Jump to content

Recommended Posts

58 minutes ago, Nofinikea said:

yes he could have and should have.  He didn't but he does not deserve the vilification of some on here.

I don't do Facebook, twitter, Instagram or anything else so have no idea what he posts about.  

I still maintain that I will trust Carol's judgement regarding an appeal over Internet outrage.  

I'm inclined to agree with this last sentence.

Ordinarily I wouldn't waste time, money and energy appealing in this case, unless there has been a strong precedent set of the EFL reducing their punishment in similar circumstances.  The fact that Tom is a repeat offender would be enough to incur the wrath of those sitting in judgement.

If anything, the ban should've been less, whilst the fine should've been greater, and Tom should pay he fine out of his own pocket.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 152
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

In my view, I don't care about what bans other players got - Pope has only himself to blame for this one. This isn't an isolated incident. He had already been charged twice in a matter of months

I'm sure this will all lead to civil and well-informed debate on the matter 🙂

There's quite a lot to unpack from this whole affair and much of it won't be obvious to a lot of people, not just because Stoke-on-Trent isn't known for having a large Jewish community, but also becau

1 hour ago, Nofinikea said:

yes he could have and should have.  He didn't but he does not deserve the vilification of some on here.

I don't do Facebook, twitter, Instagram or anything else so have no idea what he posts about.  

I still maintain that I will trust Carol's judgement regarding an appeal over Internet outrage.  

I think you’re confusing outrage with exasperation.  I haven’t seen any outrage on here - just exasperation that he keeps making the same mistake. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Jacko51 said:

I think you’re confusing outrage with exasperation.

I agree. All the moaning about 'mock outrage', 'internet outrage' etc. is a bit cringey and risks trivializing a serious issue. I think I only need somebody to use the word 'snowflake' now and I will have completed my bingo card.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The FA saw no intent so it's not illegal (?)... so it breached their rules/policies....  if that's the case it's probably incorperated into some agreement/contract pope signed... breaching that agreement once is a mistake, doing it multiple times is stupid.

From what I remember (?) The tweet was about a banker who happened to be Jewish not a Jew who happened to be a banker.

If the club decide to appeal it's their prerogative.  I would guess they would appeal the punishment not the decision.

If the club don't have a clause in players contracts 're tweeting/social madia they should have.

One of the earliest references to money lenders (bankers?) being bad I can remember was Jesus kicking them out of the temple...... yes we could argue it was the fact the temple was the wrong place to conduct business.

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, geosname said:

The FA saw no intent so it's not illegal (?)... so it breached their rules/policies....  if that's the case it's probably incorperated into some agreement/contract pope signed... breaching that agreement once is a mistake, doing it multiple times is stupid.

From what I remember (?) The tweet was about a banker who happened to be Jewish not a Jew who happened to be a banker.

If the club decide to appeal it's their prerogative.  I would guess they would appeal the punishment not the decision.

If the club don't have a clause in players contracts 're tweeting/social madia they should have.

One of the earliest references to money lenders (bankers?) being bad I can remember was Jesus kicking them out of the temple...... yes we could argue it was the fact the temple was the wrong place to conduct business.

 

Jesus was anti semitic then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Poor old Tom - being victimised again for being stupid on social media !   It is not the first time, nor the second, he has been reprimanded for making daft comments out of place !  He is supposed to be a professional sportsman - a role model, and a hero to those just growing up. He is now scheduled to miss 13% of the league matches, ok it may be reduced on appeal but it wont be nullified because he is a repeat offender. Is he going to loose 13% of his income ?  You bet your life he's not !  Through his own stupidity he is robbing the Vale of his much needed availability. Because of the wear and tear his body takes over a season he is never going to be able to play all matches and as we saw last season he is not always first choice so to put himself in position where the EFL can take away 13% of his availability is just bringing the closure of his career that much closer. Even though he has been a great servant to the club not being available to play is a prime reason for not renewing contracts. Why pay a player who cannot play?  Do we really have that much money to throw away.  Great servant yes - but he is closing his career far too quickly through gross stupidity.   As he cant think before he prints he should close all his social media outlets and do all his talking through the Sentinel - at least that gets edited before it is published. When his Vale career is over he can spout whatever he wants on whatever medium because it wont hurt the Vale. Carol and Kev are building a great reputation for the Vale through their words and actions - pity others cant follow their example 

 

Edited by pensioner
spelling error - there maybe others though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, geosname said:

From what I remember (?) The tweet was about a banker who happened to be Jewish not a Jew who happened to be a banker.

If the club decide to appeal it's their prerogative.  I would guess they would appeal the punishment not the decision.

If the club don't have a clause in players contracts 're tweeting/social madia they should have.

 

This distils my thoughts on the matter. Similarly, for me objecting to The Irsaeli state’s treatment of the Palestinians isn’t antisemetic.

I also think Pope should have got off twitter a long time before this and not been retweeting stuff, it’s unprofessional and brought the club into disrepute whatever about his intentions / beliefs. From the club’s point of view, I think they should have clauses to prevent players making an eejit of themselves on social media and while on the one hand I think the punishment should be all a fine, on the other, if the club could have done something contractually to shut him up before this they have to take their lumps in terms of the ban.

I can’t get my head around one of the club’s most senior players and an ambassador for the club behaving like this, the guy’s 35 for goodness sake, grow up. I love the guy but he frustrates the hell out of me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, pensioner said:

Poor old Tom - being victimised again for being stupid on social media !   It is not the first time, nor the second, he has been reprimanded for making daft comments out of place !  He is supposed to be a professional sportsman - a role model, and a hero to those just growing up. He is now scheduled to miss 13% of the league matches, ok it may be reduced on appeal but it wont be nullified because he is a repeat offender. Is he going to loose 13% of his income ?  You bet your life he's not !  Through his own stupidity he is robbing the Vale of his much needed availability. Because of the wear and tear his body takes over a season he is never going to be able to play all matches and as we saw last season he is not always first choice so to put himself in position where the EFL can take away 13% of his availability is just bringing the closure of his career that much closer. Even though he has been a great servant to the club not being available to play is a prime reason for not renewing contracts. Why pay a player who cannot play?  Do we really have that much money to throw away.  Great servant yes - but he is closing his career far too quickly through gross stupidity.   As he cant think before he prints he should close all his social media outlets and do all his talking through the Sentinel - at least that gets edited before it is published. When his Vale career is over he can spout whatever he wants on whatever medium because it wont hurt the Vale. Carol and Kev are building a great reputation for the Vale through their words and actions - pity others cant follow their example 

 

I believe he has not been active on SM since January from what others have said on here.  Its actually the time the FA have taken to sort this that has caused some of the issues.  Its from a while ago, he has stopped posting and its now todays news which means he is getting a battering for something he has already sorted out - using social media.

I don't like how quick some are to condemn him though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Nofinikea said:

Jesus was anti semitic then.

Is that how you read it?

He had a problem with money lenders apparently, whether they were Jews may be irrelevant .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jacko51 said:

Can you be a Semite and be anti-Semitic? An interesting philosophical question. 

It's improbable but some outspoken Jews have been called it.... I wouldn't say it was impossible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Nofinikea said:

I believe he has not been active on SM since January from what others have said on here.  Its actually the time the FA have taken to sort this that has caused some of the issues.  Its from a while ago, he has stopped posting and its now todays news which means he is getting a battering for something he has already sorted out - using social media.

I don't like how quick some are to condemn him though.

If he has stopped social media then that is to be commended - however I don't think I was too quick to condemn him, this being at least the 3rd time he has brought the Vale into disrepute. When he has made these gaffs  he was never reported as just Tom Pope - its always Port Vale Centre Forward Tom Pope or Port Vale Hero Tom Pope or Life Long Vale Supporter Tom Pope. All bad publicity for the club, and the club is everything, not the individual, no matter how great he has been. The fact that it happened a while ago is irrelevant as everyone knows once you put something on social media its there to haunt you for the rest of your life as anything on social media can be raked up long after it was written. I note that you don't challenge my observation that he is now unavailable for 13% of the league season, albeit that may be reduced slightly on appeal, and that is a cost that the Vale shouldn't have to carry. Being injured is one thing but shooting yourself in the foot is just one way of getting out of doing your job. As I have said, if he is off Social media then that is a great step in the right direction and the next step is to look at how others conduct themselves in the public. Carol, Kev, Askey, Brown, Worrall would all be excellent role models in that respect.  I fully appreciate what Tom has done for the club that he truly loves but some of his antics are not in the best interests of the Vale  

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not good to lose him for 6 matches, but as others have commented, it's not as if he hasn't done it before, so personally I have no qualms with the verdict nor action taken.  I just hope that Tom has now learnt his lesson and from now on lets his feet and head do the talking in a feast of goals between the  white posts instead of messing around on Twitter and other social media posts!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Jacob_123 said:

I personally think we should just leave it alone and not appeal at risk of getting the bad press and the ban is unlikely to be overturned

Ahmen to that Jacob - When you've been pulled over for the 3rd time its best not to tell the police they should be chasing real criminals and not persecuting honest upright citizens. That tack doesn't seem to go down too well. If he was a first timer then ok, spend a few quid and try and get him available to play. With his record though - I think plaiting fog would be easier. I would go further and ask what odds would Bet365 give on the 6 games being quashed or what odds would they give on the penalty being increased for wasting the FA/EFL time !  Its time to admit that he made a mistake and move on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Reporting Posts and Ignoring Users

    Moderators don't read everything. Please don't assume we'll spot rule breaking (e.g. personal abuse) - use the orange report button above a post to alert them.

    If you can't get on with another forum user you can select the "ignore" option. Simply click on the link below, type in their username and save - Click here




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy