CaleyD

I would make note in my will that I wished something to go towards ICT or an associated organisation and leave it in the hands of the executors of my estate to best decide how they went about that. Football (and not just ICT) changes so often and so fast that there's no guarantee that what you think is best today would be the same when the Grim Reaper comes calling. As those looking after your estate when your gone are likely to know you well, then they are best placed to know what you would like to see done at the time.

CaleyJags.com Photo Album now online - http://www.caleyjags.com/pa/e/110902CurryHoose/index.html

Johndo, I think you are totally missing the point. We can remember and look back to what happened in the past without the need to reignite the tensions and disputes that took place at the time...just as students in history classes can look back to events surrounding war and conflict without the need to pull out weapons and re-enact them. IMO, the publishing of the book and now the re-publishing of it online is not about dragging up all those arguments all over again, it's about ensuring that each and every new generation has the opportunity to get a glimpse into what happened so they can understand the sacrifices that were made to bring ICT into being. It would serve the history of the clubs, old and new, better if people chose to share their memories in a more positive and constructive manner, instead of remaining bitter and using them to continue to try and score points in a battle that is long since over. The "What Ifs" and "Could have beens" should be little more than a passing curiosity, not a ongoing point of contention and negativity....move on!!!

Three very interesting and thought provoking articles I have read recently. The first one talks about the "Myth" that a 10 team league would mean more success in Europe... http://changingscottishfootball.wordpress.com/2011/08/29/no-ten-team-euro-fix/ The second talks about the problems being more fundamental... http://changingscottishfootball.wordpress.com/2011/08/30/not-just-a-numbers-game/ This third gives a very interesting suggestion on how things could be improved domestically, and meet some of the requirements suggested in the second article... http://changingscottishfootball.wordpress.com/2011/08/26/after-the-deluge-what/

Rumours doing the rounds tonight that we might be signing a striker by the name of Rob Wilson. He's not currently attached to any pro team, so we can sign him outwith the window.

Gringo Jnr got his hat-trick, Christie got two and Robbo got one....can't remember who got the other for the Legends Squad. Unfortunately I don't know the names of the Curry Hoose scorers...or should I say, I can't remember, as I was told!!! Absolutely fantastic night. Great craic, an enjoyable, entertaining and fun game of football going on and the banter flowing in the stands among those who turned out to see the game.

4-2 actually....was 2 goals straight after the restart that we missed as they were out quick and caught us on the hop.

Can only imagine that with the number of injuries we have at the moment then Butcher won't want to be risking anyone from the first team. Without first team players then you have little draw (other than it being for charity) so best it's postponed till a better time. Will ask later when down for the Legends game.

Bottom line....the CPS thought they had a stick on case to put someone away for a sectarian related crime. They got caught up in the media frenzy (which had him pinned as guilty of being a bigot before the evidence was ever heard)...thought "hey, we could make an example of someone here and really stamp home our authority and show we are serious about tackling the issues". Unfortunately, they didn't have the evidence to support the charges. The court process WORKED AS IT SHOULD. We can argue the rights and wrongs of no Assault Charge being upheld, but it would have been an even bigger injustice to have found him guilty of acting with racial/religious hatred without sufficient evidence. The real danger now is that those on the Jury become victims of the, well publicised over the years, abuse that we know some Celtic fans* are capable of dishing out to people who do or say things they don't like. (* Fans of other clubs have also been guilty of such things, but we are talking about a Celtic related incident here)

You can tell it's the international break when the hottest topic of conversation is thinking up pet names for new players

Would be interesting to see how much of that money has come North of the border.

The right decision was returned under the circumstances and only serves to underline the point I was making at the time about it being far too easy to try and pigeon hole everything as being driven by sectarianism. It actually restores a little of my lost faith in the legal system that they just didn't take it as read that such a motive existed.

I'll give them a bell tomorrow and see what the craic is.

Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani likes to holiday in the area and since he had his offer for Man U knocked back at the start of the year he might have set his sights a little higher!!!

The large footballs are not lost, but I doubt very much they would ever find their way to TCS.

Technically speaking, it's the Board who have the power to say yes/no to any offer to purchase shares. Tulloch, as a holder of more than 25% of the issued shares can veto any resolution put to an AGM. However, that could/is changing. The recent 250,000 sale of shares diluted the Tulloch shareholding to about 27.5% (assuming they weren't one of the purchasers) and a further 250,000 share purchase by this new consortium would take that below the 25%. Granted, that situation would still need every other shareholder to vote in favour of a resultion Tulloch may object to, but it is possible and it's no different than the situation should any other group of shareholders with a combined total exceeding 25% wish to veto something. I've never witnessed Tulloch use that position to veto anything, and unless it was to prevent something damaging to the club then I wouldn't expect to see it...but the position exists (for now). We have all witnessed the Board using their powers to reject an offer for shares when that porn dude was looking to invest...and I doubt anyone would say they were wrong to have done that. What's equally important is that the Board have the power to stop the transfer of shares between parties (except when transfer is initiated by death of the holder). That means that nobody could go in an purchase then pass to someone else. FWIW, the only Director with any significant shareholding (excluding the recent purchase as we don't know who that involves...yet) is Sandy Catto (via Scotlog). The requirement for Directors to have a qualifying shareholding was removed in 2002. With regards Chairman/Director appointments....the board are self-appointing. In other words, you have to be on the board to have any part in the decision to appoint new Directors and or the Chairman. The only way a vote would ever be called for at an AGM/EGM (under the current setup) would be if they were to all resign on mass without appointing replacements first. The appointment of Directors by Tulloch has no time restraint mentioned in the most recent Articles and Memorandums, so long as they hold more than 25% of the issued shares then they are entitled to appoint 3 directors. The right to appoint the chairman expired in 2007 according to the most recent Art & Mems...however, this date seems to have magically appeared without resolution since the previous set of Art & Mems and is not mentioned in the original Special Resolution that put the right in place to begin with. It should be noted that the maximum number of directors was increased at last years AGM from "six" to "eight or such other number number of directors as the Board may from time to time determine". This hasn't happened and the Board remains the same, but if it ever were increased then Tulloch would no longer have control of the Board. The minimum number is 3. Please note that I am only giving the facts as I understand them from the documents referred too, how you choose to interpret that is up to you. This information is available to everyone via Companies House.

Hmm...relevant "one liner" Confirmed on Official Site - ICT get a Woody!!!

Been asked to let everyone know that the Kingsmills Lounge will be open for refreshments from 5:30pm until kick-off, and then again after the game. (Hope they still have Bulmers Red)

Terry just has his missus go through the DVD's

There's a fair spattering of trophies between the Boardroom and the Social Club. Now we have the sports bar, it may be good to get some cabinets in there so everyone gets a chance to view them.

We don't, and never have, celebrated our roots as a club....and that's kinda sad because we have not one, but two, rich and proud histories that date back long before 1994. So, the important thing as far as I am concerned, is that story is now readily available to all...especially to each and every new generation that comes through the ranks.

Confirmed Here - http://ictfc.com/news/team-news/179-wolf-at-the-door

David Davis - Wolves - Confirmed

Damned when they do and damned when they don't....there's really no pleasing some folk!!!

Don't think Alan Savage got the chance to show exactly what he could bring to the table as a Chairman. It's very difficult to expect anyone, Board Member or otherwise, to invest heavily when you already have an "outsider" (someone not on the board or sitting in the chair) who is the largest shareholder and in a position to veto just about every idea you might put forward. That needs to change if we are to get (different) people in who are not only willing to invest in return for a shareholding, but who want to invest just for the sake of investing and seeing the club improve. I for one would not (even if I had the money) be sticking large sums of money in if I had little or no say in how it was going to be spent or in the knowledge that I could be dumped at any given moment. On the flip-side, it must also be very difficult to find someone who Sutherland/Tullochs would be willing to sell/pass shares too as what they have done, and are still doing, at the moment to keep the wolf from the door is a lot to expect someone else to take over. Let's not forget that it's more than the club we're talking about, there's also the stadium which has a shed load of debt sitting with it that needs to be serviced/underwritten...and I would not expect to see Sutherland/Tullochs maintain that service if they were handing control to someone else. In a nutshell, we need someone who is not only willing to invest in the club, but take on responsibility for the troublesome step child as well.