The Moonster Posted October 18, 2021 Share Posted October 18, 2021 6 minutes ago, Glenmavis Diamond said: I've not once said people are blindly accepting Rico's side of the story. I've also not once said I don't believe Rico. I don't even know what his side of the story is. I'm going by the club saying they have 1 witness and 1 witness only. If Rico's agent says there is more, I still think saying so on social media is the wrong way to go about it. They should deal directly with the club and then, if they feel the club are not taking it seriously, go to the police themselves. "I'm going by what the club has said" is you siding with your club. I tend to agree that it should go to the police but your assertion here is that Rico and his agent should take it to the police...I'd like to ask why your club hasn't involved them? Perhaps this is why Rico feels he's not getting support he needs, perhaps he's been asking your club for access to information to take things further and isn't getting it. You don't know what's gone on other than the statements made by your club, Rico and Rico's family/agent. Airdrie's statement contradicts itself and the agent/brother tweets suggest the Airdrie statement isn't being entirely truthful, so you reaching a "what more can the club do?" conclusion is a strange one for me. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diamond1924 Posted October 18, 2021 Share Posted October 18, 2021 4 minutes ago, Diamonds are Forever said: What you have described seems somewhere in between these comments. You said that it would have been very easy to find out the culprit but actively chose to ignore it - instead 'keeping their hands clean'. If an organisation is aware of what is very likely to be racial abuse but ignores it, and then puts out a statement saying there wasn't any evidence then I'm not sure how else anyone could interpret that. At the very least you are claiming they are not pursuing allegations of racist abuse that would easily result in them finding the culprit (your claim) - in attempt to 'keep their hands clean'. That is a big claim to make. I've not actually said you are wrong, I have just repeatedly asked you to try and explain why they would do this as it makes no sense to me, you still haven't answered this. I'm not sure what relevance the rest of your post has, except to avoid answering the point raised above. I’m afraid it can’t get much simpler than that. It’s pretty obvious that keeping their hands clean implies unwanted involvement. Lack of investigation. Scratching the surface. I have not once said they know who it is. I have instead highlighted that they haven’t tried hard enough to identify the culprit as it would be a pretty easy thing to do. In other words they are not wanting to get involved. Or in other words again, keeping their hands clean. Again, a cover up would imply that they know who it is and have disregarded it. Whereas keeping their hands clean implies that they do not wish to even attempt to identify the culprit. Hope I’ve addressed that in a digestible way. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenmavis Diamond Posted October 18, 2021 Share Posted October 18, 2021 27 minutes ago, Diamond1924 said: Just a quick one for yourself as well. The alleged comment was overheard by a players father. It wasn’t a chant. It wasn’t a shout. It was a conversation volume comment which meant that the one witness was able to hear it and thankfully they did. Hence why there was only one witness and not 200. Research goes a long way. I don’t think it’s unprofessional. I think a young player being racially abused is the issue here and not the subsequent reactions from Rico’s agent and brother. After all, if anyone is going to be informed to make a comment, it’ll be them surely? You seem to be pretty well informed too so it seems. You've gone from being a proud Airdrie fanbwho decided to join their forum today saying "I'd like some more detail" to being the person providing some more details. And very specific details at that. So are we back to one witness or are there still 3 as the agent stated? For someone who claims to just be an Airdrie fan you seem to know a lot more information than has been made public. Please share more. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diamond1924 Posted October 18, 2021 Share Posted October 18, 2021 1 minute ago, Glenmavis Diamond said: 27 minutes ago, Diamond1924 said: Just a quick one for yourself as well. The alleged comment was overheard by a players father. It wasn’t a chant. It wasn’t a shout. It was a conversation volume comment which meant that the one witness was able to hear it and thankfully they did. Hence why there was only one witness and not 200. Research goes a long way. I don’t think it’s unprofessional. I think a young player being racially abused is the issue here and not the subsequent reactions from Rico’s agent and brother. After all, if anyone is going to be informed to make a comment, it’ll be them surely? You've gone from being a proud Airdrie fan saying "I'd like some more detail" to being the person providing some more details. And very specific details at that. So are we back to one witness or are there still 3 as the agent stated? For someone who claims to just be an Airdrie fan you seem to know a lot more information than has been made public. Please share more. All the information I’ve told you is widely available. You seem more interested in defending the integrity of the club than addressing the bigger issue. Have a listen to this, hope it helps. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuartcraig Posted October 18, 2021 Share Posted October 18, 2021 51 minutes ago, Glenmavis Diamond said: Again, that doesn't actually state that he heard it himself. As has been said elsewhere, it may have been another players parent who believed he heard it and then informed Rico and the club. And as far as has been reported, that person remains the only person to come forward and say they heard anything. "I was subjected to racist abuse ....". He's in no doubt that it happened. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenmavis Diamond Posted October 18, 2021 Share Posted October 18, 2021 7 minutes ago, The Moonster said: "I'm going by what the club has said" is you siding with your club. I tend to agree that it should go to the police but your assertion here is that Rico and his agent should take it to the police...I'd like to ask why your club hasn't involved them? Perhaps this is why Rico feels he's not getting support he needs, perhaps he's been asking your club for access to information to take things further and isn't getting it. You don't know what's gone on other than the statements made by your club, Rico and Rico's family/agent. Airdrie's statement contradicts itself and the agent/brother tweets suggest the Airdrie statement isn't being entirely truthful, so you reaching a "what more can the club do?" conclusion is a strange one for me. Me believing the clubs official statement is me believing that they are a club of integrity who wouldn't lie or cover up racism. If that turns out to be wrong, then I'd find it hard to continue supporting the club,. I'd also be very surprised that the club would even do that. Maybe I am. Being naive. Time will tell. My assertion of Rico and his agent taking it to the police is on the basis of them not being happy with the outcome. I'd be surprised if the club have not already involved the police. After all its a criminal allegation and the pice are best placed to carry out an investigation. Whilst the club statement could have been better, I don't see how it's contradicted itself. Do explain. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenmavis Diamond Posted October 18, 2021 Share Posted October 18, 2021 4 minutes ago, Diamond1924 said: All the information I’ve told you is widely available. You seem more interested in defending the integrity of the club than addressing the bigger issue. Have a listen to this, hope it helps. I shall thanks. Its not that widely available or well known or someone would have mentioned what you did on here before now. Your insight into the specifics of the actual incident is by far the most detailed on here. By a mile. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenmavis Diamond Posted October 18, 2021 Share Posted October 18, 2021 3 minutes ago, stuartcraig said: "I was subjected to racist abuse ....". He's in no doubt that it happened. Yet the new poster on here has provided info that states Rico didn't hear it himself. That's not to say it didn't happen of course. I am still amazed that nobody else heard it, just one person. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diamonds are Forever Posted October 18, 2021 Share Posted October 18, 2021 (edited) 17 minutes ago, Diamond1924 said: I’m afraid it can’t get much simpler than that. It’s pretty obvious that keeping their hands clean implies unwanted involvement. Lack of investigation. Scratching the surface. I have not once said they know who it is. I have instead highlighted that they haven’t tried hard enough to identify the culprit as it would be a pretty easy thing to do. In other words they are not wanting to get involved. Or in other words again, keeping their hands clean. Again, a cover up would imply that they know who it is and have disregarded it. Whereas keeping their hands clean implies that they do not wish to even attempt to identify the culprit. Hope I’ve addressed that in a digestible way. I know, and I've been quite clear in my responses that you didn't say that. My issue is based around you saying it would have been pretty easy for them to find out. That suggests they are deliberately choosing to ignore racial abuse which takes it beyond just not investigating thoroughly enough, which seems to be what you are now arguing. I have just been questioning what would motivate this. We will agree to disagree. Edited October 18, 2021 by Diamonds are Forever 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Moonster Posted October 18, 2021 Share Posted October 18, 2021 1 minute ago, Glenmavis Diamond said: Me believing the clubs official statement is me believing that they are a club of integrity who wouldn't lie or cover up racism. If that turns out to be wrong, then I'd find it hard to continue supporting the club,. I'd also be very surprised that the club would even do that. Maybe I am. Being naive. Time will tell. My assertion of Rico and his agent taking it to the police is on the basis of them not being happy with the outcome. I'd be surprised if the club have not already involved the police. After all its a criminal allegation and the pice are best placed to carry out an investigation. Whilst the club statement could have been better, I don't see how it's contradicted itself. Do explain. You believe Airdrie are a club of integrity and thus you can accept what they tell you. By the same token, do you believe Rico Quitongo is a man of integrity, or do you think he's lying here? That's a number of assumptions you've made there in regards to the investigation. And if you believe Airdrie have already involved the police, why is your advice to Rico to take it to the police? All over the shop here. You know what's wrong with the statement so I'm not going to spell it out again. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
She who dares gins Posted October 18, 2021 Share Posted October 18, 2021 Can maybe those who are better informed than me help me to understand where we fell down in terms of the investigation? I assumed we’d worked with Queen’s Park to check CCTV or photographs to see if the offender could be identified. That we’d spoken to or reached out to fans that had tickets and were in the stands. Was none of this done? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenmavis Diamond Posted October 18, 2021 Share Posted October 18, 2021 13 minutes ago, The Moonster said: You believe Airdrie are a club of integrity and thus you can accept what they tell you. By the same token, do you believe Rico Quitongo is a man of integrity, or do you think he's lying here? That's a number of assumptions you've made there in regards to the investigation. And if you believe Airdrie have already involved the police, why is your advice to Rico to take it to the police? All over the shop here. You know what's wrong with the statement so I'm not going to spell it out again. Your clutching at straws. Picking bits of sentences from different responses for your own benefit. Whatever floats your boat. I think the club should or may have already involved the police don't see why not. But I'm just a fan so how would I know. Similarly, if Rico and his agent are unhappy and feel the club have swept allegations of racism under the carpet, then they should contact the police. If you can't get your head around that then that's your problem. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenmavis Diamond Posted October 18, 2021 Share Posted October 18, 2021 27 minutes ago, Diamond1924 said: All the information I’ve told you is widely available. You seem more interested in defending the integrity of the club than addressing the bigger issue. Have a listen to this, hope it helps. I've had a listen and a few things jump out right away. Is the family section being referred to that of the players families? So was the alleged comments made by another players family member? Secondly, if the witness has actually turned and spoken to the person in question, then surely they should have reported it to stewards there and then? Or at the very least, be able to provide a details description of the person? Ricos original statement said the club were supporting him as best they could. So has that changed and if so, how? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tory Boy Posted October 18, 2021 Share Posted October 18, 2021 2 minutes ago, She who dares gins said: Can maybe those who are better informed than me help me to understand where we fell down in terms of the investigation? I assumed we’d worked with Queen’s Park to check CCTV or photographs to see if the offender could be identified. That we’d spoken to or reached out to fans that had tickets and were in the stands. Was none of this done? The Club started contacting folk the day after the game to see if they had witnessed anything. Our Head of Security, was previously one of the Heads of Strathclyde Police Force. As such you'd like to think they knew what they were doing and the investigation would be as thorough as a Football Club could investigate something like this. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
She who dares gins Posted October 18, 2021 Share Posted October 18, 2021 The Club started contacting folk the day after the game to see if they had witnessed anything. Our Head of Security, was previously one of the Heads of Strathclyde Police Force. As such you'd like to think they knew what they were doing and the investigation would be as thorough as a Football Club could investigate something like this. Thanks for the response - I take on board the point about how much a club can do on its own. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diamond1924 Posted October 18, 2021 Share Posted October 18, 2021 4 minutes ago, Glenmavis Diamond said: I've had a listen and a few things jump out right away. Is the family section being referred to that of the players families? So was the alleged comments made by another players family member? Secondly, if the witness has actually turned and spoken to the person in question, then surely they should have reported it to stewards there and then? Or at the very least, be able to provide a details description of the person? Ricos original statement said the club were supporting him as best they could. So has that changed and if so, how? I think by ‘family section’ they mean that his family would usually be in the crowd. I doubt there would be a section allocated for players families at a 150/200 attended away game. Absolutely. This is why I refuse to believe that the investigation is inconclusive as it would be that easy to identify who it was. Thirdly, that show broadcasted on the eve of Rico’s tweet so perhaps his view has changed since then regarding the support from the club. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenmavis Diamond Posted October 18, 2021 Share Posted October 18, 2021 3 minutes ago, Diamond1924 said: I think by ‘family section’ they mean that his family would usually be in the crowd. I doubt there would be a section allocated for players families at a 150/200 attended away game. Absolutely. This is why I refuse to believe that the investigation is inconclusive as it would be that easy to identify who it was. Thirdly, that show broadcasted on the eve of Rico’s tweet so perhaps his view has changed since then regarding the support from the club. Any reason why you didn't mention about the witness speaking directly with the alleged offender? Seems a strange thing to leave out. As I said before, I can see no reason for the club to not do everything in their power to identify someone if they could. They've nothing to gain and everything to lose by not investigating properly. What's your thoughts on why the club would not do that? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
She who dares gins Posted October 18, 2021 Share Posted October 18, 2021 I think by ‘family section’ they mean that his family would usually be in the crowd. I doubt there would be a section allocated for players families at a 150/200 attended away game. Absolutely. This is why I refuse to believe that the investigation is inconclusive as it would be that easy to identify who it was. Thirdly, that show broadcasted on the eve of Rico’s tweet so perhaps his view has changed since then regarding the support from the club. I’m admittedly a bit confused - the show says it went out on the 15th which is the day after the statement and four days after the incident - by that time it’s being said they are already really unhappy at the handling of it. I really want to understand what went so badly wrong with the investigation in that time. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Moonster Posted October 18, 2021 Share Posted October 18, 2021 16 minutes ago, Glenmavis Diamond said: Your clutching at straws. Picking bits of sentences from different responses for your own benefit. Whatever floats your boat. I think the club should or may have already involved the police don't see why not. But I'm just a fan so how would I know. Similarly, if Rico and his agent are unhappy and feel the club have swept allegations of racism under the carpet, then they should contact the police. If you can't get your head around that then that's your problem. I'm clutching at straws? I don't want any of this to be happening pal, trust me, none of this floats my boat. It was a simple question and I don't believe I've selected anything from what you've said and deliberately mis-interpreted it, if I have then I apologise but I'd rather you pointed out those mis-interpretations than simply fobbing me off with a non-answer. If the police had been involved, do you not think Airdrie would've said that in their statement? It would pretty much take away any insinuation that Airdrie haven't done enough. I can get my head around it, it's you who seems to be dancing in circles here. You say the club can't do any more but you don;t even know if they've spoke to the police. Absolutely at it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diamond1924 Posted October 18, 2021 Share Posted October 18, 2021 16 minutes ago, She who dares gins said: I’m admittedly a bit confused - the show says it went out on the 15th which is the day after the statement and four days after the incident - by that time it’s being said they are already really unhappy at the handling of it. I really want to understand what went so badly wrong with the investigation in that time. The shows are released on Spotify the day after they are broadcasted live. It’s a live radio station and so they discussed it the evening of Rico’s tweet. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.