davie

It should be noted that under Paatelainen, Tannadice had become a dysfunctional place and was riddled with bizarre and plain bad behaviour. Gunning was not alone .I know this after being treated to some information leaked from the dressing room directly - something that has never and does not happen at ICTFC. I would be a wee bit circumspect about some of the above posts.

C'mon lads, please. Caley D has tried to help, given the options and then given people an option to contact the club if they really (italics to clarify the tone of the expression) don't like it. How is that pompous? What gets me in all of this is that the "official" name of the Club is "The Inverness Caledonian and Thistle Football Club" so if there is any abbreviation that should be universally accepted it's ITCFC! For a good while, fans of the football club and unconnected with what goes on social media at it have used the "pride of the highlands" to describe all sorts of things from pictures of us in Bucharest, Dingwall, Hampden to all points in between. It's something that has been reused by fans on Facebook and their own twitter ID's. It's gone on flags. Now, because it goes on a shirt (as an addition to an unaltered club badge) it provokes this reaction? I'm ever so slightly mystified.

Complete bunkum Bannerman and you know it. I laboured under the illusion that you were a highlander by descent but I suppose being associated with nats would rule that out and explains the peculiar wording of your second sentence. Anyhow, the obese and allegedly homosexual Duke's mother was German (Caroline of Ansbach) and his father nominally English. His house was of Brunswick - Luneberg (Hanover), his Godparents the King and Queen in Prussia and nominally English Dad was actually an elector of the Holy Roman Empire. He has not a drop of Scottish blood, ancestry or tie. I look forward to the day that you get down from your high horse and give it a fair opportunity to hoof your disingenuous *rse

quick half day today and then the ritual bike ride to a pre-season game! Gies a toot if you see me.

This is a real statement of intent by the Board and Richie. I can't think of anyone more committed to the place who is better qualified to lead us forward. His football knowledge, determination, willingness to embrace learning gives me great hope for the season ahead and I'm sure that the whole dressing room will be chuffed that he's got the job.I see an answer to those who thought recently that the board were distant and disconnected from the fans - they've been listening it would seem. Some might be concerned at Richie's lack of experience, but I'd rather that than the "usual suspects" that queue up looking for another job at the first hint of a vacancy. Well done all, togetherness indeed.

what a game. Has to be one of the displays of the season - we were better than partick in every position. There were times in the second half when we threatened to run riot and up front it really did click. Tells you something when Miles storey thought he should have had 4. Absolute joy to watch.

aye I noticed! Called him a comic in my first post but failed to remember what show he was in. Get my drift though.

Charles, thanks for the reply but you appear to have missed the point. I defend your absolute right to say whatever you want to whether or not I agree with it, I’ve made that clear. You were not “asking hard questions” you were being inflammatory and wrong-headed in respect of what you were arguing. You are no Nick Robinson. As for your role as a journalist Charles, I would expect you to adhere to The NUJ code of Conduct. The BBC have a very clear policy on off-air activities which includes that on “personal use of social networking and other third party websites including blogs, microblogs and personal web space” You may want to have a look at both. There is quite a bit of your post activity in this thread that might be called into at least some degree of question. Part time freelancers can freely express political views but not offensively or inaccurately. I also have no problem with your postulating parallels with Germany in the 20’s and 30’s except that’s not what you did. You are directly comparing and inferring a similarity between the SNP and the Nazi party. It is a different matter entirely. By your use of unrelated photographs of German WW2 soldiers and Fergus Ewing you simply compound it. To be honest it appears to be verging on the libellous. Your use of hacked about Nazi nomenclature is similarly dishonest. Far from creating “a situation where people can behave completely outrageously and never be held account for it” that is precisely what I’m doing. Now. Your comparison is fallacious. Will you please address that issue directly? I’m glad that Doofers Dad got the point – about informed debate as part of a “serious topics” forum. That is what this should be but I fear you have devalued that not in the least by quoting Stalin. It comes across as a challenge of sneering dismissal which might not be your best course of action here. It’s the same as your “great unwashed” tactic. You might find that those who want, embrace and enjoy open debate have a multitude of “divisions” who will challenge your bilious and disingenuous froth and I hope that they do it fairly and without recourse to the many dreadful characteristics you ascribe them. All this 696 years to the day since the signing of The Declaration of Arbroath. Would you credit it.

I respond to this only on the grounds that there were quite astonished reactions to the content of this thread on twitter and I thought I’d have a look. I wish I hadn't. Apart from the polarised political viewpoints (to which everyone is entitled and can voice as they wish within the constraints of the Law) there is a quite dreadful quality to some of the arguments being propounded which call the right of some of the points being made into question. Before looking at this, it would really help if posts were numbered so that they could be referred to easily throughout the thread. Charles Bannerman, in his post Thursday 9:36 pm, makes several erroneous points in support of his arguments that seem to point to similarities between the SNP and the National Socialist (Nazi) party. In sequence:The Nazis came to power in Germany on the back of an idea of Prussian based military thinking that they had not been defeated in WWI, an idea that they had been “stabbed in the back” by Versailles and a territorial inheritance from the old Holy Roman Empire that divided people along lines of language based cultural identity. Those without a territorial base (Jews, roma etc.) were historically marginalised and anti-Semitism had been a recurrent theme of German life for centuries . It became lethal only when several truly ridiculous and odious ideas about race and genetics were injected into the mix. They had originated in Vienna in the late 19th Century and with the assimilation of German speaking peoples into the “Reich” became political dogma. There is no parallel whatever with the present political landscape in Scotland. The “Sturm Macteilung” reference is odious and in its self worthy of censure. The "Sturm Abteilung" were the original Nazi brown shirts that Ernst Rohm led in a campaign of torture and murder in the 30's. Likewise, I have seen no Kristallnacht of book burning in Scotland – 3 SNP Councillors burned a copy of the Smith report and were suspended for their actions. Ed’s post of Friday at 7:08 shows a comic in Wehrmacht uniform to reinforce the post above. Wrong uniform, wrong inference. Doofers Dad’s post of Saturday 11:35 is the most rationally intact one on the thread, but there are a couple of points. The Conservative party have not been set up here, they have simply not attracted enough votes to get their political message across enough to be voted in. That they have done that in England emphasises their comparative weakness here. Nothing more. The austerity argument is muddled, especially from the NHS point of view. What “significant” parts of the NHS have been contracted to the private sector? If you are referring to purchasing services or bed capacity, that’s a national policy and a conservative one at that. I do, however have a degree of empathy about the Council Tax argument. The most important point is that this is a post we could (should) debate. By Sunday, Charles Bannerman is posting something that appears to be nothing more than a goad to provoke reply to his arguments. I note Alex MacLeod’s response but this is that direct response. On Monday at 2:32 Charles Bannerman posts the out of context picture referred to above with a direct comparator of an SNP politician. Are you really suggesting Charles, that Fergus Ewing is a Nazi or has Nazi sympathies? Westhill 1 (a new signing with Ed) states that the “one party state” in Scotland should implode within 5 years. It may or may not, but Scotland is no more a one party state than Britain was during the Thatcher era. The opposition simply weren’t effective enough and that is what is happening now. If you want change, argue and persuade others that you are right. There is no dictatorship in this country. Charles Bannerman (Monday 11:58) reinforces this. I note that Alex takes exception to the “great unwashed” or the “proletariat” but I find them referred to as “ballot box fodder” more disgusting. Everyone’s vote is equal in weight, Charles. That’s what universal suffrage is about. Your vote is no more significant or valid than anyone else’s despite your frankly appalling debating strategy. Doofers Dad again contributes with a defence of Charles Bannerman making “reasoned and evidenced” argument in this thread. His arguments are neither. There was no real need to refer to Alex’s input as “your indignant little claim.” It demeans your point. Charles Bannerman then replies in post of what is now “12 hours ago”. It is this post that I find the most disturbing and disingenuous of all of them. No amount of wishful thinking can alter history Charles but your scenario would have resulted in a set of quite unquantifiable events. That’s revisionist particularism for you. More importantly and as you know Charles, you are not entitled under Law to be offensive to others on the basis that you have chosen (nationalism) with impunity. You are not being anti-Scottish, simply reactionary and muddled in your thinking and your arguments show several serious lapses of judgement. I have seen no “nastiness and arrogance” here from people who have disagreed with you, merely a sneering, dismissive and at times braying dismissal of them. Physician heal thyself. The "PC serially offended" may well not like your explicit parallels with the Nazis and the SNP, but it comes perilously close – and in some cases probably oversteps – the legal definition of hate speech in the various statutes it is defined in. You have demonstrably chosen to align the SNP with a national group (Scots) and project arguments designed to align your political opponents (aforesaid SNP) with perhaps the most odious political regime in history, one responsible for the deaths of millions. It is utterly and disgracefully wrong. I inferred above that your “rant” – for it is little better than that – showed a serious lapse of judgement and that is illustrated by the above to a degree that is unarguable. What I object to is that you have a vehicle to express your opinions as a representative of the Highland News and of the BBC. You have obligations and you are wilfully ignoring them ( by your repeated arguments above in a public forum using your own name) and I would have serious questions about your fitness for these roles. Not because of your politics, your personality, your nationality or your religion but simply because of your persistent, disgusting, divisive and wholly inflammatory arguments. You need to examine what you are doing here.

Two things. "Elected" just means "chose" and it's not Mo Johnstone we're talking about here. Move on.

I share Kingsmills unease about banning a whole group of people. I had some idea that this might happen but only got a screen shot of a message copied to me this morning. It is the prerogative of CJT to transport whomsoever they want to and from games and I had heard reports that the behaviour on bus 3 was far from ideal. But ban the lot? It's an easy way out and doesn't do much to identify and address any behaviours that individuals show. Contrary to the message sent, CJT have not denied a right to people to travel - they have exercised a right not to take their business. There's also a question that CJT don't have "control" over people using their buses. They have a code of conduct that I presume those on bus 3 have broken. That needs to be clear. Final point, the bus convener shouldn't be signing the message personally, it's CJT's collective responsibility and should be signed the board as a whole or by the chairperson. These are my personal views only.

In my view, CJT and Ross County have acted prematurely by supporting any and all sanctions (as they seem to in the joint statement that prompted this thread) and a great deal of the criticism levelled in this forum is little more than dressed up prejudice regarding young people. Sentiments that have gone without comment, except from Renegade, such as “at least they are at the head of the queue when collecting Darwin awards” are as humourless as they are tasteless. For those of you unaware, the sentiment expressed is that at least these people will kill themselves sooner than most. Nutty and discredited indeed. Scottish football supporters are already subject to surveillance from several sources and there is legitimate concern that they are being treated in a potentially criminalising way that non-football attending citizens are not. Clubs use CCTV to monitor crowds from a control room at every ground and have the necessary mugshots of persons banned to hand. The operators are in radio contact with stewards and police if their intervention is necessary. FoCUS, the national football intelligence unit, can be regularly seen filming fans. It is funded by Scottish Government to obtain the type of intelligence that the SFA appear to be saying will cost a further £4 million to refine and implement. To what end? Looking for smoke bombs? The people being subject to this are customers, not potential law-breakers. It is a palpable waste of money when the means to control crowds are already in place and it will do nothing to address the oft observed reluctance of stewards and police to intervene, especially when large travelling crowds are in attendance and “pyro” becomes more likely to be used. What will happen is that someone, more readily identifiable from a smaller support, will be chosen as an example. That puts ours and County’s fans at greater risk of prosecution than, say, those supporting a Glasgow team (who actually have a history of using flares) and that’s not justice. What is clear is that the use of these things is something that some younger supporters (customers like all of us) see as either a minor issue at football, or as something that they actually want. Contrary to what has been said, there is a place for these people in football. Why? For years, the media has lauded the “atmosphere” at (for instance) Bundesliga grounds as laudable, desirable and something to be aspired to and that appears to be what these kids have bought into. Nothing more. BT Sport, for instance, have published their 10 best “tifo’s” (fan displays). So have the Guardian. The Daily Record thought CSKA Sofia fans “astonishing” and awarded them a “gold star” for their star wars display whilst deploring anything similar in Scotland. The use of “pyro” is integral to these displays, so it gets copied and the media reinforce that by their double standards in reporting the issue. So kids keep doing it. It’s nothing more sinister, irresponsible or “stupid” than that. I’d better make it clear now that I personally don’t want to see “pyro” at our games. I don’t want to watch clouds of smoke, I want to watch the game. I certainly don’t want to watch younger fans get themselves into conflict and criminalise themselves. Above all I don’t want people to get hurt. What needs to happen is behavioural change by peer pressure from fans organisations to stop our fans from using smoke bombs. This will only be done by engaging, not ostracising them. If people don’t change, there’s a law in place for the authorities to use and it must not be broken. Let’s just not get carried away.

I thought we played really well yesterday against a good aberdeen side who were (in the second half at least) determined to go all out for the win. In the first half, we played them like a fiddle. Despite the pre-match doom spattered statements, the shape worked really well. Aberdeen's midfield had absolutely no chance of getting past Draper and Wedderburn and by the time they had tried and shipped the ball to Hayes etc., they were mugged time and again by Tremarco and Raven . The only real surprise was that we weren't three up by half time. Don't listen to those who tell you that Aberdeen "bottled it" or didn't play well - they didn't, they were just bettered in the first half. Second half, they were better when they went two and the workload we had put in showed. By the time Storey was subbed, he was out on his feet. So, pretty natural that we get pushed deeper and there is only one outcome from that. A Gary Warren slip and it's 2-1 and the Collum show starts. He was dreadful to both sides in equal measure yesterday, but the worst of it was that when the crowd got on his back he reacted to it. I can't see any other reason for the penalty in the last minute. Not so much inconsistent as incoherent. David Raven looked fresh and determined to reclaim his place but Liam Polworth was astonishingly good. I had concerns that he might not make the breakthrough this season that he needed to but was I wrong. He's blossomed under the Hughes passing regime and added passion and dig to that yesterday. Don't be downhearted, this was a great point.

Shaun, SHAUN! Where are you? Did you hear the news..........

That's the worst, most graceless highlights reel i've seen in ages. It's reminiscent of the publicity of stalinist russia (or Ibrox in the old days) in that it's a travesty of what actually happened. At no time did we look like that we had run away with the game, but we could have scored 5 with what was effectively a second string eleven - we had a hell of a lot more of the game than that shows. Motherwell are an excellent club who are badly let down by a partisan element who put this lot up. Get real.

I say it IS the business of the club to get support up - home and away. If there is no supporters bus for away games then that is pretty shameful and reflects badly on the club. I would also think that the game against Motherwell is a vitally important one albeit not high profile. I am certainly not having a go at John and CJT - what I am saying AGAIN is that the club should step in. I would never expect my trips to away games to be paid for by the club . Who would abuse the club they support in that way? As for using it or losing it - I use it all the time. Unfortunately it looks like I am also losing it. I would also say - appreciate fans or lose them. It works both ways. Hearach, I hear what you say, but your post that I replied to stated that "the deficit wouldn't be a huge amount, it could be paid for by using the salary" etc. That's getting the club to pay for the attendance of supporters (at least in part) to away venues that they accrue no benefit from. I have no doubt that the club appreciates supporters and it does a myriad of things to "get the support up" by various pricing initiatives and more - at home games that generate income for the club. . At no point did I think you were having a go at John. As I said before and maintain this is essentially a supporters matter. It is the fans who are not using the bus - how can this be a lack of appreciation from the club that in your opinion should "work both ways"? If you and CJT and others work to recruit fans to fill the bus, it will travel.

Glad to see John gone? Our most successful manager, how on earth could you possibly "be glad to see him gone"? I am not denying that he will be gone one day but I do feel he has another 2yrs before he is gone. This clown is not a true supporter in my opinion and has probably never stepped foot into the Tulloch Caledonian Stadium! He's not a clown and neither has he stepped foot into the stadium (that's another story) but he's been attending games for years. For what it's worth, I agree that John Hughes record stands scrutiny and that judgements such as Shaun's shouldn't be made on the back of a limited slump in form and injuries. I've seen plenty of conjecture, rumour and some fibs around this but absolutely no evidence that the Manager either wishes to leave or plans to.

Hearach, it's not the business of the club to effectively pay for supporters to attend away games where they incur little or no benefit from any investment. Obviously this is different for one off high profile games where the club have (and I presume will continue to) help. The club will continue to provide what benefit it can to boost home crowds and income that can be invested in our club. This is a supporters problem. I know John Horne struggles manfully to keep the busses running but there needs to be a commitment from fans here to support that. Possibly if it was publicised in a wider context, booking offered in a variety of methods and suppliers sought with an absolute focus on minimum cost it might help, as might an attempt to pull fans out of what appears to be a fairly powerful lethargy. At the end of the day though, it's a supporters problem of use it or lose it. Starting soon.

don't think you noticed but we didn't lose to Dundee of the sides you term mediocre. I'd only call killie that. Wrong emoticon

I think with Draper it was a question of getting him through to half time and then seeing how he was. Wasn't a bad idea against a side that had created next to nothing against us up to that point and we have been shown to be vulnerable when Drapes isn't there. Williams also felt the effects of that collision with Draper, so no real choice with that sub either. Raven by all accounts was feeling a knock so all of the substitutions were enforced. I'm also not sure that our players wanted to chase that game 100% on a surface that most of them don't like and on a week where I'm sure that most of them would have welcomed the managerial speculation like toothache. I also think that the surface limited the amount of potential returnees that would be risked - especially from any kind of ligament strain etc. where there is a belief that the plastic pitch would just make it worse. Seeing what happened to Dundee's unpronounceable Basque defender at Hamilton kind of reinforces that. Maybe it is one to just consign to the bin - bad day, bad pitch, bad luck and a defeat after a few good results.

nice night for it down here. Grabbing my tea in 'spoons and their fans say that they fear a thrashing - they have been that bad this year. We need focus and to do a job here. Any kind of win will do me.

Spare me the sanctimony. If you raise your hands to an opponents face and the referee/ assistant sees it, you are off - rules of the game. It was a clear punch. Neil Alexander called it right last night - he was screaming at Oshinwa, calling him a "stupid ba****d - you can't do that here" as he pulled him away. Unlike Chris Sutton, who reckons that modern players can't handle being punched and others here who reckon "if he was in a boxing ring he wouldn't last 30 seconds" Fair point but it's a football pitch he was on, not canvas. Correct decision, no fault attached to Silva.

I'll reckon you watched that on the tele, didn't see what was a clear punch (and it wasn't the first) and can be excused for your "downside" drivel. Utterly uncalled for.

I'll chip in as one of the people who introduced the £1 fee for CJT membership. IMHO it's a bit of a red herring to put increasing the membership fee as a means of subsidising the buses, which have always been "challenging" to administer and fund. The £1 membership fee was introduced as a means of democratising the trust (as it was then) by increasing the membership. This has happened and CJT should now reflect the opinion of a significant proportion of our support who are members and therefore engaged in their supporters trust. If all of those members were to pay the £10 fee mooted above, they would simply be subsidising the few that use the busses without addressing the core issue of why more people don't use them and it's easy to see how this could create tensions. I also suspect that a significant proportion of the membership would simply default on renewal. It's also difficult to see where a reduced cost of coach hire could be sourced in Highland that would allow reduction of fares. Remember that reduced fares on stagecoach and scotrail are subsidised by the whole network (and by Scottish Government) so they don't reflect a cost model that CJT can hope to come close to. It may be that the creation of a separate arm of CJT that works solely on busses is now an idea, one that doesn't rely on ad hoc subsidy by the membership and which concentrates 100% on getting members to use it and not lose it. Final thought, maybe people ought to consider that the £20 return fare is a service that is worthy of them supporting by digging that wee bit deeper. Aye, you can drink on the train or get a megabus for next to nothing if you have lived long enough but they put nothing back into the trust or the club. Use the CJT buses and it allows them to reinvest that money in ways that benefit all our supports. Your call.

well written but frankly wrong. Nine, aye nine first team picks being out, but still picking up a wage means a weakened squad but not a lot of room to improve at least in the short term. Resigning people in summer after a successful season resulted in having to spend more just to stand still. We are losing games because our defence is decimated and our attack depleted. It's not being apollogist, just stating facts. We weren't too far off it for spells today.