Jack Reed Posted November 11, 2022 Share Posted November 11, 2022 11 hours ago, smuggfifer said: Has this been instigated because Gary provides a great welcoming venue for us away fans? And deters then from going to the absolutely souless bar area at the stadium. We as a travel club will continue to support Gary at cue here. Maybe in a different league just now, but we have to play your "noiseless neighbours" again in the New Year. OTT reaction to something at the worst, which could be called , uncalled for silliness. The guy has had a tough year without his beloved club booting him in the baws. Have to be a real Airdrie supporter to feel the weight of punishment , absolutely shocking, Directors surely don't feel the same way to make this judgement. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weigh cider Posted November 11, 2022 Share Posted November 11, 2022 That’s the way to endear the support!!! Punish a guy who over many years seems to have done more than most to enable Airdrie fans to see their team at away grounds. Anyone who has experience of trying to organise buses and filling them every other week must know what a thankless task that can be. Gary made an error of judgement which I’m sure he regrets and has apologised for. Show some compassion and rescind this very unpopular ban as it will only lead to fewer Airdrie fans attending matches. We need to encourage fans through the gates not drive them away so Board do the right thing. C’mon the 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CapitalDiamond Posted November 11, 2022 Share Posted November 11, 2022 https://on.soundcloud.com/j5HCWmsaMeEDXzKy5 Latest podcast is up. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD1711 Posted November 11, 2022 Share Posted November 11, 2022 13 hours ago, smuggfifer said: Has this been instigated because Gary provides a great welcoming venue for us away fans? And deters then from going to the absolutely souless bar area at the stadium. We as a travel club will continue to support Gary at cue here. Maybe in a different league just now, but we have to play your "noiseless neighbours" again in the New Year. OTT reaction to something at the worst, which could be called , uncalled for silliness. The guy has had a tough year without his beloved club booting him in the baws. It's madness, I sponsor 2 players every year and will probably stop that now as well, do this rather than buying a season ticket as I live in Newcastle now so still a way to go and support the team the way a season ticket would. Absolute madness from the club and it will definitely backfire from them, the radio silence from them regarding it even though numerous fans have contacted them shows the contempt they have for the fans too. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Reed Posted November 11, 2022 Share Posted November 11, 2022 6 hours ago, KD1711 said: It's madness, I sponsor 2 players every year and will probably stop that now as well, do this rather than buying a season ticket as I live in Newcastle now so still a way to go and support the team the way a season ticket would. Absolute madness from the club and it will definitely backfire from them, the radio silence from them regarding it even though numerous fans have contacted them shows the contempt they have for the fans too. Pity the players to suffer, but respect your decision whatever it is, 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diamonds02 Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 Thought I'd weigh in on the gary Cunningham situation as i may have some insight to the legal side of things and why i think the decision was actually made. A large part of the quitongo case is on how the club react to complaints and he is arguing that not enough was done when he complained at the time. Someone made a complaint about Gary c. As a result quitongo's lawyers immediately know about it as how Airdrie react to any future complaints would be massive in the case. So i think the club have just taken the strongest possible action to avoid giving quitongo's lawyer's anything to use against them. I feel sorry for gary as it's not his fault he's just in a very unfortunate situation but from a legal standpoint i can't entirely blame the club for taking the action they have as losing this case would be catastrophic for the club and it's future. As it is now evidence in the case and the case will be protected with non disclosure agreements that is why there can be no comment from the club about any of it. Just a horrible situation for everyone, there are no winners here. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diamond1924 Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 Surely this is more offensive that Gary C’s gesture? Will the club ban the owner of the flag? Or can the board see the funny side? In the face of a tribunal regarding racial discrimination, you’d think the club would go down on things that might actually be used as ammunition against them (Trump flag) instead of a decent guy just having a laugh. D1CFDCAC-1895-4335-83B3-8AD24DDB3F50.webp 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenny_m Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 1 hour ago, Diamond1924 said: Surely this is more offensive that Gary C’s gesture? Will the club ban the owner of the flag? Or can the board see the funny side? In the face of a tribunal regarding racial discrimination, you’d think the club would go down on things that might actually be used as ammunition against them (Trump flag) instead of a decent guy just having a laugh. D1CFDCAC-1895-4335-83B3-8AD24DDB3F50.webp 95.97 kB · 12 downloads Now i happen to think Trump is a bit of a knob but to suggest the flag is offensive is ridiculous. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CapitalDiamond Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 (edited) 6 hours ago, Diamonds02 said: Thought I'd weigh in on the gary Cunningham situation as i may have some insight to the legal side of things and why i think the decision was actually made. A large part of the quitongo case is on how the club react to complaints and he is arguing that not enough was done when he complained at the time. Someone made a complaint about Gary c. As a result quitongo's lawyers immediately know about it as how Airdrie react to any future complaints would be massive in the case. So i think the club have just taken the strongest possible action to avoid giving quitongo's Jim lawyer's anything to use against them. I feel sorry for gary as it's not his fault he's just in a very unfortunate situation but from a legal standpoint i can't entirely blame the club for taking the action they have as losing this case would be catastrophic for the club and it's future. As it is now evidence in the case and the case will be protected with non disclosure agreements that is why there can be no comment from the club about any of it. Just a horrible situation for everyone, there are no winners here. From the limited press coverage there has been from the tribunal, there was a suggestion from Rico’s lawyer that the club had failed to notify previous racism accusations to the league and apparently the response to that was along the lines of “we are new to football club ownership and didn’t know the rules.” Do we really think that there’s any logic in coming down on Gary like a ton of bricks for low level inappropriate behaviour or that this ban is going to have any impact on the tribunals interpretation of events which happened over a year ago? I can understand it up to a certain point, but I don’t see how a one match ban here would actually have been better? Is a zero tolerance line for any inappropriate behaviour with indefinite bans handed out for anything really sustainable for a football club? Edited November 12, 2022 by CapitalDiamond 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diamond1924 Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 27 minutes ago, Kenny_m said: Now i happen to think Trump is a bit of a knob but to suggest the flag is offensive is ridiculous. I’m going with the boards narrative… 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Passionate Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 14 minutes ago, CapitalDiamond said: From the limited press coverage there has been from the tribunal, there was a suggestion from Rico’s lawyer that the club had failed to notify previous racism accusations to the league and apparently the response to that was along the lines of “we are new to football club ownership and didn’t know the rules.” Do we really think that there’s any logic in coming down on Gary like a ton of bricks for low level inappropriate behaviour or that this ban is going to have any impact on the tribunals interpretation of events which happened over a year ago? I can understand it up to a certain point, but I don’t see how a one match ban here would actually have been better? Is a zero tolerance line for any inappropriate behaviour with indefinite bans handed out for anything really sustainable for a football club? My own opinion again which is never popular, I think if this was not blown up all over social media, there would have been a far better chance of as you say a one match ban or at least a less severe sentence ( is indefinite a life ban, does it not mean it is at the discretion of the club.)... The vigilante type group on the Facebook page has not helped with the majority commenting who have not set foot in the stadium for a while for various reasons anyway...... The club have no option than to dig in here and not give in to Mob rule... Before we all castigate the club further have a look at the Policy section on the Website and it clearly states what is Inappropriate behaviour this isn't new and probably came in when Big Nats family were abused.... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CapitalDiamond Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 21 minutes ago, Passionate said: My own opinion again which is never popular, I think if this was not blown up all over social media, there would have been a far better chance of as you say a one match ban or at least a less severe sentence ( is indefinite a life ban, does it not mean it is at the discretion of the club.)... The vigilante type group on the Facebook page has not helped with the majority commenting who have not set foot in the stadium for a while for various reasons anyway...... The club have no option than to dig in here and not give in to Mob rule... Before we all castigate the club further have a look at the Policy section on the Website and it clearly states what is Inappropriate behaviour this isn't new and probably came in when Big Nats family were abused.... I think all clubs probably have similar policies about fan behaviour but don’t enforce them so I think that’s unique to us (or driven by the incident with Nat’s brother) albeit that kind of incident led to the family section. My opinion (which I’d also expect to be unpopular as usual) is that the rush to toxic comments about the board is as disproportionate as the ban handed out. I do think we should be able to criticise the club but from my perspective it’s done in the naïve hope they might take views into account. The letter citing an indefinite ban was before anything hi social media. The letter in itself was too condescending for my liking. You can interpret an indefinite ban as being at the discretion of the club, but the incident had already occurred. What made it impossible for them to put a number on it at the time it was written? Hopefully good news on the pitch today with a positive result. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Reed Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 29 minutes ago, CapitalDiamond said: I think all clubs probably have similar policies about fan behaviour but don’t enforce them so I think that’s unique to us (or driven by the incident with Nat’s brother) albeit that kind of incident led to the family section. My opinion (which I’d also expect to be unpopular as usual) is that the rush to toxic comments about the board is as disproportionate as the ban handed out. I do think we should be able to criticise the club but from my perspective it’s done in the naïve hope they might take views into account. The letter citing an indefinite ban was before anything hi social media. The letter in itself was too condescending for my liking. You can interpret an indefinite ban as being at the discretion of the club, but the incident had already occurred. What made it impossible for them to put a number on it at the time it was written? Hopefully good news on the pitch today with a positive result. Aye daft thing for a grown man to do, usually keep those kind of gestures for opposition, got a good feeling about today, 4-0 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenny_m Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 1 hour ago, Diamond1924 said: I’m going with the boards narrative… And what is the "boards" narrative? Has it been banned? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diamond1924 Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 10 minutes ago, Kenny_m said: And what is the "boards" narrative? Has it been banned? No. I am implying that if they see Gary’s gesture as offensive then the flag will be next surely. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarahs Uncle Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 A recap on the Gary Cunningham saga; Gary Cunningham is sitting in the family section and decides to stick his fingers up (with a rather disturbing facial expression) behind the mascot and his pals. Some of them are barely 5 years old. The club send a communication to him personally citing an indefinite ban. Seems extreme but as someone has already mentioned, an ongoing legal case which has its roots in fan behavior is the likely driver for this. Gary decides to make this public on an Airdrie fans Facebook page looking for online hugs and trying to create a storm. Things die down a bit over the weekend, so he puts the same letter up looking for more online hugs. The same people say the same things as they did the week before. The letter ends up on a Scottish Football Fans twitter forum. Some comments sympathetic. Others think Gary should be put on some kind of register and kept as far away from kids as possible. Gary then speaks to the Daily Record. Tells the DR he has tried to contact the club by email to resolve the issue after telling the AFC fans Facebook group he hasn't contacted the club as he 'thinks I would make it worse'. Gary can't even get his story straight. Airdrie FC say absolutely nothing while this hysterical manbaby speaks to anyone and everyone with the exception of the person he should have spoken to in the first place. Had he done so it'd probably be resolved by now. Gary needs to sack his PR team. On a far more important note, a must win for Airdrie today. Mon the diamonds. -7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenny_m Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 8 minutes ago, Sarahs Uncle said: A recap on the Gary Cunningham saga; Gary Cunningham is sitting in the family section and decides to stick his fingers up (with a rather disturbing facial expression) behind the mascot and his pals. Some of them are barely 5 years old. The club send a communication to him personally citing an indefinite ban. Seems extreme but as someone has already mentioned, an ongoing legal case which has its roots in fan behavior is the likely driver for this. Gary decides to make this public on an Airdrie fans Facebook page looking for online hugs and trying to create a storm. Things die down a bit over the weekend, so he puts the same letter up looking for more online hugs. The same people say the same things as they did the week before. The letter ends up on a Scottish Football Fans twitter forum. Some comments sympathetic. Others think Gary should be put on some kind of register and kept as far away from kids as possible. Gary then speaks to the Daily Record. Tells the DR he has tried to contact the club by email to resolve the issue after telling the AFC fans Facebook group he hasn't contacted the club as he 'thinks I would make it worse'. Gary can't even get his story straight. Airdrie FC say absolutely nothing while this hysterical manbaby speaks to anyone and everyone with the exception of the person he should have spoken to in the first place. Had he done so it'd probably be resolved by now. Gary needs to sack his PR team. On a far more important note, a must win for Airdrie today. Mon the diamonds. Perhaps it's because the guy has attended the vast majority of Airdrie games for 40 years and that has been taken away from him therefore i believe, and an extremely high percentage of others, think he deserves to be cut a little slack. Are you suggesting he called PH and said sorry, and that would have been that? 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenny_m Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 39 minutes ago, Diamond1924 said: No. I am implying that if they see Gary’s gesture as offensive then the flag will be next surely. You've lost me, why? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarahs Uncle Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 26 minutes ago, Kenny_m said: Perhaps it's because the guy has attended the vast majority of Airdrie games for 40 years and that has been taken away from him therefore i believe, and an extremely high percentage of others, think he deserves to be cut a little slack. Are you suggesting he called PH and said sorry, and that would have been that? Had Gary behaved like a man and called PH then there is a far higher likelihood the issue would've been resolved. Zero chance anyone at the club will want to speak to Gary now knowing that the content of any conversation will end up on Facebook or in the Daily Record. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD1711 Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 4 minutes ago, Sarahs Uncle said: Had Gary behaved like a man and called PH then there is a far higher likelihood the issue would've been resolved. Zero chance anyone at the club will want to speak to Gary now knowing that the content of any conversation will end up on Facebook or in the Daily Record. Would probably be met by radio silence from the club anyway, they've made their contempt for the fans known with the radio silence given to the numerous fans who have contacted the club. Anyway Paul have a good day pal. 1 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.