CaleyD

What I find most staggering is the shear number of people they owed money too.....89Companies, 24 Players/Staff and the 4 "loan" accounts = Total of 117 It's also blatantly obvious that Dundee played the system to get the CVA pushed through, but that may yet come back to bite them if the HMRC pursue a case. It also seems that 2 fingers were given to the 25 point deduction as Dundee have kept players on the books they could not afford and that the club has continued to run on a loss making basis throughout the administration - the "pot" of money they have to pay the creditors is smaller now than when they went into administration - had they cut their cloth in accordance with the position they were in then I very much doubt they would have remained as competitive as they have and they would have had more money to pay the creditors.....the whole thing stinks. What's annoyed me most in all this and still annoys me is the number of Dundee fans who continue to behave as if Dundee are the victims, being made even worse now by the ones who see the CVA as some kind of victory.

YESSSSS....ICT Doing what they do best and hitting on the counter. Again Foran and Rooney combine for Rooney to stick it away

Glad to see he has something lined up and even better to see "The Other Foot Soccer School" is developing and progressing abroad as well. It surprises me a little that he's retiring from playing and also that he hasn't had a club this season...although I do wonder if that is as much to do with his own view of the level he should be playing at as anything else!!! ICT were lucky to have got the best of him...and admittedly a season or two of the "not so good"...but a decent bloke and I wish him all the best.

Hearach.....more like ear ache!!!

Stuck in my details and hit enter....page refreshed and cleared all the boxes so, given the lack of any confirmation, I assume it's gone through!!!

Well said, 12th Man....that is precisely what is happening in order to try and force through the 10 team proposal.

It's actually quite staggering just how far off the mark the whole thing is, and part of the reason for that is because the thinking that underpins the whole thing is so flawed. A 16/18 team league is immediately dismissed on the basis that "it would make less money than the current proposal", regardless of the fact that I disagree with that assertion, what's more important is that nobody in the decision making process has gone "hold on a minute, clubs are wasting so much money anyway that if they learned to live within their means then the game might not actually need more money and what's more important is that we look at the long term needs of the game and desires of our customers" There's also flawed thinking in the point that more money makes the teams/league more competitive. Doncaster himself has made mention of teams having more money to buy in talent, which flies in the face of one of their own objectives for the change which is "allow as much opportunity for player development" - Surely if that is a core objective then they should be encouraging teams to develop their own players and/or to trade within our own borders!!! I have nothing against foreign players/signings, but I see little point in concentrating on a setup that produces more money if that money is only going to be spent elsewhere and ultimately benefiting other teams/leagues/associations. Better to concentrate on a setup which is good for the game and encourages teams to make best use of what's on their own doorstep. What's more, the proposals don't actually change the financial dynamics in any way. The OF will still take the lions share, the teams below them will still have the same income from the league (in terms of %) as they do now, 10 of the SPL2 will be financed by stealing the income from the current Div 2 and 3 teams and the top 2 in SPL2 will get pretty much the same as what 11th and 12th in the SPL currently get. If, by their own argument, finances are directly related to competitiveness, then surely the priority is not more money, but levelling out the playing field financially. A couple of radical (and admittedly not fully thought through ideas)...... A foreign transfer levy....if you buy a player from another association then you have to pay the equivalent of x% into a centralised development fund. Clubs can qualify for money from this development fund every time they bring through a young player into the first team, rewarding them for developing within and truly doing their bit to enhance the prospects and making best use of our own resources. A Champions League/Europa Cup levy......Society pretty much accepts that higher earners pay higher tax to help support the society we live in, let's apply similar thinking to football and have a % of the income from these tournaments paid into the pot for everyone. After all, it's domestic success that makes these places available to teams and the financial disparity at that level affords the top teams the competitive edge that allows them to qualify for these tournaments in the first place.

Some other bits of info on the proposals that seem to be slowly leaking out....... - The proposal regarding play-offs does not create the risk of 3 teams being relegated as the format would be that 8th & 9th in SPL would play each other (over 2 legs) and the loser would then face the winner of the 2nd & 3rd play-off from SPL2 - So you would have a situation whereby 4 teams (8th and 9th in SPL1 and 2nd & 3rd in SPL2) are going to end up playing each other a guaranteed 6 times a season. - There's a proposed "SPL Cup" which would see the SPL2 teams play off against each other and 6 teams join the draw (seeded) along with the 10 SPL teams to give the last 16....from here the details are a bit non-existent, but it would seem it would then go to 4 groups of 4 as the intention is to provide additional games for SPL1 teams. - Baring in mind that 4 teams are already guaranteed to play each other 6 times, and then consider the fact that the teams from SPL2 could face each other in the SPL Cup Play off and could then face each other in the final 16 onwards (at least once) and then meet in the Scottish Cup, then you have the potential for SPL2 teams to end up playing each other up to 11 times and SPL 1 teams facing each other up to 9 times in a single season...proof positive that nobody is listening to the fans and the fact that we're bored of playing the same teams over and over. What's more, where are the SPL2 teams going to fit these games in when they already have a 44 match league schedule? - The voting structure for SPL1 would require a 9-1 majority to change anything and votes from SPL2 clubs would carry "less weight"....i.e. they would not have equal voting rights within the SPL, effectively making them associate members as opposed to full members and leaving them entirely at the mercy of the 10 SPL1 teams. That's democracy for you!!! You can come play with us, we want control of your money, but you can't have a proper say in the decision making!!! The 9-1 required majority for SPL1 teams also means that the OF effectively maintain control over the whole lot. - Also seems to be some posturing around the idea that the SFL could be scrapped with all teams coming under the administration of the SPL (why not just scrap the SPL as well and have the SFA do the job?) However, teams below SPL2 would have NO voting rights whatsoever. - The ?1.5M "saved" by reducing the SPL1 to 10 teams would be split between 1st and 2nd in SPL2 with another ?1.5M coming from 50% of the current SFL money and that being split among the other 10 teams.....effectively recreating (actually it's worse) the uneven split in finances we currently have in SPL(1). Personally I view this as nothing more than a tool to try an win favour with the SPL teams who would face being dropped from the top tier in a "we will protect you by giving you the money to remain at the top of SPL2 and have a chance of coming straight back up" - Season would start earlier, but the OF would be able to "opt-out" and rearrange their early fixtures to allow them to play "lucrative" foreign friendlies. So an ICT v OF at home game in July where we might expect a decent crowd could be moved to midweek in December in the cold and rain where we would almost certainly get a smaller crowd and as a result lose revenue. Meanwhile the OF are off raking it in at some firendly somewhere and losing little, if anything, from the rearranged fixture.

Suggest you forget it....could you imagine how that might sound coming from our pa system!!!

You could turn that argument on it's head and say Tuffey would be better rested and more alert!!!

I don't see the problem, it's not as if he's a goalkeeper!!!! Don't be such a sissy, strap it up and get yer erse out onto the pitch.

What message does it give by dropping the guy for nothing? Where's the motivation for him to perform if called upon due to an Esson injury if it's in the back of his mind that he's just the "make do" guy who'll be on the bench again as soon as Esson is fit? If they were worlds apart in terms of ability then I could see the justification, but they aren't and any talk of one being better than the other is purely speculative as neither has done anything in the games they've played to suggest that one isn't as capable as the other. There's no good reason for benching the guy in favour of Esson.

It doesn't stop with the keeper, but unlike outfield players their inclusion is not, in most circumstances, determined by the team tactics being deployed in any individual game.

Tuffey. I don't see him as being "weaker", just unfortunate to be on the sidelines while Esson has done nothing to warrant him getting the shirt from him. Likewise, Tuffey has done nothing to warrant his being replaced for cup games so should not be asked to step aside.

Not many players out there would deliberately miss a chance like that to save their club the cost of a goal bonus. The fact that Rooney was willing too shows how dedicated he is to the ICT cause. Well done for taking one for the team I say.

Drawing the OF is no different than drawing anyone else. If you want to win a tournament then you have to beat all comers and the objective for each game is the same....go out there and give it your all. Bring it on.

Copies of the DVD are still available for those who haven't got one yet - Clicky Clicky

For those in need of a Simple Minds/Big Country Fix - Playing Inverness on 16th July

I know there's a certain "only Morton" feeling in this result, but the fact we got 3 different players on the team sheet and never looked in any trouble should give everyone a bit of a boost. If we can get Hayes back to full fitness then I really think with him on one side and Doran on the other then we can really stretch the opposition and (finally) start using the width at TCS to our advantage over the rest of the season.

Can't find it on search but I did a song to the tune of Spongebob Squarepants a while back as well.....Caley Thistle works in great with the tune.

I dunno, I think my chances are pretty good.

I've spent the day practising my ball bouncing technique in the back garden, the club have said they'll give me a shout if nobody else is available.

I would come in after kick off for every home game if that was used. Never before, or since, has a song nipped my head as much as that one does. So much so that even when I was DJing I refused to buy and/or play it. SMEE, I think Simple Minds, Promised You A Miracle would be more apt considering that's what Terry did when we got relegated...and then delivered when we got promoted.

I've always felt Nessun Dorma was a "closing" song, something used to end an event or evening.....don't know why, just feels like that kind of tune. Maybe a bit of John Williams - Empire Strikes Back.....recognisable, inspirational and a bit of fun all in one. So long as you don't play "Another One Bites the Dust" when we win a cup match then you should be ok.