Leaderboard

It's pretty clear where this is heading and how this will ultimately impact the club's viability moving forward. Another example of the council's complete indifference to the club which, despite our current paltry crowds, remains the largest community supported organisation in the city. You've got to laugh at the loss of green space argument which seems to be the crux of the matter. I left Inverness 30 odd years ago and in the intervening period the city has probably doubled in size with barely an improvement in community facilities and the loss of massive tracts of green space for housing, retail, etc. Yet this particular scheme has the planning committee's knickers in a twist like no other in living memory. I find this latest U-turn very strange, bordering on the highly dodgy. Councillor Oldham's "barely quorate" comment is bizarre. It either is or isn't, it's akin to suggesting someone's barely pregnant. Absolute ludicrous and clearly a man with an agenda. Alas, another entirely predictable omnishambles which drags the club's name and the city's credibility through the mud.

ICTFC is NOT a community organisation, they undertake zero community activity and despite their claims in the most recent rant, they have almost zero fan engagement. They can't even organise a kids Christmas party. I said we were a "community supported organisation", as in which other organisation in Inverness generates the numbers through the door? Which other organisation has generated the level of publicity for the city and visitor spin offs? There were rather a lot of Hibs fans in town last week spending money in bars, restaurants, hotels, etc. Not sure any other organisation in the city can say the same. ICT Community Trust is a seperate, self funded, self staffed and independently operated organisation. It is they who do the community work the club are taking credit for. As per almost every other professional club in Scotland. It's done to facilitate funding which we wouldn't be able to access under the auspices of the club, as I'm sure you're well aware. To say it's wholly separate/unrelated entity from ICTFC entity is disingenuous in the extreme. Likewise with the ICT Women. Given how the club has operated the last few years, it clear that they have taken way more from the community than they have given, and until we know the figures we can't know how much, if anything, might find it's way to good causes. We're only taking the word of people who have shown time and again that their word is worthless. What exactly has the club taken? We were forced into a merger by the INE and have done nothing but raise the profile of the city ever since. It baffles me that people think that football clubs should be allowed to just hoover up and **** away money as they please. Any other business wouldn't last 2 minutes if they operated in this manner. Access road aside, how exactly have we hoovered up public money, please enlighten me. The council planning committee aren't doing much for their image, but given the circumstances I think it's right that this goes to full council. Full council should also be kicking the ass of the planning dept. As someone who has clearly fallen out of love with the club your views on this seem extremely jaundiced. To be crystal clear I'm no fan of the CEO or the general stewardship of the club in recent years but it's my club, I travel all over the country following the team and I would prefer that we don't end up part-time or out of business. I'd rather we didn't have to rely on a Battery Farm planning approval to keep us afloat but if that's what it takes then so be it. Reading your posts it would seem that your game plan is to stand over the corpse of the club telling us you told us it'll all end in tears. This seems a decidedly odd stance to adopt for someone who claims to be a fan of the club - different strokes for different folks, I guess. The shortcomings of the current custodians of the club are evident to all but the happiest of happy clappers. Personally I'll hold my nose and swallow the battery farm medicine until such time as a credible alternative materialises. My comments on the green belt subsist, to use this as grounds for rejection in Inverness, a city which has allowed rampant development on the green belt for the benefit of a small number of wealthy individuals and private companies, with almost zero community benefit, is frankly laughable. It should never have gone to a vote once they realised only 5 were eligible to do so and should have been redirected to full council at that stage. The meeting may have been quorate, but 5 people should never have been considered representative. If the Council can't get their act together to muster then that's their problem. Quorate is quorate, move on. It's as if the planning committee and club are having a competition to see who is the least competent. Not going to argue with you there.

It is a sad sign of the times that the sheer stupidity of the Chair and Vice Chair of the planning committee does not surprise me. It is of course appropriate, that Councillors with a relevant interest in a scheme declare that interest. But how many of the committee members actually have a relevant interest in ICT? Going to watch them from time to time is hardly a relevant interest. What next? Will these numpties be arguing that no councillor should be allowed to vote on any housing proposal due to a “relevant interest” of being generally supportive of building more homes to alleviate the housing crisis? As for complaining that more Inverness based Councillors didn’t vote, words fail me. What on Earth did they expect if they come up with such spurious examples of “relevant interests” which are obviously going to prevent Inverness councillors from voting! And what don’t they understand about what a quorum is? A meeting is either quorate or it isn’t. If it is, then the vote is perfectly valid under the rules of the organisation.

No no no... All they need to do (ICT) is build a wee play park near the battery storage facility - sorted!

Possibly, but they need to start the process without undue delay as it could take months to identify who might be preparedto break the news to him

No it isn't. There are numerous examples across the UK in the past two years of battery storage developments being permitted on green belt land as decision makers have realised that the threat of climate change is more important than an arbitrary green belt/open space designation.

You have to give the councillors a bit of slack for not turning up as there was a bit of snow on the ground.

Pursuing other sources of income is fine, it's this thing with whoring out the clubs name and reputation to the highest bidder and greedy projects that's unacceptable. They could have rented the stadium to an experienced concert operator and taken a nice wee rental income every year. Instead they go all Johnny Big Baws, attach the club name to an unaffiliated (yeah right!) company, **** it up, and are now unlikely to see any promoter come near us in future. Not to mention the reputational damage and money lost by local companies. If the battery storage was such a winner, then it could have been done by ILI without need to attach the club name and they then make a major donation, or do a big sponsorship deal to pass on the proceeds. The developers knew it would need the 'community benefit' leverage to have any chance, so the club are all over it like a cheap suit and the clubs name, reputation and.possibly even it's existence, are again on the line. Meanwhile, the club have totally taken the eye off the ball with fan engagement, matchday experience, and the product on the park. There's **** all for fans to be proud of when it comes to Caley Thistle at the moment.

Highland Council covering themselves in glory yet again. If I understand it correctly certain people were asked to recuse themselves due to potentially having a conflict of interest (e.g. having been to a match in the home end). The council are now calling it in due to not enough inverness people voting. Pretty shambolic and bordering on shady. Regardless, I'm utterly fed up of our chairman and CEO and these projects. I wish they would just concentrate on the nuts and bolts of running a football club rather than than these expensive and time consuming schemes. The concert company was a fiasco and this is potentially heading the same way.

As opposed to house builders who build houses by the hundred on Any Green field site they find without much opposition from planning. And.. leave a token gesture of a 100 sq ft playpark.

Planning policy is also that you don't build on green space, and you certainly don't put industrial use on green spaces.

I don’t disagree that there are bread and butter things like that that we need to do much better, but what’s the upside from those things? It’s a 5 figure sum, when we need to survive is a 7 figure sum like the gain from the battery project (hopefully).

Correct. However, this means building good relationships with local businesses to secure additional commercial income or benefits. Not shafting them with side projects that go bust leaving them out of pocket. It means looking into membership schemes, hiring out of facilities on a more regular business - the nuts and bolts of running a football club. It is not pursuing risky projects which take money and time. Projects which are diverting time and resource of people working for the club.

WTF! Councillors never cease to amaze me…

The ball being you, the press, the club, making it personal. Based on your previous posts, I think you know fine well it's not as clear cut as: "batteries go anywhere coz net zero, init".

Nothing I said in the post you initially replied to had anything remotely to do with or mentions the CEO. I was pointing out that they (chair & vice) might not have raised the issue of irregularities if the vote had gone their way, and they wouldn't have had to bring up the 'quorate' at all, or seek advice on how to involve the full council to reverse the decision that they didn't vote for. It plainly reads they regard their voting position was the correct one,despite the outcome although they stated that they accepted the decision and moved on. Really?

Exactly .The land is green open space which Inverness is vastly running out of . Messrs Cameron and Sutherland knew when buying this land the restrictions of which the land had . But no they think they are bigger and better than anyone else and can do as they please .Not seeing them donating it to the community for parks , walks etc . Putting a battery project near hundreds of houses and schools is Insane . if our chairman and CEO did a fraction of work in promoting our club instead of trying to do a quick fix . Like I have said many times SG is so unpopular in our football community that it’s near impossible to gain much support by public and businesses alike . Are the rest of the board blind into what’s going on . We are an Inverness club representing the Highlands not bloody Tayside or Glasgow

ICTFC is NOT a community organisation, they undertake zero community activity and despite their claims in the most recent rant, they have almost zero fan engagement. They can't even organise a kids Christmas party. ICT Community Trust is a seperate, self funded, self staffed and independently operated organisation. It is they who do the community work the club are taking credit for. Likewise with the ICT Women. Given how the club has operated the last few years, it clear that they have taken way more from the community than they have given, and until we know the figures we can't know how much, if anything, might find it's way to good causes. We're only taking the word of people who have shown time and again that their word is worthless. It baffles me that people think that football clubs should be allowed to just hoover up and **** away money as they please. Any other business wouldn't last 2 minutes if they operated in this manner. The council planning committee aren't doing much for their image, but given the circumstances I think it's right that this goes to full council. Full council should also be kicking the ass of the planning dept. It should never have gone to a vote once they realised only 5 were eligible to do so and should have been redirected to full council at that stage. The meeting may have been quorate, but 5 people should never have been considered representative. It's as if the planning committee and club are having a competition to see who is the least competent.

Planning permission has been sought and plans are in the docs. Would be awesome if it comes to fruition and as someone who was an IRA pupil and used to play on these pitches back in the 90s, I'd love to see them in use again. https://wam.highland.gov.uk/wam/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=S7D0JUIHGU500

I'm no Gardiner fanboy and I'm not sure how much he's been involved anyway as it seems to me to be more from board level. Regardless the club have to look at ways at generating income away from the matchday as we will never make enough from tickets, pies and hospitality to make ourselves viable long term in the Championship. External revenue generation is something that we desperately need and could help us survive long term if done right. If done wrong (like the concerts) then it's a double whammy of losing money and damaging our reputation in the community. This is why imo they lean so much into the good work that the Community Trust do. As they do way more to promote ICT positively in The Highlands than the actual club does.

Think it’s a bit early to get rid of Duncan, but would be good to know who drove the January changes. Could field 2 defences now, but not one competent attacking unit. Bigger worry for me is we have half a dozen loanees who don’t care what happens to us end of season as they will return to their parent clubs irrespective the outcome, just seems a hap hazard approach IMO.

Relegation is a real possibility this season. Who's fault will that be? There hasn't been any sustained progress since that relegation. Who's been running the show?

Looks like that rabbit might have myxomatosis.

They had a full-time, competitive club to run. That's going well eh?

The reason for pursuing additional sources of income is so that we actually have a full-time, competitive club for them to run.

The hotel development needed planning permission, and this was decided by the south planning committee. If permission had been refused, there would likely still be a cultural use at the site. That is beside the point anyway - the Chair of the commitee is claiming that the battery decision isn't valid because not enough Councillors from Inverness voted on it. Yet he represents Fort William, and has been happy to vote in favour of the hotel development at the Ironworks and against the battery farm last week. I hope the club embarrass the Council over this, it's a shambles.

If it had gone the other way, would the chair and his vice who voted against it have raised the issue as being barely quorate. Which is irrelevant anyway, it either is or it isn't, no barely about it. They've clearly been upset and after some 'advice' on how to get their results have rustled up some signatures.

Only 5 councillors voted . Why would u abstain from a vote of great importance? something smells so bad about all this . Another great SG flop maybe which we are getting so used to it shouldn’t surprise us .

The council did not make any decision to close the Ironworks, that was the property owner. Going by some accounts, the operator was quite happy to get out of the lease as it wasn't making money. Sucks that it's gone, but blame lies elsewhere.

If the original decision had gone the other way, then the club wouldn't have accepted the 'democratic process' and would absolutely be appealing it, as would have been their right. The full council can recall any decision by the planning committee or any other committee so are exercising their right.

Doran is class. He hasn’t played many minutes this season but he and new loanee Samuel are way ahead of anybody else in the minutes per goal stats. We need him on the pitch looking to shoot on sight and the likes of Billy and Samuel primed to pounce on the loose balls from blocks, saves etc. Dunc has spoken highly of the ever present Gilmour, but I think I’m right in saying he has scored just once and has no assists. For someone in his role it is not good enough. Shaw may not be playing as well as last season but he has as many goals and assists as the rest of the regular midfield put together. Football is about scoring more goals than your opponents. It is not about how many safe passes you can make.

The inevitable Ferguson witch-hunt gathers pace. This forum must be a leader in the propensity of whingers and armchair manager assassins. Has Ferguson been afforded any cash to splash or is he part of the cull to save money ? Have we ever seen such changes mid season and who is at fault there ? Do you think that Ferguson made that decision on his own or perhaps maybe the decisions were made for him ? Is Ferguson being set up as the Messiah or the fall guy - and who would do that ? Fraid the off field element of our club has become a real self preservation society - and finally (The Rock has come back to Inverness) did anyone actually think that we would beat Hibs

Hopefully that's true , but just have a nagging feeling it might not be that straightforward. It's Scottish football after all.

This is a wild post. What appeal meeting? The application was heard at the routine South planning committee (16 councilors). The committee includes representives from all across the South of the Highlands and Inverness. At Novembers meeting there were more councillors than at last weeks meet. But several of them voted for the deferrment so they could visit the site. Many who voted for the visit then didn't turn up for the site meeting, which immediately excluded them from the vote - as they said on Wednesday, a member has to be at all the meetings for them to be allowed to participate in the vote. IMHO what happened on Monday is asking searching questions of the Inverness councillors on the committee and beyond. Where the f*ck were you? Why did you shy away from this? Why did you wilfully chose to skip the site visit knowing full well you would be excluded from the vote? Only 1 of the 5 who could vote was from an Inverness ward and not a ward close to the project. Now it will be heard by the full council (assuming they don't all hide from it again).

Makes you wonder why they weren't there at the appeal meeting full stop. As someone else said, there's probably absentees due to conflict of interest. When its specifically an Inverness issue, surely the smart thing to do would be drag in the Inverness Councillors, but instead they've taken one from an area 66 miles away and others from god knows where. They've cocked up, made their bed and they need to lie in it. All the coonsil have done here is made themselves look heinously incompetent.

This is a total shambles and, to me, the Council has messed up and some Councillors are now taking fright at the backlash. Surely the Committee, especially the Chair and Vice Chair, should have been advised on the implications of only one third of them being able to vote, and referred the decision to the full Council rather than creating further uncertainty. Meanwhile, in other news: https://ictfc.com/ictfc-announces-partnership-with-autovision/

Aaaaand there goes the appeal to the Scottish Government... Cheers, Highland Council, for shooting us in the face at point blank after giving us a lifeline. Competent as per... Full article: https://www.inverness-courier.co.uk/news/breaking-highland-council-u-turn-on-its-own-caley-thistle-b-342166/

Oh oh.

It's the wooden panel flooring which failed. This should be easy and relatively inexpensive to replace, as well as regularly checked under normal maintenance. That has no baring on the structural integrity of the stands. What's happened there is down to neglect on the club's part.

Aaaand there goes half our earnings from the Battery Farm, on building an up to scratch set of stands and/or the ensuing lawsuit... https://twitter.com/rjs334/status/1756382836758552749?t=83osJPtsZptCdy-fsLAt0A&s=19

I think you'll find it's from the horses mouth, or maybe the other end depending on whether it's the vice chair or the chairs turn to lead the pantomime horse.

Where is this revisionism on here coming from? At the November meeting 14 of the 16 possible councillors turned up. Only 2 of them declared an interest due to them being on the ICT ladies team committee and in the ICT supporters club. That left 12. They voted to defer the decision for a site visit, which did the club a massive favour. Only 6 turned up at the site visit last week - that failure to attend eliminated another 6 from the vote(the councillors knew they would be excluded by not turning up). One of the remaining 6 later withdrew from the vote during the debate on Wednesday morning. That left 5. Instead of bleating about the chair (and 29 others) calling this out, you have to question why all these councillors were knowingly and willingly going into hiding and removing themselves from the vote on such a high profile and controversial application.