On reading the content of many offerings on here, I wonder how this impacts on the numbers going through the turn styles.

I realise constructive crits are a positive but very few seem to appear on here.

The manager, players and staff MUST read this and I cannot see how this can be helping their efforts.

The press do use this and magnify the negatives.

Potential new supporters could read this and wander over the bridge due to negativity re the coming season.

Maybe Scotty could do ICT a favour and consider closing the Forum down for six months.

n. But then again, I think that Abedeen might win this league this year so what do I know! Just bring it on.

You are an odd individual Davie, a self acclaimed Dundee Utd supporter who's watches ICT yet wants Aberdeen to win the league

Good fishing on your part though as I've nibbled

Dougal

Thinking Aberdeen might win the league doesn't mean you want them to. How did you come to that conclusion from his post? By that logic everyone who's tipped Celtic to win the league want them to.

I feel that we may need to be particularly adept at 'set plays' this season. It's not been our strongest suit in recent times. I know it's the case for all clubs and they doubtless work on free-kick scenarios in training, but more productivity from dead-ball areas near the 18 yard box would really help our cause.

Not to say we won't have our moments from fluid moves in open play, but as IHE observes, we're likely to be seeing a style at polar opposites from the Pele days of high scoring games. Did we not go something like 150 games under Paterson without a 0-0 draw!!! Yet, that's a very likely outcome on Saturday!

 

Sorry - Posted in 'wrong' thread but I'll leave it.

Edited August 7, 201411 yr by Sneckboy

Well, not everyone is a happy clapper just because they favour the positive viewpoints rather than the negative ones which  usually end up irritating or depressing us standard balanced folks,

 

 The  jolly Joes in raincoats having reserved personalities and possessing reserved judgements no doubt are , in the eyes of the critics, also happy clappers  but why any fan at all should be objected to because he claps his hands  and are happy is a complete mystery to me. Are we all supposed to be miserable until the  Great non-happy clapper Chief gives a signal ...? 

 

The old saying ''Oh,wid the guid lord the gift tae gie us tae see oorselves as ithers see us"springs to mind as something the non-happy clappers and  negative criticisers could ponder over.

 

There is nothing to indicate this was written tongue in cheek so I will bite and take it at face value as I think this illustrates why we are never going to agree on whether posts are positive and negative.  SP starts with a quite extraordinary statement which begs the question of why anyone would consider favouring either positive or negative posts in the first place.  Surely reasonable folk would favour objective posts - whether you then perceive those posts as positive or negative is a matter for your your own perspective and expectations.  SP goes on to refer to himself as amongst the "standard balanced folks" but he seems pretty firmly in the "happy clapper" camp to me.

 

SP finishes by saying "The old saying ''Oh,wid the guid lord the gift tae gie us tae see oorselves as ithers see us"springs to mind as something the non-happy clappers and negative criticisers could ponder over".  Note that he doesn't see those sharing his own happy clapper views having a need to see themselves as others do as presumably their views are unquestionably the only views that have any validity.  The truth is that it behoves us all to reflect on how others see us and to respect the views of others.

 

To me the issue is not about positive versus negative posts, it is about the intolerance of some towards those who offer objective comment on aspects of this football club.  Far too often when the comments are critical, the happy clappers condemn them as "negative" yet rarely offer any objective argument to counter the points made.  There are many folk who are no longer posting their views or who feel intimidated to post any views in the first place because of the way any critical posts are responded to.  Interestingly, it seems to me that those who are often branded as negative are the first to acknowledge improvements.  Renegade makes an excellent post  relating to this. 

 

Whilst not agreeing with the OP, he raises an important point in questioning whether critical postings on this website have a negative impact on the players and the potential support.  As far as the players are concerned I would expect that objective criticism will always be welcomed by players with any ambition to succeed.   The players will know when criticism, however well meant, is misguided and they'll not worry about that in the slightest.  But where they can recognise that objective criticism has some validity to it, any professional worth their salt will use it to motivate them to respond positiively.  As far as the fans are concerned, surely honesty is the best policy - tell them the product is better than it is and they'll feel cheated and won't come back

 

There is nothing so negative as an intolerance to an honest exchange and debate of sincerely held views regarding concerns that fans may have.  I wish that what we were seeing on the park was such that everyone was saying it's brilliant to watch - but it isn't.  If you don't like what you're seeing then why pretend that you do? 

 

I doubt that there are any fans who don't hope that the faith Caley D has in the development of Yogi's plans is justified, but I think it is perfectly reasonable for folk to raise concerns based on what was undeniably a season of two halves last year.  Let's end this positive v negative nonsense and have a bit of respect for other folks views and concerns and debate the points raised in an objective and respectful way.  That is the kind of positivity I would like to see.

I had someone say to me last weekend "you used to be one of us*".

 

On further thought/discussion, it transpired that the assertion seems to be that because I had become more directly involved in volunteering and doing stuff at the club, then I should no longer be considered a fan with the right to a valid opinion on CTO (or elsewhere).  There's even people who are going around suggesting that as a club employee (which I am not) then they should gag me and prevent me from posting on here.

 

It's not the first time I've seen this view, when I was an active admin/moderator on the forums I often had the validity of my personal opinion called into question (as others have and still are).

 

Am I less critical of the club on here these days? Yes, absolutely.  Firstly because I think there's a lot less to be critical of, and secondly because I make good use of the fact that the Chairman is open to talking to anyone about their concerns or issues...something anyone can do if they take the time to get in touch.

 

I decide what I post or don't post on here. The club have no "hold" over me (and anyone who thinks I would work like that should read THIS), but I appreciate that in order to do what I do (primarily for the benefit of the fans and club) then I need to have a professional, honest and trustful relationship with the chairman, manager, players, staff etc.

 

That works both ways and I got involved with eyes wide open to the potential pitfalls. It's the reason I stepped back from front-line operations on CTO as I didn't want the sites impartiality to be called into question...and also because I felt I could achieve more by putting my time from here into other things.

 

* I don't believe for one second that the comment was made with any malice or intent, but it wasn't a pleasant accusation.

I also read in the link that ICT had 100 followers on twitter 4 years ago.

Its amazing how well something can take off if the public interest is there, well done for having the creativity and willpower bring it to life.

Edited August 8, 201411 yr by 12th Man

To be fair to Caley D he is one of a number of the more positive posters. He does however be the more eloquent of the defenders whereas there used to be a degree of critique. There are also quite a number on the other end of the scale. But that is life.

I have been oop Norf this week and have chatted to a few of the players - two of whom are usually very direct. I don't usually post but to a man they backed Hughes and his system. One went into more tactical detail and I can see the potential. But it is far more defence minded than I would personally liked. I can see now what they were trying at Brum. I suppose I concede that they were taking on a Championship outfit but I now think that it could work, there are a number of players who could pull it off but I still think that it may go over the heads of a few. The first few games will be interesting. I feel that we could be or should be top of the league after 3 games. But that may depend on whether we go for a Plan B and I cannot see that happening away from home unless we go 2 down.