Leaderboard

This fan rampage has been blown out of all proportion by the do gooders brigade. I don't condone violence or wanton vandalism but ffs, do we really want to go back to the BBC2 Old Grey Whistle Test days when Lynyrd Skynyrd were giving it their all, three guitars blazing and an audience of cultural viewers with beards and polo neck jumpers clapping politely whilst bolted to their eats.. I know which I prefer. However, keep the replies polite and wind yer neck in guys as some of the replies are getting personal.

One of the hallmarks of our club over the years has been patience. How often have players been prematurely punted by other clubs only to flourish in Inverness? Lest we forget the mediocrity of the likes of Billy Mckay, Graeme Shinnie or Barry Robson in their debut seasons for us. Give these new guys a chance. Players come into their own when they're settled, happy and feeling at home.

Good to hear he is well on the way to recovery. Hope he gets signed up soon as he has been a big miss this season.

Good informative article. I would love to see Aaron given a new contract and the opportunity to establish himself again as a first team regular.

It's not just related to these guys though. I genuinely believe that if we had made Shinnie a (damn good) offer in the summer of 2014 he would have signed it. That's not to say that we would have retained him but at least we would have gotten some cash for the guy had he moved on. Instead we didn't try and offer him a contract until the midway point of the season by which point his head was already being turned by what else was out there. Bottom line, if you want to try and keep your players and avoid other clubs coming in and nicking them for buttons try and start your contract talks a little bit earlier. Something ICT seldom seem to do.

Seemingly we're attempting to sign (presumably on a pre-contract) Mansfield Town's 6"5 defender Ryan Tafazolli. He was linked with Dundee United a couple of years back and came through the youth system at Southampton.

Ended 1-1 with Andrew Macrae scoring for us.

Has Hughes not been played mainly out of position for the majority of the appearances he's made? Harsh to judge a player on that.

I like Hughes. Didn't think he had much of a chance to do anything in the other games as there was nobody anywhere near him for him to knock the ball down to etc. And would like to see a bit more game time from Roberts...I wonder if he's still not fully fit?? Him and Mutumbo may be good value one year extensions? Their down time may keep them cheap enough....

No Charles I got the facts from here http://news.scotland.gov.uk/news/parliament-backs-2014-15-budget-8ff.aspx and here https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/464199/HMRC_disaggregated_receipts_-_Methodology_Note.pdf GERS is not a reflection of how Scotland would fare on its own. All figures within GERS reflect how Scotland is faring under a WM government.

People born in Scotland voted a majority Yes, as did the good people of Sneck, so I guess that makes us the majority.

Aaron Doran about his recovery : http://www.inverness-courier.co.uk/Sport/Football/Exclusive-I-went-silent-and-didnt-know-what-to-do-I-didnt-know-whether-or-not-to-cry-Aaron-Doran-opens-up-on-his-Caley-Thistle-injury-nightmare-24032016.htm.

Joe the young fans create a great atmosphere and long may it continue but surely you are not saying that the only way they can do this and enjoy themselves is to act like complete d***s!

It's a great shame that a thread that should be celebrating a welcome and comprehensive derby triumph has deteriorated into a debate about the conductof a few fans.

Starting on stewards- is that the same stewards who antagonised the situation by their over zealous heavy handed approach? The stewards behaviour was, I would suggest, like a red rag to a bull. Shouting at police - the same police that were hurriedly called to the section by the stewards who were fearing for their lives because some people were jumping and singing oh the humanity! The police that were then video-recording said singing and jumping. I'm sure they were politely asked to turn off their cameras........ A small pitch invasion....are you having a laugh!!!! One guy jumps over the barrier to celebrate a goal and it's a pitch invasion.....behave herself mun! and I agree, there is no place for foul mouthed hate filled chanting at a derby match......because that doesn't happen at a Dundee Derby or the old firm or Manchester or any London derby.....nope just those unacceptable ict fans..... and I witnessed a lot of pro ict songs. More than I ever did whilst sitting in the main stand at TCS, now....if this is what you want from football then you crack on. in fact, the 'support' that I have witnessed while sitting in the main stand at TCS is far more derogatory to the club than anything that happened through in Dingwall. Sitting in silence, only breaking that silence to deride every single pass and decision by every player and the management, whilst simultaneously tutting that the opposition never make a mistake and are just perfect.....the players hear it and pick up on it! the atmosphere on Saturday was described as fantastic and electric by the Beeb....this was of course as a result of the tremendous support of the two teams by everyone in the ground, except for those in section d.......because they were just childish hooligans! FANS NOT CRIMINALS

The young fans have brought a great new dimension to our games both home and away recently with their noise and colour which I am sure is noticed and greatly appreciated by the team and the vast majority of the rest of the fans. It would be a great pity of that positive image they have generated for both themselves and the club were to be tarnished by immature and criminal activity by the few apparently endorsed by some misguided posters on this site.

Sounds like we're going back to the darkest days of hooliganism in the 80s. Folk used to complain how quiet our fans were. I'd be interested to know how many seats were actually broken. And if some of our fans were so out of order, why weren't there complaints from County? Why didn't the police/stewards take some action? Personally I think it's great that we've now got a loud, vocal, enthusiastic group of younger fans. Fk me, those complaining should try attending something like a Spurs/West Ham game, like I did earlier this season. They'd walk out in disgust after 5 minutes!!

The team needs good vocal support and I don't think there is anybody who doesn't think the increased vocal support from the youngsters recently is great. But there is a world of difference between supporting your club by making a lot of noise, and harming your club by behaving in a way which might involve the police and which might result in the SFA taking sanctions against the club. You're smart enough to know what the difference is, so please continue to support the team by making a lot of noise - but just leave it at that.

Maybe they were not seen as good enough. Why make offers if we don't really need them. Players come, players go. New season same ****. It's nothing new.

Disappointed that they are going? Yes, but but inevitable I fear. Devastated that they are going? No, Vincent will always have a place in our hearts for his winner at Hampden. But he has hardly played since through injury. Williams I think is a 'nearly man'. Decent player but never quite made a position 'his own' so that it became impossible for Yogi to leave him on the bench. Edit Don't know why Rig's blank quote appeared. I didn't intend to quote anybody!

They are far from our best players. Injury prone and bit part player.

Dismissing those with which you disagree, over 50% of the population very many of whom are sophisticated, well informed, intelligent and educated as 'cerebrally disadvantaged' is no substitute for debate. With the coming of additional powers, these are the most important Holyrood elections ever likely to have a significant impact on the course the country takes over the next five years and beyond. I get the impression that, despite much evidence to the contrary, you yourself are not altogether unintelligent. Are you going to seriously engage in this debate in any meaningful way or merely stick to your usual diatribes in the absence of any coherent argument to back up your position ?

Mr Bannerman, the only person banging on about the 70s is you....when you are not banging on about the 18th century....

Not me who is looking down my nose at our fans my friend as it appears anyone who disagrees with you is not entitled to say so. Didn't say anything about people being hurt or if seats were broken but if fans are behaving in an unseemly manner, even if only a minority, it can reflect on the club and perhaps discourage people from attending which is the opposite of what we both want.Being of a generation who have sung and shouted at football matches for over 40 years, I am happy to sing and support my team but will not sing along with certain songs if I think they are offensive. Enough said by me on this topic now.

I can assure you that my motivation is not tribalism. I'll leave that to the SNP whilst I will continue to argue for a a greater level of working together for the common good. Neither am I gung ho for tax rises; it is just that I feel we have reached a point that we need to put more money into public services and there is no other sensible way of doing this. Let's go back a few years to when Blair first got elected. He inherited one of those rare things in British politics - a budget surplus. At that time Gordon Brown was renowned for his prudence, and whilst we moved into deficit in the next few years, it was nothing serious. Then 2 things happened. Firstly, Brown, having become PM decided he wanted to be popular rather than prudent and, with the help of Alistair Darling, significantly increased public spending. No sooner had they done that than the recession arrived. This caused expenditure to rise further with people losing jobs and needing welfare and bank bail outs etc. Meanwhile income from taxes of all sorts dropped and the deficit (the difference between the government's spending and its income) rocketed from just under £10bn at end of March 2008 to £103bn in 2010. In May of that year the Tories came into power in coalition with the Lib Dems and clearly faced a very serious crisis. If deficit is funded by borrowing this in turn increases the level of the national debt. In turn, higher levels of debt increase the interest payments and further squeezes what you can do with the income you get. They had to contain the level of public spending whilst taking measures to encourage business to grow in order to create jobs and get the economy growing again. Whilst there is much I don't like about the Tories, the fact is that, with some reservations, they handled the crisis pretty well. We are now one of the fastest growing economies in the world, employment levels have never been higher and they have halved the level of the deficit with it forecast to move into surplus (in the UK) in around 2020. The SNP, of course, have railed against the austerity measures and claimed we should have borrowed more to invest in public services and created jobs there. They know fine that all that would have achieved would be to increase the deficit and the debt even more because we need jobs which earn the country money. But it was easy to say because there was no chance they would be in a position to address the problems. In this way the SNP have been able to sit back and let the Tories get the economy back on track again whilst at the same time blaming them for any perceived hardship and getting a nation to hate them . That's pretty cynical, but what makes it worse is that in all this time the SNP have had it in their power to ease the pressure on public services by increasing Council Tax - even if only in line with inflation - and they have chosen not to do so. Not surprisingly, Education and Social Services amongst others have been squeezed and people have suffered as a result. They blame the Tories but that is SNP austerity pure and simple. Looking at the debate yesterday I cringe every time I see Sturgeon spit out those 2 words "Tory austerity". She spits the words out as though all Tories were child molesters, and yet it is the Tory policies which have, albeit with some pain, got the country's economy back on a sounder footing. The irony is that should Scotland vote to become independent in the next few years, thanks to the Tories, the Scottish economy is in a far better shape to go it alone than had we attempted to borrow our way out of recession as the SNP and the loony left of the Labour party wanted. But make no mistake, whilst the UK economy is steadily eroding it's deficit, the Scottish Budget deficit is growing. The Scottish economy may be much better off than had we tried to borrow our way out of recession, but according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies the deficit per head in Scotland is 3 times the level it is in the UK as a whole. In other words, the budget deficit in Scotland per head of population is currently higher than it was in the UK as a whole at the height of the recession. It is expected to rise to over £12bn when the UK as a whole moves into surplus. There is a huge black hole in the Scottish economy and it is about time the SNP Government took some responsibility for it rather than blaming the Tories all the time. This is why there is a need to put up taxes. It is either that or cutting public spending. With the new devolved powers it's becoming harder for the SNP to avoid taking responsibility, Yesterday's debate was interesting in that Sturgeon's tactic was a continuation of saying what is most popular on every issue. So she will increase welfare payments, invest more in education, the NHS and alternative energy but yet won't increase income tax. Interestingly, her policy of not increasing income tax is going to raise an additional £2bn! It just doesn't add up and I would expect the other parties to become increasingly effective at showing the public what frauds the SNP are. Unfortunately, the SNP's failure to act is in keeping with their usual cynical manipulative strategy. The excuses are being trotted out already. They say that if the better off are taxed more then they'll put their money elsewhere or leave the country - well, if that's the case and they are not going to use the powers, why didn't they think of that before they asked for them? They will now expect the UK Government to bale them out and when they don't, they will bleat on about it all being the Tories fault. They will point to the fact that we only have one Tory MP and Scotland doesn't get the Government it votes for. And they will use this to fan the flames of independence again. What's best for the Scottish people does not come into it.

OK, maybe I didn't explain this to Alex as thoroughly as it seems I needed to earlier this afternoon, so I'll try again now, and a bit more meticulously. His first quoted link does indeed seem to say that the Scottish Government does get £35bn a year to run health, education, police and all the other things it so conspicuously mismanages - ie the Devolved Functions. And yes, his second quoted link does seem to say that Scotland contributes a touch over £40bn a year to the UK exchequer. Now it's here that I would normally get to the "and your point is?" stage, because here we have two figures which do not actually relate to each other. This ithe the crucial element here, but what I think Alex is trying to make us believe here is that because 40odd is a bigger number than 35, then we are subsidising the rest of the UK. Simples!!!! However what he is trying to do is to establish the difference between 35 apples and 40 oranges which is as good an example as I have seen of a great big non sequitur. Unfortunately these are the kind of simplistic non sequiturs with which the SNP have been conning the gullible for decades. Indeed, Scotland does contribute £40bn+ to the UK Exchequer (including Grand Theft Auto revenues!), but that's not only to cover the £35bn it gets back to fund devolved functions, it also includes Scotland's contribution to non-devolved UK-wide functions such as defence, foreign policy, pre-Smith welfare and pension matters etc etc. All of these cost a lot of money and while the Gers figures aren't a precise and categorical expression of the net difference, the magnitude of what they say still indicates that when you take into account ALL the things, devolved and reserved, that we benefit from as UK citizens, then up here we are being subsidised pretty generously by the rest of the UK. As things stand, that amounts to a Scottish DEFICIT of £15bn which is an eyewatering % of GDP.... as opposed to the £5+bn (40odd - 35) surplus that Alex seems to be trying to con us into believing. Alex also tells us that Gers applies to Scotland as part of the UK as opposed to a separate entity. Here I do really have to ask "and your point is?" For a start, Alex seems to assume that all Scotland would need to do post-separation would be to wave that big saltire-tipped magic wand and that deficit of Zimbabwean proportions would simply disappear just because we're doing things "the Scottish way". This obviously makes the assumption that things must get better post-separation. Again, what justification does he have for this apparent assertion? How does he not know that things would not get much WORSE? After all, the way the currently devolved powers have been administered to date (and not only by the SNP) has been far from impressive, so God help us if we also have the Big Ticket items to deal with. So in summary.. yes £35bn to run devolved powers and yes £40odd bn in tax revenue - but these two numbers simply aren't comparable and when you add in the cost of all the other reserved functions Alex has (conveniently?) failed to mention, then we do have that multi-billion Big Black Hole. Sorry if this seems a bit lengthy whilst coming over as pretty obvious to many, but needs must.....

They can be in favour of what they want, but having been firmly told to take a hike in 2014 it would be really nice if this divisive rabble would desist from boring the backside off the majority of us about this pathetic, parochial sideshow. On the other hand I can see that they are getting desperate in case time runs out on them. After all, the very same global trend of "angry politics" which is contributing to support for nutters like Trump and Corbyn, the resurgent German right wing and that "Chorizo" party in Greece whose grasp of economics is about as loopy as the SNP's is also currently boosting crank organisations like the SNP. Things will move on though. They always do. They therefore need to get their second referendum before sanity and reality return to world politics. But should they get one and win it, when can we expect a third one once the economic realities sink in of half price oil, no Barnet Formula, the problems of being semi detached to a competitive non-EU neighbour with an economy 11 times as big and the departure there of high achieving high earners who will hence no longer be subsidising the lifestyles of the group which predominantly voted for separation?

Whilst obviously warmly welcoming this, I am also reminded of the rogue poll which prompted the completely unnecessary "vow" which led to powers which the SNP now seem too scared to use - a literal case of inability to put their money where their rather large mouth is. I would therefore like to see more of the same - or better! But it does seem to me that the days worldwide of the lunatic fringe invading the mainstream may be numbered - although I'm not sure if this will happen early enough to prevent more expenses-hunting undesirable, brainless apparatchiks being elected as Holyrood lobbyfodder, or indeed The Donald becoming the next US President.

Power to the peepullll Wolfie Smith/ Comrade Stan! New black beret for the next Caledonian Socialist Workers' Congress, maybe? Your problem is that in a democracy, as opposed to the former Soviet Union etc, if the loony lefties get into power all the cash and money-making expertise will clear off elsewhere. So in the event of the nightmare scenario of a Scottish Yesserendum, in addition to the oil going t!tsup and possibly having a half arsed EU newcomer attached to a competitive and much larger non-EU sterling economy, you will also find that many of the NO voting benefit subsidisers will go elsewhere, leaving the yes voting benefit dependers to whistle for their public subsidies.

Stan's aphorisms in defence of the grievance dogma would do credit to theThoughts Of Chairman Mao. And I wonder when his train is due to arrive at the Finland Station? However I don't think he's going to convince the large number of people who no longer live in council schemes, wearing hand-me-downs and their parents only able to get to work on a bike. And after all this progress has been made, you find Sturgeon and Salmond asking us to pee it all against the wall by voting yes.

So how many people did they actually ask in the Gelluns the night after the referendum to "confirm" their "majority" in Inverness? I must have missed the pollsters there when I popped in that night to sample the "atmosphere" and order my pints of Schadenfreude and Scottish Bitter. The link to the Record is alarmingly light on how rigorous the analysis referred to there may or may not be. That it's by "Edinburgh University" isn't necessarily an endorsement and I'd also be interested to know how the claimed number for the Inverness subdivision of the Highland count was really established. Even if it wasn't in the Gelluns it was presumably from some poll or other but again, given how wrong even the "professional" pollsters can be, it would be interesting to see how reliable this is in its claim that Inverness is so far out of step with the rest of the Highlands. But in any case, the SNP decided to have that referendum, they set the rules.... and they lost. And given the number of Christian Allards and Tasmina Ahmed Sheiks that are around, it would be difficult for them to complain about non-natives. But, perhaps to return to the upcoming Holyrood elections, these assertions of dubious provenance about who voted where in the referendum simply join the lengthening "Alex MacLeod" queue of GTA, 20 tonners on the Forth Road Bridge, resilient oil prices and the Scottish economy being in surplus to illustrate the extent to which peddling unsubstantiated and downright erroneous assertions has simply become a nationalist way of life. It certainly doesn't say much for the level of critical thought that goes into voting Yessenpee. So, despite the SNP's woeful administrative record and recent cataclysmic economic data, their ballot fodder will, for the moment, still uncritically put their crosses in that box - until the bawbee drops. I don't believe that stage is too far away but, given the woeful state of the other parties, there is little doubt about the outcome on May 5th.

There is simply no way of knowing how the populace of Inverness voted. There are no stats for that - it's pure speculation and now, utterly irrelevant. Twitter or Facebook utterances as 'fact' don't change that. The boxes of voters' papers in Highland were not regionalised and so no official number can be allocated to each area. To sate that 'Inverness' voted YES is neither correct nor incorrect - it's simply unknown. Where has this 'Inverness YES' assumption come from? Indeed, what's the official 'definition' of Inverness? Where are the boundaries? Do we count North Kessock, Balloch, Culloden? Croy? Tomatin? Where do you 'literally' draw-the-line? Far too many unknowns. It's like saying that the folk in Scorguie voted x, Dalneigh voted x, Hilton voted x, Lochardil voted x....where are the cut-offs? But...enough of this Inverness voted 'YES' nonsense. It's completely unfounded. I've never seen an official source for it...and I never will! Highland's votes were counted as a Region. NO official breakdown of areas was made. Inverness may have voted YES or may have voted NO. To claim either way is absurd. We just don't know! What we do know is that Highland voted NO and Scotland voted NO.