See on BBC news riccardo has been found guilty of beating up a woman in brimingham after her car hit his. Reading the details of his sustained assault on a female this is totally unacceptable behaviour from one of our players while he was in our employment. He is due to be sentenced on 4th december

Edited November 7, 20187 yr by MorayJaggie

DoofersDad after our away game against Brechin (no criminal charges involved):

14 hours ago, DoofersDad said:

It is only  the tiny number of Idiots who break the law, who put their so called mates at risk of legal sanctions and who damage the reputation of our club who are not welcome.  Instead of playing the victim, it is high time that the majority of decent lads stood up to the idiots and stood up for the club.

DoofersDad after a court convicts our employee of beating a woman with a shoe:

14 hours ago, DoofersDad said:

What shoe?  Did he stop to take off one of his own shoes to hit her?  Or perhaps when he went to talk to her, she tried to hit him with her shoe?  After all, many women will remove high heeled shoes for driving.  He claimed he was acting in self defence so presumably he told the court what he was claiming he was defending himself from, but that is not reported.  Did she try to hit him with the shoe which perhaps he took off her and later threw back at her. Did she say something to provoke him?  What caused him to lose the plot?  We simply don't know the answers to any of these questions.

 

Well done to the club on a swift, appropriate communication and decision.

Club had no choice and made sure it covered itself by waiting before doing anything.

What really boils my p*sh about the whole thing is that he denied assault, whether this was his lawyer's doing in persuading him to do so I'm not sure and we'll never know, but in my eyes it shows that he feels he's done nothing wrong. Whether through an act of self-defense or not, striking another individual in any manner no matter the provocation or not is assault, end of.

I know in this case it's not self-defense, as stated by the CPS and in the article, but be big enough to own up to what you've done regardless of the reasoning behind it.

Anyway any man who hits a woman in my book regardless of anything is a scumbag, in this case he's the lowest there can be and that's my polite response.  

I have been critical of the club where I feel it was needed but 1000% behind them on this one. It could have been a legal minefield had they said anything up to the court case and verdict, and an employment law debacle had they said the wrong thing after this point. Swift and decisive action with the details of the dismissal remaining private ... that's about right. good job on this one and sends out the right message about behaviour. 

36 minutes ago, Jack Waddington said:

Not exactly defending his actions, and unfortunate to see him go, but surely there's more to the story. He's a decent lad doubt he'd go ahead and clobber someone over a fender bender. And also, it's confusing, because correct me if I'm wrong, but werent Danny Williams and another player (forget who, may have been Doran) done by the police for a fight or something in the city centre?

The (entire) attack was caught on CCTV. It's going to be very hard for Calder to defend his actions in the face of such compelling and irrefutable evidence.

Aye well done the club, but i want to know whose shoe it was?

43 minutes ago, tm4tj said:

Extremely disappointed in Calders actions and absolutely the correct and swift decision by the club.

I agree totally just a pity when he was coming good for us. 

2 minutes ago, mikeyrob73 said:

Aye well done the club, but i want to know whose shoe it was?

Was he at Hamilton for the Brewster game? Could be anyones.

Perhaps the poor lad cracked under the stress of being poorly managed and misinformed by a below par Board. Perhaps if they had put warnings and guidelines about Managing Road Rage on the main site then this would not have happened.

A sad way to end his time at ICT but, after the conviction, the end result was inevitable and correct. The club were left with no alternative and no one is to blame other than the player himself.

Personally, I would have been inclined to suspend him and wait for the sentencing hearing before dismissing him but I am not going to criticise the club for acting quickly and decisively since the end result was in little doubt.

I don't think that he could have remained at ICT but I do believe in rehabilitation where appropriate and, while I think that any finding of rape or sexual assault should, quite properly be career ending for a professional footballer among numerous other professions, I think that this case, serious as it is, does allow for him to try to rebuild his career elsewhere.

That said, he has to be punished first and to demonstrate a clear understanding of just how wrong his conduct was and to display genuine remorse.

 

44 minutes ago, CaleyD said:

 

Was a vote taken on this then?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/46142675

BBC news report on his contract termination.

 

Right decision. Inevitable. Move on.

1 hour ago, IMMORTAL HOWDEN ENDER said:

Perhaps the poor lad cracked under the stress of being poorly managed and misinformed by a below par Board. Perhaps if they had put warnings and guidelines about Managing Road Rage on the main site then this would not have 

A very poor show trivialising such a serious matter, particularly the poor traumatised victim.

29 minutes ago, ICTPAISLEY said:

Was a vote taken on this then?

Who would you expect to have been polled?

while it is good that the club have acted so quickly i am wondering how long have they know about this Did Calder tell them Tuesday he wont be in  for training tomorrow as he is in court or did the club know sooner as i would have thought the court would be doing background/employers checks but i suppose up until yesterday he was innocent until found guilty . This may well carry a custodial sentence which is what he deserves either way i cant see many clubs wanting to sign him now so career over 

I think you've answered your own question there. The club will have likely known about the charge but won't have been required to take action until the verdict (innocent until proven guilty as you say) and therefore weren't going to be saying anything unless they had to. Once that verdict was known they've acted accordingly and informed the fans in a timely fashion. 

32 minutes ago, RiG said:

I think you've answered your own question there. The club will have likely known about the charge but won't have been required to take action until the verdict (innocent until proven guilty as you say) and therefore weren't going to be saying anything unless they had to. Once that verdict was known they've acted accordingly and informed the fans in a timely fashion. 

I agree. In this instance, the club have acted entirely properly. Credit where it's due.

2 hours ago, Kingsmills said:

A very poor show trivialising such a serious matter, particularly the poor traumatised victim.

Apologies to any vultures who did not appreciate the sarcasm and in their usual warped manner of thinking even considered that the said sarcasm included any reference to the victim of the crime. Still I suppose if you cant have a pop at the Board you have to find another victim to prey on. ?

Professionally dealt with ICT, well done.

ffs Calder, ya idiot.  Shoes off to send Calder down! 

I wholly agree with the decision but it is a sign of the times (again probably rightly so) but we have had players in the past who have committed offences with no reprisal.

22 minutes ago, IMMORTAL HOWDEN ENDER said:

I wholly agree with the decision but it is a sign of the times (again probably rightly so) but we have had players in the past who have committed offences with no reprisal.

It's not a reprisal it's a proportionate and reasonable response to disgraceful conduct on the part of the player.

We have had players who have committed criminal acts in the past and retained their jobs with the club, Richies Hart and Foran come to mind. However, I can't recall any other player committing such a serious offence as this.

While I agree that the club has acted appropriately and as quickly as it could, some of the intolerance shown to posters who dared to have a different viewpoint is depressing. It seems to be the way today that tolerance of different views is not permitted.

 

40 minutes ago, Hugh Johnston said:

While I agree that the club has acted appropriately and as quickly as it could, some of the intolerance shown to posters who dared to have a different viewpoint is depressing. It seems to be the way today that tolerance of different views is not permitted.

What are you wittering on about? No posts have been removed as far as I am aware.