CaleyD

Are you Jack Dee in disguise?

You mean Ralph Topping, right?

It's not really a vote, it's a which is your favourite and if it's the same as ours and your stupid enough to give us all the information we need to steal your identity on a non-encrypted web page then we'll stick you in a prize draw.

Thats why i have sarted a group on Facebook. First plan is to get as many fans, from as many clubs as possible to join. The next step is to throw some ideas about regarding what would be the best plan of attack. Thirs step...hopefully enuff fans would would do more than just talk the talk, and get of their asses and protest en masse! Think the likes of Facebook are great for communicating and spreading the word, but not so good for organising and getting things done. Before anything can/should be done, we first need to get informed, we need to get as much information from what happened/was proposed at todays meeting as possible and communicate that to the fans. Given ICT's position, I wouldn't envisage us having any problem getting the information, and it's maybe an idea that the Supporters Trust speak to George Fraser (which I am sure they will do anyway) and them organise a fans meeting at the stadium in order to communicate that to us. The meeting should be open to anyone, including fans of other teams who live in the area, as this is not ultimately about just ICT and the more people involved the better. Hopefully other Supporters Trusts up and down the country would be willing to repeat the exercise and once all these meetings have taken place then representatives from each can arrange to bring all the information, questions and issues together so that our concerns can be presented in a strong, single voice to the necessary people and organisations. Any other action/protests/displays can also be co-ordinated in similar fashion.....better to have a widely identifiable "sign" of protest than lots of small groups doing their own thing and losing focus by turning heads in several directions trying to keep up.

Meanwhile, back on topic..........

If you double click the login button you often get the "invalid token" message.....or if the page doesn't load properly and/or you refresh part way through. My oldman is a double clicker.....for some reason his brain just can't register that he only needs one click.....drives me nuts.

The more you think about the proposal being championed by the SPL beaks, the scarier it gets. For a start, they would have to introduce the same "criteria" for membership of the SPL2 as they do for SPL1 in regards to Stadia, USH, Licensing etc. Partly because every one of the 20/22 teams that are a member of the SPL would have to be governed by the same rules and partly because a failure to create a level playing field would, in effect, leave us with a league structure that has two MASSIVE points of failure....... One of the arguments used is that they can create a better play-off situation and have more meaningful games.....however, what happens if (when) you get the following..... 1. Champions of SPL2 fail to meet criteria for SPL1 and/or Teams in play off position at upper end of SPL2 fail to meet criteria for SPL1, who gets promoted (if anyone) and do you have several sets of play off rules depending on how many teams you have who meet the criteria? 2. Champions of whatever league/s exist below the SPL2 fail to meet the SPL2 criteria and/or those in play off places fail to meet SPL2 criteria.....same problem as above. You end up with meaningless play off games as the teams can't go up anyway or you have no play off games at all and those much anticipated play-off money spinners that everyone was looking forward too don't transpire. How happy are the TV companies, sponsors, advertisers, fans, clubs going to be then? What you effectively end up with is the continuation of a system which encourages and nigh on insists that smaller clubs spend beyond their means in order to be able to advance up the leagues....only instead of one bottle neck you have two and you force the pressure to spend further down the tables and on to teams who are even less well equipped to meet the financial requirements than the teams whom the burden currently lies on. It's proved devastating enough for Div1 teams who aspire to play in the SPL to be spending the money required for unneeded infrastructure, absolutely no way that Div2 teams could afford it. The alternative for those clubs outwith the SPL1/2 setup is to accept their lot and give up any hope they might have of promotion to the upper leagues. How can either of those scenarios be good for the game? They would be just as well saying "We're going to cut the number of senior clubs in Scotland in half and have a single 22 team league"....it would generate the same outcome, get rid of two thirds of the administration, spread the money more evenly and at least you'd be saved from the monotony of playing the same teams over and over and over. The 10/12 setup makes even less sense than the 10/10 setup, and the fact that the SPL are now peddling this idea makes them look even more incompetent than they already did. The big argument from the start has been "We need to do it for the money"...so why does adding another two teams into the mix make it more financially attractive than before? Could it be that taking all 10 Div1 teams into the fold simply makes it easier to sell to the SFL and SFA as it removes the need for any reconstruction on their part? One other glaringly worrying thing in all of this is why are the SFA sitting back and allowing the SPL to decide what is good for football in Scotland? Here we have an organisation who split away from the rest and who's main reason for doing so was because they felt they could make more money for themselves. What's changed? Why should we suddenly believe that their motives for change now are any different than the motives for creating the organisation in the first place? What's more, why should they be allowed to call all the shots and why isn't it the SFA who are leading the way in bringing about any change that may be needed? They (the SFA) are the senior association in Scotland, the SFL and SPL only operate under license to them and the SPL should have been smacked into place the moment they started talking about "restructuring Scottish Football". In fact, what do the SFA actually do these days? I'm half hoping, but not holding my breath, that the SPL will go to them with their proposal and the SFA will just go...."nah, no thanks, get back in your box....and while you're there, pack your things because you've made enough of a mockery of the game and we're pulling the plug on you"....we can but dream!!!

I've just spoken to someone who has more of an insight into what happened at the meeting and they have reassured me that what is being reported in regards to this being a done deal is definitely not the case and nobody has performed any u-turns. I would fully expect the same scenario to unfold in the next couple of days as happened after the last meeting.....Doncaster comes out saying everyone is in agreement, but as the press catch up with clubs and they make statements it will quickly transpire that nothing really has changed and the whole 10/12 team thing is merely the working committee coming up with another idea and asking for time to formulate it and get back to the them.

Inverness Caledonian Thistle Supporters Trust Notice of Annual General Meeting 7:00pm - Thursday 20th January 2011 Inverness Caledonian Thistle Social Club, Greig Street, Inverness The Supporters Trust do have vacancies available on the Board for those who may wish to seek election. Contact Trust on [email protected] for more information. People can join the Supporters Trust on the Night. Following the AGM there will be the now traditional Football Forum, and this part of the meeting will be open to members and non-members alike. It is hope that this will commence around 8pm Jonny Hayes and Lee Cox will make up the panel for the forum which will be hosted by Ex Trust Chairman, David J Sutherland.

OK, so it seems that we have a continued consensus that a 10 team top league is not acceptable to the fans on this thread.....so what do we do about it? Are people really that outraged that they are willing to step up, take action and be counted or are they just full of hot air and going to do as they always do....sit back and hope that someone else will fight the fight for them?

Threads like this just show how fickle football fans are. The last time this question was asked on here Foran was "voted" the most important with Rooney second and Hayes coming in behind that. However, most people commented along the lines that "no one player was any more important than another", even if some might prove harder to replace. Even though people won't admit to it, the lack of "votes" for Rooney is definitely a result of the talk/likelihood of him moving on, it's how we tend to cope with rejection....the "They aren't very good anyway, we have better" defence. It happens every time we have one of these polls around the transfer window when there's speculation of a "favoured" player moving on. I'm sure IHE will be along to tell us that it's all part of our coping mechanism, that we somehow find it easier to reject than be rejected or some other thing...and he'd be right (again). Not saying it's right or wrong, it's just the way it is and we'd have to be a fairly heartless and dispassionate bunch if we all just shrugged it off and moved on without thought or feeling. Regardless of where the goals come from (open play, set piece or penalty spot), Rooney is a 20 Goal/Season Striker. Take his goals out of the equation and we're toiling towards the bottom of the table. Would others have contributed so many goals if he wasn't there? Dunno, maybe...it's all speculation. Will we find an equal or better replacement if he goes? Dunno, maybe...we've done not too bad replacing players over the past 16+years despite the regular rounds of "X Player is leaving, we're doomed" every time a transfer window comes around. Would Rooney have scored so many without the rest of the team? Not a chance....as good as we might think Rooney is, 1 man against 11 is a hiding to nothing. As for Hayes...yeah he's a good player who can make things happen and causes problems for the other team. However, take the striker out of the picture and all you have is a player who is creating a lot of hot air and the team have no final product. Even if you were to credit Hayes with setting up every goal Rooney scored (that didn't come from the spot or a set piece), it's not all that impressive a statistic. Is that because Rooney is wasting chances, or is it because we have a rose tinted view of just how much Hayes provides? Who knows, I imagine we'd get 10 different angles put forward in response to the question and each of them would be subjective and based on our own view of the player. So what's the answer? Who is the most important player? Neither or both and you are free to take your pick....personally I'm not going to lose sleep over it. In the past 16+ years we've been in this position more times than I care to remember, and on almost every occasion we've come out the other side of it doing pretty well (on the park, if not necessarily on the bank book). In the modern game, players moving on is almost as certain as death and taxes, so why sweat it and why turn it in to some kind of competition to either big up or beat down a player who is looking to ply their trade somewhere else? Players come and players go, but so long as ICT remains I'll be happy enough.

Other scores have worked out ok for us today as well....interesting to note that there's no changes in any league position for anyone.

Overdue bringing on Sanchez, not sure about taking of Duncan when we're obviously being hit so hard at the back though.

Time to be thinking about getting the subs on to give them time to do something.

You been down in the vaults listening to the voices in your head again haven't you?

Not surprised to see Sanchez starting on the bench at all. Sutherland will (should) offer more of a physical challenge for the Well defence, and hopefully that will tire them a little and give Sanchez more opportunity to steal a yard on them when he comes on later in the game......time will tell.

....and the only time clubs raise the issue of how things are run is when they get themselves into bother and the rules/sanctions don't suit them!!! Then it's everyone elses fault and they should be the ones changing to help the affected club. Yeah, the SFA/SFL/SPL may be severely lacking in processes which serve to prevent clubs getting themselves into that much trouble, and they are found more than a little wanting when it comes to the procedures that are used to deal with it....but when push comes to shove, they didn't force Dundee to operate outwith it's means and end up landing itself in administration.

Why is it so important for the Scottish Game that Dundee get themselves out of this? They would be missed by their fans, sure, but beyond that the game would not suffer any more than it would from the loss of any other individual team. In fact, you could probably make a very good argument for Scotland having too many senior teams and it being in the games best interests if it was thinned out a little.....what better way to do that than by getting rid of the teams that are not well run, whilst directing any extra effort into assisting those who are.

Alex, I've not been in the slightest bit smug in any of my posts about Dundee's situation. Where do you draw the line with "help" and how much have Dundee, and other clubs, learned from being bailed out in the past? What message does it send out to other teams if you continually forgive indiscretions because you have a soft spot for a team....or whatever other reason you come up with for not being too hard on them? It's typical of the mentality that has not only put football in a mess, but the whole country. Those who break the rules or live beyond their means are lavished with help and kindness, whilst those who struggle by and make do with their lot get feck all in return. My sympathy for clubs who get themselves into these situations ran out long time ago....not that I would have had much for a team who managed it twice in 7 years anyway. That's a feeling which is compounded by the victim mentality that they have displayed regarding the whole thing. Since day one they've done nothing but blame everyone else and expect everyone else to be bending over backwards to get them out of the mess. If they were truly serious about putting the clubs existence above all else then they would be operating with a squad of part-time players, paying as little as they could in wages and directing every additional penny towards getting the club out of administration.....instead, they seem more concerned with trying to maintain league position and doing deals which circumvent the rules of the sanctions which have been placed upon them. Of course we are not immune to the possibilities of it happening to us. For me, that's all the more reason to be clamping down on the issues now in order to get rid of a culture which somehow views administration for any team as inevitable and almost acceptable.

I'll be coming back with a Red Dot for Scotty if he's jinxed us and we pick up any Reds this weekend

And rightly so. How can any club in administration offer a contract, even a loan contract, when they don't know if they are going to be in business in a weeks time, let alone 6 months or more? What benefit is it to the business (or those they owe) to sell a player and then use the money from that sale to pay to loan him back? They're lucky they still have the ability to put a team of full time players out on the park. To be honest, if I were the authorities, I would already be having a close look at the situation at Dundee as they are obviously still paying inflated wages in order to keep players like Griffiths on the books whilst the club is in administration. The money paid in wages over the last few months would have gone a long way towards providing the additional £150k now on offer for a single player. I'm afraid the story and comments from Dundee do little more than highlight that they are still to accept that they got themselves into this mess and it's not everyone elses job to get them out of it.

The double figure/statement seems to be press interpretation (we refused 100k so must want more than double), what Butcher is quoted as saying is that "We value the player a lot higher than what has been offered" We've not actually had any confirmation on what the offer is/was, the P&J just seem to be sticking to the 6 figures = ?100k road which they've pedalled since they broke the rumour and are building their story around that. All we do know for certain (well, from quoted club sources) is that we've had an offer and it's been rejected.

If I was the club I would tell them to feck off. ICT have worked damn hard (and spent extra money) over the last few weeks to ensure they got games on and weren't adding to the fixture congestion, so for the SPL to turn around and pull something like this on them is bang out of order. Tough titty on Rangers if they are facing problems fitting games in, it was their inability to provide a usable stadium (game was cancelled due to burst pipes) that caused the problem so they should have to suffer the consequences, not us.

I wonder if Marius tipped off Petrescu to have a look at Rooney after he turned down an offer from them last month?