Scotty

As predicted !!!!! its the standard procedure !!!

sure the chairman would be happy with that ...... but bear in mind, the bigger the team, the less money Barry might make as most teams will require payment in some form or another for things like making an appearance, hotels, travel costs etc .... this is standard practice in friendlies and cant see it being any different for a testimonial unless the opposing team waive any fees etc.

mmmm ... might it have anything in common with the following things http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6180387388162839873 [attach=1] [attach=2]

squad seems a bit lopsided ..... 8 defenders but only 5 midfielders ??? not sure the formation the team plays but if it is a standard 4-4-2 then surely 3 x GK, 7 x DEF, 7 x MID and 4 x FWD might have made more sense .... might have helped Zander's cause but probably not Rory !!! They dont fly out for another two weeks so there's always time for call-offs and late additions to the squad !!

Zander Sutherland and Rory McAllister will not be spending the summer in Canada after being left out of the squad for the U20 World Cup. Shame about that as I was looking forward to wearing an ICT shirt and maybe persuading some of the TFC diehards to support them at Toronto's BMO Field if Scotland reached the latter stages .... full squad Goalkeepers Scott Fox (Celtic) Greg Kelly (Aberdeen) Andrew McNeil (Hibernian) Defenders Andrew Cave-Brown (Norwich City) Andrew Considine (Aberdeen) Scott Cuthbert (Celtic) Garry Kenneth (Dundee United) Alan Lowing (Rangers) Ryan O’Leary (Kilmarnock) Mark Reynolds (Motherwell) Lee Wallace (Heart of Midlothian) Midfielders Jamie Adams (Kilmarnock) Ryan Conroy (Celtic) Brian Gilmour (Clyde) Sean Lynch (Hibernian) Michael McGlinchey (Celtic) Forwards Ross Campbell (Hibernian) Graham Dorrans (Livingston) Calum Elliot (Heart of Midlothian) Steven Fletcher (Hibernian) Robert Snodgrass (Livingston)

cant you just feel the love in this thread ....... I'm on Blackieforce's side on this one .... a missing apostrophe and an extra comma are certainly not the worst examples of grammar on here recently. and no yellow cards for anyone - smart arse response to the original post and a fair enough comeback (including smilie) to the smart arse response .... I am in a good mood today ... must be time for my medicine :icon_nurse01:

Good luck to him. also interesting to see Pele finally get Marino Keith - a player he was rumoured to have wanted to sign for ICT for years.

Lost 1-2 to New York Red Bulls tonight :( ..... Scottish connection - ex Rangers player Claudio Reyna is captain and another ex ger Ronald Wattereus is keeper (but was out injured tonight) ... Despite losing two goals in the second half, it was a decent game and Toronto played one of the slickest passing games I have seen in a long time ... at least in the first half ... second half it was a different TFC and it allowed league leaders NY to grab a couple of goals.

Facebook is the site of choice on this side of the pond now ........ cant remember if I am on bebo or myspace as these are all blocked at work and i usually forget to look at these things from home.

Congrats ...... see you at your next game in 18 years time :023:

Costa Rica [shudder]

Good article in the Courier about Grant Munro - HERE Talking about the chance of being captain ... "It would be a great honour, I really enjoyed captaining the side in the games against Falkirk and St Mirren last season. However, there are probably a number of contenders to become captain, but if it did come my way then I would be absolutely delighted." About his ICT future ... "I'm very happy at Caley Thistle, I'm contracted to the club until 2009, but in football you don't know what could be around the next corner. You could get dropped through a loss of form or injured, so things can change very quickly. However, if the opportunity came along to stay at the club even longer then I would be delighted." :clapping03: :021: :021: :clapping03:

I can see the point Charles, but in the current scenario they have to qualify first ( through several rounds) and that isnt always an easy task, then they might get a bye in the first round proper - or not - and face anyone from div 3 or 2 in the second round before the big guns come in at round 3 ... in theory I would suggest that this new route might be easier ... 1st round - playing reasonably equal opponents 2nd round could play equal opponents or a senior (Div3) side - which some would argue could be equal opponents 3rd round could still play equal opponents or a tougher opponent from Div2 or 1 4th round - anything goes !!! I can see many "shocks" in the 1st and 2nd rounds as some of the better non league sides put some of the stale perpetual bottom feeders to the sword but what seems quite good to me is that you know going into it (as a non league side) that you need to raise your game after every round as it will truly get more difficult.

You mean like "Bring it on Home" (hip hop mix) :rotflmao: :015: :015:

The Clyde one is a beauty :015: :015: ... complaining about their own pitch !!! class. It just goes to show though, when it comes to complaining and trying to circumvent or overturn the rules in Scottish football the more things change, the more they stay the same ....

fair play to the SFA - the format was stale and eventually they realised this and changed it. Definitely a step in the right direction. Harking back to pre ICT days, the Scottish Cup was always something to look forward to and the new format will hopefully generate a little excitement and some cash for the smaller teams. Even though the format that the Fly posted seems complicated, when you re-read it a couple of times it starts to make perfect sense .... non-league and lower league teams have a chance to progress (and make more money) based on the tiered nature of the draw and byes look to be completely eliminated. I like it. two thumbs up to the SFA (for once). :021:

indeed :sillywave:

cant see it being too different in format - just means first round (or will they call it preliminary) will have as many byes as it has games (20 of each) if it includes the 40 non-league clubs and 20 division 2 and 3 sides. however - well done on the SFA for at least letting the non league sides have a crack - who knows, we could have a few upsets and some interest. If i have my sums right, this would be the format. rd P = 40 + 20 = 60 teams. 20 games, 20 byes to get down to 40 teams rd 1 = 40 teams = 20 games to get to last 20 teams rd 2 = 20 teams = 10 games to get to last 10 teams rd 3 = 16 games as the 22 SPL & div1 teams join the remaining 10 teams from rds 1&2 rd 4 = 8 games Rd qf = 4 games Rd sf = 2 games Rd F = 1 game

ok - I could have sworn I posted twice in this thread and other messages seem to be missing ....... what gives ?

moving this to anything goes as it stopped being football related quite some time ago. :blah01:

maybe it could be a new section of the website ......... [attach=1]

I think it depends which bit you are talking about Charles. As you know, from day 1 of this club, many of us have been loyal fans turning up at glamour games against the likes of Albion Rovers, East Stirlingshire or the stars of the cauldron that is recreation park in Alloa .... I would still be going to as many games as I could if I actually lived in the country but alas it is not possible for me at the moment but when I do travel back home, the fixture list is where I look before i even look at plane schedules or anything else !!! During this 'miraculous' rise through the ranks we have seen the club turn from a fan friendly collaborative organisation where the club knew its fans and worked with them for the benefit of both, into one which gives off the distinct aroma of a corporate entity where "them" and "us" is a more prevalent feeling and attitude. I accept that with our increased success there does need to be a degree of this as the club have to be more business like on all fronts but the simple fact of the matter is that you can be businesslike without pushing people around or treating them like s***. Supporters are also customers and you can only push people so far before you get a backlash - whether that be verbal or by the means of making a choice to no longer attend games (as some have said on here). As you mentioned ... "There was a series of incidents at Caley Thistle's final home game which resulted in a number of fans being ejected from the ground for standing. This raised a range of issues including, as far as I can see, bringing to a head a longish running dissatisfaction among some fans with the stewarding at the Caledonian Stadium". This is a prime example of the "them and us" attitude I mentioned. Fans have been complaining about 'heavy handed stewarding' at the stadium for YEARS and for years NOTHING has been done. We have had new users on here over the last couple of years describing harsh treatment received, we have had regular posters like IHE describing the fact that he was told he was "targetted" and we have had incidents where stewards have been alleged to have abused their powers to carry on a personal vendetta by accusing a particular fan of behaviour that ended up with solicitors letters flying around. Perhaps someone like IHE with his obvious passion for the club despite his self described eccentricities will actually get a result but there have been far too many incidents where the club have either done nothing or buried their head in the sand and hoped it would go away. I wont even go into details about the "family section" debacle in the main stand which was highlighted on the Caley Jaggie site when Mr Kelly was running it as that is a different subject (albeit another example of 'them' and 'us'). Perhaps we should expect heavier security now we are in the SPL ? I agree that this is indeed likely ... however, the security applied at the ground should be consistent in all areas of the ground. If you are not going to chuck out OF fans for standing up then you should not be chucking out IHE or the others for the same 'crime'. I think a lot of our fans would ***** and moan about the stewards if they were really heavy handed all over the stadium but there would be less of an impact if this was consistently applied as everyone would be getting the 'treatment'. Incidentally - prior to us reaching the SPL, the worst stewards I encountered were those at Hampden during our semi final experiences - arrogant and officious, but on the footage of the recent cup final, I swear that I saw hundreds of fans standing and cheering without the 'snatch squads' going in and ejecting them ........ I applaud the trust for getting involved in this issue. However I would expect nothing less as it was a joint initiative between them and the club. I will reserve any praise for them until we hear the final outcome of the various meetings, talks and investigations !!! I am possibly being a little unfair with this next comment - but its my opinion and I am going to state it - I hope this doesnt take too much longer or people might wonder whether there is an effort to make this subject go away by drawing it out in the hope that it will be forgotten. IT WILL NOT. On this we agree ... to a point. At the end of the day, the chief exec is the top man at the club on a day-to-day basis. Previous incumbents of his position (regardless of the actual name of the position) have been considerably more visible and accessible to the fans and therein lies a good portion of the problem. IHE asked a very valid question - "what does he do, what has he done". As a shareholder of the club, I find myself wondering the same thing. We are paying the man a lot of money and not seeing any tangible results. I have sat down with him and spoken to him on a number of occasions and he seems to be a very pleasant chap but whilst I may have opinions, I have no actual knowledge on how good (or otherwise) he is at his job as I cannot see the results. He is an accountant by qualification is he not ? so I am assuming that he was brought in partially to make sure the cost controls and fiscal management structure that David Sutherland instigated were adhered to. If he is responsible for ongoing prudency in this area then that is a very good achievement which we may not see, but we can and should appreciate. However, as the top man at the stadium, he ultimately takes the rap when things go awry and the Dunfermline game is a good example. Calls for his head are perhaps over the top but I am sure even he can understand the frustration felt by fans ejected by the club from an area they themselves setup to create some atmosphere. Charles, this is a considerable issue at clubs all over the country regardless of how much progress their club has made. I dont see how the on-field success of the club should negate the desire or right to stand. perhaps you could explain ? Should we sit down, shut up and be thankful just because the football management have put a decent team on the park or should we respond to the pleas of various managers of the club and try to create an atmosphere that they have all admitted spurs the club on - perhaps the '12th man' will actually be a factor in us climbing to the next level of progress and reaching the top 6. Lest we forget, football is supposed to be about entertainment. we pay money to go and watch the sport because we want to be entertained. For the most part, that happens on the pitch but for years now (and not just at ICT) many clubs have forgotten that supporters are customers and you should treat your customers with some respect before they become ex-customers. Stewards are there to ensure safety and aid/assist the customers, they are not there to enforce petty rules or harass people which is what they have been allowed to do unchecked. I would agree with this - there has been too much court activity surrounding Scottish Football in recent years. Fans need their voice to be heard and the SFA/SFL/SPL need to actually listen but the courts is not the place to do it.

Buchanan would be one for the future, not a replacement for Dargo .... its the younger players who might be more worried about him signing rather than the likes of Bayne, Dargo or Wyness

IHE - another fine article. Hopefully the club/directors will see how the 6 specific points that have been tailored to ICT in your posting could turn the unmitigated PR DISASTER of ejecting their own fans from an area that the club were promoting, into a nationwide PR OPPORTUNITY. The club got a lot of good press when lobbying for a reduction in the SPL stadium capacity from 10k to 6k ... perhaps this could be another initiative that shows we may be a small club but we have big contribution to make.

Flower - I think your idea is vaguely similar to what has already been suggested in one of the multiple threads on this matter although you have also addressed the 'numbered seat' portion of the rules which is good. This idea is simple, easy to implement and allows both those who want to sing and those who dont to make a choice. it would also allow those who only want to sing periodically to pick and choose --- There might be a few logistical problems for big games like Celtic / Rangers where more people want to be in there than it may be designated for but I suppose you could do a 'first come first served' limit in that area and then close it off. The one stumbling block is that this would still require the SPL to change its rules as they dont allow terracing in any form at the moment - hopefully our chairman can help them to see sense in some compromise that doesnt involve the return to terracing but permission to incorporate "safe standing areas" in stadia where the clubs wish it.