CaleyD

No worries, was a bit of a last minute decision this end also. If we manage to get a few more people through to support the team who might not have gone otherwise then all is good.

I've got some spare seats on minibus going to Aberdeen if anyone is looking for transport. Leaving Stadium about 15:30 (3:30pm in old time). Let me know via PM or e.mail [email protected] First come, first served.

I think the more people go on about and/or try to analyse the whole "home v away" thing, the more it plays on the mind of the players and the bigger a hurdle it is going to be for them to overcome. The players are every bit as appreciative for the home support as they are for the away support and I have witnessed nothing that suggests they acknowledge one any more than the other. The sooner our fans can get over the need for the recurring c*ck measuring contest that comes up every now and again about which fans are better than others for whatever reason...be it home v away, north stand v main stand or whatever other criteria you wish to dream up...then the better it will be for everyone.

Not to mention that Tesco isn't town centre, nor are they all that much more accessible than club shop at the stadium.

Unlikely to have any direct impact. Rok had bought out Tulloch Construction but not the parent company Tulloch Ltd or Tulloch Homes which is the major shareholder in ICT. Tulloch Ltd did have a large shareholding in Rok at one point but I believe they may have been sold off/reduced in the past few years.

I plan to be there.

I think we're still a shoe-in for a European slot.

I think you would be surprised just how many people do leave the city every weekend to go watch the OF. I would put the figure in the high hundreds given the number of minibuses and coaches they hire. In saying that, I do agree with you that the trend seems to be reversing though and things swing more in our favour with each new generation that comes through....evidenced by the fact that we are probably one of the few, if not the only team, that can show fairly consistent attendance growth over the past 15 years.

I think it's one of those things where we all know it doesn't do us any favours, but you would be hard pushed to put a number on it. Personally, I don't think there's much point in moaning about it, all we can do is put the best possible product we can on the park every week and hope to encourage a few more in our own direction.

Technically speaking they have not been banned from selling them, they've just not been given permission, and that is in-keeping with Celtics policy of not allowing collections for anything. There's nothing to stop them getting permission to collect beyond the area controlled by the club on the approaches to the ground.

Heard from a little birdie that Tommy has been awarded Groundsman of the Year in both the league and overall categories. Thoroughly deserved and I think many will agree that this award is long overdue.

There's a word that is used regularly by the Supporters Trust movement...Governance. Many people, wrongly, assume that Supporters Trusts are set up with the intention of taking over clubs. Whilst many will have contingency plans in place to effect such a move should it become necessary, that is not their core roll, function or objective. What they want is a system which puts "power" in the hands of all stakeholders, has clearly defined expectations, accountability and a monitored/verifiable performance matrix of some kind for the business as a whole. Such a system would almost definitely need to put a Board in place, but that Board would be accountable to the stakeholders and the stakeholders would have the power to remove anyone who was jeopardising the business. As things stand, clubs find themselves with Boards which are self selecting...the current Board choose new Board Members...and even the shareholders in many cases are unable to change that unless they all club together. As the initial Boards are normally put in place and "controlled" by the largest shareholders (who don't even need a majority) then it makes the business a closed shop and dangerously exposed to the whims of a few....a situation that becomes even tougher to change when your Board is made up from major shareholders and/or their representatives. Shareholders are also Stakeholders and they should be represented, but that should be through a vote of the Shareholders in picking a representative/s. Fans are Stakeholders and they should have a representation appointed by the fans. Local Authority, Youth & Community Development, Local Businesses and others who don't come to mind immediately are all Stakeholders in some way and all should be represented proportionately. Only once everyone is represented accordingly at the highest level can you begin to operate a club which balances the interests of all parties and is better equipped to prevent many of the problems we see arising on the business side of football clubs.

I'm not sure just how much Dee4Life would have been able to do in reality. As I pointed out elsewhere, any "fans rep" on the Board of the Club has obligations to that Board and is bound by the same rules of confidentiality as any other member. This would, technically, prevent them from "grassing" what was going on. Furthermore, the Trusts 26% shareholding counts for nothing in the Boardroom as the Board are empowered to make all decisions, as per the articles and memorandums. One Board Member = One Vote. That's why fans reps on club boards under the current business models used are fairly pointless, other than from the point that they can raise issues at Board Meetings (no guarantee they have to be listened too). There's also no guarantee that the Fans Rep was aware of how bad things were. However unlikely, it is conceivable that he was kept in the dark over certain matters and/or was being fed assurances from the money men that everything was in hand. Maybe he wasn't the only one, from what I can gather, Melville was all for putting more money in to the club, even though it was not going to be to the same level as he had previously...then out of the blue that seemed to be pulled. Not saying any of the above is the case, and I'm not looking to make excuses for Dee4Life or the fans rep. Just pointing out that they don't have some magic wand they could have waved to stop the club getting in to the position it has. Even if the fans rep had flagged an issue, what could they have done to prevent it? 26% would have given them the power to call an EGM and it gives them the power to stop any changes to things such as Articles and Memorandums etc. Unfortunately it's not enough to force through any changes and, if like us, they have a self appointing Board, they couldn't have forced the removal of anyone. It all adds up to give further evidence that Clubs are being run under the wrong models and how badly it needs to change.

Your constant and unwavering lugubriousness never fails to amaze me!!! Having witnessed a speech or two given by Butcher he is truly an inspirational character who (deservedly) commands respect and is able to back it up in his actions. With that in mind in doesn't surprise me in the slightest that he has gained recognition for his contribution to the sport and not only as a player. Not only that, but he uses what he has learned/experienced in the sport to help others in non-football scenarios as well. Thoroughly deserved recognition for a man who knows more than a thing or two about giving back.

I know why they do it, I just don't see the need. It should be drilled into players that they only react to the whistle, so much so that it should be a sub-concious process that they continue until they hear it. Assistant referees are there to do just that and there's absolutely no need whatsoever for a player to pay them any attention during a match. How many times do you see a defender being caught out because he looks over to see if a flag has been raised for offside and stops, only for the ref not to give it and a striker is left clear through....or they stop chasing a ball because they think it has gone out of play, only for the opposition to nip in and steal it. A flag or a wave of the hands doesn't stop a game, only the whistle does.....it's not a hard concept to understand.

As I've already said, I fully understand that Dundee fans are hurting right now and it's fairly understandable that many of them are lashing out at anyone and everyone...even if very little of that is being directed at the Board who got them in this mess. However, I would have expected a sensible and measured communication from the DFC Supporters Society, but instead they have gone ahead and published the following cringefest!!!! http://www.dee4life.com/homepage/2010/11/1/dundee-fans-dee-fiant.html It now seems blatantly apparent that nobody...club, fans or supporters groups...maintain any grip on reality and/or the focus that is going to be required to get Dundee FC through this mess. To be honest, it's starting to get rather painful to watch as they continue to implode with no sign of anyone within the Dundee setup taking any responsibility for the fact they brought this on themselves. If anything, it's their actions and attitude that will lead to the death of the club...but they can't see that.

I never understood why refs should have to wave play on...surely the lack of whistle is enough to let players know play hasn't stopped!!!

Mordor Have a Green Dot for giving me a laugh

Must......resist!!!!!!

I should just have put "They aren't going to do anything until forced into it" I think Scottish Football (and maybe even global football) has just entered a period of natural selection and if we haven't lost at least a half dozen of the teams in the current setup to liquidation within the next 4 or 5 years I'll be surprised. I also don't think it will be a bad thing in the grand scheme as trying to support 40 teams in a professional setup the way we are is folly for such a small country....that in itself should force the issue on league structure, which is also desperately needed but not going to happen until forced. Probably best I don't allow myself to be drawn into a discussion on ICT's finances or I'll be here ranting all night!!!

As I said, Scotty....."Turkeys voting for Christmas" and "Until things change". I'm familiar with the attached document and there's a load of other things out there at the moment which will force much needed change....but until then "we'll continue to see clubs using Administration as a means for running up, then escaping from, huge debts."

Or, as I have been harping on about elsewhere, put in place systems that reduce the likelihood of it happening in the first place. One of the biggest problems is that the worst offenders in situations like this (the Board) are the ones who suffer least as they just up and out the door, leaving everyone else to clear up the mess. The only possible recourse would be for the shareholders to take action against them for negligence/corruption, but very difficult and expensive case to prove in court....especially as the companies Articles will be written to allow them (the Board) to do pretty much as they like, and unless you can prove personal gain on the part of a Director you're probably pissing in the wind. Quite simply, the business models being used do not fit football. What's most unfortunate is the decision makers within the Associations who could force change are the clubs and you're not going to get the Turkey voting for Christmas (which is why I think the proposal for working with HMRC for early warnings is unlikely to happen). SFA/SFL/SPL are suppose to be a regulatory body, but they have little/no powers to regulate how clubs operate beyond footballing matters. Until all the above changes then we'll continue to see clubs using Administration as a means for running up, then escaping from, huge debts.

It's a board of 8. Leishman was/is the only 1st Div Club represented on the board and he abstained in the vote on punishment.

It does seem extremely harsh.... The wrong people are being punished through no fault of their own. This could very well be the end of the road for DFC. So how do they punish the club without other suffering then? I don't buy into the "innocent fans" theory either, certainly not in the grand scheme of things. They were happy enough to be out there supporting the team that was built on unsustainable financial models, lording it over others in the process. They're not the only fans to do it, but when it all goes tits up they have to accept they were/are part of it and any anger should be directed at those who caused it, not those faced with the task of imposing punishment. Also, I see they are already trotting out the "nobody will buy us if we get demoted" line. If these potential buyers were so sincere then why didn't they step in to prevent administration in the first place? Could it be that they are only interested in getting control of the club if they can do it on the cheap whilst maintaining a league position that was obtained through cheating? Is that the kind of person they really want running their club? Livingston had some semblance of a defence in that regard as Massone was refusing to part with his shares so it wasn't an option for any new/interested owner. Dundee shareholders had made it known they were happy to sell, but nobody came forward. What's more, had this happened during the closed season then Dundee would almost certainly have faced relegation to Div 3. It would seem that, given when these debts were originally due, they have dragged it sufficiently into a new season so as to make such a fate almost impossible.....hence the 25 points deduction instead and the 31st March deadline to get out of admin, at which point I think they will face relegation to Div 3 if not rectified....and rightly so.