Tree

New keeper same story.....

Dave King was only registered as a Director on passing test. Would explain resignation pending passing test......or could be an alternative baffling reason to match much of what has happened recently

Possibly awaits passing SFA Fit and Proper test to allow position to be taken up?

I stand corrected

Non-exec Directors are not Registered at Companies House. Only Exec Director are.

Typically the Chairman chairs the 'Main' Board of a Company. This may be made up with a mixture of Executive and Non-executive members. Separate Executive meetings and sub-boards will be common some of which may be restricted to executive members only. Directors are defined under law and have responsibilities and duties of which there are many. The non-executives are broadly tasked with providing scrutiny for the Shareholders by being separate from the day to day decisions requiring to be taken by company directors and wider employees. It is not good governance (though often occurs) for the Chairman to be executive and is frowned upon (but is allowable) to undertake the role of Chief Exec. As most will now have fallen asleep I'll now be brief in that the Main Board under the direction of the Chairman are responsible with dictating strategy and direction for the company (or in this case the club) with the Executive responsible for implementing these goals. In summary, the Chairman should not be a Director (but frequently is). Separate requirements outwith the Companies Act exist for Licensing Clubs via the SFA, etc

Best practice, for the purposes of Corporate Governance, etc, is that the Chairman is a Non-exec appointment and would not therefore be appointed as a Director. Many occasion where the Chairman is also a Director for numerous reasons.

It was obvious in the first half that the team had not played together previously. Without the aid of the wind in the 2nd half and with Draper/Leith being far more disciplined in positioning you are correct that Forres were rarely in the game in the 2nd half. There was a definite lack of end product however over the full part of the game and whilst Elbouzedi showed flashes there was rarely an end product to match (reminiscent of Mulraney??). Saw little in Davidson (though he was starting to come into the game when he came off). Would not be surprised if he has a broken foot and the tackle was poor (first foot caught the ball and second foot came through and got the player).

trialists are Chalmers, Leitch, Davidson, Oakley and Elbouzedi Ridgers on bench

It is the desire/intention for ICT to have a Colts team in the Highland League from season after next. Next season the players who would have played in the Development League will be loaned out to HL teams with an ICT Colts team the following season.

The new SFA Project Brave is a disaster waiting to happen. Only 5 clubs can afford the 6 full time development staff and break away meetings happening.

The downward spiral began whist JH was still here. The post split points we picked up flattered us and if you remove the points picked up against Aberdeen and County we had relegation fight form.

BBC keep referring to things happening in the background.....

Shareholders can call an EGM and look to vote in/out subject to the company articles

"One major flaw there would appear to be that these are volunteer directors who receive no remuneration" So you are telling me that we have no directors receiving any remuneration either directly or via business relationships with associated companies? If they are receiving indirect benefits as you suggest then this may well result in a conflict of interest and a breach of duties as Director. I doubt that this is therefore the case in a tangible form. "I wonder how many volunteers there would be to become directors if these were the rules? Absolutely no idea but I think you would find others outwith the current carefully selected members. The rules for limited companies are pretty clear and do not give any allowances to the "football type" business. If the directors have no financial responsibility then who should bear the losses? The people who bear the losses are called Shareholders. Shareholders may or may not be Directors but being appointed as a director does not imply any direct financial responsibility or consequential impact. One of the extensive duties of an appointed Directors is promoting the success of the company however I doubt it would be fair to conclude that every club that gets relegate has Directors acting contrary to duty. In normal circumstances if Shareholder believe that the board are not performing the Directors are removed.

Is there a similar clause stating he can be released if he is a liability in goal.......

The board are simply an extension of the real power behind the club. That person has been trying to offload his involvement for many years but awaits a pay off from someone coming in (and Savage has repeatedly refused to bite at this prospect).

The issue preventing Alan Savage being involved is Sutherland. Removal of those linked to him does not remove the basic stumbling block.

Meekings is 2 weeks away from return

To clarify, ICT development have contacted all Primary Schools this year, have offered coaching for kids, support for school coaches and even chance for games each Thursday evening. They can always do more but this year Danny and his team have been much more overt. Reality is that SFA and County also are active and dilute what is and can be done. Important thing at primary school age is that the kids are being coached and developed. The fact that they are coached by one or both has limited affect on who they then follow

DId Hughes see Miles Storey before Kenny brought him up?

Transport Scotland are the Roads Authority with BEAR the Operator.

Have you looked into using a Bonded ADSL option?

We are missing the point. There are a significant number of people who are saying that they are not going to renew. A further number are uncertain. Currently there is nothing happening which gives any positive reasons for changing their mind and saying that they are not true supporters, irrespective of the intentions of the statement, will not make a difference. Only tangible reasons to expect improvements in the product being offered will change this situation. These people will not stop being supporters but will put less money into the club by limiting the number of games they attend and this impacts both finances but also the atmosphere at games.

Another game when you leave the stadium thinking why bother. This has been the case for the majority of the home games and there is nothing to suggest that next season will be any different. It was bad enough when Yogi was clearly sulking following him being not allowed to speak to the Arabs. There are times now when it seems that we are simply an experiment in being stubborn. The worrying thing is that many are going to stay away next season and not renew tickets. I know of about 10 people in this camp all of whom have had tickets since day one. I must admit to being minded not to renew with my 9 year old (who is ICT and football mad) not wanting to continue to go till there is more enjoyment in going to games.