MU3001A, you silly boy. You still don't understand.
Unless you have an ATPL, don't dare comment about something that is more about people skills, common sense and ego than anything requiring specialist knowledge. To use the logic of some, if you are on a bus and the bus driver behaves strangely, don't even think about it because you don't understand what's involved in driving a bus. When your eating at a restaurant and the meal isn't right, don't assume there's anything wrong with it because your not a chef. When the drycleaner ruins your shirt, don't suggest that he could have done something wrong. You don't understand his job and it could be all the fumes he has to inhale.
Makes as much sense.
It's true we don't know the whole story and it's possible that the diversion can be justified. Time will tell if the real authority, UAL management agrees, not to mention the judgement of the regulatory authorities. There will be no fat settlement if it is decided false claims were made.What galls me is the mentality that "he couldn't possibly be wrong because he's one of us" and everyone who suggests otherwise (PPLs, ATCO's, SLF, etc.) is a liar, an idiot and so on.
I salute all the Captains who amazingly deal with their staff without diverting and
possibly declaring them terrorists, even though you've got the authority. Also, those smart enough to figure out that my comment about the two FO's "wrestling" with the Captain was made in jest. The point was that the crew, CC in particular, might have continued the flight (as one poster said) because the purser urged them to consider the passengers. To dismiss that possibility is just as bad as passing final judgement on the Captain.