Scotty

and your point ? bottom line - ask any statistician and they will tell you that an own goal scored by an opposition player is credited to the team for whom it was scored and likewise an own goal scored by an ICT player into his own net counts for the opposition in stats. The numbers of OGs - for and against - in ICT's case are miniscule. I dont have the figures to hand as I am at work but I dont think its even into double figures.

Burley will do for me. seemed to be doing well enough at Hearts and he has two things going for him straight away ... He is neither Tommy Burns or Graeme Souness

If its for the good of the club/fans then we dont have a problem creating a separate forum or sub-forum. Let myself and CaleyD know what you are looking for and how you would like it to work and we can sort something out. The word "ultra" can have sinister connotations but in reality - as I have seen with 'u-sector' and Toronto FC ultras - for most clubs its really just another way of saying 'loyal and noisy' fans and we are all for that. :clapping03:

forget about everything else for a second and just ask yourself if this was an OF match at Parkhead or Ibrox whether this would be allowed to happen or even Aberdeen V Rangers at Pittodrie etc. If the answer is no (as it would be) then there is no grounds to say we should "just accept what happens" because its only ICT V the OF. Our fans have just as much right to feel safe and content in the designated home areas at the TCS as any other fan has at their own ground and to say any different is treating them with contempt. It is clear that many of the Rangers fans were not a problem behaviourwise, but it is equally clear that many home fans also felt intimidated or had their enjoyment somewhat spoiled and that is a problem. It is also a problem to have such a wide variety of ways of dealing with fans. If OF fans are not going to be removed from the home areas of the stands, then lets just get rid of segregation. no wait, we cant, its in the rules. ok then, lets apply the rules in the same way as we would for fans of Hearts, Hibs, St Mirren or Gretna .... no wait, we cant, against other teams we could happily move fans from home areas into empty seats in the away stand but for OF games we have already filled that one up. and of course we can't throw them out for breaking the stadium entry conditions, they might get angry. We need consistency, and if that takes a few games where there are extra police and opposing fans are horsed out of the home ends then so be it. The next time the fixture comes up again, the same thing should happen until it is realised by the fans themselves that the only way you are going to get away with being an opposition fan in the home end is if you are happy to make the trade-off of sitting quietly on your hands. And while we are on about consistency, I have seen a few mentions of the standing/sitting debate again in relation to this game. Again, if you are going to berate home fans at every game when they stand even for a minute or two, and do the same to opposing fans that travel in smaller numbers but then turn a complete blind eye to the OF standing or even sitting in the aisles then that also needs to be looked at. -rant over- :015:

did we mention the asterisk rule as well ..... :015: never mind though, you can use as many of these ones as you want - :crazy02:

no disrespect Alex, but that is a piss poor excuse. The shop premises (but certainly not its staff) have been a joke for a number of years and in my opinion the club are missing out hugely because of this. Personally, I would take a three pronged approach. 1: The club should have a 'proper' shop located within the stadium building which is big enough to allow customers to browse and for the staff to merchandise and display the stock effectively. When you go to any other normal retailer, you dont see all their stock on their shop floor - they display it, have some available and the rest in their warehouse. The club should take a similar approach. You will be able to store far more stock in a storeroom than you will ever be able to do if it is fighting for space in the actual shop itself. Part of the reason for having so much stock is also to do with minimum orders and extended lead times from Errea which is another thing that needs to be addressed. 2: The club should have its own town centre or Eastgate retail outlet. If charity shops can afford this then there is no reason that the club cannot. 3: The online shop is open for the whole wide world 24/7, is severely under-utilised and doesnt encourage overseas sales especially for the smaller items. If items 1 and 2 cannot be resolved then why not beef up the online shop so that ICT fans the length and breadth of the country as well as overseas fans can browse it. You dont need any space other than cyberspace to display anything in that one and your whole product line can be shown in glorious detail. Unfortunately however, the online shop only has a few items for sale and as i mentioned above, the terms offered actively discourage me from shopping. If I have a big order, then fair enough I might absorb the default delivery costs or they may even have to be higher depending on parcel size or weight, but if I want to order a few things they make huge markups on such as a mug, pennant, maybe this year's calendar and such like its going to sting me an additional 14 quid for postage and that makes it useless to me. I have actually had people go down to the shop on my behalf and post the stuff I mentioned to me at a cost of 3 or 4 pounds which kinda defeats the purpose.

who knows ...... we have yacht to see what will happen with the marina developments planned for that area :029:

David Stewart - a fan of ICT, and former MP can say what he likes just like any other fan. David Sutherland, said he would buy more shares if he had to to keep McGregor out.

Spencey's ok - just wish he would finish his pies before the second half starts .... he's always chomping through the first 10 minutes of the second half. Get Charles Bannerman and Bobby Wilson doing it as a double act instead :004:

Bottom line is that we should be open to investment from sources who we think have the interests of the club at heart. From my point of view, David Sutherland has always had this as part of his make up. He rescued the club from the edge, has put money in when required, sometimes publicly to a fanfare of plaudits but also quietly and philanthropically when virtually no-one was watching. I am not so naive that I think it was all done for no return - he has had plenty of good advertising of his business, he gets positive publicity for giving back to the local economy, his companies doubtless earn contracts both from ICT and others based on what they have done and if/when the Longman area starts developing as discussed, they will be in pole position to benefit from that. I have no problem with any of that so long as anything done concerning the stadium area is in the best interests of ICTFC. This other character - described as a Rangers supporting fantasist in the media over the weekend - a "King Billy Liar" if you like - seems to have desires to take over a football club, any football club but no clue as to what he would do with it other than grand statements that he cant back up .... and should be kept as far away from ICT as humanly possible.

The stage is set for Fir Park ..... Barry Wilson has scored some beauties there and he will bag #1000 this weekend :014:

Dont know much about any of the teams but Ghana and Ivory Coast are 3/1 joint favourites and Nigeria / Cameroon are at 7/1 The rest are way out there: http://www.oddschecker.com/football/intern...rket/best-odds/

:024: mmmm, didnt he sign for us from Huntly as a striker or midfielder back in the depths of time and only became a defender at the moulding hands of Pele ?

Must put that in my signature somewhere :004: As a matter of interest .... while looking for something else, I came across my copy of the accounts for 2007 and whilst I wont post them in full, a few snippets make interesting reading based on the above conversations ..... In 2006 we made a profit of just under 220K, in 2007 this rose to 280K In 2006, after the AGM our balance in the bank was 200K, in 2007 that rose to 430K In 2006 we had 82 staff, in 2007 it was 92 In 2006 employment costs were 1.65m, in 2007 it dropped to 1.61m we seem to be running a tight ship, the bank balance looks good, employment costs are under control and there is no evidence of financial mismanagement ..... i look forward to the next accounts in May 2008 that will - as i suggested earlier - probably show a slight loss due to the two factors i mentioned but still see us having a nice healthy positive bank balance.

Is it true that Bobby's now got his own postcode ?

RiG - there are many ways to find out the content of this rumour - even in Toronto, so it should not be a problem to get that info in your locale. I just have a problem with name(s) being posted when they cannot be verified.

Go on.... please be aware that any name that is specified will be deleted from the thread unless it can be backed up by verifiable proof. we do this not to protect the ICT official, but this website, from claims of defamation.

Graham Dorrans - LINK

off the top of my head .... We have quite a lot more backroom/non-playing staff We have a far larger playing squad Our pre-season now includes a foreign training camp Wages are higher but not ridiculously so Bonuses are higher and based on a percentage of the SPL payout for final league position We have more responsibilities/costs associated with non first team squads (U19s / reserves etc) Because of the club licensing scheme we now have specified minimum standards to reach in every area of the club's operation from lux levels of floodlights, to equipment in medical rooms, to customer areas, to all sorts of other things. Because we are in the SPL, our standards are also set at a higher level than if we were in div 1 and we have to constantly make sure repair and maintenance of these standards is met. We must also make sure that all staff have been put through certain levels of certifications in their area of expertise, and maintain those certifications. We were in the black by virtue of some nice cup runs and things like that. we are not making money hand over fist and I really think you should retract the "back pocket" comment as I find that offensive to people who are working hard to make sure we have healthy accounts each year. There may be some spending that you could question here and there, but for the most part, as a shareholder, I have seen (or heard) nothing untoward and certainly nothing deserving of the claim made. In our first SPL season (04/05) we made a loss of 102K because of the rental cost of Pittodrie In season 05/06 - as shown in the report - we made a gross profit of around 220K (before tax) In season 06/07 I believe we also made a profit, cant remember details though as I dont have my copy of the accounts to hand In season 07/08 I believe we may make a small loss due to the offset of Marius' wages against Rankin transfer and no cup run. Because of the way our financial year does not mesh with our playing season, I think the Mark Brown money is in the 05/06 accounts and the Brewster/Proctor money in the 06/07 accounts or perhaps spread over both but at the end of the day, both figures have a large part to do with profits made in 06/07 and 05/06. Bottom line is that we just about break even each season but transfer dealings and cup runs should hopefully ensure that year-on-year we maybe slowly increase our positive bank balance but its not going to buy us a new stand or a(nother) star player anytime soon.

matters not the reason, a transfer fee was still paid Was it ? Dundee Utd were paying in installments for both Brew (compensation) and Proctor (transfer fee) and there is/was a lot of discussion/speculation as to whether they ever paid in full......... Anyhoo, that particular deal aside, the bottom line is that we are still a loss making side who need to pull out some good cup revenue or transfer profits each year to break even. The last couple of years have been decent for us but the simple fact is that most years, any unexpected revenue simply goes to keeping us in the black. This year, the 'profit' from the Rankin deal might offset the increased wage bill, otherwise i fear we will make a loss because of our early cup exit.

I'm with Bronson on this one. every time we lose a game ... and sometimes when we win ... certain posters seem to need a scapegoat who must be expelled from the club or ridiculed to the max. it is getting quite boring, predictable and making them look quite silly. I was actually able to wangle some limited coverage of today's game and thought Rosscoe looked decent enough. not wonderful, but certainly not the worst on the park. No-one covered themself in glory today but no-one is deserving of a lynch mob because we lost to an 89th minute goal from a team that should - on paper at least - be pumping us each time we meet.

sleeping. It was a 9AM kickoff where I am so got up around 8-15, made a coffee and then ambled down to our basement "media room" to surf the interweb as well as cable TV in search of coverage. [and found it too :003: :003:] Kudos to Scarlet Pimple who was also surfing - it was a 6AM kickoff for him :017:

Charlie Adam just had a goal disallowed :015: :015: :015:

see what you mean TheresNoEsInBlack - the link takes you back to sportsound page where there is no link to audio ...... you could try the email link to Sportsound at the bottom and ask them where the actual link is !!!

This is the live text link. for those in the UK, the listen link at top of page should work: http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/footbal...ult.stm?refresh