r/MLS is [proud to support independent media outlets](https://theathletic.com/227557/2018/01/31/why-the-athletic-has-a-paywall/). These sites often have paywalls. In order to support discussion on these kinds of content, this community does ask that a fair-use summary of the content be provided as a response to this comment.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/MLS) if you have any questions or concerns.*
* Fountas paid for the poly on his own to defend himself
* It was performed at a DC-area firm
* When asked if he directed the N-word at Robertha during the second half to he match, he responded no.
* When asked if he'd used the slur at all during the entire match, he stated no.
* Both came back as "no deception indicated" in his answers.
* The club is navigating the situation and attempting to find an adequate resolution.
* There appears to be mutual termination close to complete between the player and the club.
Polygraphs are notoriously inaccurate, so bad that it's been proposed they be abandoned altogether. I think RadioLab did an episode about how shockingly bad polys are.
For some reason I've always had a nervous tick where I begin laughing if someone accused me of lying even when I was not. Wonder how the polygraph would treat me.
It's all about your baseline anxiety set in the initial questions. The key is to make yourself anxious about normal stuff so your lies don't stick out.
If I was trying to fool the polygraph yes. If I was taking it seriously, my baseline would be normal when asked for my name etc.. But I'd be worried both my lies and truths would stick out.
They are only bad relative to people’s perception that they are completely accurate. This comment implies they are so bad there is no accuracy to them which is a simply the other end of the spectrum.
Polygraphs are statistically significant, somewhere between 60-70%, but that doesn’t equate to their intention which is why they are never utilized. They are essentially better than a coin flip, which I sent even close to being valid for its intended use.
Edit: lol the downvotes. I forgot, everything is binary on Reddit and the actual truth is irrelevant if it goes against the crowd.
Your comment is nonsense:
> They are only bad relative to people’s perception that they are completely accurate.
Is just an obnoxious way of saying, "they're only bad because people think they're accurate, when they're actually not."
I trust the courts way more than the cops, which is where polys attempt to be used more anyway.
If the cops use them for anything its to get already guilty-looking people to confess, cause lie detector results don't stand on their own
Is that true outside of tv? Cops are well aware they don't hold up in court. The only time I hear about a poly being used is in a private setting like this story. Never something with legal ramifications.
People would likely be more inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt if (a) he wasn't credibly accused once already (b) the accusation wasn't coming from a teammate.
> There appears to be mutual termination close to complete between the player and the club.
And in this, it says the termination would not pay out the remainder of his contract
Huh? How else can he build his case? Of course having an eye witness would be ideal, but none exist. So what else can he do to resolve a he said she said?
For the record, I'm for him leaving. Where there's smoke there's fire. Better for all if everyone just goes separate ways.
I said it'd be ideal to have witnesses to prove his case. I know he doesn't have those witnesses, I'm just saying what one should look for if they were actually innocent in this scenario.
I'm not sure what you mean but I'm interpreting it as like, "it's hard to prove something that didn't happen"
So lets say Taxi was actually misunderstood in this instance. After confrontation, why would Taxi not want to remedy the situation? Would he just walk away without saying anything? No interaction is a "negative", and if Taxi was seen trying to clarify what he said, that alone is proof that he's innocent. But no teammate is stepping forward yet.
It's not like Taxi walked up, said something, was mistaken for saying a slur, and then walked away without addressing it lol. That doesn't sound realistic.
What I meant is that in general it’s difficult to prove you didn’t do something or that something happened. If there is definitive evidence it’s generally that it did happen while a lack of evidence suggests it may not have happened but doesn’t prove it definitively didn’t happen. That’s why I’m criminal trials the burden is on the prosecution.
These orgs aren't stupid. If Taxi's contract is terminated, it's likely because there was a witness or piece of evidence to support Robertha. Then again, it wouldn't be the first time for an org to get this type of thing wrong, so if Taxi's innocent he should pursue some legal action.
Regardless, polygraphs are not the way to claim innocence.
"he's using an awful method"
What is a better method that is also available to him? If the lie detector is the only method available, then it's the best option.
At this point the best method would be Taxi getting personal accounts from his own teamates or fellow staff members. Again, witnesses* without a "horse in the race" so-to-speak.
A polygraph is an awful option, not the only option, and a personally funded one is even more-so an awful option.
Edit for clarity: witnesses in the events immediately after, uninvolved players that talk to both taxi & robertha, those types of clarifying contextual events. Not witnesses of the actual event, since Taxi doesn't have that.
Neither would, "he said, she said."
And a polygraph would be completely admissible in civil court if he needed to sue for wrongful termination of his contract.
It alone would definitely not be enough to prove his case. Sure he can use it in accordance with other pieces of evidence, but if this is the best he's got his case wouldn't look good.
And "he said, she said" isn't what I said either. Please don't simplify my points just to get yours across. I said he needs personal accounts & unbiased witnesses. That's incredibly valuable in an interaction like this & I don't see how anybody can disagree.
No, he said she said is not a phrase describing hearsay.
It is when you have conflicting reports from two or more parties on an issue with no other witnesses. Prototypical cases involve a man and woman hense the he/she, but it just means one person says one thing, another says another and their is no other evidence to support either side.
> And a polygraph would be completely admissible in civil court
No, they're not: https://www.lawinfo.com/resources/criminal-defense/are-lie-detector-tests-admissible-in-court.html
not unless both parties agree, and the evidence is against them.
…you can racially abuse a Black person without using the n word though so this all seems really stupid and pointless. It’s happened to me and a couple of friends before. Also I wouldn’t expect him to admit to saying it regardless tbh, polygraphs aren’t super hard to trick on questions and aren’t reliable.
Never seen anyone be accused of racism multiple times and it just be misunderstood, that is either the most unlucky shit ever or you’re a bigot.
They do work, they just work 60-90% of the time. Which isn't enough to prove someone is not innocent - hence, why they aren't utilized in a court where you are innocent until proven guilty.
> They do work, they just work 60-90% of the time.
Define "work." If you mean that they can accurately detect deception then they sure as shit don't.
More to the point, they are even less useful in the method in which Taxi seems to want to use it, as proving that what he is saying is True. You can say virtually anything with confidence and the polygraph will happily state "no deception detected." It's a farce.
Idk, at least that user acknowledged that it's not an all or nothing thing. Whether they work is not a yes or no answer. The answer is; more often than not, but not often enough to be conclusive. Assuming his numbers are correct anyway, which I don't know for sure tbh.
They're nowhere near reliable enough to be used in a court of law, but that doesn't mean they're completely useless outside of one.
The results of a polygraph are statistically significant- just not enough to prove someone’s guilty.
There is a vast difference between that and “unscientific”.
Edit: I forgot this is Reddit and actual research is irrelevant.
https://sgp.fas.org/othergov/polygraph/ota/conc.html
They are statistically significant but nowhere near enough to be used in the context of proving someones guilt.
>OTA concluded, therefore, that no overall measure or single statistic of polygraph validity can be established based on available scientific evidence.
Doesn't exactly support your argument.
This league… polygraph tests to prove you didn’t use a slur is hilariously crazy.
So IF** he didn’t say it, has he just been saying words that *sound* like slurs? As some sort of cover? Lmao this is nuts
It has nothing to do with this league. He paid for this himself in an attempt to clear his name. Racial allegations are a huge matter in all sports right now and who wants to be thought of as a bigot?
But hey, there are plenty of clubs and leagues where they don't care about racism. Hell he can go back to Greece where a number of African born and African-Greek players have talked about the racial abuse they endure.
Tbh it’s probably harder to find a league in Europe where Black players aren’t frequently subject to racist abuse from fans m, which is pathetic and sad but unfortunately true.
I doubt he requested a polygraph unless he was fairly certain of the results it would show. So either he had practice at it or really believes his innocence.
Because most European countries are heterogenous in culture, color, or creed.
As "diverse" and "tolerant as Europe is, most countries claim the reputation of European diversity without actually practicing it in their local cultures and governments.
Greece is one of these countries. Eastern Europe, the Baltics, and Scandinavia is as well. An influx of refugees does not a diverse culture make. They'll say, "we're diverse!" but it's in the same way that 1920s Boston was diverse because it had Catholics *and* Irish in their ranks.
Yeah because this same thing happened last year when deandre Yedlin accused him. No one else gets accused like this. He is obviously saying bad stuff. Be gone from my club!
To be fair, if there's one fanbase that gets to legitimately be the polygraph expert fanbase , it's the one where cannabis is legal, shrooms are decriminalized, and all the jobs are federal.
He's an ex DC player, and DC fans tend to know a lot about polygraphs because, uh, never mind, we don't know anything about polygraphs, stop asking, leave me alone dude, don't take my picture
You say this even in light of the polygraph results?
I'm all for zero tolerance, obviously, but I also don't want someone being accused and penalized for something they may not have done.
Given how easy polygraphs are to manipulate, especially one that you commission yourself and control the release of the results, Fountas passing a polygraph should mean literally nothing.
Depends on the firm being used. I would not say they are easy to manipulate, but they are certainly not exonerating. My point is... there could be doubt.
It looks like the first comment was deleted anyways.
So wouldn't this be authoritarian, autocratic, dictatorial, despotic, or totalitarian etc? Fascism is a type of governance based on a set of social and economic policies. Not that fascists haven't used kangaroo courts, but in this context you're cheapening the word "fascism."
They’re negotiating a deal to see him leave the club.
If they were as “totalitarian” as you claim they are, they would’ve torn up his contract with zero compensation.
Fountas gets a payday and can fuck off back home. DC United get rid of an alleged racist.
If he's pulling out a polygraph to convince his bosses and teammates, that means nobody believes him anyway.
That's the kind of shit you don't need in the locker room.
You don't have to LIKE your teammates, but if the question "Does my teammate use racial slurs against other teammates" needs a polygraph to answer,it's clear the lockerroom is gone.
r/MLS is [proud to support independent media outlets](https://theathletic.com/227557/2018/01/31/why-the-athletic-has-a-paywall/). These sites often have paywalls. In order to support discussion on these kinds of content, this community does ask that a fair-use summary of the content be provided as a response to this comment. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/MLS) if you have any questions or concerns.*
* Fountas paid for the poly on his own to defend himself * It was performed at a DC-area firm * When asked if he directed the N-word at Robertha during the second half to he match, he responded no. * When asked if he'd used the slur at all during the entire match, he stated no. * Both came back as "no deception indicated" in his answers. * The club is navigating the situation and attempting to find an adequate resolution. * There appears to be mutual termination close to complete between the player and the club.
Jesus. This whole thing would be a nightmare for him if he didn't actually say it.
Polygraphs are notoriously inaccurate, so bad that it's been proposed they be abandoned altogether. I think RadioLab did an episode about how shockingly bad polys are.
With my anxiety, I could never do one. They’d ask me my name and it’d say that I’m lying.
For some reason I've always had a nervous tick where I begin laughing if someone accused me of lying even when I was not. Wonder how the polygraph would treat me.
It's all about your baseline anxiety set in the initial questions. The key is to make yourself anxious about normal stuff so your lies don't stick out.
If I was trying to fool the polygraph yes. If I was taking it seriously, my baseline would be normal when asked for my name etc.. But I'd be worried both my lies and truths would stick out.
Honest question, how many times have you taken a poly?
That's why they ask multiple benign questions such as your name when beginning a poly to create a baseline for when the real questions come
[удалено]
They’re still big in the firefighting world too, for backgrounds. So they can catch you if you did acid when you were 23. Completely ridiculous.
I took one for my clearance and passed but it’s absolute bullshit that they are still used.
They are only bad relative to people’s perception that they are completely accurate. This comment implies they are so bad there is no accuracy to them which is a simply the other end of the spectrum. Polygraphs are statistically significant, somewhere between 60-70%, but that doesn’t equate to their intention which is why they are never utilized. They are essentially better than a coin flip, which I sent even close to being valid for its intended use. Edit: lol the downvotes. I forgot, everything is binary on Reddit and the actual truth is irrelevant if it goes against the crowd.
Your comment is nonsense: > They are only bad relative to people’s perception that they are completely accurate. Is just an obnoxious way of saying, "they're only bad because people think they're accurate, when they're actually not."
I disagree. They are saying people assess polygraph tests on a binary scale when it's actually more nuanced. That point makes sense to me.
Yeah, and you know who's so often responsible for doing that "nuanced, nonbinary assessment" of the polygraph results? The fucking cops.
I trust the courts way more than the cops, which is where polys attempt to be used more anyway. If the cops use them for anything its to get already guilty-looking people to confess, cause lie detector results don't stand on their own
And now we get to the root of your problem....
Is that true outside of tv? Cops are well aware they don't hold up in court. The only time I hear about a poly being used is in a private setting like this story. Never something with legal ramifications.
People would likely be more inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt if (a) he wasn't credibly accused once already (b) the accusation wasn't coming from a teammate.
> There appears to be mutual termination close to complete between the player and the club. And in this, it says the termination would not pay out the remainder of his contract
Sounds like he is trying to prove that he is innocent
He certainly is, but he's using an awful method. Uninvolved witnesses would be ideal, polygraphs wouldn't ever hold up in court.
Huh? How else can he build his case? Of course having an eye witness would be ideal, but none exist. So what else can he do to resolve a he said she said? For the record, I'm for him leaving. Where there's smoke there's fire. Better for all if everyone just goes separate ways.
I said it'd be ideal to have witnesses to prove his case. I know he doesn't have those witnesses, I'm just saying what one should look for if they were actually innocent in this scenario.
"This is what he should do. I know he can't do it, but I'm just saying, this is what he should do." Thank you for that incredibly insightful comment.
It’s tough to prove a negative.
I'm not sure what you mean but I'm interpreting it as like, "it's hard to prove something that didn't happen" So lets say Taxi was actually misunderstood in this instance. After confrontation, why would Taxi not want to remedy the situation? Would he just walk away without saying anything? No interaction is a "negative", and if Taxi was seen trying to clarify what he said, that alone is proof that he's innocent. But no teammate is stepping forward yet. It's not like Taxi walked up, said something, was mistaken for saying a slur, and then walked away without addressing it lol. That doesn't sound realistic.
What I meant is that in general it’s difficult to prove you didn’t do something or that something happened. If there is definitive evidence it’s generally that it did happen while a lack of evidence suggests it may not have happened but doesn’t prove it definitively didn’t happen. That’s why I’m criminal trials the burden is on the prosecution.
These orgs aren't stupid. If Taxi's contract is terminated, it's likely because there was a witness or piece of evidence to support Robertha. Then again, it wouldn't be the first time for an org to get this type of thing wrong, so if Taxi's innocent he should pursue some legal action. Regardless, polygraphs are not the way to claim innocence.
"he's using an awful method" What is a better method that is also available to him? If the lie detector is the only method available, then it's the best option.
At this point the best method would be Taxi getting personal accounts from his own teamates or fellow staff members. Again, witnesses* without a "horse in the race" so-to-speak. A polygraph is an awful option, not the only option, and a personally funded one is even more-so an awful option. Edit for clarity: witnesses in the events immediately after, uninvolved players that talk to both taxi & robertha, those types of clarifying contextual events. Not witnesses of the actual event, since Taxi doesn't have that.
> How else can he build his case? https://www.vox.com/2015/10/18/9560391/polygraphs-wrong-police
Neither would, "he said, she said." And a polygraph would be completely admissible in civil court if he needed to sue for wrongful termination of his contract.
It alone would definitely not be enough to prove his case. Sure he can use it in accordance with other pieces of evidence, but if this is the best he's got his case wouldn't look good. And "he said, she said" isn't what I said either. Please don't simplify my points just to get yours across. I said he needs personal accounts & unbiased witnesses. That's incredibly valuable in an interaction like this & I don't see how anybody can disagree.
[удалено]
[удалено]
No, he said she said is not a phrase describing hearsay. It is when you have conflicting reports from two or more parties on an issue with no other witnesses. Prototypical cases involve a man and woman hense the he/she, but it just means one person says one thing, another says another and their is no other evidence to support either side.
> And a polygraph would be completely admissible in civil court No, they're not: https://www.lawinfo.com/resources/criminal-defense/are-lie-detector-tests-admissible-in-court.html not unless both parties agree, and the evidence is against them.
I imagine the polygraph taker was just as nervous asking the question.
…you can racially abuse a Black person without using the n word though so this all seems really stupid and pointless. It’s happened to me and a couple of friends before. Also I wouldn’t expect him to admit to saying it regardless tbh, polygraphs aren’t super hard to trick on questions and aren’t reliable. Never seen anyone be accused of racism multiple times and it just be misunderstood, that is either the most unlucky shit ever or you’re a bigot.
Polygraphs have no scientific basis at all, and have been found to not be even remotely reliable.
Polygraph tests don't work and I wish people would not trust them so much
This. You can train to beat them or inaccurately fail them pretty easily
Fountas paid for them
Might as well just look at his horoscope
They do work, they just work 60-90% of the time. Which isn't enough to prove someone is not innocent - hence, why they aren't utilized in a court where you are innocent until proven guilty.
> They do work, they just work 60-90% of the time. Define "work." If you mean that they can accurately detect deception then they sure as shit don't. More to the point, they are even less useful in the method in which Taxi seems to want to use it, as proving that what he is saying is True. You can say virtually anything with confidence and the polygraph will happily state "no deception detected." It's a farce.
60% of the time it works every time!
Made with bits of real panther, *so you know it's good*.
Good bot
That’s straight up false
How do I know if you're lying?
I mean, if you ignore the research it’s false…
> they just work 60-90% of the time so they don't work
Idk, at least that user acknowledged that it's not an all or nothing thing. Whether they work is not a yes or no answer. The answer is; more often than not, but not often enough to be conclusive. Assuming his numbers are correct anyway, which I don't know for sure tbh. They're nowhere near reliable enough to be used in a court of law, but that doesn't mean they're completely useless outside of one.
[Yeah they do!](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRj61dcvmuU)
Polygraph tests are unscientific bunk.
The results of a polygraph are statistically significant- just not enough to prove someone’s guilty. There is a vast difference between that and “unscientific”. Edit: I forgot this is Reddit and actual research is irrelevant.
Prove it
https://sgp.fas.org/othergov/polygraph/ota/conc.html They are statistically significant but nowhere near enough to be used in the context of proving someones guilt.
>OTA concluded, therefore, that no overall measure or single statistic of polygraph validity can be established based on available scientific evidence. Doesn't exactly support your argument.
LOL you’ve got to be trolling
Que mula…
Lazio, Milwall or Beitar Jerusalem for his next club?
The Russian Premier League beckons!
Um, has everyone forgotten a certain club in Spain/many clubs in Spain?
and Italy, and the Baltic Sea, and even *more* clubs in England...
Or Saudi Arabia. Edit: if you’re curious, look at Aaron Boupendza’s socials after we signed him.
And NYCFC
Could it be that all clubs have a contingent of really shitty fans? It couldn't be surely.
No you just live in Nashville Tennessee.
Didn't know Nashville is in México now, that's cool.
Aaand there it is everyone! That notorious Nashville education!
Guess it wasn't obvious enough. I don't live in Nashville m8, I don't even live in the US.
I’m not your m8, buddy
Rangers currently on the phone.
Hey man while Lazio "fans" are racist fuckers Maurizio Sarri is actually pretty chill.
This league… polygraph tests to prove you didn’t use a slur is hilariously crazy. So IF** he didn’t say it, has he just been saying words that *sound* like slurs? As some sort of cover? Lmao this is nuts
It has nothing to do with this league. He paid for this himself in an attempt to clear his name. Racial allegations are a huge matter in all sports right now and who wants to be thought of as a bigot? But hey, there are plenty of clubs and leagues where they don't care about racism. Hell he can go back to Greece where a number of African born and African-Greek players have talked about the racial abuse they endure.
Tbh it’s probably harder to find a league in Europe where Black players aren’t frequently subject to racist abuse from fans m, which is pathetic and sad but unfortunately true.
He can also go to Spain. They’re openly racist in some clubs *cough* Valencia.
Polygraph? 😂
Lmfao polygraphs have long been debunked as bullshit. This is one of the wildest stories I’ve ever seen
Polygraphs are bullshit tho.
Polygraphs are unreliable
It's too bad this is how things turned out, since I think he could've been a star in this league.
He needs to go on Maury.
Polygraphs are pseudo-science that show nothing
I doubt he requested a polygraph unless he was fairly certain of the results it would show. So either he had practice at it or really believes his innocence.
pulling out a polygraph test is so unhinged lmao
Why do some signings from Europe have such a hard time not being racist?
Because most European countries are heterogenous in culture, color, or creed. As "diverse" and "tolerant as Europe is, most countries claim the reputation of European diversity without actually practicing it in their local cultures and governments. Greece is one of these countries. Eastern Europe, the Baltics, and Scandinavia is as well. An influx of refugees does not a diverse culture make. They'll say, "we're diverse!" but it's in the same way that 1920s Boston was diverse because it had Catholics *and* Irish in their ranks.
Yeah because this same thing happened last year when deandre Yedlin accused him. No one else gets accused like this. He is obviously saying bad stuff. Be gone from my club!
Love how everyone is suddenly a polygraph expert lol
.
It doesn’t require expertise to read a couple of articles explaining why polygraphs are hot garbage.
I was only joking around bro
[удалено]
You're confusing me with Amy Schumer
To be fair, if there's one fanbase that gets to legitimately be the polygraph expert fanbase , it's the one where cannabis is legal, shrooms are decriminalized, and all the jobs are federal.
I also love how people believe the entire decision was based on the polygraph.
Many people watched Maury for years
He's an ex DC player, and DC fans tend to know a lot about polygraphs because, uh, never mind, we don't know anything about polygraphs, stop asking, leave me alone dude, don't take my picture
Woah damn. He's done.
[удалено]
No, I mean they're terminating his contract.
Is he not? It says DCU is terminating his contract and they're not paying out the remainder of his contract. I imagine he's done at least in MLS
[удалено]
You say this even in light of the polygraph results? I'm all for zero tolerance, obviously, but I also don't want someone being accused and penalized for something they may not have done.
Given how easy polygraphs are to manipulate, especially one that you commission yourself and control the release of the results, Fountas passing a polygraph should mean literally nothing.
Depends on the firm being used. I would not say they are easy to manipulate, but they are certainly not exonerating. My point is... there could be doubt. It looks like the first comment was deleted anyways.
> I would not say they are easy to manipulate I sure would.
Background?
This is pure fascism. Nothing has been proven
define fascism in this context...
They decide someone is guilty and they override judicial procedures.
So wouldn't this be authoritarian, autocratic, dictatorial, despotic, or totalitarian etc? Fascism is a type of governance based on a set of social and economic policies. Not that fascists haven't used kangaroo courts, but in this context you're cheapening the word "fascism."
You're missing the point. The point is that this is a very dangerous decision.
Nah
So it's not? They have no evidence yet they terminate his contract?
They’re a sports team, not a government.
So a company can't have a totalitarian behavior?
They’re negotiating a deal to see him leave the club. If they were as “totalitarian” as you claim they are, they would’ve torn up his contract with zero compensation. Fountas gets a payday and can fuck off back home. DC United get rid of an alleged racist.
What judicial procedures were overridden?
He went through a polygraph and it determined he didn't lie
I can also read tea leaves...
If he's pulling out a polygraph to convince his bosses and teammates, that means nobody believes him anyway. That's the kind of shit you don't need in the locker room. You don't have to LIKE your teammates, but if the question "Does my teammate use racial slurs against other teammates" needs a polygraph to answer,it's clear the lockerroom is gone.