CaleyD

Think you've been watching too much Eastenders

I think your more intelligent than that 5thStand

I was about to try a clever calculation with %, but after my screw up on the VAT thread earlier in the week I don't think I'll risk it

You got off to a bad start if that was what you were hoping for!!!! Anyway, I just wanted to add that Dundee Utd made NO substitutions today....proof that sometimes it's more about getting the players on the park in the right place as opposed to changing them for others.

I think they just did!!!

As I just said on the matchday thread.......... "I know everyone has opinions as to who should be playing up front and who shouldn't and I know I've voiced my opinions on the subject as much as the next person.....however, the truth of the matter is, if your playing a lone striker and they aren't getting any service or support then they could be the worlds best and it wouldn't make any difference. "

I know everyone has opinions as to who should be playing up front and who shouldn't and I know I've voiced my opinions on the subject as much as the next person.....however, the truth of the matter is, if your playing a lone striker and they aren't getting any service or support then they could be the worlds best and it wouldn't make any difference.

Brewster in "Stating the Obvious" shocker

Was suggested on the radio that Imrie went into the game with back problems and was even doubtful to start at one point. That might explain the change there, but doesn't help explain much else!!!

I'm praying this evening that the talks of a contract extension are actually the "vote of confidence" that normally precedes a managers getting his P45.

They've all been banned

If played properly I think a 4-5-1 CAN work at home, but we don't play it with an attacking duo coming from the midfield to support at the front to make it function. It's therefore the boring old "counter attack" football which is nothing but frustrating IMO....especially when it's what your subjected to all the time. I'm not saying we'll get beat because of it, I just don't think it gives us our best chances or makes for anything that comes close to entertaining.

ARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH - we're lining up 4-5-1

Some very interesting discussion on the radio just now about the ICT pitch. Dundee Utd and Jim Spence creating a hullabaloo because ICT never made an earlier decision that the games was on??? We told them the pitch was fine, they then insisted on a pitch inspection, and are now complaining that we left the inspection late....when their was no need for the inspection.

BBC Story If I had to pick games likely to be called off due to frost then this is the two I would have had at the top of the list. Killie have history of not utilising their USH properly and it would appear that they are using the "weather caught us out" excuse this time. i.e. They never had it turned on. Motherwell, well you only have to look back to last season and the ongoing speculation that they don't have an operating system. Lot of very valid and interesting points being made on the Radio, and have a feeling Motherwell and Killie could face sanctions this time around.

Oh yes, I remember it well. Travelled up for that one. Top of the table clash I recall. We had key players on the treatment table. Game off due to 'frozen pitch'...yeh right!! Went to watch Clach instead...in Inverness....on an unfrozen pitch...hmmmm... :thumb04: Clyde also had a number of players out for treatment, so they weren't complaining too much about the postponement either

And the longer the wait the more people he'll have keeping him company.

Hope we get a copy of the cheque and have it framed, could be a very long time before we ever get another one for European representation

Maybe Black was offered a contract, maybe he wasn't.....I don't know. All I do know is that we have the player saying in the press that the club haven't talked to him which is conveniently followed by a press articles and interviews from the club which seem to be trying to make a big deal of the fact that they have talked to him. I also know that there's been very little information/news which has come from the club this year that has turned out to be what they originally tried to spin it to be....and it's that fact which leaves me questioning whether or not they are telling the full story or only a part story and spinning it in their favour. I pursued the point with Charles because he was portraying his version of events (which come from the club) as being an insight in what has been happening whilst ignoring the fact that there's information out there which is contradictory. When push comes to shove, I don't give a stuff who's telling the truth, what I want to see is those charged with the stewardship of ICT acting in a professional manner and doing everything possible to keep key players or to ensure that we get the best deal possible if/when the leave. Right now I, personally, see little or no evidence that they are doing this effectively. As I said before, the clubs reactionary approach to communication and providing information/news does them absolutely no favours....again, IMO.

Two games postponed as a result of weather from what I can ascertain. One against Morton in January 2001 and one against Clyde in February 2004. From memory the Morton one was called off due to travel conditions and the Clyde one was called off early (the night before) and the pitch was actually playable the next day. Someone with a better memory than me might be able to confirm?

With the current economic climate I think we're extremely fortunate to be getting a deal extended to 2010. It appears to be on very similar terms to the current deal, but even if it was a little less it's still better than reaching the summer and being stuck with a hole in the accounts and struggling to find a sponsor to fill it.

I agree with Stomach. When players aren't performing they are sent away and told they have to earn a contract and I believe Brewster should be told the same thing.

That statement is in effect defamatory. All I have done is to have quoted ICT's Director of Football and his account of the manner in which events unfolded. No, you clearly stated in your opening line that your report was an insight into what has been happening. In other words, your were citing the information as fact and not simply an account of any discussion you might have had with the DoF. The information contained therein is in direct conflict with what Ian Black said in the press...so you are in effect calling him a liar. If anyone is in danger of having made a defamatory comment, then I'm afraid it is you.

Here it is again for those who may have missed it the last twice this subject came up for discussion. For the record I'm not (at this time) making any comment on whether or not the amount received by the DoF is too much, too little or just enough. I'm merely trying to clear up the misconception as to whether or not he receives a salary (payment for work he does).

5thStand......you've clearly missed the "in" joke with Bingham Legend. Unfortunately one of the down sides to Internet Forums and not necessarily knowing everyone all that well.