This subject seems to rear its head now and again so i'd thought it was time to set up a poll so the subject could get put to bed once and for all

Its probably more appropriate to older ICT fans but younger fans can join in as they may have fathers/relations etc who were involved with Caledonian Fc or Inverness Thistle at the time of the merger

Think it safe to say that we all know that there are fans of the two parent clubs who refused to watch or support ICT in any way but just how many are/were there???

From what I can make out from this forum there are very few Caledonian or Thistle fans on here and the majority seem to be younger fans who have only supported ICT in their life time

I've stated before i've experienced hostility from pre-merger fans when the topic ICT is mentioned so I know it exists in our city

A few questions to maybe ponder and debate

1. I'm not an expert on the merger as I wasn't in Inverness at the time it happened but would we have a higher average attendance had Caledonian FC gone alone?

2. Buses leave Inverness for Pittodrie,Ibrox and Parkhead every weekend so did numbers dramatically increase on these coaches once both pre-merger clubs ceased to exist?

3. Do any on here personally know any refuseniks and if so are they as anti ICT now or have they mellowed as time goes by?

4.Were any posters on here in the Caley Rebel group?

5.Were and posters on here involved in any of the meetings when the voting on the merger took place and if so what were your memories and recollections?

6. Were you a pro merger or anti-merger voter?

No doubt I will get slated yet again for posting this thread but this is by no means a wind up or a fishing trip, its a subject i'm genuinely interested in and to be honest i find the whole subject quite fascinating

dougal

I find the poll results very interesting reading and I thinks it safe to say that there are a lot more refuseniks out there than the average ICT fan likes to admit

I think you're gonna have to explain your logic there.

Surely the most relevant stat from the poll is that over the course of a week, hundreds of people have viewed it but only 24 took part.

Yngwie it hardly takes a brain surgeon to work it out but here goes just for you Sir

11/24 which is less than 50% voted for very few refuseniks(0-50) while 13/24 more than 50% voted for considerable numbers

Are you trying to tell me the votes have somehow been rigged??

I'm afraid the fact that only 24 have voted leads me to think that the number of original Caley or Thistle fans on this forum are neglible and backs up my claims about the numbers of refuseniks

For the record there are four more members on this site that think there are more refuseniks than I do so try and work that out if you can

Finally I would just like to point out yet again for Tearlach Bannerman I've never set foot in either Telford St or Kingsmills but don't let that stop you trying to stereotype me

dougal

so because slightly more than half the people who voted voted in favour of considerable numbers that is your basis for backing up your point ????

in that theory if three people had voted 2-1 that there were considerable numbers does that make it right?? it may be the majority of people taking part but it is not a true majority if it only represents a mninority

I'm afraid the fact that only 24 have voted leads me to think that the number of original Caley or Thistle fans on this forum are neglible and backs up my claims about the numbers of refuseniks

dougal

Someone famous once said "there are lies, damned lies and statistics". Far be it from me to give Dougal a lecture on research methodology but I think everyone other than him will recognise that his conclusion is complete and utter nonsense. He refers to only 24 folk voting. Had nobody voted at all then presumably he would have claimed that there were even more refuseniks because they have all stayed away from having anything to do with ITC. Had 240 voted then he would have claimed that the high number of people who thought there were a lot of refuseniks proved that was the case. What ever the result, Dougal claims it proves his point.

Get real, Dougal. The fact that only 24 people voted demonstrates that the vast majority of people who have read any of this thread think it is such a non issue that they can't be bothered to vote. The vast majority who watched the 2 former clubs are now fully behind ICT and delighted about the success the merged club has had. Some people have refused to watch the merged team - how many, I neither know nor care. What I do know is that I have greatly enjoyed the rise and exploits of ICT over recent years and those who have not shared the thrills over the years have missed out and only have themselves to blame.

Just for the record I along with 4 others have voted 1,500+ but this was just for the crack. How can you take the poll seriously as all you are asking for is an opinion and not actual facts. Still the thread was fairly interesting.

Get real, Dougal. The fact that only 24 people voted demonstrates that the vast majority of people who have read any of this thread think it is such a non issue that they can't be bothered to vote. The vast majority who watched the 2 former clubs are now fully behind ICT and delighted about the success the merged club has had. Some people have refused to watch the merged team - how many, I neither know nor care.

Well said DD! You've called it spot on. The only reason I find any interest in this topic is totally academic since I followed and studied in great detail the entire merger process which is still of that kind of interest to me.

Other than that....

* A merger took place in 1994.

* Some people didn't like it. Their prerogative.

* But all the same it resulted in Inverness being projected from the Highland League to the SPL in a single decade and around five times as many people come to watch football in Inverness now, and in a 7700 capacity stadium, compared with the pre merger days - so who gives a toss!!!

"They will none of them be missed!"

Ha ha, Dougal's logic is comparable to that of the 'never wrong' Donald Rumsfeld. When challenged on his belief that the Soviets had vast numbers of nuclear missiles hidden from all the declarations, and which necessitated the US building and developing even more, he replied that the lack of evidence was in fact evidence of the success of the Soviet deception, and thus of their existence. Dougal similarly argues that the lack of evidence of any significant number of refuseniks is evidence of their great numbers. My my, you have to congratulate the refuseniks on their brilliant disguise and secrecy, since nobody can find more than enough to form a football team. Perhaps Dougal would like to do MU and start a new team called Telford St in the Welfare League, since he believes that thousands of supporters would come out of the woodwork. I can't wait.

Ha ha, Dougal's logic is comparable to that of the 'never wrong' Donald Rumsfeld. When challenged on his belief that the Soviets had vast numbers of nuclear missiles hidden from all the declarations, and which necessitated the US building and developing even more, he replied that the lack of evidence was in fact evidence of the success of the Soviet deception, and thus of their existence. Dougal similarly argues that the lack of evidence of any significant number of refuseniks is evidence of their great numbers. My my, you have to congratulate the refuseniks on their brilliant disguise and secrecy, since nobody can find more than enough to form a football team. Perhaps Dougal would like to do MU and start a new team called Telford St in the Welfare League, since he believes that thousands of supporters would come out of the woodwork. I can't wait.

Call them Kingsmill Telford FC and there'll be even more. I dont think many statasticians would make sense of this poll. To me the results would say that 24 people think there are refuseniks but none know how many. The other thing that makes the poll invalid is the banding within each choice. Choice 1 is 0-50 so if I think the answer is 1 I have a possibility of being 49 out. Another choice gives 900-1500 so if I think the answer is 901 I could be as much as 599 out. Then there's 1500 to infinity.

The truth is that those who chose to refuse to support the new team are a small number whereas there are probably a good few others who found themselves faced with the choice of supporting the new scottish league team or sticking with the scottish league team they had always supported. The highland league team in Inverness being the team they went to watch on a saturday when they couldn't go and see their scottish league team.

There is no evidence to suggest that one or other of the two teams would have had an increased support had they gone it alone. I was a Jaggy in the early 70's but when I moved away from the highlands I didn't attend football much. I didn't actually start being a regular until ICT,s 02/03 season in div 1 so it could be said that I became a new fan. It is unlikely that I'd have made journeys from central belt to watch Thistle in the highland league and I dont think I'd have travelled up the A9 to watch Thistle as a lone team wallow in the lower leagues. I am a realist and know that thats where any one of the two teams would be now had they gone it alone.

Yes, I think we can say that it is a known unknown!

I didn't like to be too pedantic before but the first option is 0 - 50. There is of course a world of difference to thinking there are none and thinking there are as many as 50. But then the second choice is 50 - 150. So if I think there are 50, what do I go for? 0 - 50 or 50 - 150? Worryingly this is a basic mistake you often see in what are supposed to be serious surveys by qualified researchers

Anyhow, it's all been nonsense but it's been fun. There's been precious little else on the forum of late so, thank you, Dougal, for giving us a laugh.

I think what it is, is that the tiny handful of refuseniks still hold a grudge to this day, and they want to believe that their denial still matters. They desperately want to have something to show for their 17 years (!) of bitterness - like a conviction that there 'thousands' of them, that their self-imposed exile in the wilderness is a great stain on the club blah blah (never mind missing out on 17 years of thrills and spills just to prove a point) - I suppose it is a bit galling that nobody really cares about your long nurtured and carefully honed sense of grievance. They used to delight in ICT's defeats and, Cassandra-like, were prone to predicting failure which would satisfy them deeply. But that hasn't worked so we are back to crying crocodile tears and lamenting the great injustice of the Telford St Clearances, and the latest wheeze - a Mickey Mouse poll. It's all a bit Victor Meldrew , though DD is right that it has lightened up this board for a while.

Edited March 20, 201115 yr by The Long Man

Ha ha, Dougal's logic is comparable to that of the 'never wrong' Donald Rumsfeld. When challenged on his belief that the Soviets had vast numbers of nuclear missiles hidden from all the declarations, and which necessitated the US building and developing even more, he replied that the lack of evidence was in fact evidence of the success of the Soviet deception, and thus of their existence. Dougal similarly argues that the lack of evidence of any significant number of refuseniks is evidence of their great numbers. My my, you have to congratulate the refuseniks on their brilliant disguise and secrecy, since nobody can find more than enough to form a football team. Perhaps Dougal would like to do MU and start a new team called Telford St in the Welfare League, since he believes that thousands of supporters would come out of the woodwork. I can't wait.

Call them Kingsmill Telford FC and there'll be even more. I dont think many statasticians would make sense of this poll. To me the results would say that 24 people think there are refuseniks but none know how many. The other thing that makes the poll invalid is the banding within each choice. Choice 1 is 0-50 so if I think the answer is 1 I have a possibility of being 49 out. Another choice gives 900-1500 so if I think the answer is 901 I could be as much as 599 out. Then there's 1500 to infinity.

The truth is that those who chose to refuse to support the new team are a small number whereas there are probably a good few others who found themselves faced with the choice of supporting the new scottish league team or sticking with the scottish league team they had always supported. The highland league team in Inverness being the team they went to watch on a saturday when they couldn't go and see their scottish league team.

There is no evidence to suggest that one or other of the two teams would have had an increased support had they gone it alone. I was a Jaggy in the early 70's but when I moved away from the highlands I didn't attend football much. I didn't actually start being a regular until ICT,s 02/03 season in div 1 so it could be said that I became a new fan. It is unlikely that I'd have made journeys from central belt to watch Thistle in the highland league and I dont think I'd have travelled up the A9 to watch Thistle as a lone team wallow in the lower leagues. I am a realist and know that thats where any one of the two teams would be now had they gone it alone.

Glory hunter .

In my experience, watching OF games in pubs in town brings out the refuseniks. Whilst in the lavvy or at the bar I'm always asked who I support. The usual response I get when I inform them I support ICT and neither of the filth is usually with distain -

'Aww you don't support the scum do ya?'

or

'Aye my favver used to support Caley in the Highland League but he refuses to go to the dump now eh. I'm a Rangers man through and through though'.

This, invariably, comes from Rangers fans. Most Celtic fans, again in my experience, show more apathy towards ICT for some reason.

I've come to the conclusion that the "refusniks" are not the problem. We are.

People who have never/will never set come to a game are not important. They (both of them?) have made their (a dozen of them?) position clear. They (hundreds of them?) won't be coming. Their (thousands of them?) loss.

What is concerning me is how few of us (CTO posters) appear to go to the games now is we take the POTY Voting as an accurate measure. 11 votes this time round. Appreciate we all have good reasons and that my own attendance has been shocking this year but surely this is far more worrying than 2/4/6/15/45/80/150/1235 people who said in 1994 that they don't want to play and still can't get over the fact that it succeeded way beyond their dreams despite their bitterness?

In my experience, watching OF games in pubs in town brings out the refuseniks. Whilst in the lavvy or at the bar I'm always asked who I support. The usual response I get when I inform them I support ICT and neither of the filth is usually with distain -

'Aww you don't support the scum do ya?'

or

'Aye my favver used to support Caley in the Highland League but he refuses to go to the dump now eh. I'm a Rangers man through and through though'.

This, invariably, comes from Rangers fans. Most Celtic fans, again in my experience, show more apathy towards ICT for some reason.

Dunno about up here in the Sneck, but after living in Weegie land for 9 years I never really had any bother with either side of the OF, just the usual banter. Although one time back in about 99' I had my ICT top on and a bouncer was about to stop me getting into a pub, but when he saw it was ICT he just said: 'Ach never mind big man, just go in, nobody will be bothered by that!'

What is concerning me is how few of us (CTO posters) appear to go to the games now is we take the POTY Voting as an accurate measure.

Not a new or unusual trend. People have always voted more on the POTY in the games we've won and voting also tends to drop off when the team are going through lean spells....number of site visitors/threads/posts is impacted in the same way.

The only exception to the above has been when things got really bad.....like we witnessed during the Brewster end game.

For the record there are four more members on this site that think there are more refuseniks than I do so try and work that out if you can

Would be nice if you also told us that you have changed your vote three times over the last week, at one stage being one of only two posters who went for 1,500+.

For the record there are four more members on this site that think there are more refuseniks than I do so try and work that out if you can

Would be nice if you also told us that you have changed your vote three times over the last week, at one stage being one of only two posters who went for 1,500+.

I think your getting dougal confused with dougie danger

I'm not, Dougal originally went for 600-900 IIRC, then to 1,500+ before changing his vote again. Dougiedanger is another voter.

For the record there are four more members on this site that think there are more refuseniks than I do so try and work that out if you can

Would be nice if you also told us that you have changed your vote three times over the last week, at one stage being one of only two posters who went for 1,500+.

Wow what an earth shattering revelation that is and loaded with irony too

Surely you are not trying to say I have somehow rigged the vote?

Thats like saying an imaginary vote ended something like 55-50 when only 97 voted

dougal

Sorry, I can't make head or tail of what you're on about. Go back to your medicine.