Scotty

if you have other sites loading slow, it could be you, or more specifically your Internet provider or their DNS servers. Its unlikely to be FireFox. I use DNS servers from openDNS.com for this at home instead of my ISPs ones and most sites load very quickly - see here for details https://www.opendns.com/start However, we always seem to have issues at certain times of the day because of our hosting provider - basically, the more people who are on the site at any given time, the slower it becomes as each user chews up some resources on the server as they are viewing the site. Add to this the fact that we "share" the server with possibly hundreds of other sites and their users also slow down this site in the same way as we slow down theirs. The solution to this problem is "dedicated" hosting where we either get a complete server or a large portion of it to ourselves but that costs a lot of money each month and we simply cant afford it unless someone wants to sponsor us for this type of hosting. The other factor - one which is under our control - is to make sure we are not putting undue stress on the server with sloppy code in our pages. You may have noticed an apology from Don in another thread for some issues we had last night. This was because he spotted some code that was causing server stress and fixed it. However, in fixing it he made a slight error that caused another little hassle and had to go back in and fix that too. These tweaks (usually without errors) are the sort of thing we are always doing in the background to try and make sure the site loads quickly or without errors. We are in the process of testing new forum software for next season and if it goes as expected it should hopefully speed up the forum a lot as it handles things a little differently and doesnt put so much stress on the server. (Dont worry, it will still look and feel very similar, and no posts should be lost, but from our point of view - in the background - should perform better)

If this is confirmed then its a good deal all round. Sounds like ICT may have low-balled and the player may have high-balled in their offers/expectations and a happy medium has been reached. The details are none of our business really, but happy that common sense seems to have prevailed. I still maintain that PM is no Darren Dods or Bobby Mann ... but then again, neither were they when they first came into the side. PM is a decent defender who is in the process of forming a good partnership with Munro. Hopefully that partnership will continue to grow stronger as the weeks and months go by and we will in future be able to say "He is no Phil McGuire" about future signings. With David Proctor sniffing around and keeping the central defenders and also Rossco on their toes, I am a lot more content about our defensive situation now than I was a few days ago.

I am in total agreement with that statement. I had numerous meetings - both formal and informal - with DFS and those in his "ICT posse" in the past few years and have always felt that regardless of anything else he always had the best interests of ICT at heart. That is why we heavily supported him when he was attempting to become chairman the first time and why we would likely support him and the current board should their be any takeover bid. I would agree that his published acts are not always selfless as his company does benefit from the exposure/work but I dont think that this has ever been the be all and end all for him. At the end of the day he masterminded our return from the edge of the cliff as he commented in the paper and that is something that no Caley Thistle fan should EVER be allowed to forget because I sincerely believe that we would have gone the way of Clydebank had he not pulled us up by the bootstraps. I would also note that he does (or used to do) quite a lot of things within ICT when we were struggling financially that could best be described as philanthropic. Most of these were never publicised so it cant be said he is only in it for what he can get. We all mump and moan on here about things at the stadium, or the way that ICT is not as customer oriented as before but that does not mean we want to replace everybody with a new set of owners - especially ones that set alarm bells ringing when they are described as "a central belt businessman" or "a group of London based investors" .... Maybe we will be less suspicious when we know who these currently faceless people are ... but i doubt it. Although a takeover would seem unlikely given the ownership of large numbers of ICT shares by relatively few people who I think are "ICT people", the idea scares me because I think CaleyD may well have hit the nail on the head with his "harbour development" theory. That part of the longman will be unrecognisable in a few years - I have seen the plans - and if it is developed as per those plans (leisure village - yachts, marina, hotels etc) then the TCS will be at the heart of it and located on land that will - as CD says - skyrocket in value to the point where ICT may well be able to return the stadium to normal ownership and either make enough money by selling their lease to build a brand spanking new stadium (if thats what we want) in an alternative location or be able to stay where they are and be at the heart of a vibrant leisure district.

you are correct - hadnt noticed that one. I updated the spreadsheet to auto-award points but Excel has a bit of a problem with RANK commands where it skips a rank if anyone is tied - There is a solution to this but I cant think of it at the moment. Once i figure it out, will repost the spreadsheet and you might want to try it - guess its good to know we agreed on (most of) the totals and that where there was a discrepancy it was easily explainable :021:

I was playing around with the excel file and think i managed to make it more understandable and a little more user friendly by automating more of the calculations. I entered all results up until last weeks game as that poll is not yet closed and the results so far (by my calculations) are as follows Players of the Month August: Michael Fraser September:Don Cowie October:Don Cowie November:Don Cowie December:Michael Fraser Rankings 01. Don Cowie ( 53 ) 02. Michael Fraser ( 44 ) 03. Marius Niculae ( 33 ) 04. Ian Black ( 28 ) 05. Ross Tokely ( 14 ) 06. Dennis Wyness ( 11 ) 07. Russell Duncan ( 8 ) 08. Craig Brewster ( 5 ) 09. Richie Hart, Alan Morgan, John Rankin ( 3 ) 12. Barry Wilson ( 2 ) 13. Graham Bayne, Roy McBain, Grant Munro ( 1 ) All other players on 0 points. Does this agree with your numbers hislopsoffsideagain ? POY200708.xls

Why do you think he is acceptable ? I think the arguments against him have been pretty much consistent as to why people dont want him ...... but I am curious as to your reasoning in supporting him (or perhaps tolerating would be a better description).

Paul Hegarty Aberdeen / DUFC

Craig Brewster - ICT / DUFC Jim Jefferies - Killie / Hearts Jimmy Calderwood - Dunfermline / Aberdeen Craig Levein - Hearts / DUFC Bobby Williamson - Killie / Hibs Alex McLeish - Hibs / Rangers Jim Leishman - Livi / Dunfermline David Hay - Livi / Dunfermline

I managed to throw August into a copy of the spreadsheet - attached - see if this makes sense to you .... Player of the Month for August - Michael Fraser mainly due to a good display against Rangers, with Marius and Ian Black a fair bit behind and Cowie further still. In terms of POY points, Marius was leading with Cowie 1 point behind. ICT-POY-0708.xls

here are the first six games - Rangers on 4th August until Hibs on 1st September. let me know if you need any others. I also included a screenshot from last years spreadsheet to explain how it works ..... As you will see on the screenshot for December, Ian Black and Mark Brown both got a total of 8 vote points in the Motherwell game while Richard Hastings got 13 and Darren Dods got 18. In this instance Dodsy got the 5 POY pts for this game, Hastings got the 3 points and BOTH Black and Brown got 1. In the next game against Dundee Utd Mark Brown and Barry Wilson were tied with Grant Munro and Craig Dargo getting the next two highest totals ... in this case Brown and Wilson both got 5 POY points and Munro and Dargo got 3 and 1 respectively .... basically if there is a tie, then the players get the appropriate points but 5, 3 and 1 are always awarded even if it means 4 or 5 players get points. When it comes to Player of the Month then it is total votes irrespective of how many 5, 3 or 1 pointers they got 01.rangers.gif_thumb 02.motherwell.gif_thumb 03.stmirren.gif_thumb 04.dundeeutd.gif_thumb 05.arbroath.gif_thumb 06.hibernian.gif_thumb DSM05.gif_thumb

they are for me - will screenshot them for you

I was thinking Robbo - Livi (asst), ICT, Hearts, Livi (mgr) but now know I am wrong as I had forgotten that Lambert got them relegated before Robbo took over.

I do not understand why you only start talks with important players two weeks after the transfer window opens !!!

I certainly wont turn down any offer of help ...... all polls from this year should be visible at this link by looking in the dropdown menu http://www.caleythistleonline.com/index.ph...4&Itemid=49 if you want a copy of my spreadsheet let me know ... it automates some of the sums (but not all)

According to someone on P&B Rangers fixture congestion is now so bad that they may have to play 3 games in a week a couple of times to get them all played by the split if they progress further in Europe.

indeed it would have been ... but he reportedly is a supporter of them despite his record against them

that will be because I havent posted the results yet .... will try to get them up to date soon.

nope. Burns is/was part of the debacle we shall call "The Berti era" and should not be considered.

The crux of the matter is that we are offering opinions without really knowing the facts ..... not that that has ever stopped us before :004: ... but lets face it - wages are none of our business so we cant reasonably expect to be given details from anyone. all we can really say is ..... If ICT have offered him something less than what might be deemed acceptable then the player is right to knock it back and the club need to get real. If ICT have offered a decent wage, reasonably comparable to what he could expect elsewhere then the player should give himself a shake and realise this. either way, I would like to see him in an ICT shirt, but not if we have to pay a big premium because he used to earn more at Aberdeen or the Pars.

Kind of 'cross-posting' here but on the "McGuire rejects Caley" thread, LG has wondered if current contract negotiation problems are part of the "Marius effect" and it would appear that this is may be the case ...... Cutting through the rights and wrongs of what Marius is on and the whole debate surrounding it which we have already done to death, I would have to say I would support a get tough policy by the club. Firstly we should review the wage structure at the club. I am not sure what it currently is but we all had a fair idea that it was between 500 and 1000 p/w a few years ago. That is probably not realistic now. Now that we are pretty much an established mid to lower half of the table SPL side we should have our wages reflect that. I would still support the ethos of a decent basic wage, topped up with performance bonuses. If the players do well they earn more, and that additional financial burden is offset by the fact that doing better means we are further up the table and get a bigger payout from the SPL .... a fiscally prudent approach ... "we make more, you get paid more" We should not be paying players anything outwith the wage budget unless a sponsor is prepared to foot that bill. That would allow the likes of Marius to attract a higher wage, and maybe even others, but players can be shown quite easily that the basic wages are within the same structure. it should be transparent. If a player doesnt like it, then they should read the comments of Steve Paterson today in the P&J ..... CLICK "Every season there was a steady stream of players who were lured away. It is a nightmare for any manager, but it's part of the job and we just had to get on with it." - Steve Paterson

Once McGuire gets a few international caps under his belt then maybe, just maybe he can put himself in that bracket !!! until then he is a reasonable defender who should be worthy of a reasonable salary. ICT shouldnt take the p*** but neither should he. However, if, as posted on another thread, Russell Duncan is another who is to leave then maybe there is a bit more than a grain of truth in what you have just posted.

Maimie, not that we doubt the authenticity of your comments as you are not known for scurrilous rumours but ... SOURCE?

Thats pretty much what I was inferring above. I know from conversations I have had with certain people, that ICT have - in the past - made less than acceptable offers to players as a starting point only to up the numbers to a reasonable level later. I guess its all part of the negotiating process. The unfortunate thing is that this has led to players leaving in the past. If its a lowball figure then ICT need to make him a realistic offer to stay as he is a decent player who has done reasonably well with us. If the player is holding out for a package that would seem to be beyond his worth then its "thanks for what you did, but best of luck in your future games elsewhere" as far as I am concerned None of us know which scenario is the right one, or even if its a bit of both so lets hope it gets sorted.

If the offer was a 'decent' one then **** him. He is good, but he is not Darren Dods or Bobby Mann who were immense for us. However, if the offer was merely ICT's lowball figure then offer him an improved and decent contract and see what transpires. Agree we should not be held to ransom though.

you are correct. when we moved from SportNetwork to our own hosting/design everyone started from 0 posts. This is because everything is held in a database and post counts are based on the actual post quantity held in the database. just as we could not take the posts themselves from SN, we couldnt take anything else either as the software was not compatible.