CaleyD

LG, if the Trust don't communicate what they are doing, then it can only be expected that people will ask questions of them. I know they haven't been idle, but that's only because I have spoken to members of the Trust Board (including yourself) recently. The current situation with problems between the club and fans has been building for some time now, and I don't think it's unreasonable for people to have expected some kind of statement from them (the Trust) before now. The Trust need to be telling the fans what is coming out of these meetings with the club, otherwise what's the point?

We couldn't afford his wages in the first division.

You can't sell TCS, we don't own it....David Sutherland does.

Hey guys, let's not be giving the Stewards a hard time here. They were only acting on the instructions of Mike Smith and were very polite and courteous. The woman who I was talking too seemed as baffled by the request for the banner to be removed as we all did and was simply passing on the instruction. As I will be taking things further I don't want to say any more for the moment.

I actually found the whole "Evidence Gathering Team" thing quite funny to be honest. I even shouted after them at half-time that should they find any evidence of tactical ability in the stadium then I'd be interested in them letting us know. Seriously, it's nothing to get worked up over and I don't think the club have any right to see the footage unless it's part of police investigation into any trouble....of which their was none. If they were there at the request of the club, then it only serves to show just how out of touch the club are with the fans, in so far as we were never likely to start ripping out seats and causing problems.....but maybe that's part of the problem, we're far too soft a touch!!!

At the Match? Vote for your top 3 players in the SPL Match versus ABERDEEN Please make sure you vote for 3 separate players. If you make an error, let us know so we can fix it. PLEASE ONLY VOTE IF YOU WERE AT THE GAME Anyone caught trying to cheat the system WILL be banned from voting in polls...this is your only warning.

Alex, there's nothing at all in the response to suggest that our e.mails went anywhere near the Board of Directors, let alone the fact that any response might have been as a result of their direction....and all e.mails that I was copied in on were directed for the attention of the Chairman and BoD. If they did in fact go in front of the board, then I find it hard to believe that they would not have the common courtesy to put their name to the replies we have received...which, as far as I can tell have been written and sent by Mike Smith who is not even a member of the Board, and who, on several occasions, we have been told has little or nothing to do with the footballing side of the club.

Can we all help save some of our Carbon Footprint by not quoting a post when your responding to the last post in the thread.

11th top SPL Goalscorer.

Here's a starter on the e.mails for press Inverness Courier - [email protected] Highland News - [email protected] Daily Record - [email protected] The Sun - [email protected] Press and Journal - [email protected] or [email protected] If anyone has thoughts for others (including the BBC) then you can generally find their contact details on the "contact us" page of the respective website.

- as far as wind-up merchants go, your right up there with the best at the moment HC. You've even managed to hook a few people.

As the song goes "you say it best, when you say nothing at all". The response from the club was pretty much as I thought it would be. So why bother? Because I'm sick fed up of hearing the "we can't do anything if people don't communicate things to us directly" line being trotted out, either by the club or the Supporters Trust every time a problem crops up. The content of the response and the fact that it's a simply copy and paste to everyone who contacted them only serves to highlight the point that taking a civilised and responsible approach to resolving issues does not work and if we want to make ourselves heard then we have to resort to other methods. That's why I would encourage everyone who is dissatisfied with the current situation to make their feelings known at the match tomorrow. Again, I ask that people keep it within the boundaries of both the law and the rules of the SPL/SFA and ICTFC, but none of that prevents us from being vocal in our calls for change. For those who can't bring themselves to attend the match to make their feelings known (and even for those who can) I would now suggest that you send a copy of your e.mail to the press. If your not happy with the response from the club I would make sure you highlight that point to them.

Looks like it's the same response that's been sent to everyone who e.mailed the club.

Since McAllister is out for a while with a bad injury then he's guaranteed a contract extension, so that narrows it down a bit.

Larsson, Scott McDonald, Nacho Novo, Petrov, Darren Mackie, Derek Riordan, Billy Dodds, Stephen Crawford - All under 6 Feet tall and they pretty much make up the majority of the SPL top scorers over the years.

I'll be at the game tomorrow and I will be making my feelings known on the situation at the club just now. If I am alone, then so be it. Nobody is suggesting anyone do anything to disrupt the tribute to Jock MacDonald, or any other part of the match day, and if others want to try and twist the fans discontent with the club into something it isn't then, IMO, they are the ones who need to be taking a look at themselves.

Sorted, moved non-poetry related posts to this thread.

It makes the world of difference. Soon as the Transfer window opens the clock is ticking and I would rather have a replacement in who has time to look at the market and assess our needs now than in 2 weeks when he'll then be left chasing the pack. Not to mention the fact that come 1st January players like Cowie, Black, Fraser, Vigurs etc could all be signing pre-contracts with other clubs and we're at the stage where it's not possible to convince them to stay.

Sorry, but I disagree. I would expect and encourage everyone to honour the minutes silence and not do anything stupid or inappropriate at that time, however I fail to see why anything else should change. Next weeks excuse......"It's Xmas, a time for forgiving and forgetting", and in 2 weeks we can have the "You can't protest on the Sabbath".......give me a break!!!

We'll cross that bridge if/when it happens.

Guys, can you continue the Wyness argument on another thread, this topic is about what Action fans should.shouldn't be taking under the current circumstances at the club. Anything off-topic from here on will be removed.

The problem with trying to determine what sort of package Niculae was on is that we had so many stories which were put out there by the press which were never challenged or refuted by the club. It suited them (and to an extent Niculae) at the time that people thought he was on far, far more than he actually was. It suited the club because it made them look like they could be a player in the transfer market, and it suited Marius because if/when the time came for him to move on then the last thing he would want is people offering him wages based on his real salary at ICT instead of the perceived one. i.e. If clubs thought he was on 3k or more a week then only the serious contenders would be coming in looking to top it. If they knew he was on nearer ?1500 or so a week then every chancer would have been pestering him looking for his services.....just my opinion on things, but I think it makes a certain amount of sense. You then have to look at the kind of figures which were being talked about, and which were confirmed by the club at the time or following Marius' departure, and the figures put about for Barrowman when he signed. For Barrowman we were told it was a 3 year deal thought to be worth over ?200,000 plus a signing on fee. When you do the maths on that it's about ?1300/week not including the signing on fee. For Marius we were told that an investment was made by Orion which would have covered the players costs for 2 years. We know a singing fee was involved and that it was 200,000 Euros or more (press reports on him still being due 100k and this being a second instalment suggest this to be the case). So if you take that first instalment off and divide the remaining investment by Orion down weekly over 2 years then you end up with a figure which is not too far off what Barrowman is receiving. So, IMO, based on the information to hand, I would surmise that selling Niculae had very little to do with "finances", or the clubs inability to pay his level of wages....despite the spin placed on it at the time. We then come to more recent stories about players such as Black where we're being given the impression that we can't afford his wage demands as finances aren't what they should be and things are difficult with the credit crunch. That, on the face of it would appear to make sense....money is tight so we have to think about trimming the squad. However, we then see stuff appearing in the papers about money being made available to bring in players in the transfer window....experienced players, players who we aren't going to get for the same or less money than players being let go. That, again, leaves me feeling that these decision is NOT being based on finances, which seems to be the party line, and just more poor spin.

On the subject of spending wisely, giving money to Brewster does worry me a bit, but that's a different discussion altogether.

It happens....sometimes clubs/managers make signings that don't work out and I'd challenge anyone to find a manager who's never done it. Seriously, as much as I think Brewster has his faults (and plenty of them), and as much as I might question the logic behind some of the signings from the perspective of them being replacements for what we've let go, I won't be crucifying him for the odd non-starter in the signings department. If you want to question signings then look at things like why we let someone like Marius go, only for us to replace him with a comparative amateur on comparable wages, or why he's never looked to take in a serious replacement for Dods at the back and is still concentrating on forward players on the approach to the window when we have just as many issues in defence.

I would agree with comments that his signing would appear to have been a waste of time and money, somewhat of a "panic buy" I think at the time. What I don't agree with is having a go at the guy himself, especially as very few will have seen him play more than once.