CaleyD

The latvian ICT fan who post under that name on here?

He's either exceptionally talented, and has been playing professional football since the age of 11....in which case the answer is yes. Mind, if that was the case, then I'd guess we'd be competing with the likes of Barca, Man utd etc, for his signature. Or the answer is.....doesn't sound like it. Saying that, if his signature leads to an influx of Latvian women at the TCS, in support of their local hero, then I say...sign him now!!! I was actually referring to Latviaman!!!

Is he an experienced defender?

They're as entitled to an opinion as anyone else and should not be dismissed on the basis that they don't necessarily agree with you.

Source?

The under 21 League they scrapped not so long ago you mean?

But it's the DoF that takes care of the contracts.....even Brewster said so.

I'd be worried that that might sound the death Knell for Clach,. Or the saving of them if THEY became our reserve team

Something would be needed to fill the void between the U19's and the First Team.

Johnboy, the Trust are a Shareholder....therefore if you wanted to get technical a shareholder has called a meeting.

The last time this came up for discussion I believe ICT were in support of a 10 Team SPL!!!!

I think we'll see a couple of new faces but I'm not holding my breath on them being any better than what we have. If we're lucky we might land a decent defender OR a decent forward, but can't see us being able to splash out for both. The truth of the matter, whether we like it or not, is that we don't have the funds for "substantial" investment in the squad. Certainly not for 3 or 4 quality players. I remember hearing in the summer when we sold Marius that we'd be bringing in 3 or 4 quality players to strengthen....still waiting, and I don't think it will be any different this time. Happy to be proved wrong though. One other thing....if the club had substantial funds to invest in the squad, why were/are they not using them to obtain the long term services of the likes of Cowie and Black?

Let's not turn this thread into another "wish list", there's enough of them running in the relevant sections of the site.

I for one don't believe for a second that increased funds will/have been made available. We'll see the usual one or two changes, but nothing more.

What Sutherland (Tullochs) and Grassa are up to is called "propaganda". They think it suits them better to portray tomorrow night as a "protest meeting" because they are of the belief that there's insufficient support among the fans/shareholders to put any real pressure on them for change and that most people won't support the meeting if that's the case. Grassa himself is a member of the Supporters Trust, I wonder if he will be in attendance to make his views known?

My Response to the Devils Advocate............ "A section of the support who like nothing more than a whinge and a moan," Possibly an accusation which could have been thrown at those who took the stance that they would not support Brewster from the moment he returned, but I don't believe that was the case for the majority of people who accepted that he'd been appointed (some reluctantly) and got on with supporting the team. You might even be able to point the finger at those who were quick to complain after the first couple of losses, but as it it at this moment in time, even those who have been accused of an attitude of thinking "the club can do no wrong" are now calling for change. "spitting the dummy because they think they know how to run a football club, real supporters support through thick and thin, not expecting the moon on a stick" Dismissing someone's view/stance on this basis is simply a cop out and I would counter it with....Why would they bother if they weren't "real" supporters? Would I be any less Scottish if I disagreed with the policies and actions of the Scottish Parliament? "Its a fashion these days calling for the managers head, and these guys are just following the media like lambs" Large sections of the ICT support have been calling for changes for a long time now and I don't think the media, in this instance, could be accused of leading anything...quite the opposite in many cases. "The board cant act on the whims of supporters else the club would be in chaos." I agree, but I don't subscribe to the fact that the large majority of ICT fans are being in any way whimsical in their calls for a change of manager. We've been through poor spells before and although none as bad as this, this is the first time there's been widespread calls for a change in management. So it's not a claim which could be backed by any previous instance. I would say that, as fans, we've probably been guilty of "blind faith" in a lot of things we've allowed happen, and supported, since the club came into existance. "There are successful businesmen at the helm who have seen it all and more." Something which makes the current actions (or inactions) of the ICT Board even more bizarre. "Let them bicker away, never happy, theres no pleasing some people." Such is their perogative, but a time may come when they are forced to listen to the arguments. I just hope they are prepared for the consequences that come with leaving it so late to take positive action to try and rectify the situation.

We already have a manager who doesn't (seem to) know the team. For the reply on the Myths regarding Robertsons ventures after leaving ICT read This Thread

I don't see the trust making any public campaign for anything. The board have given a view, just as David F Sutherland (Tullochs), a shareholder, was on TV and gave his view...and even went so far as to publicly attack the opinions of the Trust Board. As to what does or doesn't happen at the meeting among the Trust and other shareholders....that's a private meeting, so they can discuss as they please, and if they wish to invite other shareholders and seek their opinion then that is entirely up to them.

He's played for the U19's He was part of the squad that won the 2007 La Manga U19 Tournament in Spain, played in the match v Slovakia (0-0) and match v Norway (2-1 Win). He also played in a Friendly v Austria in May 07 (2-0 win)...Vigurs coming close to adding the third in this game, but his chip was cleared off the line.

The statement dated 26/12 is the view of the Trust Board, but it may not be the view of the Trust Members. Whilst the Board have the power to act and represent the Trust as they see fit, I think it only responsible that they call this meeting to gauge if the views of the members match their own. These, IMO, are the actions of a board that actually do give consideration to it's membership...a stark contrast the the "we're the board and will do what we like" attitude that seems to be emanating from the stadium. As to what options are available to the Trust?....there's many paths which could be taken as a result of the meeting, but I don't think we should try and pre-empt what they might be, certainly not before it can be established what the views and wishes of the members might be. There's also the fact that whilst the Trusts 10%+ share/voting right does give them certain options, it does narrow other options, and I can only assume that shareholders have been invited to the meeting to gauge their views and possibly to increase the options available, not just to the Trust on their own, but to the shareholders as a whole.

I've spoken to a couple of people like that also, but they tend to be people who are a bit closer to those at/running the club or who have boxes/hospitality packages and the like and don't necessarily mingle with the general fan base. Not saying they are any more or less of a fan than anyone else, but they are in an environment (especially at games) where those around them may not be too inclined to speak their minds for fear of upsetting someone at the top or for fear of their comments getting back to people at the top. All I say to anyone who doubts just how widespread the "groundswell" is, look at the reaction of the fans at recent games. Historically, ICT fans have never been the type to get up and leave a game early, we've all sat through some awful performances and results over the years, some of which are worse than what we're witnessing at present, but for the most part they stayed and supported the team till the final whistle. That's no longer the case and almost every week we're seeing masses of fans leaving with 15 or 20 minutes to go....30 minutes if you look at the Aberdeen Game. The Aberdeen match was also a great indication of just how many people do want Brewster Out. Not only was the crowd the most vocal in support of the team that I have witnessed in a long time, but I would say that equal numbers (if not more) were just as vocal in their calls for Brewster to be removed. So, we have two sets of fans here...one set who feel beaten, scunnered or helpless by what's going on and simply pack up early and toddle off home because they aren't the type who are up for a battle, or who have witnessed the fans being ignored and cast aside for so long that they think any complaint is a waste of time...the other set of fans are those who are more vocal about what's going on and are up for the battle, who won't be ignored or cast aside. Admittedly you have a third set of fans who just want to watch a game of football on a Saturday afternoon and aren't interested in anything other than what happens on the pitch, but will they continue to attend when the product is constantly as bad as it is at the moment? Getting round to my point....it's not just the "groundswell" of vocal support for Brewsters Sacking that needs to be considered here, and just because someone isn't screaming their lungs out in defiance of Brewster at the football doesn't mean they think he should be retained. These "quieter" people are actually speaking louder than anyone right now, it's just that those running the club aren't listening.....these are the fans who are staying away, the fans who took up the 4500+ tickets at this point last season which haven't been sold this season. The club are fools if they consider the silent fans as being the ones who are backing them as these will be the fans who are hardest to win back in the long run. It's a very weak business that doesn't know, understand or ignores it's customer base. If the club, or anyone, seriously thinks there's not a majority backing among the fans for change then I fear the worst, because not only are they incomeptent, they are totally naive and certainly not fit to be running our club. I'm getting to the point now where I fear it is too late to turn things around through any structured means and that our survival is in the lap of the gods. Not only do we need to remove Brewster, we need to appoint the right replacement and they need time to strengthen in the Transfer Window. It's at the point where the current board are proving have proved that they aren't fit to be running our club and we should be looking to replace them as well as the Management team.

Imagine what he could do with a whole left foot!!! :o

The offer of a coaching role would surely be thing to tempt Pressley to choose us ahead of the Swiss team. Aren't we crying out for a coach to come in and organise our defence? Once again, Brewster is showing his fear of strong personalities. It cost as Park and Barry, and it may now cost us the signing an experienced defender. It has, and is set to continue to, cost us a lot more than those you mention.

I didn't say my choice would be anyone else, I was making the point that if people are trying to deflect blame from Brewster by pointing the finger at Munro they then have to ask the question as to why the Manager persists on giving him the armband. As I've said before, if you put people in a position for which they are not suited then you can't blame them when they fail to do the job. It's those that put them in that position, and persist with it when it's not going well, who are accountable.

Not true caleyboy. As I understand it, some problems existed over ownership/rights to the Tartan, but I believe this was all sorted out at some point last year and the club have actually ordered a bale/roll (whatever you refer to it as) to be run off. What the turn around times are, or what/who the order was intended for, I have no idea.