kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,354 
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Jan 2, 2022 15:01:10 GMT
The only unanswered question i have is when or what happened for you to change from a quite fierce critic of Wael’s to seemingly a protector. No more Steve. I get why you stood tall here and back you totally. I wont go into anymore but a reply on that would be great. The fact I can swing between critical and support shows no bias doesn’t it? That I can call what I see at the time for exactly what it is, based on what I may know and my own personal opinion or perspective. I’ve been critical for the loss of the UWE opportunity that came our way, the fact that the ALQs said they had every intention of building it and they didn’t. I’ve been critical of the time it’s taken to get the training ground underway, the managers that have been chosen, the board members that have been installed. The list is endless but always fair given on what I know to be true. So why do you then want to overly criticise my intention of supporting our owner who has faced a barrage of unfair criticisms, from everything from financial misappropriation to child grooming, especially when it’s utter BS. False allegations are serious, contemptuous and damaging, no matter to whom they are alleged. Far be it from me to stand by, knowing full well that what being said is untrue and allow those things to be said and also pedalled just to suit a the narrative of a disgruntled group. And what I type on here wouldn’t be any different than I would say to the faces of the those at the club either. I’m not some wishy washy lap dog happy to soft soap whomever I’m talking to. I’ll base what I say and also my allegiance to whomever is telling the truth. Like I said previously, there is no benefit to me to being critical or supportive. I’m not given anything and I’m not treated any differently from any other supporter. I have to pay my own way for games and any benefits that you can receive such as hospitality or sponsorship and I’m not the sort of person who’s loyalty that can be bought anyway. It seems the bigger issue here is that the ones involved assumed me and the majority of the supporters to be stupid enough to take what they were saying as true without actually checking their fake news and stories For the ones that did and caught them all out, they then ostracised and attempted to silence with threats of legal action and the like. Whoaaa there neddy i asked one question and you go into a paddy. I only asked one question,so no need to be so defensive eh fella. |
|
|
|
Post by irenestoyboy on Jan 2, 2022 15:17:35 GMT
The fact I can swing between critical and support shows no bias doesn’t it? That I can call what I see at the time for exactly what it is, based on what I may know and my own personal opinion or perspective. I’ve been critical for the loss of the UWE opportunity that came our way, the fact that the ALQs said they had every intention of building it and they didn’t. I’ve been critical of the time it’s taken to get the training ground underway, the managers that have been chosen, the board members that have been installed. The list is endless but always fair given on what I know to be true. So why do you then want to overly criticise my intention of supporting our owner who has faced a barrage of unfair criticisms, from everything from financial misappropriation to child grooming, especially when it’s utter BS. False allegations are serious, contemptuous and damaging, no matter to whom they are alleged. Far be it from me to stand by, knowing full well that what being said is untrue and allow those things to be said and also pedalled just to suit a the narrative of a disgruntled group. And what I type on here wouldn’t be any different than I would say to the faces of the those at the club either. I’m not some wishy washy lap dog happy to soft soap whomever I’m talking to. I’ll base what I say and also my allegiance to whomever is telling the truth. Like I said previously, there is no benefit to me to being critical or supportive. I’m not given anything and I’m not treated any differently from any other supporter. I have to pay my own way for games and any benefits that you can receive such as hospitality or sponsorship and I’m not the sort of person who’s loyalty that can be bought anyway. It seems the bigger issue here is that the ones involved assumed me and the majority of the supporters to be stupid enough to take what they were saying as true without actually checking their fake news and stories For the ones that did and caught them all out, they then ostracised and attempted to silence with threats of legal action and the like. Whoaaa there neddy i asked one question and you go into a paddy. I only asked one question,so no need to be so defensive eh fella. I think you misread the tone of the message. I’m not in a paddy or even upset with you for asking. I was explaining as much I could so you understand how I am as a person, given that we have never met or don’t know each other. |
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Jan 2, 2022 15:29:02 GMT
Whoaaa there neddy i asked one question and you go into a paddy. I only asked one question,so no need to be so defensive eh fella. I think you misread the tone of the message. I’m not in a paddy or even upset with you for asking. I was explaining as much I could so you understand how I am as a person, given that we have never met or don’t know each other. I did read it a bit like kP did itb But your explanation reads as clear as ever |
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Jan 2, 2022 16:13:54 GMT
It would help if ITB could confirm that the heinous accusations allegedly made against Wael were contained in the letter of concern.
|
|
|
|
Post by irenestoyboy on Jan 2, 2022 17:42:53 GMT
It would help if ITB could confirm that the heinous accusations allegedly made against Wael were contained in the letter of concern. In the letter that was sent to me, it specifically only mentioned issues of safeguarding. |
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Jan 2, 2022 19:56:15 GMT
It would help if ITB could confirm that the heinous accusations allegedly made against Wael were contained in the letter of concern. In the letter that was sent to me, it specifically only mentioned issues of safeguarding. Where are the heinous accusations to be found ? |
|
|
|
Post by johnmalyckyj on Jan 2, 2022 20:39:18 GMT
I'm getting lost in all of this. Is the accusation that Masters and Hamer between them totally made up this story about a safeguarding issue? If so, what outcome could anybody reasonably expect from investigating a fictitious event other than 'nothing to see here, move along'? A follow up question, is Jim being accused of knowing that the accusation was false, or just of knowing that Hamer and or Masters were involved in drafting the letter? I think the issue for me is the continual denials on the part of the SC and Masters that they didn't know why he had been first banned from the West Stand, and then asked to leave the Board. It is apparent that they knew full well why it had happened, utterly disgraceful and inexcusable. It nearly destroyed Bristol Rovers Supporters Club, and I actively called for it to be disbanded, I may have taken a different view had they not done everything they could to conceal the fact that they knew why the Football Club took the action they did. I can just imagine the stick I would have taken from the "old guard" had it happened on my watch, just like the money that disappeared from the SC coffers, the whole lot of them should have departed at that point, instead they clung on and presided over this debacle. Regards John Malyckyj |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2022 21:10:44 GMT
I'm getting lost in all of this. Is the accusation that Masters and Hamer between them totally made up this story about a safeguarding issue? If so, what outcome could anybody reasonably expect from investigating a fictitious event other than 'nothing to see here, move along'? A follow up question, is Jim being accused of knowing that the accusation was false, or just of knowing that Hamer and or Masters were involved in drafting the letter? I think the issue for me is the continual denials on the part of the SC and Masters that they didn't know why he had been first banned from the West Stand, and then asked to leave the Board. It is apparent that they knew full well why it had happened, utterly disgraceful and inexcusable. It nearly destroyed Bristol Rovers Supporters Club, and I actively called for it to be disbanded, I may have taken a different view had they not done everything they could to conceal the fact that they knew why the Football Club took the action they did. I can just imagine the stick I would have taken from the "old guard" had it happened on my watch, just like the money that disappeared from the SC coffers, the whole lot of them should have departed at that point, instead they clung on and presided over this debacle. Regards John Malyckyj I'm keeping an open mind on all of this. We don't have Masters, Hamer or Jim to put forward their version of events. One thing we do know though is that something went seriously wrong with the relationship between the SC and the FC, and as you say, it nearly destroyed what was left of the SC. Wonder what happened to that FC demand that the SC hand all of their money over? Didn't dream that, did I? |
|
kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,354
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Jan 3, 2022 14:17:42 GMT
I think the issue for me is the continual denials on the part of the SC and Masters that they didn't know why he had been first banned from the West Stand, and then asked to leave the Board. It is apparent that they knew full well why it had happened, utterly disgraceful and inexcusable. It nearly destroyed Bristol Rovers Supporters Club, and I actively called for it to be disbanded, I may have taken a different view had they not done everything they could to conceal the fact that they knew why the Football Club took the action they did. I can just imagine the stick I would have taken from the "old guard" had it happened on my watch, just like the money that disappeared from the SC coffers, the whole lot of them should have departed at that point, instead they clung on and presided over this debacle. Regards John Malyckyj I'm keeping an open mind on all of this. We don't have Masters, Hamer or Jim to put forward their version of events. One thing we do know though is that something went seriously wrong with the relationship between the SC and the FC, and as you say, it nearly destroyed what was left of the SC. Wonder what happened to that FC demand that the SC hand all of their money over? Didn't dream that, did I? I would be very interested to know or even have an idea of the brothers side as it seems that all of this went on because of his views or that is how i read it. We will never know though. |
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Jan 4, 2022 1:34:07 GMT
In the letter that was sent to me, it specifically only mentioned issues of safeguarding. Where are the heinous accusations to be found ? No answer ? |
|
eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,556
|
Post by eppinggas on Jan 4, 2022 9:54:13 GMT
It would help if ITB could confirm that the heinous accusations allegedly made against Wael were contained in the letter of concern. In the letter that was sent to me, it specifically only mentioned issues of safeguarding. Appreciate the detail you have supplied ITB. Is the letter you were sent confidential? Could you quote the bits where "heinous accusations" were made? I guess that would add colour as to whether they were 'reasonable concerns', or were 'malicious'. Either way - it seems very likely that the accusations/concerns were used to undermine Wael Al-Qadi. As others mention, Wael comes out of this very well with a dignified silence. |
|
kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,354
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Jan 4, 2022 11:39:54 GMT
In the letter that was sent to me, it specifically only mentioned issues of safeguarding. Appreciate the detail you have supplied ITB. Is the letter you were sent confidential? Could you quote the bits where "heinous accusations" were made? I guess that would add colour as to whether they were 'reasonable concerns', or were 'malicious'. Either way - it seems very likely that the accusations/concerns were used to undermine Wael Al-Qadi. As others mention, Wael comes out of this very well with a dignified silence. But also showing a ruthless streak in meeting out revenge |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2022 11:45:02 GMT
Where are the heinous accusations to be found ? No answer ? Have asked 3 times whether the accusation is that Jim thought that the contents of the letter were in response to contact from a concerned parent / guardian or whether the suggestion is that that he thought that Hamer and Masters had made the entire thing up. No reply to me either. Maybe some of this is covered in ITB's posts, so if I've missed something, I apologise. |
|
|
|
Post by Bath Gas on Jan 4, 2022 12:00:40 GMT
Have asked 3 times whether the accusation is that Jim thought that the contents of the letter were in response to contact from a concerned parent / guardian or whether the suggestion is that that he thought that Hamer and Masters had made the entire thing up. No reply to me either. Maybe some of this is covered in ITB's posts, so if I've missed something, I apologise. If the letter was addressed to the club's safeguarding officer, surely Jim should not have seen the content? As mentioned previously, why involve the SC as a conduit, this should have been kept between the originator(s) of the letter and the club personnel. |
|
Cheshiregas
Global Moderator
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 2,901
|
Post by Cheshiregas on Jan 4, 2022 12:34:01 GMT
Have asked 3 times whether the accusation is that Jim thought that the contents of the letter were in response to contact from a concerned parent / guardian or whether the suggestion is that that he thought that Hamer and Masters had made the entire thing up. No reply to me either. Maybe some of this is covered in ITB's posts, so if I've missed something, I apologise. If the letter was addressed to the club's safeguarding officer, surely Jim should not have seen the content? As mentioned previously, why involve the SC as a conduit, this should have been kept between the originator(s) of the letter and the club personnel. Agree with this. The BRSC Safeguarding Officer is responsible for safeguarding issues within the BRSC not the club. The Club Safeguarding Officer is responsible for safeguarding issues within the Club. Why then was this letter shared with the BRSC in the first place and why shared with various members of the BRSC? Issues of this type by their various natures should be kept within the people with the appropriate responsibility. Accusations can have far reaching consequences whether proven to be true or not. It is important for victims and accused that they are handled properly and sensitively. I wonder then why this letter has been seen by so many people..... |
|
Cheshiregas
Global Moderator
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 2,901
|
Post by Cheshiregas on Jan 4, 2022 12:35:30 GMT
Where are the heinous accusations to be found ? No answer ? Not many answers coming from anywhere Swiss, especially from the PC crew and those who bandy about accusations like knowall..... hit and run again I guess! |
|
|
|
Post by irenestoyboy on Jan 4, 2022 12:35:35 GMT
Where are the heinous accusations to be found ? No answer ? I'm not going to publish what was sent to me or anything else I might have in my possession amd really, I dont think I need to say anymore. I'm sure you appreciate its difficult for me to write anything further. Like I said, I am only involved because I (a) heard a rumour and had to moderate one comment on GC because of that (b) asked if it was true (c) was told who started it (d) was given a copy of the correspondence (e) then challenged all of the untrue accusations and included this one in them. The real people to ask going forward from here and for the devils detail from here would be Wilf, KM, Hamer and Jim. From there you can ask John Harding, Roy Cowell and anyone else connected to that circle if they were complicit or in knowledge of any compaint, construction and sending of the letter. Any accusation that is made, if you know it has no foundation, verbal or written is henious IMO, if indeed it was an actual accusation to begin with and there was no accusation from a parent in relation to any child. |
|
|
|
Post by The Concept on Jan 4, 2022 12:41:42 GMT
One thing I find strange is that the Supporters Club officers were used as a vehicle for delivering the letter, thus bringing them into the equation. If I had similar concerns, I would have found out the details of the football club's Safeguarding Officer, and written to that person via Recorded Delivery. It's a very good question. If the originator of a 'Letter of Concern' wishes to remain anonymous, then your scenario does ensure that the FCs Safeguarding Officer receives the letter. However, the anonymous originator has no way of knowing that the correct procedures were followed from there. Therefore, the only reason I can think of using a third party is so that the originator can remain anonymous. The originator approaches the SC for an update and the SC's Safeguarding Officer can check the outcome through the FCs Safeguarding Officer. What we don't know is if the 'trusted member of the SC', who handed the 'Letter of Concern' to the SC, was actually the originator or a stooge for the originator. |
|
eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,556
|
Post by eppinggas on Jan 4, 2022 12:58:28 GMT
I'm not going to publish what was sent to me or anything else I might have in my possession amd really, I dont think I need to say anymore. I'm sure you appreciate its difficult for me to write anything further. Like I said, I am only involved because I (a) heard a rumour and had to moderate one comment on GC because of that (b) asked if it was true (c) was told who started it (d) was given a copy of the correspondence (e) then challenged all of the untrue accusations and included this one in them. The real people to ask going forward from here and for the devils detail from here would be Wilf, KM, Hamer and Jim. From there you can ask John Harding, Roy Cowell and anyone else connected to that circle if they were complicit or in knowledge of any compaint, construction and sending of the letter. Any accusation that is made, if you know it has no foundation, verbal or written is henious IMO, if indeed it was an actual accusation to begin with and there was no accusation from a parent in relation to any child. But you can't possibly KNOW it has no foundation. You referred to an incident yourself. You might assume someone was sh*t stirring on the back of it, and you might well be right. But even a supposed 'trivial' incident would still need to be investigated. It has been. No further action required. Nothing to see here. No reason for it to be in the public domain. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2022 13:47:28 GMT
If the letter was addressed to the club's safeguarding officer, surely Jim should not have seen the content? As mentioned previously, why involve the SC as a conduit, this should have been kept between the originator(s) of the letter and the club personnel. Agree with this. The BRSC Safeguarding Officer is responsible for safeguarding issues within the BRSC not the club. The Club Safeguarding Officer is responsible for safeguarding issues within the Club. Why then was this letter shared with the BRSC in the first place and why shared with various members of the BRSC? Issues of this type by their various natures should be kept within the people with the appropriate responsibility. Accusations can have far reaching consequences whether proven to be true or not. It is important for victims and accused that they are handled properly and sensitively. I wonder then why this letter has been seen by so many people..... Wouldn't it be the case that when Ken knew about a letter of concern he would have a responsibility to advise the SC? |
|
