Maybe Dave Whelan - as twisted as it sounds - is part of a plot to destroy Malky Mackay's career. Crazy?

Well, allow me to elaborate.

Mackay, of course, is the subject of an FA investigation launched in August when someone (no prizes for guessing who) leaked text message and email correspondence between the former Cardiff City manager and his head of recruitment, Iain Moody, that appeared to many to be anti-Semitic, racist and homo-phobic. (I say "appeared to many" instead of "was" because there may be folks living in caves who might disagree).

It's obvious Mackay screwed up. It's equally obvious - after some ham-fisted statements issued via the League Managers Association (never a good idea to let those folks drive the bus) - that he is aware of this. Whether he's contrite or not is something only he knows, but he has clearly been put through the media wringer and may yet face FA punishment. So he's been doing what you'd expect in this situation: keeping his head down and quietly trying to find another job.

That's the key word here: "quietly". You expected his appointment at Wigan to generate negative publicity and concerns over whether the FA will punish him, but that's it. If you're Wigan and you really want him, you say something like: "He's our guy. We don't agree with racism, sexism and homophobia, We don't believe he is racist, sexist or homophobic. The FA may or may not punish him, but either way we'll accept their decision and we believe everyone deserves a second chance."

What you don't do is allow Whelan to become the arbiter of what is acceptable talk and "banter". Not when this is the guy who, at the time of Luis Suarez-Patrice Evra case, mused that black players who suffer racist abuse should just "get on with it" and when they complain they are "sometimes a little bit out of order".

Because, of course, a white septuagenarian multi-millionaire is just the guy to tell a twentysomething black footballer what he should and shouldn't accept in terms of what he gets called when on the pitch.

Whelan going on television and sharing his view of what is and is not acceptable talk does Mackay no favours. When the Guardian reported the Wigan owner as saying that "Jewish people do chase money more than everybody else" and that "if any Englishman said he has never called a Chinaman 'a Chink' he is lying", he claimed he had been misquoted.

And he added the standard "if anybody was offended"-type apology, before pointing out how many Jewish and Chinese friends he had ("hundreds and hundreds"). This, of course, became low-hanging fruit for Cardiff owner Vincent Tan, who, of course, has a major axe to grind with Mackay and Moody, not just for the dubious texts, but for the way they spent his money.

"This is a racist chairman hiring a racist manager," Tan told the BBC. "I hope it stops at two racists in Wigan and doesn't snowballing to 2000 or 20,000 racists in Wigan."

Whelan has the right to hire whoever he wants to manage his football club. Mackay is innocent until proven guilty and the fact that the FA's investigation is moving at a snail's pace is unfair to him. Even if he is found guilty, he's entitled to a path toward rehabilitation.

That said, people are equally entitled to criticise Whelan's choice and Mackay's actions. Whatever the outcome of the investigation, the stain will remain on Mackay for a long time. Whelan's behaviour, if anything, has only made it harder for him to remove it.

The whole Fifa/Garcia Report/2018 and 2022 World Cup tale has become so convoluted it's hard to follow. And, I appreciate, some are thoroughly bored with it. So here's a quick update on events of the past week.

Michael Garcia's report into bidding for the 2018 and 2022 tournaments was, of course, not made public. Instead, we had Hans-Joachim Eckert, head of the adjudicatory branch of Fifa's ethics committee supplying a summary.

Garcia thought the summary was "erroneous" and "incomplete" and threatened to take action. So Fifa announced they'd get the head of their audit and compliance committee, Domenico Scala, to take another look at the full report and, if he deems it necessary, release all or part of it to the executive committee.

What does this mean? Well, at the very least you presume Fifa were embarrassed by Eckert's summary, which appeared to epitomise a whitewash. There's obviously more information in the report that they'd like to get out. Scala has the power to do this. But because whatever he releases will go to the 25-man executive committee, you're pretty much guaranteeing that it will be leaked.

After all, at least half a dozen ExCo members have called for the Garcia Report to be made public. It was easy to keep it under wraps before last week, when only four people - including Garcia and Eckert - had seen it. But once it goes to the ExCo, enough people will have seen it that it will be easier to leak it. Not least because ExCo members are guys (and a gal) who are powerful enough not to fear backlash.

Equally, the "circle of trust" who have seen it has now been extended to the Swiss magistrates, after Fifa forwarded them a copy so they could investigate possible money laundering.

So the reality is that it is likely a fair chunk of the report will come out. Whether there's anything relevant or actionable in what does emerge remains to be seen.

But - and here's the thing to remember in perpetuity - Sepp Blatter never wanted a World Cup in Qatar. If something dubious did go on in awarding them 2022, he was not involved (though he may have been aware of it). So if stuff does emerge, it most likely won't affect the Fifa president.

So why the secrecy? Why not publish the whole shebang? You suspect it may simply be Blatter being shrewd, Blatter turning to some of his enemies and saying: "See? This could destroy you. But I'll do my best to protect you, at least for the time being. And maybe you'll be kind enough to extend your support for me in return..."