Leaderboard

And that's the catch 22. The club will not set "achievable targets" with some random person behind an internet pseudonym, even if that person decided that they would longer be anonymous. So that begs the question on just who could get them to sit down and set some targets. Whether you like/dislike, trust/distrust the ST or anyone on the board (as is your right), it doesn't really change the fact that this is the most likely body with a chance to galvanise support from a wide spectrum and unite fans to get something done and hold the feet of those who are currently unaccountable and increasingly aloof, to the fire. The Trust could identify and discuss Specific, Measurable, and Attainable items from the survey or other feedback that are Relevant to the support and agree a Timeline with the club to hit certain milestones or benchmarks. Thats S.M.A.R.T. If the same body can increase membership and voting share whilst doing this, then they do become more and more "strong and relevant" and let's face it, they stand more chance of that than any of us do as individuals (unless someone has an Uncle Roy sized wallet?). If people have an issue with giving the current board of the Trust this responsibility, then as has been mentioned already, anyone is free to stand/serve or influence the policy through participation. However, it's like every other volunteer body ICT has ever had, it's not hard to get on the committee, because not enough people are willing to get involved ... it is harder to get off the committee. I was on the predecessor of this back in the early 2000s. I had to emigrate for my resignation to be accepted [joke - mostly] On a personal level, I am going to break my own online rules and use credit card to join since I can't use alternate payment options and will be happy to proxy my tiny shareholding to them should they want this for future meetings. I personally will also hold the Trust accountable in their own right using the same 'SMART' process. If they set goals with the club, then i would expect them to do their darndest to achieve those goals, and if they don't then I may choose not to renew membership and/or revoke my proxy. The aim here is to get the club listening and pointing in the right direction again, and however we can get that done is great. If anyone has other suggestions or better plans or simply doesn't want to place any faith in the trust, that is your right and I respect that. When it comes down to it, we are all ICT fans, and we all want what's best for the club and that is for us to be heading up the table not down, playing good football, and being fiscally responsible off the pitch while also having a social conscience and community focus. We have lost a lot of that in the last few years so getting some of that back would soon begin to turn the tide.

Ayr Away Matchday two will see us head to Somerset Park Ayr for a tough game against the Honest Men. It's a standard 3:00pm kick-off and both clubs will be looking for better results after drawing blanks in the opening day fixtures when Ayr went down 3-1 at Morton and we lost 2-1 at the Caledonian Stadium to Queens Park. Like us, Ayr have brought in five new faces for this campaign and lost some familiar faces. Notable outs are the Championship's top scorer Dipo Akinyemi who has gone to York City and long time servant Michael Moffat who spent eleven years over two spells at Somerset Park scoring 77 goals in 263 appearances. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Match /Ticket/Bus Info (£20) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Ayr United have advised that there will be no cash gates in operation and tickets must be purchased online. ICT supporters can purchase tickets HERE (West Stand only) Adult – £22 Concession – £15 (Over 65s and Students) Juvenile – £15 (13-17-years-old) Child – £6 (Under 13s) Venue - H2H v Ayr United Pld Won Drn Lst For Agst + / - Home 24 10 11 3 39 26 +13 Away 25 12 6 7 47 31 +16 Neutral 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 49 22 17 10 86 57 +29 Last seasons Competitive Meetings: Ayr finished 2nd last season, we finished 6th. 1 - 2 (H) 2 - 1 (A) 2 - 2 (H) 1 - 0 (A) Two away wins last season but the final game ended our interest in promotion: The final game of the regular season would decide who went into the play-offs and who ended their league campaign now. It couldn't be tighter across the Championship on Winner Takes All Weekend. David Carson was a surprise omission from the starting XI after his Cup suspension with Wallace Duffy retaining his place at right back. Billy Mckay was hoping to be a record breaker as he searched for his 101st goal for the Caley Jags. Only a win would be good enough for Inverness who could finish third or sixth, depending on results elsewhere. A win would end speculation and put Inverness in the play-offs. As it turned out we ended the season in sixth place and Ayr, Queen's Park and Partick Thistle will battle it out in the play-offs for a Premiership place alongside Champions Dundee. Ayr United never read the script properly and deservedly took the plaudits in a 2-1 win at the Caledonian Stadium. A first half goal from Josh Mullin who looked close to being offside and Nathan Shaw in a crowded box with ten minutes left looked to be enough for the Honest Men. However Mark McKenzie ensured it would be Ayr's night with an 88th minute strike to shatter our hopes after such a strong finish to the season. Alas we fell at the last hurdle and now have a month to wait for a Scottish Cup Final appearance. SATURDAY 12th AUGUST 3:00pm Airdrie v Partick Ayr United v Inverness CT Dundee Utd v Dunfermline Queen's Pk v Arbroath FC Raith v Morton Team News Inverness CT will be without Roddy MacGregor and Lewis Nicolson for the first few months with knee injuries. Sean Welsh has a groin injury and will miss out again. Adam Brooks missed the Queens Park game whilst Danny Devine remained on the bench after injury. New sensation Keith Bray has a bright future ahead of him and will be difficult to keep out of the starting XI given his performances off the bench recently and Billy Mckay will be eager to add to his record breaking exploits at Inverness. We have frailties in defence and errors are costing us big time at the moment so we'll have to see if Billy Dodds will address those issues as rumours abound on new recruits. Ayr United have done some shrewd business in the summer, Aiden McGeady and Jamie Murphy signing on, but have also lost some quality; Akinyemi, Moffat, Mullin and keeper McAdams departing. McAllister and Murdoch both took knocks at Cappielow but are hopeful making the squad. Here's Lee Bullen with the Billy Dodds script after the game at Morton:- Ins & Outs @ Ayr In: Jamie Murphy, forward (St Johnstone); George Stanger, defender (Alloa Athletic); Olly Pendlebury, midfielder (Aldershot Town); Francis Amartey, forward (Aldershot Town); Robbie Mutch, goalkeeper (Edinburgh). Loan in: Elicha Ahui, defender (Lincoln City). Out: Dipo Akinyemi, forward (York City, undisclosed); Daire O'Connor, midfielder (Glentoran); Josh Mullin, midfielder (Raith Rovers); Jordan Houston, defender (Queen of the South); Michael Hewitt, midfielder (Hamilton Academical); James Dolan, midfielder (Stranraer); Kinlay Bilham, defender (Stenhousemuir); Michael Moffat, forward (Glenafton Athletic, loan to permanent); Jayden Mitchell-Lawson, midfielder; Chris Maguire, forward; Aidan McAdams, goalkeeper; Alex Jeanes, defender and David Bangala has also left the club, he had been on loan at Cove Rangers. Loan ended: Alex Kirk, defender (Arsenal); Reece McAlear, midfielder (Tranmere Rovers). Loan out: Lyall Holding, defender (Glenafton Athletic). Ayr United team in 3-1 defeat at Cappielow: Albinson McAllister (Ahui 45) Musonda McGinty Reading Amartey (Rose 70) Dempsey Murdoch (Pendelbury 40) Murphy McKenzie (Ashford 81) Bryden (McGeady 70) Subs not used: Mutch; Smith, Ecrepont, Tomlinson.

Hope that works or you'll be needing to change yer name to ohno!

Too much treasoning

no idea no idea no idea From a personal point of view, I think most people would notice any improvements just as we see the opposite right now. For me, if I see incremental improvements based on changing behaviour (rather than one-offs), signs that we are moving in the right direction, then that might start to satisfy 1 & 2 for me. For others, what they want to see may be different. In some ways, that's where the survey comes into play. It's a representative document with a broad cross section of respondents so if the club want to sit down with the ST and discuss how things can improve and set "SMART" goals then I am fine with that. Plan 'B' no idea, but I hope no-one really has to look to that as that would indicate the club are continuing to ignore the very real concerns of their shareholders. I always remember this (or similar) graphic from a training session decades ago where I was encouraged to set realistic and measurable goals - I try to stick to that to this day ....

I’ll leave the last word with you! Too much reasoning for me!! bc

Three of our youngsters have signed two year deals: Sam Nixon, Calum MacLeod and Jack Walker: https://ictfc.com/three-ictfc-academy-graduates-sign-deals/ Nixon appeared as a trialist off the bench in the Elgin friendly.

ICT @ 3.75

Noting that the concert company was also a separate entity from the club, that’s a screeching u-turn you’ve made on the club being responsible for separate but connected entities!

If that quote from the club is correct and completely in context, then it is worrying. I am guessing it came from the CEO as it sounds like the kind of verbiage he has used in the past. If so, then exactly what does this employee of the club, which is owned by its underlying shareholders define as a "strong and relevant" group? If we assume that the season ticket base is somewhere between 1000 and 2000 as often quoted, then is the definition of "strong" or "relevant" 10% 20% or 50% of that number? Who has arbitrarily decided the level or does it vary depending on how accountable you choose to be? Does an organisation with 200 paid members and a minimum 10% voting right in the organisation for which this employee works cut it? no? 500 members with the same 10% right? If so why the delineation based on number rather than voting share? We (CTO) have - on average - 5000 unique 'real people' per month visiting the site when you exclude anonymous visits, bots, search engines etc. Are we strong or relevant? or, as has been levied at us in the past are we just a bunch of whingeing naysayers in the eyes of some folks and happy clappers in the eyes of others? Are sizeable numbers of Twitter and Facebook users relevant even though not organised into a single cohesive group? Social media postings, even on an individual basis if strong enough can often cause policy changes in even the biggest companies. What about Podcast listeners? or Travel Club members? or section 94? all of whom seem to be relevant to the club sometimes and not others. Bottom line is that when enough people from all of these disparate 'groups' are unhappy about the situation then the powers that be should really take notice. Whether you are a proponent of the Trust or see issue with it, it doesnt really matter, the reality is that the survey is an excellent document and one that the club would be ludicrously stupid to ignore or write off just because it says what they don't want to hear. The highlighted bit is the money shot here IMHO. We have been through all of the highs and lows together and for most of it we showed "TogetherNESS" as the old cliche went ... but sometimes during our 29-year history, we have gone it alone with the support and club badly misaligned. These have typically been the deepest lows and the club at those times has become more and more insular thinking it protects itself if it does not communicate. This is the worst I have seen communication in my memory and to be sure, it does NOTHING to protect the club, just alienates more and more people. For fans to not even get a reply from the SLO or when fans send generic emails with zero controversy and those are still ignored, is unacceptable and if we were ever to aim for the premiership again, this would also pose a problem for achieving UEFA club licensing for the top division. Its not that hard. You start with the small stuff. reply to emails and engage the support. Perhaps one day you can graduate to multiple paragraphs or regular communications? ^ this % You are entitled to your opinion, but I can't really agree with this. Over the last 29 years there have been various incarnations of official supporters' organisations with varying names. The commonality between them is that they were always run by unpaid volunteers, who have the club in their heart. Is it the same group of people? yes, quite frequently its the same names in the frame every year, but that's because these are often the only ones stepping up. Do those people become jaded after a while? absolutely - talking from experience on that one. You can only bang your head against a brick wall so often. In the case of specific individuals you mention, yes, they did a good/great job of engagement either while volunteers or in some cases while in the employ of the club, but I think in those cases life happened with job changes, moving houses etc. or they also banged heads against brick walls, so they no longer actively participate. Again, you are entitled to show your displeasure how you want, and it is perhaps wrong of me to comment in either direction given that, other than the player sponsorship (for last season, or for the season just started) which we have heard nothing about since the end of the season, I have very little commercial interaction with the club or local businesses except when visiting. Wholeheartedly agree about the concert debacle and to this day I wonder why they never looked to talk with (or perhaps they did?) someone like Les Kidger or Kenny Cameron who had previously run successful concerts either at the stadium, as a (CK Events) partnership, or on their own. indeed. All seems very unsustainable. Think it has pretty much been like that for a few years hasn't it? Getting to that point too. For me, one of the best (worst) examples of where we wasted money we didn't need to, was Pixellot or whatever it was called. Through the years with volunteers like Don and Andy and others ICT built a pretty good (dare I say award winning) social and broadcast media team, but it seems that this was not really good enough for some as volunteers are (and to an extent always have been) viewed with suspicion at ICT. "What are you after?", "Why are you doing this?", "What's in it for you?". Some people can't grasp that volunteers can simply be in it because they want what's best for their club and are willing to put in time or services if they cant pour in hard cash. In the end we chose to replace that perfectly good arrangement of Andy doing the excellent camera and editing work with a baldy headed social media moment that still does the rounds on social media and not in a good way. Why did we do it? Was it because the perfectly good system in place needed replacing? or was it more to do with it not being an idea that came from a specific source? That ethos is a sure recipe for failure and its painful to watch.

Gringo Ayr Utd @ 1.85 shite odds but if Dodds can't get us at least a point here, I can.

One thing the Trust exhibits which the Club does not is a democratically elected Board. If you and other fans are unhappy with the current Trust Board, you and they are free to join the Trust, put yourselves up for election and/or vote for others who would also like to see a change. By voting with your feet, you are, in effect, voting for a continuation of the very thing you are complaining about. The fact is, that the 6 current members of the Trust Board are the only supporters of this Club who currently demonstrate the willingness to take on the responsibility and accountability that being on the Trust Board entails. They have also ensured that the Supporters Trust together with the 10% voting right in the Club on behalf of supporters continues to exist. But the future direction and success of the Trust is not going to be dictated by the current Board members, it will be dictated by the views and the numbers of those fans who join the Trust and express their views through it. If some fans don't want to be part of a collective voice, that's up to them. The Trust Board is also more accessible than the Club. They have a desk in the Sports Bar and members of the Trust Board are present there before most home matches and are available for anybody who wants to have a chat. In addition if you email the Trust, you are likely to get a response – unlike sending an email to the Clubs SLO address. If you feel that a change campaign is the best way forward, then the best way for that to be successful must be for it to be done through the Supporters Trust. If enough people want a change campaign, there will be enough people to make that the strategy of the Trust. As I said above, the Trust is a democratic supporters body and as such, any campaign will be far more successful as part of the Trust strategy than as a separate group working against the wishes of the recognised democratic supporters body. Having a campaign quite separate from the wishes of the Trust would be playing into the hands of certain people in the Club who are quite happy to encourage a divide and rule situation. As supporters, we need to be as united as possible in order to engage constructively with the club in addressing the concerns of supporters. The Matchday survey could be a changing point in the Club's attitude. It was encouraging that in the P&J article, the Club was quoted as saying that the 300 or so fans who completed the survey should be seen as a reasonable cross-section. We need to build on this. If the club is sincere in this view, then they will take the results of the survey more seriously. This is why it is so important for more people to join the Trust so that Trust membership is at a level of at least the number who completed the survey. Clearly, the more members the Trust has, the more representative it becomes and the harder it will be for the club to ignore. The survey therefore represents the best opportunity fans have had for many a year to get the Club to engage constructively in addressing fans' concerns. To be successful, it really is important that Trust membership increases significantly and that a good few more folk show a willingness to get actively involved in supporting the expressed views of the fans. Of course, the club might just decide to ignore the Trust and the fans they represent, but it makes sense to give them every opportunity to engage. If they choose not to, then it may well be that the kind of active protest campaign that Big Cherly advocates would begin to find more favour and could become the Trusts strategy too. Either way success is far more likely if campaigns are the strategy of a recognised supporters body and led by democratically elected fans representatives.

For me, I think the best option - whether some agree with the organisation and its current leadership or not - is to make the Supporters' Trust "strong and relevant". Call out that statement for the BS it is!! An inbuilt voting share of 10% plus the potential to have other supporters to perhaps proxy their personal shareholdings to the Trust may be the quickest and possibly most effective way to have a voice heard. I hear the arguments made, and everyone is entitled to their opinion, but for those who decry the lack of communication from the club, then the Supporters Trust is at least communicating on here in this forum, and has been reasonably often, as well as the subforum they asked us to setup (https://caleythistleonline.com/forum/152-supporters-trust/) and it should be noted that they also just setup their own feedback forum on the back of the report: https://www.ictsupporterstrust.org/forum Only issue I have is I don't use credit card for personal online purchases and there does not appear to be a PayPal or alternate payment option otherwise I would be reporting now that I have joined already because the 'strong and relevant' comment has tipped the scales for me.