Leaderboard

Why be aggrieved that he achieved more in a few years at our club than many do. Were you aggrieved when Wyness went to St Mirren? When Barrowman went to County? When Vigurs went to County? In any professional team sport transfers are part and parcel with the set-up. Adam gave us a good run in the 1st and probably sealed promotion for us but his development as a player is not something he owes to ICT although he will have learned here. There is so much wrong with that statement.

I would strongly recommend you don't miss Football Focus tomorrow (Saturday in case you don't see this tonight) on BBC1 at 12.15pm. The camera crew spend a whole day in Inverness with the team and in particular Terry Butcher, even visiting his home. Set your recorders now so you don't miss it, should be entertaining.

Hibs are a bigger club than us and can pay better wages, that I agree with completely. I just feel that if Adam does go to Hibs he will not score as many goals and probably has even less chance of winning a trophy at all than he does at ICT (unless Hibs get relegated...). Therefore I feel it is showing a lack of ambition on his part in my opinion. BTW - Just for the record, I like Hibs. A lot.

What evidence can you provide to disprove this statement by Ayr United chairman Lachlan Cameron: ?In the grand scheme of things, the money doesn?t flow down properly. There are two teams who run Scottish football, Rangers and Celtic, and everything revolves around them. That is not a league; that is a monopoly. We are the laughing stock of European football.?

If he doesn't like what Hibs have to offer you can see the Sun headline now: Rooney prefers what Young Boys have to offer

Bigger club and more money... DUH

Yup.....would be purely financial motives only for a move to Hibs!

I would start with asking him to produce the facts and figures to back his financial claims because from what I can gather nothing adds up........ TV Money Claims clubs would lose £1 Million a year from TV/Gate if we increase league size - For a start, half (or more) of the clubs aren't actually making £1 Million a year from TV, so how can they lose it? SPL have a 5 year deal worth £65 Million, that's £13 Million a year. OF take a third of that between them and the rest is divided based on league position and number of games they appear in. Anyone in the bottom 6 is unlikely to be taking home £1 Million in TV revenue. What is the new offer being put on the table by SKY-ESPN for a 10 team league and an SPL2? Does an offer actually exist? Why, as the only real bidders in the market place, would SKY-ESPN be offering up more money for less games being broadcast to narrower marketplace and, if fans vote with their feet, to fewer people? Surely they want a product that will sell, and a product that will sell is a product the customers want (see listening to the fans below) Other Money As I understand it, the figures for the money going to an SPL2 have been based on the SFL handing over half their income, but only a third of the teams to the SPL. Has this been agreed to, by who and when? You talk of "significant" reductions in the financial loss from relegation. Given that ICT lost £1.5 Million from it's turnover and other clubs could conceivably suffer larger losses (it;s not a fixed figure, but one based on club size/revenue of which we are amongst the smaller ones), then where is the money to come from to allow you to "significantly" reduce the burden? What's more, if you are taking away 50% of the SFL income in order to bolster the SPL2 then you have a bigger gap between the finances of the SPL2 and the SFL, will the same financial parachutes be on offer there and where is that money to come from? Has any consideration been given to what clubs sponsors & advertisers might think? Are they going to continue to pay what they do to advertise to a narrower market (fewer opposition teams) and potentially smaller crowds if fans vote to go elsewhere through boredom (see listening to the fans below). From there I would then start delving in to some of the other points which seem to have been overlooked or quickly cast over........ What would be the criteria (stadia, USH etc) for SPL2? Any restrictions on entry make the idea of Play-Offs as an additional money spinner absolutely null and void, they also throw the argument for a more competitive setup right out the window as you're taking the deciding factor for progress totally off the park and placing it squarely into the business side of the operation. What would be the criteria (stadia, USH etc) for SPL1? Same paints as above. Following on from the point on qualifying criteria, do you not think that it's damaging enough that we have one point of failure in that regard within the Scottish League System, why would you want to introduce a second? We have all witnessed clubs sending themselves to the wall as a result of speculating on promotion and spending more than they can afford on both the players to achieve that and the infrastructure required to secure entry to the SPL. Many of these clubs suffered during a time when their was far more money in the game than we have at present, so does it not seem like complete folly to be forcing this situation on clubs, especially on clubs far further down the ladder who are even less capable of shouldering the cost in leagues below the SPL where you have stripped out half their income? Where are the side by side comparisons? If you are so adament that 10 teams is the best, then you've surely done your homework on the pro's and con's of all the other league sizes. People aren't stupid, lay it out there for us in black and white and show us, let us understand for ourselves. Perhaps the most obvious question of all, why aren't you listening to the customer? Whilst I appreciate there's a market for selling people what they think they want (gimmicks), such things are generally short lived and football is not the marketplace in which to be peddling such wares (even tacky merchandise in club shops is becoming a thing of the past). In order to develop a long term, fincially stable business then you have to give customers what they want. Where would Ford be today if they had ever stuck to the principle that customers could have any colour they wanted, so long as it is black? We have the exact same situation here where you are telling your customers they can have any size league they want, so long as it's got 10 teams in it. A successful business is one which provides it's customers what it wants, a dead business is one which ignores it's customers and quickly finds they have moved on elsewhere....and in this day and age, where football is already on the verge of pricing itself out of the entertainment industry, it's not going to take much to turn away customers to the point where it becomes unsustainable and the quickest route to that end is not listening. How do your proposals benefit the game as a whole? What does it do to reverse the falling trend of good young Scottish players coming through our systems? If it comes down to a straight up choice between having a system that allows and encourages us to develop our own players, or one which is driven entirely by money, then I know where my vote would lie. Better to have a bit less money and see it being spent developing players in Scotland, than have more money and see it all being spent abroad. I appreciate the above is probably a waste of breath as we're all preaching to the converted on here, but I do intend to do what I can to push these, and any other questions that people come up with, through the channels where they can be collated with those of other fans and hopefully find their way to where they need to be and are being asked by someone with the balls to demand full and proper answers.

that we weren't being bullied and basically that it wasn't Terry's job to get involved in the political side of things. What a spineless plonker.

I'll poo in a paper bag put it on Neil Doncasters doorstep, set light to it, ring the bell and run away.

I hope a way can be found to protest without hiting our own club in its already poor pockets. I really feel that the club has been doing its best to stand up and be counted and doesnt deserve to be the one that suffers.

Kieron or Nathan?

The way Rooney is playing just now, he will be lucky to go anywhere, I would be more concerned if it was Hayes.

In Switzerland are all football fans neutral?

Yes, with Brewster in charge the number of teams was irrelevant. Would he have been in favour of the "16 ream league" you refer to?

Aye, as good as Ross is, a bit too slight to play to start against Accies. While Odhiambo and Sanchez also aren't the biggest, I feel that after Eric's performance at Ibrox he gives the pace down the wing the team needs in the absence of Hayes (in fact I nearly went with Duff at right back with Tokely at right wing), while Sanchez may be more capable of playing the killer ball through to the front four. Ross can always come at half time should he need to mind (even before!).