CaleyD

Points deduction applied after the initial decision, set aside as soon as they lodged appeal with SFL, re-applied after SFL appeal upheld original decision and then set aside again when they submitted appeal to the SFA....which is still to be heard.

Wasn't having a pop....just making the point that you have your reasons which are personal to you and, as you rightly stated, are nobody else's business....many others will be the same. I don't like the whole subject of questioning fan loyalty or judging how big a fan they are for whatever reason....be it individuals or large portions of the fan base. It's also a tad hypocritical to be questioning others when you haven't been able to attend yourself (for whatever reasons). I don't think people realise they are doing it some times and I doubt it's a unique phenomenon of our support, but any time we have a low crowd people are quick to turn on each other.....even more bizarre when some of those not in attendance are questioning why others not in attendance didn't show. (Not a specific go at you SMEE, more a general observation) For what it's worth, I never made the game either.

SMEE, why didn't you attend and take your kids with you?

Sanchez sets up the second....not sure what we were all worried about

DANNY "YA FECKIN DANCER" SANCHEZZZZZZZZZZZ

Far more acceptable than a loss.....anyway, we could do with the big money replay back at their place

Also more than a little suspect that he's now suggesting that part of the SPL's "Ultimate Aims" is to have a larger top league "probably of 16 teams". Would love to know why that would be an option for the future, but is not at the moment.

Is it safe for me to look at what's been permitted in the preview? Just hope it's not in vain having looked outside and seen about an inch of fresh snow on the ground!!!

You can add....... Why are they happy to split the "pot" among 20 teams in a 2-tier set up, but reckon there's not enough to go around 16 teams? .....to your list.

Don't see how clubs would lose ?1 Million by switching to 16 teams and would love to see the sums they've done to arrive at that one. Even if they were short sighted enough not to revamp the cup to fill the gap of some of those missing games then bottom 6 clubs will lose 1 OF game and 3 Other games, top 6 lose 2 OF games and 2 Other games. Even if you remove the argument that more variety would improve crowds, the figures given by Doncaster would mean that clubs would have to lose 50,000+ through the gates in a season (assuming ?20 average ticket price, which is high) to come anywhere close to ?1 Million lost revenue.....from 4 less games? Unless the OF offer a 12,500 allocation to anyone visiting them (which is filled) then not even they are going to lose ?1 Million from the reduction in number of games.

The whole "We have to do it for the money" argument just underlines everything that is wrong with the game and the mindset of those charged with running it. Doncaster and anyone else spouting such nonsense should be driven from the game.

Provided its kept as its current use and provided there's a decent membership using the place then I think it could be a good bit of business all round. The seller gets some much needed cash and the buyer gets the rent. The only debt ICT have is what's owed to a couple of Directors (about ?150k I think). Other than that, we may be struggling a bit in terms of cash in the bank, but I don't think it's so desperate that we should be looking to sell off the one remaining asset the club has. Giving up a stable, long term income in order to put a few quid in the bank is NOT good business sense. If the club feel that they need the relatively small lump sum in the short term and can survive without the longer term income, then it would make more sense to just borrow against the asset and use the income that was coming from it to service the debt. Or, why not offer to sell it to the fans? Such a transaction could be accommodated via someone like the Supporters Trust or even the current members organisation of the Social Club itself....at least the profits would find their way back into the ICT "circle" and not into the hands of a private profiteer.

Have ICT actually said "No"? From what I can see on reports so far (not read this mornings press yet), all they have said is that they didn't expect the 10 team recommendation and will now need to go back and have another board meeting. When this was talked about a few years back (2006), ICT were actually in favour of it - clicky

Got wind of this at the end of last week but shrugged it off as it sounded like a total rehash of the rumours that were doing the rounds towards the end of last season.

Just because people are showing interest does not automatically mean the lad is for the off. However, if he is intent on moving on, then the club need to weigh up what they might make for him now against what value he adds to the team over the remainder of the season. Unless Butcher is confident he can replace Rooney for less than what we would get from letting him go now, then I'd be looking for the club to hold on to his services until the end of the season. A deal that only puts ?50k or ?60k in our pockets could end up costing us in terms of league places if we can't replace him with someone who has a similar goal to games ratio....and even losing one league place as a result would mean it was a negative financial outcome. Regardless of all of the above, what I do hope we can avoid is a situation where it's strung out till the end of January. Far too much of a distraction and if he was to move on, then Butcher needs more than a couple of days to find a replacement in what would be, by then, a depleted market. We either need to tell his agent that we want him till the end of the season or put a minimum price and time limit on the table for offers to take him now. Something along the lines of "If we get an offer of ?250k before 15th January then we'll talk, if not then he's here till the summer. Beyond that date and the price starts to go up" If all the clubs who are alleged to be interested are really serious, then the ball is very much in our court. They're not going to lose out to the opposition for the sake of a couple of hundred thousand and if we're going to have a bidding war, then having a time scale will focus the minds and get the ball rolling sooner rather than later.

I actually missed what caused it due to the TV gantry being in the way, only got to see Esson saving the end result.

oops.....yeah I kept calling him McInnes yesterday as well, despite being corrected....mental block!!!

What a horrible, boring game of football...... Not going to question who started, changes in playing positions etc as we can only guess at the reasons for such things....what's more, I don't think any of that was the cause of the display we were subjected to yesterday. What's happened to the urgency in our squad? We were reluctant to chase, soft in the challenge, unwilling to work for space and had too many players hiding for large spells of the match. Worst offender, Odhiambo...I don't think he made any effort to get on the end of a ball that wasn't coming straight to his feet for the whole of the first 45 minutes and seemed to be AWOL ever time we did manage to venture beyond the half way line with the ball. He did improve on most of that in the second half, but unfortunately it only served to show up how weak he can be on the ball....thankfully it wasn't windy yesterday, as he was so lightweight he'd have need ankle weights to keep him from blowing away. Duff wasn't much better, but that seemed to be down to him not knowing and/or understanding what his role was in the game. Lots of aimless running around and chasing his own shadow. Blumenshtein....bloomingheck more like!!! Totally ineffective, even allowing for lack of match practice. Not sure what deal he is on here but I wouldn't be falling over myself to keep him here if we have a chance at signing a headless chicken in his place. Rooney....how frustrated must he be getting? We struggled to get a ball to him in anything remotely considering a dangerous area yesterday. He also wasn't helped by what seemed to be a game of "Long Ball...Headers and Volleys Only" that was taking place between both sets of defenders. Tokely seemed, for the most part, to slot back into his old role ok. Seemed to be pulled into the middle unnecessarily on a few occasions, but due to St Johnstone being just about as inept as we were, it didn't cause us any problems. Munro, don't recall having any reasons to praise or criticise him. Innes...defensively, he had a decent enough game and stuck all the important tackles. However, his distribution was horrible and I counted several occasions where he failed to clear the ball beyond the half way line and it ended up coming straight back at him. Shinnie...Thought he had a decent game, dealt with what was thrown at him and made a few great moves forward....unfortunately the rest of the team were on a tea break when he did this, so he was left having to turn back to find a pass or just running into trouble with no support. Ross...Again, seemed to have an ok game but lacked support/options at the end of his hard work due to the the lack of urgency in getting forward from most of the rest of the squad. Esson...not infallible, but mopped up all his own mistakes and prevented errors from others from costing us more than they did. His reflexes are superhuman and the one on one with Samuels will need to be seen to be believed.

Those of us at the back of the next section along stood for the majority of the game with no hassle whatsoever. A Steward did come up towards us near the start of the game, but only seemed interested in having a wee chat and telling us how hard the match commander made their job and being concerned that they would end up having to throw people out for nothing (again). What was happening over with the rest though was ridiculous, and has already been said, the actions of the Stewards (under orders from above) was more likely to cause problems than prevent them. Again, as has been said, the Stewards need to take responsibility for their own actions. They are (suppose to be) trained and licensed individuals and If they are being asked to perform a task that is blatently out of line with that training, common sense and/or public safety then they have to say "no, I won't do that". What's more, the police, who obviously found the situation equally ridiculous, have to exercise their powers to step in and tell the Stewards to back off where they are obviously creating a situation likely to lead to public disorder or endanger public safety. The whole situation where everyone seems to hide behind someone else and/or they pass off their actions as "only following orders of the match commander" is not acceptable. There's a small part of me that says we, as fans, need to learn to "play the game" a bit better and do our bit to avoid such confrontation, but that has to be a two way street and yesterday was a situation where it was all going to be one way and their was no sign of compromise or reason in the actions of the Stewards. I'm still baffled as to what led to the need for 3 or 4 of them to surround IHE in the manner they did....truly bizarre and had it not been for my chants of "you only pick on the old boys" then I think they might have thrown him out Our fans are not angels and I have seen behaviour in the past which merited steward/police interjection and people being thrown out, but I witnessed none of that yesterday....certainly not before the stewards started wading in and getting in peoples faces...and in that situation it would be rather naive to think they wouldn't get a bit of the same in return.

Can't say much more than has been said already about events on the park.....truly a year to remember and I look forward to us building on that in 2011. I think it only right that I also make comment about things off the park also. Despite not always agreeing with the way the club do things I think they too deserve their share of the credit for bringing us through our season in Div 1 and keeping things together to allow Terry and Mo to do what they are doing on the playing side. The fans also played their part and despite any "opinions" about what happens home and away, you can't have one without the other and when all is said and done......well there's nothing more to say Moving on to CTO and thanks to the moderators. Whether people have noticed it or not, the vast majority of the work that's now done in keeping the forums ticking over on a day to day basis, dealing with queries, laying the odd smack down where it's needed etc, is all done by these guys. Also special mention to everyone who has chipped in on the Editorial Team to bring us some very entertaining, interesting and informative match previews and reports....with extra special mention to TM4TJ who runs a tight ship and ensures everything is done and in place on time every week. Please don't take what these guys do for granted because without them doing what they do then CTO would not be half the site it is today. For the first time in many years all parts of ICT seem to be pulling in the same direction and long may that continue. A very Happy New Year to the HMS Sneck and all who sail in her.

If you want to believe you got anything right in regards to the Stadium Ownership discussion that took place Charles, then you go right ahead. I see no merit in dragging it all up again....spin that however you like.

Any more postponements and I reckon the above will go out the window when they have to start squeezing in two midweek fixtures to make up games.

Sorry Charles, but it really does get on my tits when people who are being paid to do a job opt for the lazy option and try to get other people to do it for them. It took me all of 30 seconds to look up the information I posted, and whilst I wouldn't expect every ICT fan to have that information to hand, or to go to the effort of finding it, I don't think it's beyond reason to expect someone who is reporting on the subject to have done their homework instead of relying on a fans internet forum. I may be wrong, but your questioning was either lazy or an attempt at pushing my buttons. I deliberately chose to post only the information I did (to clear up a misunderstanding by another poster) and give no opinion on my thoughts regarding the announcement. The situation with the appointment of Special Directors is what it is and will doubtless be relevant to any new investor...and I am sure they will partake in due diligence which extends beyond asking questions on here.

Charles, why don't you just get a copy of the Articles of Association and check for yourself? You'd then be able to report accurately on the structure of Inverness Thistle and Caledonian FC Ltd without the need to cross examine me every time I post something.

DFS has a very small personal share holding of only 250 shares. Tulloch Group have somewhere in the region of 750,000 shares. That's about 24.5% of authorised shares or 34% of allocated shares...the voting right equates to a little less than that as you have to factor in the situation with the Supporters Trust having a minimum of 10%. The club still have approximately 900,000 unallocated ordinary shares, so a new investor could gain a larger holding without the need to purchase/obtain shares from Tullochs. What Tullochs DO have are certain rights in terms of placing people on the Board of Directors. Until the last AGM (and so long as they hold 25% or more of the voting rights) that "right" as good as gave them control over the board (3 of the 6 directors and a right to appoint the chair...and chair has a "casting vote"). The last AGM increased the permitted size of the board but no increase was made in terms of Tullochs "right" to appoint further Directors, so that position of absolute power/control has changed, but they do still have a large influence on the Board of Directors. That "right" is not transferable and any similar rights for a new investor would need to be negotiated.