 - May 4 with 2626 views | gazza1 |
Around 60 mins of the game a foul was committed near the half way line, CA involved, and the two players shook hands. A few seconds later the ref goes to the 4th official looking at his watch and says something. He then runs off and restarts the game with a free kick to the Bees. That is it, nothing seen of Kane.
Interesting that it has taken so long to come to light but I wonder why the ref spoke with the 4th official looking at his watch.....around 60 minutes. | | | |
| Kane or Kakay on 17:05 - May 4 with 2626 views | bosh67 |
| Kane or Kakay on 16:37 - May 4 by E15Hoop |
Let's be honest, Bosh - The FA is not going to waste their time pursuing this if there isn't enough evidence to convict him.
I'd love to say I'm surprised, but I would respectfully suggest that would be a little naive.. |
Still Todd deserves to put his side to them. Let's see what the outcome is. If he is guilty then he's daft and should be punished. If he's not found guilty then he has to be able to get on with his career without lingering criticism. |  |
| |
| Kane or Kakay on 17:11 - May 4 with 2595 views | E15Hoop |
| Kane or Kakay on 17:05 - May 4 by bosh67 |
Still Todd deserves to put his side to them. Let's see what the outcome is. If he is guilty then he's daft and should be punished. If he's not found guilty then he has to be able to get on with his career without lingering criticism. |
You're a good man, Bosh - If I'm ever up in court on any kind of offence, I definitely want you in my jury👠| | | |
| Kane or Kakay on 17:16 - May 4 with 2572 views | Northernr |
| Kane or Kakay on 17:05 - May 4 by bosh67 |
Still Todd deserves to put his side to them. Let's see what the outcome is. If he is guilty then he's daft and should be punished. If he's not found guilty then he has to be able to get on with his career without lingering criticism. |
If, and it is still if though Todd's strong suit does not seem to be things that happen when he opens his mouth, it's true and he's found guilty of it then he should be sacked. He certainly shouldn't ever be representing QPR again if it's proven.
Sergi Canos is the Brentford player involved according to WLS.
This post has been edited by an administrator |  | | |
| Kane or Kakay on 17:18 - May 4 with 2549 views | ed_83 |
God, what a sickener. I think it's important not to jump to any conclusions before he's responded or the incident's been fully investigated, but as others have said the fact he's been charged at all suggests that there's at least a credible case to answer.
Either way, between this and the infamous interview I think it'll be in everyone's interests for him to move on in the summer, even if it's on a free. I've liked him as a player, but he's not been much better than Kakay overall and it's clear his attitude is at the very least an unhelpful distraction from the rest of the team's progress.
And if the charges are proven, then I'd support us tearing his contract up on the grounds of bringing the club into disrepute. All the fantastic work we've done for Grenfell and BLM, and all our criticisms of John Terry, become meaningless if we let our own players get away with racial abuse. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Kane or Kakay on 17:22 - May 4 with 2515 views | E15Hoop |
| Kane or Kakay on 17:16 - May 4 by Northernr |
If, and it is still if though Todd's strong suit does not seem to be things that happen when he opens his mouth, it's true and he's found guilty of it then he should be sacked. He certainly shouldn't ever be representing QPR again if it's proven.
Sergi Canos is the Brentford player involved according to WLS.
This post has been edited by an administrator |
Well said, Clive! Imagine if this happened in any of our regular workplaces? Gross misconduct without even having to take a look at the Code of Conduct (which I seem to remember Sir Les heavily promoting when he first came in as part of his clean sweep mission..) | | | |
| Kane or Kakay on 17:32 - May 4 with 2442 views | daveB |
says a lot about the FA that this has taken 3 months before anything is done. If he's done anything wrong he should have been charged within days rather than months.
Is interesting reading the reactions on here calling for him to be sacked/released when none of us know what he's supposed to have said or if he did it or not. I doubt the reaction would be the same if it was a more popular player given what we currently know. [Post edited 4 May 2021 17:41]
|  | | |
| Kane or Kakay on 17:37 - May 4 with 2407 views | PinnerPaul |
| Kane or Kakay on 16:37 - May 4 by E15Hoop |
Let's be honest, Bosh - The FA is not going to waste their time pursuing this if there isn't enough evidence to convict him.
I'd love to say I'm surprised, but I would respectfully suggest that would be a little naive.. |
You can read the written reasons for these more 'serious' charges on the FA's website and surprise, surprise, just like a court of law, there are some Not Guilty verdicts in there!  | | | |
| Kane or Kakay on 17:40 - May 4 with 2388 views | E15Hoop |
| Kane or Kakay on 17:32 - May 4 by daveB |
says a lot about the FA that this has taken 3 months before anything is done. If he's done anything wrong he should have been charged within days rather than months.
Is interesting reading the reactions on here calling for him to be sacked/released when none of us know what he's supposed to have said or if he did it or not. I doubt the reaction would be the same if it was a more popular player given what we currently know. [Post edited 4 May 2021 17:41]
|
Given how quick they were to charge Charlie Austin for his stamping offence, there must be a logical reason why this one has only just been announced.
My first thought is that they've been busy gathering and cross referencing evidence from a number of sources and are preparing to throw a very heavy book at Citizen Kane.. | | | |
| Kane or Kakay on 17:40 - May 4 with 2380 views | PinnerPaul |
| Kane or Kakay on 17:32 - May 4 by daveB |
says a lot about the FA that this has taken 3 months before anything is done. If he's done anything wrong he should have been charged within days rather than months.
Is interesting reading the reactions on here calling for him to be sacked/released when none of us know what he's supposed to have said or if he did it or not. I doubt the reaction would be the same if it was a more popular player given what we currently know. [Post edited 4 May 2021 17:41]
|
Again, from reading previous cases, delays can be due to witnesses, both for and against not responding to the FA's requests for information/clarification etc.
Either way we will be able to read all the ins and outs on the FA's site after any hearing has taken place. [Post edited 4 May 2021 17:41]
| | | |
| Kane or Kakay on 17:41 - May 4 with 2375 views | E17hoop |
| Kane or Kakay on 17:16 - May 4 by Northernr |
If, and it is still if though Todd's strong suit does not seem to be things that happen when he opens his mouth, it's true and he's found guilty of it then he should be sacked. He certainly shouldn't ever be representing QPR again if it's proven.
Sergi Canos is the Brentford player involved according to WLS.
This post has been edited by an administrator |
Just after the foul mentioned above, Canos (7) runs over to the ref from their left wing and has a brief word with him. The ref then does as gazza days and the game restarts. |  |
| |
| Kane or Kakay on 17:43 - May 4 with 2361 views | daveB |
| Kane or Kakay on 17:40 - May 4 by E15Hoop |
Given how quick they were to charge Charlie Austin for his stamping offence, there must be a logical reason why this one has only just been announced.
My first thought is that they've been busy gathering and cross referencing evidence from a number of sources and are preparing to throw a very heavy book at Citizen Kane.. |
Austin one was different as I think that was pretty straight forward, I do get these things take time with a he said type thing but once allegation was made he should have been charged imo | | | |
| Kane or Kakay on 17:46 - May 4 with 2317 views | rsonist |
Picturing him roaring "SPANIARD!" like Oliver Reed in Gladiator.
Maybe some residual bitterness from Rangel keeping him out the team too eh. |  | | |
| Kane or Kakay on 17:59 - May 4 with 2234 views | DannytheR |
Chelsea is as Chelsea does. |  | | |
| Kane or Kakay on 18:16 - May 4 with 2152 views | Northernr |
| Kane or Kakay on 17:32 - May 4 by daveB |
says a lot about the FA that this has taken 3 months before anything is done. If he's done anything wrong he should have been charged within days rather than months.
Is interesting reading the reactions on here calling for him to be sacked/released when none of us know what he's supposed to have said or if he did it or not. I doubt the reaction would be the same if it was a more popular player given what we currently know. [Post edited 4 May 2021 17:41]
|
Well this is going to be premature, because we should wait for the hearing, wait for the verdict, and then see. But as I'm one of the people who has said he should be sacked IF he has made a racial remark, and IF he's found guilty of it, I'd like to say that personally, for me, that's not the case. I'd be saying the same if it was Austin, Chair, Dieng. Whoever.
The problem with what Liverpool did with Suarez, Chelsea did with Terry, Leeds did with Cassila, is they sacrificed what was obviously the right, ethical thing to do in favour of bottom line economics and football results. If a crap, reserve team Chelsea player had been found by the FA to have said what Terry said, the punishment would have been far steeper, the club would have gone to town on them and made an example of them to show how wonderful and inclusive they are. See how Chelsea dealt with the fans who racially abused Raheem Sterling, as opposed to how they dealt with their own captain for abusing Anton Ferdinand. Because of who Terry was, they didn't sack him, fine him, sell him. In fact they went completely the other way nuts defending him, banners, sticking him on the front of the programme for the return fixture. Liverpool had Suarez t-shirts made. Leeds made Cassila their captain.
What you do when you do then is basically surrender your image, ethics and what you stand for. You can put all the Twitter posts out condemning racism you like, when push came to shove and it was your best player and most valuable asset, you went with the racist rather than against. I watched on Friday as Leeds, Liverpool, Chelsea all put up their "enough is enough" social media boycott posts - and replies, absolutely rightly, just filled up with people saying "errrrrrrr, is this you?" with pictures of Terry, Cassilla, Suarez t-shirts and so on. Once you make that choice, that's your choice, there's no going back.
QPR, for all the really obvious reasons around what the club purports to stand for, absolutely cannot do the same thing. If a player is found guilty of making a racial remark they must never play for the club again, regardless of who that player is, how good they are, how important they are. Simple as that. Otherwise all the work in the community, Grenfell, all the rest of it just becomes a hollow PR exercise, done to make the club look better, but when push cames to shove you stick with a racist because he's your best goalkeeper, or a sellable asset.
Like I say, all hypothetical and premature, let's wait and see, but I do refute the suggestion I'd be making excuses if it was Austin or somebody else. My reaction would be the same - clear your locker.
It doesn't surprise me there's something like this bubbling in the background. Kane's interview was stupid, but he's literally been bombed out of the team altogether, when he was playing reasonably well, and Kakay has not been doing too well prior to Saturday. So not surprised there's more to it. Also the club pointedly social mediaing Osman Kakay to death, lot of pointed post match remarks on Saturday about how happy everybody was for him, everybody in the stand, all the players bigging him up on socials. There's clearly been something more to all of it than a simple daft comment to R generation, and now I guess we know what that something is.
This post has been edited by an administrator | | | |
| Kane or Kakay on 18:17 - May 4 with 2148 views | dmm |
| Kane or Kakay on 17:16 - May 4 by Northernr |
If, and it is still if though Todd's strong suit does not seem to be things that happen when he opens his mouth, it's true and he's found guilty of it then he should be sacked. He certainly shouldn't ever be representing QPR again if it's proven.
Sergi Canos is the Brentford player involved according to WLS.
This post has been edited by an administrator |
I wouldn't disagree but wondered if it is a sackable offense as JT, for one, wasn't given the boot? Of course, Ch**** isn't a club that ever sets admirable ethical standards in football so it's probably not a good example. |  | | |
| Kane or Kakay on 18:18 - May 4 with 2147 views | ed_83 |
| Kane or Kakay on 17:32 - May 4 by daveB |
says a lot about the FA that this has taken 3 months before anything is done. If he's done anything wrong he should have been charged within days rather than months.
Is interesting reading the reactions on here calling for him to be sacked/released when none of us know what he's supposed to have said or if he did it or not. I doubt the reaction would be the same if it was a more popular player given what we currently know. [Post edited 4 May 2021 17:41]
|
Can't speak for anyone else, but if any Rangers player was found guilty of racism I'd want them out of the club immediately regardless of popularity or status.
If it was someone at the level of Eze last summer, where their potential transfer value was critical to our finances, then I'd want them sold rather than sacked, but they'd need to go either way.
With Kane it's not just this one incident either, even if it ends up being some awful misunderstanding. As Clive says, he seems to have a habit of saying things that are ill-advised at the very least, and indicative of a less-than-ideal attitude. I think there's an argument we'd be better of getting rid regardless of what the FA says, even if we also need to reserve judgment about exactly what happened. [Post edited 4 May 2021 18:20]
| | | |
| Kane or Kakay on 18:22 - May 4 with 2112 views | daveB |
| Kane or Kakay on 18:16 - May 4 by Northernr |
Well this is going to be premature, because we should wait for the hearing, wait for the verdict, and then see. But as I'm one of the people who has said he should be sacked IF he has made a racial remark, and IF he's found guilty of it, I'd like to say that personally, for me, that's not the case. I'd be saying the same if it was Austin, Chair, Dieng. Whoever.
The problem with what Liverpool did with Suarez, Chelsea did with Terry, Leeds did with Cassila, is they sacrificed what was obviously the right, ethical thing to do in favour of bottom line economics and football results. If a crap, reserve team Chelsea player had been found by the FA to have said what Terry said, the punishment would have been far steeper, the club would have gone to town on them and made an example of them to show how wonderful and inclusive they are. See how Chelsea dealt with the fans who racially abused Raheem Sterling, as opposed to how they dealt with their own captain for abusing Anton Ferdinand. Because of who Terry was, they didn't sack him, fine him, sell him. In fact they went completely the other way nuts defending him, banners, sticking him on the front of the programme for the return fixture. Liverpool had Suarez t-shirts made. Leeds made Cassila their captain.
What you do when you do then is basically surrender your image, ethics and what you stand for. You can put all the Twitter posts out condemning racism you like, when push came to shove and it was your best player and most valuable asset, you went with the racist rather than against. I watched on Friday as Leeds, Liverpool, Chelsea all put up their "enough is enough" social media boycott posts - and replies, absolutely rightly, just filled up with people saying "errrrrrrr, is this you?" with pictures of Terry, Cassilla, Suarez t-shirts and so on. Once you make that choice, that's your choice, there's no going back.
QPR, for all the really obvious reasons around what the club purports to stand for, absolutely cannot do the same thing. If a player is found guilty of making a racial remark they must never play for the club again, regardless of who that player is, how good they are, how important they are. Simple as that. Otherwise all the work in the community, Grenfell, all the rest of it just becomes a hollow PR exercise, done to make the club look better, but when push cames to shove you stick with a racist because he's your best goalkeeper, or a sellable asset.
Like I say, all hypothetical and premature, let's wait and see, but I do refute the suggestion I'd be making excuses if it was Austin or somebody else. My reaction would be the same - clear your locker.
It doesn't surprise me there's something like this bubbling in the background. Kane's interview was stupid, but he's literally been bombed out of the team altogether, when he was playing reasonably well, and Kakay has not been doing too well prior to Saturday. So not surprised there's more to it. Also the club pointedly social mediaing Osman Kakay to death, lot of pointed post match remarks on Saturday about how happy everybody was for him, everybody in the stand, all the players bigging him up on socials. There's clearly been something more to all of it than a simple daft comment to R generation, and now I guess we know what that something is.
This post has been edited by an administrator |
I don't disagree he should be got rid of if he has made a racial comment it's just that we don't really know yet what he has been accused of saying.
The Chelsea, Liverpool and Leeds situations were a bit different as the clubs and fans actively supported their players, I don't think we should be doing that and I'm really not backing the bloke I'm just hesitant to pass judgement until I know what he's been charged with.
Of course him not playing for weeks makes a lot more sense now, i did think the comments on that interview were all much about nothing. | | | |
| Kane or Kakay on 18:33 - May 4 with 2049 views | BrianMcCarthy |
| Kane or Kakay on 18:22 - May 4 by daveB |
I don't disagree he should be got rid of if he has made a racial comment it's just that we don't really know yet what he has been accused of saying.
The Chelsea, Liverpool and Leeds situations were a bit different as the clubs and fans actively supported their players, I don't think we should be doing that and I'm really not backing the bloke I'm just hesitant to pass judgement until I know what he's been charged with.
Of course him not playing for weeks makes a lot more sense now, i did think the comments on that interview were all much about nothing. |
Fair points, as ever, Dave.
I think I was the first to say he should be moved on if, IF, he is found guilty. I also said, though, that he is innocent until proven guilty regardless of what he's done in the past or who he has played for in the past.
I would have said that no matter which QPR player was charged.
You are right that we don't know what he was accused of saying but we know by the charge itself that it is racial in nature. I don't think that we could or should keep a player at the club if he is guilty of such an offence. Not for one day.
I hope for his sake and for the club's sake that he is innocent and found to be innocent. | |
| |
| Kane or Kakay on 18:37 - May 4 with 2027 views | E15Hoop |
| Kane or Kakay on 18:16 - May 4 by Northernr |
Well this is going to be premature, because we should wait for the hearing, wait for the verdict, and then see. But as I'm one of the people who has said he should be sacked IF he has made a racial remark, and IF he's found guilty of it, I'd like to say that personally, for me, that's not the case. I'd be saying the same if it was Austin, Chair, Dieng. Whoever.
The problem with what Liverpool did with Suarez, Chelsea did with Terry, Leeds did with Cassila, is they sacrificed what was obviously the right, ethical thing to do in favour of bottom line economics and football results. If a crap, reserve team Chelsea player had been found by the FA to have said what Terry said, the punishment would have been far steeper, the club would have gone to town on them and made an example of them to show how wonderful and inclusive they are. See how Chelsea dealt with the fans who racially abused Raheem Sterling, as opposed to how they dealt with their own captain for abusing Anton Ferdinand. Because of who Terry was, they didn't sack him, fine him, sell him. In fact they went completely the other way nuts defending him, banners, sticking him on the front of the programme for the return fixture. Liverpool had Suarez t-shirts made. Leeds made Cassila their captain.
What you do when you do then is basically surrender your image, ethics and what you stand for. You can put all the Twitter posts out condemning racism you like, when push came to shove and it was your best player and most valuable asset, you went with the racist rather than against. I watched on Friday as Leeds, Liverpool, Chelsea all put up their "enough is enough" social media boycott posts - and replies, absolutely rightly, just filled up with people saying "errrrrrrr, is this you?" with pictures of Terry, Cassilla, Suarez t-shirts and so on. Once you make that choice, that's your choice, there's no going back.
QPR, for all the really obvious reasons around what the club purports to stand for, absolutely cannot do the same thing. If a player is found guilty of making a racial remark they must never play for the club again, regardless of who that player is, how good they are, how important they are. Simple as that. Otherwise all the work in the community, Grenfell, all the rest of it just becomes a hollow PR exercise, done to make the club look better, but when push cames to shove you stick with a racist because he's your best goalkeeper, or a sellable asset.
Like I say, all hypothetical and premature, let's wait and see, but I do refute the suggestion I'd be making excuses if it was Austin or somebody else. My reaction would be the same - clear your locker.
It doesn't surprise me there's something like this bubbling in the background. Kane's interview was stupid, but he's literally been bombed out of the team altogether, when he was playing reasonably well, and Kakay has not been doing too well prior to Saturday. So not surprised there's more to it. Also the club pointedly social mediaing Osman Kakay to death, lot of pointed post match remarks on Saturday about how happy everybody was for him, everybody in the stand, all the players bigging him up on socials. There's clearly been something more to all of it than a simple daft comment to R generation, and now I guess we know what that something is.
This post has been edited by an administrator |
Hopefully, now that this has come to light, he won't even be named on the subs bench for Luton on Saturday.
I would imagine MW will politely suggest that this is for his own benefit to keep him out of the firing line.. | | | |
| Kane or Kakay on 18:38 - May 4 with 2022 views | jtuck |
Warbs comments about 'respect' re Kane situation also can now be seen in slightly different light. | |
| |
| Kane or Kakay on 18:40 - May 4 with 2009 views | Northernr |
| Kane or Kakay on 18:37 - May 4 by E15Hoop |
Hopefully, now that this has come to light, he won't even be named on the subs bench for Luton on Saturday.
I would imagine MW will politely suggest that this is for his own benefit to keep him out of the firing line.. |
Well I'd be absolutely stunned if the club didn't know about this, because the FA will have been gathering evidence and statements before making the charge, hence it's taken three months, so TBH it makes me a bit uncomfortable he's been on the bench at all in that period, and used a couple of times fleetingly. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
