Leaderboard

Presumably you now have an answer to that question Richard?

A 3rd league draw against supposedly the worst team in the SPL is a big part of the reason we won't make the top 6

Thought Winall might have started, Shane is hardly prolific, Claude seems not to wear accurate shooting boots, Nick 'no goals' Ross starts again.... wonder where the goals are going to come from? hope Jonny is up for it today! c'mon ICT!!!!

Not long in from the game, and a fair point to take from a relatively poor game. Neither side played too well despite both having a share of the chances and in the end can't really complain with a point each. We weren't getting going at all really until the much needed introduction of Tudur-Jones and McKay. Gnakpa is not a natural striker and there was little movement at all from him up top which was limiting our attacking options. For what it's worth I thought Shane did alright and looked bright enough in the short time he was upfront before being replaced by McKay. Until we had Tudur-Jones and McKay on the pitch we were playing long ball all the time and just gifting it back to Dunfermline. There was a 10 minute period after half-time where it was so frustrating to watch and even our most creative player in Jonny Hayes got the ball in our half and just hoofed it aimlessly forward at one point. Changes simply had to be made, and credit where it's due, Terry got them spot on. McKay buzzed about creating movement and chances for us upfront with Foran pushing forward to support him, and Tudor-Jones held the midfield superbly well with Tansey. We got the ball down and played some good football pressing the Pars back into their own half. McKay did well to get the ball out to Hayes, who'd made a good run on the left. He fizzed it across goal and Nick was in the right palce to finish it. Well worked goal and I think it's exactly what he needed to get a bit of confidence back after missing a similar chance a couple of weeks back. Hopefully he won't be so hesitant now to have a pop, after the goal v Hibs last season we know he's capable of a good finish. Proctor was poor and shouldn't be near the CB position for us. Whenever he goes in for a tackle in the box my heart is in my mouth convinced he's going to give away a pen. As stated above Gnakpa wasn't effective upfront and was rightly subbed after a poor performance. On the plus side though, good performances from the rest of the team. Hayes, Ross, Foran, Gillet and Tudur-Jones all did well with the latter changing the shape of the game and having a huge influence on the result for us. But MOTM for me would go to Greg Tansey today. Did all the dirty work today in a Russell Duncan-esque performance. Battled for everything, had the head up looking to open up the play and try and create something when he got on the ball and put a good shift in. All in all not a bad result and a decent away trip, onwards and upwards to 3 points against HMRCFC next weekend.

Never underestimate the power of a strong bench, Tudur Jones and Mckay changed that game for us. Those lads have both steaked a claim for a start next week. We were all over the Pars first half, defended soundly, controlled midfield but Terry's brain dead idea of playing 2 wingers up front was an absolute sham. They got in each others way, they overran passes, they underhit passes, there was no communication and against the run of play Dunfermline exploited our lack of clinical finishing by scoring right on half time....well done Proc for heading it back into the path of Cardle . We struggled to keep our heads in the second half, ball was getting given away cheaply and we continued to look non existent. Proctor nearly drove me to tears when he let that ball run under his feet and had it not been for Esson it wouldve been 2. As said the 2 subs came on, helped with the goal and after that we looked like we could push on for a winner. Dont want to give Gnakpa a hard time, only his 2nd start and yet again he was out of position. He is a winger - end of, hasnt got the strenght or the work rate to be a target man. Also Tokely or Williams have to go in for Proctor next week, it was easily his worst performance of the season. Foran was outstanding today, grafted and created from both midfield and attack and also worth noting that he appeared to keep a cool head when things were difficult and was prepared to admit a couple of mistakes he made in the game, keep it up Richie. Tudur Jones deserves a mention too, he came on and almost instantly our midfield and overall play had more urgency about it. Terry reckons he could be a key player for us in the run in, if he stays fit that is almost a certainty. Satisfied with the point given the performance but we probably couldve taken 3 points today had we played better. Changes need to be made for next week, especially up front, so looking to at it with much anticipation.

As usual, great account from hislopsoffside again. Couple of things to add: Foran was terrific. Worked harder than any other player on the park and on a day when too many ICT players, unusually, looked like they didn't care, fought for everything and tried to make things happen. We would not have equalised had it not been for Billy Mackay's persistence in the box. Deserves a start next week: despite his goal, Ross is not a striker, and Gnapka didn't quite seem to know where he should be playing. Kenny Gillet is the best player on the books and should stay at centre back. All in all, it was a horrible game of football and we would do well to improve next week, but Dunfermline were at least as bad as us and we're no worse off with one less game to play.

The whole renewable agruement is highly complex and needs to be split down into the various forms to get a real appreciation of the complexities. To deal with wind first, there are a number of basic syncronisation issues as well as the unreliable nature of the wind (i.e. you need 100% redundancy in electricity production from other forms for periods when the wind does not blow) and the best information suggests that the maximum percentage of wind which can be generated is in the order of 7 to 13 % depending on who you believe. This is being borne out in some regions of Scandanavia where there are finding that there is a ceiling on how much wind can be used. Aside from the technical issues, the cost for wind generation, particularly offshore, are in the order of £157 - £186/mWh vs Nuclear at £67mWh (there is a Motts Report from a couple of years back which gives various numbers for each of the options). My view is that wind is part of the 'big picture' but has been overplayed as a solution to all problems. The main other renewable option for Scotland are hydro - both major (Glendoe when it gets fixed and the new Great Glen projects) and micro-hydro (estimated to be 3,500 potential schemes by the Scottish Government). From a profit perspective, hydro is good in that it can provide peak production (unlike wind which is base load due to the non-guaranteed nature) and this offers a major premium. Interestingly, when SSE gave Glendoe the go ahead the ROI was borderline. By the time it was completed (sic) the ROI was massively foreshortened due to the increase in wholesale value. Glendoe, when fixed, will even generate income by providing 'hot stand-by' for the French and English based generators by sitting syncronised but not on-load in case of plant failure (there are massive penalties for the generators if they drop out). The micro hydro option may struggle to provide the 3,500 due to capital cost/ROI and technical issues. Uncertaintly on FIT does not help either Wave and tidal generation has yet to demonstrate that it can be successfully deployed. The potential is howver massive both in terms of production and certainty (as long as the moon rotates round the earth :) ). Nuclear provides a fall back against lack of wind or drought and should be considered as part of the picture. My view is that electrcity security is almost as important as electricity cost - the thought of relying on other countries for fossil fuels does not seem clever (though this may be more of an issue for the wider UK than Scotland). For those interested, there will be investment of c£8 to 10bn over the next 5 years to enable renewables to be incorporated into the wider grid. Part of this will be the proposed interconnector with Norway (look up NorthConnect) which if is goes ahead will 'land' in Peterhead.

I would rather wait until it was mathematically impossible for us to go down to talk about it than sumise over ifs n butts and ins n outs. To answer your question though I really don't see us going down, not compared to Dunfermline anyway, a team that haven't won at home all season cannot stay up contrary to what Jim MacIntyre says Disappointed we couldn't take three points today but at least it wasn't a defeat and keeps the big gap between ourselves and Dunfermline

just back from game staying across road from ground. tel you made a balls up today, with you team selection. lots of possesion in first half but i never seen such an inept front line in all my days of watching caley thistle. they score on half time after hardie hit bar from free kick, looked like meekings playing dunfermline player on side after ball came off bar. he would have been 4 yards offside if meekings wasnt 6 yards behind everyone else. gnapka and sutherland were a waste of space, neither could control ball loosing possesion every time they got it. proctor was a disaster. hayes could not do anything right. shinnie was waiting too long on ball before eventually loosing it,getting his passes blocked. early second half dunfermline running down clock everything from throws to goal kicks taking ages. we were pathetic enter tudor jones off goes gnapka, foran up front . off goes sutherland on comes mackay. all of a sudden we are on the ascendancy again. jones is pure class. tansey very effective, nick ross was good also once we scored never really looked like getting a second. in fact dunfermline could have nicked it late second half with free header at back post over the bar. looked easier to score. why did we not start with the second half team?????????????????????? proctor was very poor, but must be difficult being 4th or 5th choice. two thing we must do next year , get 2 central defenders and a striker that can hold the ball

Grant Munro scored County's opener....

Craig Whyte in my opinion new exactly what he was doing when he bought Rangers over from Sir David Murray, he in my opinion looked at a business that was facing some massive debts namely the 'big case' with the HMRC and had it all in his mind that he would run the club into administration in order to strip the club back, get rid of the debts owed and then sell the club on to one if his other companies and then overtime take the club back through some legal loophole. Look at what he has done with other companies, he's a man who steps into the helm of an ailing business, puts them into administration and then makes his money from it. I think he massively underestimated just how much public interest there would be in Rangers going into administration and the close scrutiny that would be put into it by all involved and all in the media. Rangers have massive assetts not to mention Ibrox Stadium that would be one of the very last things to be sold off to service debts not to mention that the main stand is a listed building which hikes up the value, even if the club is stripped back and left to the bare bones with the debt serviced Ibrox Stadium still remains an asset and that alone would give him his money back and more. it's no coinsidence that one of the administrators has had a seat in the directors box since Whyte took over and it would not shock me to find out that Whyte was seeking the services and advice from administrators from the minute he stepped foot into the club, from the outset of administration it is usually clear whether a club/business will survive and they came out within a matter of days and said that they see no reason why Rangers cannot continue on as a club now and for the future to come. Also it's not as easy to suddenly get administrators in to take up the case especially in the circumstances that came about on Tuesday with the HMRC calling it to the courts, this in my opinion also shows they have been there in the background ready to take up the administration as and when it happened. Yes the administrators are answerable to the courts but lets be clear about it, they are a business in their own rights and stand to make a tidy little amount from the administration of Rangers not to mention taking them out of it which will ultimately happen. The 'big case' with the HMRC is a bit of an unknown to all and the totals are not really known, I have read that the unpaid tax bill is £24m with about £12m interest added on then fines to be added on top of that decided by the courts but then that's only rough but where it looks favourable in certain ways for Rangers even if they lose the HMRC have came out and stated beore the administration that they would allow Rangers to make servicable payments to the debt to allow them to continue trading as a club, all of tyhis Whyte new but he has backed himself into a massive corner with what he has done since he took over the club and clealy any leway that the HMRC where willing to go to may now be severly strained. There are two people to ultimately blame for the problems that Rangers face, Sir David Murray and Craig Whyte - DM from the ridiculous bad management during his term and CW for the way he has run the club since he took over, one thing I would say in DMs defence is that he always maintained that he would only sell Rangers to who he believed was the best man that had the best interests of the club to heart but his hand was forced by the bank and he was made to sell up hence whyit went for £1 as CW took over the £18m debt. Rangers at the time were actually servicing that debt well and reducing it quite considerably monthly but not quick enough for the bank which now makes the whole situation even more ludicrous and so difficult to understand. It's no coincidence that he sacked half of the old board after taking over including a very influencial Martin Bain who is much reveared in what he does and steared Rangers almost single handidly for 3 years before CW took over. Was it that they knew exactly what CW was going to do or what he had in mind and didn't agree with it or didn't want part of it and threatened to blow the lid on his plans? No one knows but it all looks very very suspicious. I would not be surprised to see Martin Bain back at Rangers in some capacity after CW has moved on after the administration with a new board and owner in place because there is no way CW can continue in the capacity he has, not to mention the fact that he could soon be facing criminal charges should any wrong doing be discovered which looks ever inceasingly likely.

In the eyes of the law you are innocent until proven guilty. But he has not been proven innocent, the prosecution simply failed to prove he was guilty. He is therefore innocent. But that does not mean he didn't do what he was alleged to have done, and in saying that, that in turn does not mean I have any opinion on whether or not he did actually do what it was alleged he did. If this sounds as though this is all a bit of a grey area, I would say, no, it is a clear case of Black and white.

That is exactly what I said to my missus this morning when I geve her the dozen red roses - I'd much rather see the main body and not have those 2 stupid bits hanging out at the sides !!