Leaderboard

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.

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

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

Given that we (rightly) punted Lopez for gobbing on an opposition player in a reserve game I cannot see a scenario whereby we stand by someone who has been convicted of assault.

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.

Calder away. http://ictfc.com/index.php/news/club-news/2342-club-statement-riccardo-calder

personally i couldn't give a toss about shoes etc. he has been found guilty of sustained assault on a female which I feel should be considered "gross misconduct" and his contract cancelled immediately .

Aye that's a really good point mate, what shoe? Was it her shoe? Was it his shoe? Maybe it was her left shoe? Or maybe Calder just found a shoe? And what kind of shoe was it? A doc marten shoe? That would hurt, but maybe he just melted her with a nice brogue type shoe? Is a slipper a shoe? I mean if its a slipper shoe he's smashed her about with, thats important. It's very, very important we all wait to find out the shoe details before we rush to judgment folks. We don't even know the size of shoe yet! The state of this site sometimes, ******* embarrassing. Sack the ***** today.

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.

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.

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

The club have confirmed he has been dismissed. The right decision, in my opinion.

I could see a scenario where we do quite properly stand by a player convicted of assault. For example, if someone is perhaps assaulted in the street and lashes out once in retaliation. However, subject to anything new that emerges at the sentencing hearing, Calder's actions appear to be much too serious for us to take that view. It should be noted that the Magistrates Court that heard the case referred the matter to the Crown Court for sentencing which suggests that they view it as too serious a matter to continue to be dealt with at Magistrates Court level.

I am genuinely confused about this post.

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.

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.

Professionally dealt with ICT, well done. ffs Calder, ya idiot. Shoes off to send Calder down!

Right decision. Inevitable. Move on.

That does sound daft ? A win is what we definitely need ?

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.

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.

What the f**k u on?

Sentencing does not cover compelling reasons for the assault etc it only covers social background.I.e income, children, family circumstances To determine the sentence. The trial found his reasons for the assault not to be true as he said self defence. The sentencing has been delayed to move it to a higher court which cam impose a higher fine/ and or jail term. They do not take into account the reason for the assault that is what the trial is for. He has been found guilty and the club must act. The full facts of the case are concluded at the end of the trial. He knew the situation he chose to plead not guilty and by going to trial the penalty with will be more severe as he will not get any discounts for pleading guilty at any of the intermediate or pleading diets. Also during the trial once the CCTV was shown he could still have changed his plea but did not. This shows a lack of remorse or acceptance of his disgusting assault. What more does the club need to know?

If it was me and I was aware of the situation I'd have gained that advice long before the outcome of the trial so I knew my options immediately after the verdict wether that was guilty or not guilty.

It's a serious issue but genuinely guffawing at how stupid this post is.

He is not making any excuses as far as I can see but simply advocating the prudent course of waiting for the judicial process to be concluded before the club takes any final action. I agree with that. Where I disagree with DD is that I personally find it very difficult indeed to think of any factors which may emerge at the sentencing which would persuade me that he should not have his contract terminated based on the information already in the public domain. We already know that this was not a momentary lapse but a sustained and brutal assault on a woman who had simply accidentally damaged his car. Not the sort of conduct that can be in any way excused.

Absolutely nobody is giving any hint that Calder's behaviour is acceptable. Absolutely nobody is saying that footballers should be treated more favourably than anyone else or that better players should be treated more favourably still. What some people are clearly saying is that footballers should be treated far less favourably than the rest of us. Your prejudice on this matter is clear when you say the attack was without provocation. How do you know that? Were you in the courtroom and did you hear Calder admit there was no provocation? Of course, provocation does not excuse his actions, but it may explain why he flipped. You talk of community values, but one important value in a community is to support the rehabilitation of offenders. The courts will punish him as part of the due legal process but you seem to feel he should also be punished by the club and the community and thrown out of his chosen career. He needs to accept the punishment of the courts, but what purpose does it then serve to punish him for the rest of his life? I would hope and expect that Calder is utterly ashamed at what he has done and is now full of remorse. The responsibility of a caring society is to support people who have offended and try and ensure they don't offend again. People who are given a second chance are often the very ones who then become very active themselves in supporting community projects, often atoning for their own wrongs many times over. That is why I don't think the club should make any rushed decisions here. I don't think it is in anybody's interests to kick Calder out Professional Football. It may well be that it is best if he plies his trade elsewhere, but that is a decision for the club in the light of all the facts.

The CPS The CPS prosecutor stated the high quality CCTV showed he was not acting in self defence and that is was a sustained assault. The report says they drove to a pub car park it does not mention any conversation to agree they drive there. Irrespective of anything said it does not justify the level of violence he committed towards a female. Why are you trying to find an excuse for his horrendous behaviour? Nothing can justify a male beating a female to the point she has sustained fractures, lacerations and bruising in this case. It doesn't matter what shoe he used, he hit her with it. She would have been completley justified if she had tried to hit him with it after being punched several times through her car window. The club will have the same information we do as it has been presented in evidence in court it is available for any member of the public to access.

He's got to go. As well as he's done over the last few weeks we can't be seen as a club to condone this type of behaviour. I could perhaps have been more understanding if it was one hit in a moment of madness and in self defence. However, it's clear from the report that he's been found guilty of a sustained attack on a woman. Utterly unnacceptable and frankly scumbag behaviour.

This was not a moment of madness. He knew the victim. He then drove to a car park got out of his car walked over to hers leaned through the window punched her several times stopped allowed her to get out then continued to assault her by kicking and hitting her with a shoe causing her to sustain lacerations, bruising and a fractured thumb. That is not a moment of madness he had ample time to consider what he was doing. To say other players have done worse and trying to condon an assault by a physically fit male on a female is not acceptable in my view.

The club were 1000% correct not to say anything to this point. Its a legal and personnel matter concerning one of their employees. Even now they are limited in what they can and should say and I would not expect anything said until the sentencing date. There is no evidence to say when they became aware of things but certainly before this week I would guess ! Its my opinion - for what its worth - the player has to be suspended by the club until the sentencing date and any employment repercussions are then put in place.

Just read the story. Sorry, but there appears no other option :

Terminate contract. No question about it.

Agree he turned a corner in his ability recently but has thrown it all away. I cannot support a person who has acted in this way.

Just because we have a defensive error does not mean that the team has scored against us, and we have made quite a few. I do think Brad Mckay makes a few too many mistakes for a centre back. I think we are just a bit fortunate that a lot of times the team that we're playing has not capitalised on the mistake that we've made. I do agree with the lack of goals though, we could really do with more contributions from the team overall. For example none of our centre backs have scored from our set pieces, it would be interesting to see how many set pieces we score compared to the other teams and how many goalscorers other teams have in comparison to us.

Every day is an education ?

I think that forresjags is saying that we don't want another draw. Of course a win would be the desired outcome but a defeat would end the never ending sequence of draws.

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. ?

There is absolutely nothing in what I wrote which in any way condones what Calder did. What we shouldn't do, however, is rush to judgements when we don't know all the facts. From the report, the facts are clearly not as clear cut as your summary would suggest. In fact, the report paints a rather bizarre picture and there are clearly gaps which may have a bearing and which presumably will be known to the courts and will be taken into account in sentencing. Yes he knew the victim. He dropped her off at her car. She then, for some reason or by accident drove her car into his. The report doesn't say whether this incident happened at the point where he dropped her off or at some later point after they had both driven off. The report says that following the collision they agreed to drive to a pub car park. That means that immediately after the collision they must have had a discussion. One can imagine he was pretty annoyed but there is no suggestion that he was in any way threatening to her at that point, indeed, had he been, then why would she have agreed to drive to a pub car park? There is no information in the report which says whether they got out of the cars at the point of collision - perhaps they spoke on their mobiles and agreed to drive to the car park and look at any damage there. At the car park Calder punched her through her car window. When she got out of the car he is reported to have hit her with a shoe / thrown a shoe at her. 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. Let's be clear. None of the unknowns I have outlined can possibly excuse Calder's behaviour, but they may help explain it and may influence the sentencing decision. I would expect the club will have far more detail about the incident than we will ever know. I hope the club will make a statement tomorrow but I would also expect them not to rush to making any decisions other than a suspension until after sentencing.

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?