Maurice Ross sacked by Notts County as he expresses regret over 'inappropriate comment' to player

Status
Not open for further replies.
Aye, let's finish him off for good. He should never work again etc etc....
Not even in same ball park as Malky MaCkay incident from a few years ago.
What was said about Sakala?
Looks older than 24. I don't think he does tbh. But there will always be some scepticism about African players age because so many African players have changed age. To be fair I have read that because records are barely kept in some parts of Africa that many don't actually know their real age.
 
What was said about Sakala?
There have been a few threads about him and it was said on the one from the weekend I believe.
Yeah, except that is not true. I posted links, only one of which was British, with the others being from Africa, where it is said that the practice is widespread. With Senegalese players the most famous for it and with Senegalese commentators claiming 99% of their players have lied. The British link is the BBC claiming it is rampant. It is not 'some individuals', it is many, many individuals. The reason it is referenced so often is the fact that it is so common. Saying so is not racist. Unless of course the BBC are racist, along with the aforementioned Senegalese chap who claims 99% of footballers from his country are at it.

I take the Senegalese chaps comments with a pinch of salt. I think is likely saying it to legitimise his own actions.

As Terry's Hairlock said above it's the same as people associating cocaine with Alfredo. In this instance Mo Ross wasn't raising a major concern to the FA that one of the players birth certificate wasn't legitimate, he was making what he deemed to be a joke based on the guys race. Like it or not this is racist.
 
There have been a few threads about him and it was said on the one from the weekend I believe.


I take the Senegalese chaps comments with a pinch of salt. I think is likely saying it to legitimise his own actions.

As Terry's Hairlock said above it's the same as people associating cocaine with Alfredo. In this instance Mo Ross wasn't raising a major concern to the FA that one of the players birth certificate wasn't legitimate, he was making what he deemed to be a joke based on the guys race. Like it or not this is racist.
You clearly did not read any of the evidence presented to you.

‘Football's world governing body had been researching its use from 2003 and results from Under-17 World Cups in 2003, 2005 and 2007 revealed up to 35% of players were over age.

this was proven with the use of MRI scans.

It is completely and wholly disingenuous and completely ignoring the facts to try and claim it is not something that is widespread.

Try actually reading the evidence shown to you instead of thinking you just know best. The links include statements from some particularly well informed individuals and it might lead to you learning something.
 
You clearly did not read any of the evidence presented to you.

‘Football's world governing body had been researching its use from 2003 and results from Under-17 World Cups in 2003, 2005 and 2007 revealed up to 35% of players were over age.

this was proven with the use of MRI scans.

It is completely and wholly disingenuous and completely ignoring the facts to try and claim it is not something that is widespread.

Try actually reading the evidence shown to you instead of thinking you just know best. The links include statements from some particularly well informed individuals and it might lead to you learning something.
Ok mate. I retract the some individuals claim. You're correct it is more widespread than that.

The point that I'm making is it's a racial stereotype that has deeper lying connotations. Because it's true of some doesn't make it true of all and people should be challenged when making sweeping generalizations or accusations based on the race of an individual.
 
You clearly did not read any of the evidence presented to you.

‘Football's world governing body had been researching its use from 2003 and results from Under-17 World Cups in 2003, 2005 and 2007 revealed up to 35% of players were over age.

this was proven with the use of MRI scans.

It is completely and wholly disingenuous and completely ignoring the facts to try and claim it is not something that is widespread.

Try actually reading the evidence shown to you instead of thinking you just know best. The links include statements from some particularly well informed individuals and it might lead to you learning something.
You're both arguing at cross purposes. You're talking about a separate problem, but as the other lad said Mo was probably not highlighting the issue, he was trying to be funny and failed spectacularly.
 
Oh, Maurice.

Whether there is any truth in the age that some players "fake" their age is beyond the point.

No one rushed to the defence of Mark Sampson when he asked a mixed race player how many times she'd been arrested by citing the high percentage of black people incarcerated as evidence of there being truth in the statement, or cited WHO figures to support his wish that Eni Aluko's parents don't bring over Ebola from Nigeria with them :D
 
Ro
Ok mate. I retract the some individuals claim. You're correct it is more widespread than that.

The point that I'm making is it's a racial stereotype that has deeper lying connotations. Because it's true of some doesn't make it true of all and people should be challenged when making sweeping generalizations or accusations based on the race of an individual.
Ross did not say it was true of all. He stated that the individual who was playing reminded him of the African players who HAVE changed their age. He did not say the player reminded him of ALL African players because he looks older than he is and ALL African players lie about their age.


It was a stupid thing for him to say in this day and age but it was pretty clearly not said because he wanted to denigrate all players from Africa. It was said because he thought it would get a laugh and it backfired. As I said way back at the start, this was not racism, this was stupidity.
 
Ro

Ross did not say it was true of all. He stated that the individual who was playing reminded him of the African players who HAVE changed their age. He did not say the player reminded him of ALL African players because he looks older than he is and ALL African players lie about their age.


It was a stupid thing for him to say in this day and age but it was pretty clearly not said because he wanted to denigrate all players from Africa. It was said because he thought it would get a laugh and it backfired. As I said way back at the start, this was not racism, this was stupidity.
Having a laugh at someone's race is racist mate. It's also stupid, so I'd say we're both correct.
 
Having a laugh at someone's race is racist mate. It's also stupid, so I'd say we're both correct.
Yeah no. He was not having a laugh at his race. He was having a laugh at something it is proven beyond any doubt that people of his race do on a regular basis.

This is circular but the fact you are hell bent on painting a former Rangers player as racist, when every single other person involved, from the player in question to his club and beyond have not said that is more than a touch strange. Everyone has said it is insensitive. The police are not involved, no charges have been brought against him. It is a pretty open and shut case of stupidity but you, not involved, are 100% determined to call Ross a clear and obvious racist. Nice one.
 
Last edited:
Yeah no. He was not having a laugh at his race. He was having a laugh at something it is proven beyond any doubt that people of his race do on a regular basis.

This is circular but the fact you are hell bent on painting a former Rangers player as racist, when every single other person involved, from the player in question to his club and beyond have not said that is more than a touch strange. Everyone has said it is insensitive. The police are not involved, no charges have been brought against the player. It is a pretty open and shut case of stupidity but you, not involved, are 100% determined to call Ross a clear and obvious racist. Nice one.
I haven't called him a racist I said the alleged comment is racist. Being an ex Rangers player is irrelevant, I'm able to judge individual instances objectively. A joke made on the basis of race is racist. I'll leave it at that.
 
I haven't called him a racist I said the alleged comment is racist. Being an ex Rangers player is irrelevant, I'm able to judge individual instances objectively. A joke made on the basis of race is racist. I'll leave it at that.
So...what he supposedly said was racist but he is not a racist? How does that work? You have, on at least 2 separate occasions on this thread, told us why what Ross said was racist. Not stupid or insensitive, you specifically stated, clearly and with no riders, that what he said was racist. Now you are standing by that, but at the same time trying to deny you are calling Ross a racist? Yeah, that is inconsistent with your words.

It appears that the last thing you are is able, or willing, to judge things objectively and it is abundantly clear that you have made your mind on this and are willing to ignore facts, make things up and generally confuse the issue in order to facilitate publishing that pre-determined opinion. You had to be forced, after 3 attempts, to read any conflicting literature and grudgingly accept that you were completely wrong about the scale of the issue and you are still, even though nobody else at all has said the comments were racist, determined to insist that what Ross said was racist.


You are at it, so, to save yet another ban, I will bow out now, leaving you with the most obvious of facts laid out in an easy to understand format.

Maurice Ross said something pretty stupid that was not intended as racist, had no racist intent, was not meant to denigrate a race but was, poorly, aimed at getting a laugh out of a well documented, proven, completely and utterly common occurrence in African football and because of the tensions that we see today, he was rightly or wrongly sacked for, in the words of the people doing the sacking, not showing sensitivity to a wider issue. The people sacking him have not at any stage said it was because he was racist.
 
The whole of Scotland would've been sacked for saying the Saudi under 16 team looked closer to 25 than 15 in the 1989 World Cup.
This incident did run through my mind when I read what Ross had said . Everyone , bbc Scotland news , radio Clyde , all the papers here ran numerous reports claiming the Saudis were all older than their passports said .

These days you simply need to be more mindful of what you are saying and whether that’s for good or bad long term I don’t know . The only group who can still get away with hate speech of any kind it seems are people referring to protestants/rangers fans as “ huns “ an aggressive , dehumanising slant thats still used commonly in Scottish workplaces and online in 2021.
 
Some amount of hypocrites on here.

Since I joined the forum in 2017 I've seen countless threads where Lennon has been mocked for being ginger. Not once in that time have I seen anyone condemn it. Not once have I seen anyone claim folk should lose their job over it.

What's the difference mocking Lennon's hair colour or mocking a player's skin colour or sexuality? The only difference I can see is the it's apparently acceptable to openly and publicly mock someone for ginger hair.

How do you think that effects the mental health of young men and women with red hair? To know that you have to accept being the butt of jokes because of an aspect of your appearance you have no control over, and if you speak up you only open yourself to further ridicule.

I'm in no way defending Lennon here, by the way. I can't stand the man, but that's down to his personality. I'm also not calling for GLM :)) I just struggle with the hypocrisy of posters who have made or ignored posts mocking folk for the colour of their hair suddenly thinking that they are somehow bastians of social justice and morality.

I'm confident there are people on the forum who would post on a thread like this one like some kind of white knight and jump straight onto a Lennon thread and mock his ginger hair.

Or maybe I've got it wrong and we're all squeeky clean angels on FF.
 
Some amount of hypocrites on here.

Since I joined the forum in 2017 I've seen countless threads where Lennon has been mocked for being ginger. Not once in that time have I seen anyone condemn it. Not once have I seen anyone claim folk should lose their job over it.

What's the difference mocking Lennon's hair colour or mocking a player's skin colour or sexuality? The only difference I can see is the it's apparently acceptable to openly and publicly mock someone for ginger hair.

How do you think that effects the mental health of young men and women with red hair? To know that you have to accept being the butt of jokes because of an aspect of your appearance you have no control over, and if you speak up you only open yourself to further ridicule.

I'm in no way defending Lennon here, by the way. I can't stand the man, but that's down to his personality. I'm also not calling for GLM :)) I just struggle with the hypocrisy of posters who have made or ignored posts mocking folk for the colour of their hair suddenly thinking that they are somehow bastians of social justice and morality.

I'm confident there are people on the forum who would post on a thread like this one like some kind of white knight and jump straight onto a Lennon thread and mock his ginger hair.

Or maybe I've got it wrong and we're all squeeky clean angels on FF.

Where's that Nicholas Cage laughing GIF when you need it?
 
You clearly did not read any of the evidence presented to you.

‘Football's world governing body had been researching its use from 2003 and results from Under-17 World Cups in 2003, 2005 and 2007 revealed up to 35% of players were over age.

this was proven with the use of MRI scans.
I'd love to know how you can work out someones age from an MRI scan, and how accurate it would be. Is this something you're familiar with or are you paraphrasing the article? If you are familiar with it, and have a relevant link, please do share. (I know this isn't really on the thread topic, but it's piqued my curiousity).

Edit: I did some digging myself. This is for X-Rays of wrists and teeth rather than MRI scans, but suggests such tests are pretty inaccurate:


 
Last edited:
I'd love to know how you can work out someones age from an MRI scan, and how accurate it would be. Is this something you're familiar with or are you paraphrasing the article? If you are familiar with it, and have a relevant link, please do share. (I know this isn't really on the thread topic, but it's piqued my curiousity).

Edit: I did some digging myself. This is for X-Rays of wrists and teeth rather than MRI scans, but suggests such tests are pretty inaccurate:


From the article. Something to do with wrist development.
 
Quite mindboggling that, given everything to have happened following the Slavia debacle, we still have some supporters equating being ginger with racism and homophobia.
So being openly mocked for an uncontrolable aspect of of ones appearance is ok? Like I said, how do you think that effects the mental health?

Just to clarify. Mock skin colour = bad. Mock hair colour = bants. Is that right?
 
Would you say that to a black man? If you don't like racism keep it to yourself and just hit the report button?

Yes mate, I would. Look through my post history, I'm a big bully who thinks people who cry racism or sexism are a flakes of snow.
 
I'd love to know how you can work out someones age from an MRI scan, and how accurate it would be. Is this something you're familiar with or are you paraphrasing the article? If you are familiar with it, and have a relevant link, please do share. (I know this isn't really on the thread topic, but it's piqued my curiousity).

Edit: I did some digging myself. This is for X-Rays of wrists and teeth rather than MRI scans, but suggests such tests are pretty inaccurate:


Cheers for that. Had a quick read of the second one. It does not throw any doubt on the 35% figure from the championships. The width of the band of error dictates that a false positive is as likely as a false negative. Basically, statistically for every player wrongly given as too old, there was likely an older player likely given as under age. Given that there is a far wider number of ages over the limit, there is also a far larger proportion of ages who could register a false negative, meaning that if anything, the 35% is too low.

Interesting, but only a small part of the evidence, which includes testimony from people such as the Ghanaian fa’s president.
 
I looked at their squad, from what I can tell they only have one African player and he actually looks younger than he is


The player he said it about is from the Netherlands and his family are of Surinamese (in South America) descent.

He also doesn't look older than his age.

The validity of whether people in Africa lie about their age isn't really relevant to the guy.
 
Some amount of hypocrites on here.

Since I joined the forum in 2017 I've seen countless threads where Lennon has been mocked for being ginger. Not once in that time have I seen anyone condemn it. Not once have I seen anyone claim folk should lose their job over it.

What's the difference mocking Lennon's hair colour or mocking a player's skin colour or sexuality? The only difference I can see is the it's apparently acceptable to openly and publicly mock someone for ginger hair.

How do you think that effects the mental health of young men and women with red hair? To know that you have to accept being the butt of jokes because of an aspect of your appearance you have no control over, and if you speak up you only open yourself to further ridicule.

I'm in no way defending Lennon here, by the way. I can't stand the man, but that's down to his personality. I'm also not calling for GLM :)) I just struggle with the hypocrisy of posters who have made or ignored posts mocking folk for the colour of their hair suddenly thinking that they are somehow bastians of social justice and morality.

I'm confident there are people on the forum who would post on a thread like this one like some kind of white knight and jump straight onto a Lennon thread and mock his ginger hair.

Or maybe I've got it wrong and we're all squeeky clean angels on FF.

I use that example all the time.

It could be ginger,fat,skinny,ugly,big ears the list is endless. We have all ripped every single one of them for appearance and i dont see how it is any different in this scenario.

It is easy to sound racist but not actually be one. Just everyone wants to be offended so much these days that they are sitting waiting on a chance to jump on your every comment.
 
Quite mindboggling that, given everything to have happened following the Slavia debacle, we still have some supporters equating being ginger with racism and homophobia.
I have a son with a shock of red hair. When he was first year at high school (in England where there arent that many red heads) he was told that his mother was either raped or a slag as neither of us has red hair. Plus all the usual ginger whinger shit that goes with it. I would definitely say that is on a par with racism and homophobia for getting inside someone's head: particularly a child. So you are guilty of unconscious bias on that front, but we are all that way about something. Nobody in life has a zero bias approach.
 
Cheers for that. Had a quick read of the second one. It does not throw any doubt on the 35% figure from the championships. The width of the band of error dictates that a false positive is as likely as a false negative. Basically, statistically for every player wrongly given as too old, there was likely an older player likely given as under age. Given that there is a far wider number of ages over the limit, there is also a far larger proportion of ages who could register a false negative, meaning that if anything, the 35% is too low.

If it's a random sample of the population, you'll have as many people showing an older age in their tests as a a younger age. But I don't think that's a valid assumption - the children that appear to grow faster are, I suspect, more likely to be successful in the selection process for under age football (in a similar fashion as kids born so that they're near the oldest of their year group are more likely to be selected for age group sports and hence more likely to become athletes: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/olympics/18891749 ). So the sample of kids being tested is, in my opinion, likely to be skewed in the direction of those that appear older for their age.
 
Please explain the difference.
They’re slightly different and more serious, I’d imagine 99% of ginger jokes are tongue in cheek and in real life usually found in the school playground but if it does upset you etc you can report the said comments I’m sure not that I know how to
 
Why? Can you tell us the difference?
I just find it funny and in all honesty once you grow up a bit from being in a school playground I can’t say I’ve ever came across any ginger person being discriminated against
 
They’re slightly different and more serious, I’d imagine 99% of ginger jokes are tongue in cheek and in real life usually found in the school playground but if it does upset you etc you can report the said comments I’m sure not that I know how to
So bullying a kid because they have ginger hair is less serious than bullying a kid because of their skin colour?
 
So bullying a kid because they have ginger hair is less serious than bullying a kid because of their skin colour?
No but again it was never bullying i witnessed but if you did then that’s fair enough, I can honestly say it was never a big deal about someone’s hair colour when I was young maybe the odd comment as a joke that was all
 
The guy is Dutch, it was a stupid comment made about him entirely because he is black.

The team are unhappy, the guy he said it about was unhappy, he has admitted it was wrong and apologised.
What is there to argue about here?
 
If it's a random sample of the population, you'll have as many people showing an older age in their tests as a a younger age. But I don't think that's a valid assumption - the children that appear to grow faster are, I suspect, more likely to be successful in the selection process for under age football (in a similar fashion as kids born so that they're near the oldest of their year group are more likely to be selected for age group sports and hence more likely to become athletes: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/olympics/18891749 ). So the sample of kids being tested is, in my opinion, likely to be skewed in the direction of those that appear older for their age.
I would disagree with the idea that it is more likely people have developed outside of the normal rates over people have lied, particularly given the multitude of other evidence, including African leaders within football and outlets such as the wine BBC claiming it is rampant and happens all the time. You are making assumptions to fit a narrative. I am taking the presented evidence and extrapolating from it. Anyway, probably too much said on this anyway.
 
They’re slightly different and more serious, I’d imagine 99% of ginger jokes are tongue in cheek and in real life usually found in the school playground but if it does upset you etc you can report the said comments I’m sure not that I know how to
Was Ross' comment not tongue in cheek? He just lost his job and most on here agree that was the correct course of action.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top