Charles Bannerman

Looked at totally clinically and objectively there is actually a strong case for this. But it's a completely nonsensical non-starter which virtually no one would want. The case for the notion is that I do wonder if the population base of the inner Moray Firth is capable of sustaining two top six Premiership sides? Things have changed massively since two teams came into the Third Division in 1994. A single team would be a significantly more formidable entity. But here's the top and bottom line - there is absolutely no desire for any merger to happen and there are one or two other massive factors against it as well. Apart from what I said in the first sentence of the second paragraph, there are no factors in operation which would make a (further) merger desirable or feasible. * Unlike what happened in 1993/94, Dingwall and Inverness are two completely distinct communities. The earlier case offered huge progress for the single entity of Inverness. * There is also not the well defined carrot, such as Inverness at last getting into national league football after decades of rejection, that there was 20 years ago. * The question of location alone would kill the whole thing stone dead. * Mergers tend to take place when both parties' fortunes are at a low ebb - as was the case in Inverness in 1993. This is most definitely not the case at the momernt - quite the opposite. * A merger now would be rather different from selling the notion simply to season ticket holders. Voting power in both camps now lies with shareholders and the personalities involved, I am certain, would want none of it. So... I actually agree with Davie here. Let's not go there or there will be exploded brains all over the place! In fact, looking at the OP, why did FC start this thread in the first place?

Very interesting to hear an eyewitness account of what was a bodyblow for Inverness football back in 1950. And we just have to wonder how much more information Alex Main would have obtained for Caley All The Way had he had access to the club records which also went up in smoke that night. However I think we do know that IHE doesn't have National Service ahead of him!

I have to say I think this thread might be getting a bit of a "Seville" feel about it! I have also heard a few anecdotal claims about five figure crowds at Inverness football matches in the immediate post war years. But whilst not doubting the sincerity of those making these claims, which I am sure they genuinely believe, I just find the idea a bit difficult to come to terms with. I would question the claims of attendances of 10+ - 13000 on a few grounds. * Did even Grant Street have the capacity to accommodate such crowds, even though they were almost all standing? * The figures claimed are around half the population of Inverness (men, women and children) at the time. * To get to figures like that, think of the crowd that packed into Telford Street for the St Johnstone game in 1992, or imagine the Caledonian Stadium pretty full - and double that. * Did anyone actually count the crowds in these days? I do know that matches back in these days attracted large crowds and, for instance, whuilst researching something else in the Courier came across a claim of 7000 at Grant Street for a Scottish Cup tie - which I would believe. But when it gets to 10+ - 13000 I begin to struggle a bit.

Dearie me! This is getting more and more like Follow Follow or maybe more likely Celtic Talk with all this Establishment victimisation that's clearly going on!! If you're talking about what might be taken for a question in the last two lines of post #174, well there's no answer to that since it's not possible to respond to the delusional. It would be easier to explain the price of pirate hats in Never Never Land!

It was much nearer to the 90s that the stands were taken down. Clach had the biggest capacity ground in the Highland League back then. Ive read stories of the Clach vs Caley new yrs derby attracting crowds of 12 000!!. In the old highland league Derbies, Caley fans used to get the stand on the right, which is only partially shown, and the Wine Shed. I know this to be true...as i meandered between the two frequently on Derby days of old. happy happy days :) It's actually a bit complicated. Into the latter 1980s, Clach began to struggle financially, in advance of the complete collapse which prompted the 1990 rescue. However in about 1988, the main stand burned down under circumstances which have never been officially confirmed. Consequently, far be it from me to allege even the most tenuous of cause and effect relationships there! Incidentally that means that all three Inverness grounds suffered stand fires since Caley's burned down in 1950, taking much of the club's records with it, and Thistle's went up in smoke in the summer of 1995, more than a year after it ceased to be used as a football ground. Now I simply can't remember whether one or both of the Clach sheds to either side of the main stand survived after the fire. However I do have a fairly clear recollection of being in the one on the left of the photo in that catastrohpic 89-90 season when Clach's record was P34 W0 D3 L31 F26 A151. But then, as part of the 1990 rescue, the land behind around where the dugouts appear in the above photo was sold off for the flats which are now there, so for a while there was no touchline covered accommodation until the present stand was built in the early/ mid 90s.This also meant that access to Grant Street Park switched from through Pumpgate Street to where it is now. On the subject of crowd sizes back in the "Horlicks advert era", I do, however, tend to be just a little bit sceptical. Certainly Grant Street had significantly the biggest capacity of the three Inverness grounds and in days gone by crowds did tend to be a good deal larger. But I'm just not too sure about 12,000, which would be almost half the population of Inverness at the time, turning out for local derbies.... even if many of them had also made their way there via Seville!!

You actually raise another serious questionmark against separation there - which I am sure you will try also to categorise in your so called "Project Fear". But with less than 9% of the BBC's current licence fee revenue, I would be interested to see what kind of service a Scottish equivalent would be able to provide - even if it were to try to raise a few more quid by imposing lots of adverts on viewers of and listeners to... what? The BBC is actually an excellent example of one of the fundamental benefits of the Union - economies of scale. Just home.......never intended to recognise your existence until I had sobered up (had a bottle of red) and became less swearie inclined......but, imo, who gives a toss about a taxpayer paid Scottish equivalent of the Project Fear BBC supporters? Really? I think that an SBC would be the death of democracy in Scotland just as the BBC has been in the UK! Why would we be even wanting to pay for a state subsidised entity which is little more than a brainwashing mouthpiece for the state....whether that is for the UK state or the possible Scottish one.(and one which, in print produces worse grammar and spelling that I do pretty smashed.) Having spent a lot of time listening to BBC radio, perusing BBC online input ,BBC blogs, etc since independence was mooted.....few of which are open to comment in Scotland, btw....I'm not prepared to have the likes of you in a Scottish BC brainwashing my children/grand children etc in an independent Scotland as the media is currently doing UK Wide. Project Fear is not a new thing.......it is what all Governments have always used to combat possibilities they don't want..or alternatively to ramp up possibilities they are gagging to accomplish. Project Fear brought us Afghanistan and Iraq, Trident, the terrorism acts here and the Patriot acts in the US ..and to an extent, even the economic meltdown.because of the fear that we would be left behind profit-wise as the USA reduced financial controls of banks to let them rip the population from bahookey to breakfast time..so we followed suit. The current Project Fear version is in the "possibilities they don't want" stable...because they can't..and you know they can't come up with any real reason NOT to end the Union.....bar it will be really bad for the UK.or what will be left of it. So far as I am aware coming out of the Union would reduce the UK influence in the world...(hidden in the weasel words "no Scottish input in international entities"...as if there had ever been any in the past 300 or so years ), To me, Project Fear confirms the utter childishness of what will be left of the UK epitomised by their never-ending cry of "you're not going to be able to do that"...re currency, the EU, the UN, NATO, pensions, welfare, oil, etc.as if the UK/rUK was god.and lies and misrepresentation were facts. . Explain to me why we would WANT, in an Independent Scotland to pay tax, which is what the licence fee is, to set up a government mouthpiece to shaft the people who pay for it as is happening in the UK at the moment? So is that it? Is that what I've been waiting all weekend for in fear and trepidation? The latest monologue from Citizen McSmith!

That looks as if it may be a reasonably old photo since I can see no evidence of the current stand which went up, I seem to recollect, during the early 90s. I would therefore guess that the photo was taken after about 1988 when the original wooden stand (ahem ) "burned down" - or maybe after the slice of land with the old enclosure was sold off as part of the 1990 rescue - and before the current stand went up, maybe around 1992/3?

Dosser... I take it you are talking about the Grant Street institution which was the wineshed at the far end? Basically it had become dangerous to the point of being condemned and the only option was demolition. I am sure a lot of Merkinchers and others as well have fond memories - some rather less clear than others! - of the place.

7pm news report - "Police estimate that over 8000 took part. Organisers claim that the turnout was between between 20,000 and 30,000." Sounds like the Oil Revenues Calculator has been pressed into service then.

Yes, I can understand your confusion, given that the UK bank insists on calling itself Bank of England! However Sterling is not an English currency, but belongs to all of us. Maybe Alex or his successor will let them use it too! What an incredible selectivity about what the Nats want to opt out of! Why not just share the oil as well?

Very difficult to -play the ball when the man only shows you part of it As much as that?! So far he hasn't even told us what shape he wants his ball to be, although we do follow that much of the time just wants to share the ball (on issues ranging from e.g. currency and fiscal policy to sports coaching facilities) owned by the bigger team across the fence which he wants to build.

Nope. I'm sufficiently close to retiring from that as well that by the time the doomsday scenario kicked in it really wouldn't make much difference at all on a personal level. (I am only an occasional freelance contributor and not on the staff by the way.) So the only worry is having to spend my years of leisure listening to and watching the kind of stuff that a tiny budget broadcaster would be able to offer.

You actually raise another serious questionmark against separation there - which I am sure you will try also to categorise in your so called "Project Fear". But with less than 9% of the BBC's current licence fee revenue, I would be interested to see what kind of service a Scottish equivalent would be able to provide - even if it were to try to raise a few more quid by imposing lots of adverts on viewers of and listeners to... what? The BBC is actually an excellent example of one of the fundamental benefits of the Union - economies of scale.

Speak to yer brother!!!

Full commentary on BBC Radio Scotland 103.5 - 105FM from Liam McLeod. Open All Mics with Rob MacLean on 92 - 95FM. Updates and full time report from Chris McLaughlin on BBC1 Scotland from 4:30. Updates from across the Premiership on www.bbc.co.uk/scotland/sportscotland

To summarise the link, a poll in schools in Aberdeenshire has produced 8718 votes (75.4%) for NO and an embarrassing 2847 (24.6%) for yes. This isn't simply a case of this outcome just squeaking it. This is a massive NO majority - and using a very large satatistical sample compared with your average opinion poll. It is especially embarrassing for Salmond, coming as it does right in the back yard of the said MSP for Aberdeenshire East!! It is very interesting from one or two points of view. But principally, speaking here is the younger generation which current voters would leave holding the baby in later years in the event of a yes vote. This of course is also the generation which will become the decision makers and those responsible for running things when the oil starts to run out. You hear a load of selfrighteous nonsense from the separatists about "campaigning for the future of our children and grandchildren". Well it looks to me as if the said children and grandchildren are telling them - by a majority of more than three to one here - "Look we are quite happy as we are. Go away Alex and leave us alone!" Hopefully this should also be a strong message to possible yes voters not to try to impose a scenario which they clearly don't want on the generations which would have to live with its consequences. This poll also shows that Salmond's attempted flanker of enfranchising 16 and 17 year olds has backfired spectacularly! It seems to me that the SNP maybe thought/ hoped cynically that younger voters might not have the maturity to weigh up the arguments and come to an informed decision so might well base their decision on something less cerebral like watching Braveheart. This is another typical example of SNP "wish list politics". Because instead, recent polling seems to suggest that it is male voters from west central Scotland who are perhaps being influenced in this manner. Meanwhile the youth of Scotland have shown that they are not the soft touch the separatists expected, but instead are showing a commendable degree of judgement here and are telling the SNP not to mess with their future.

Never mind GG. At least it makes visits to the dentist seem quite attractive!

By which time the oil will long since have run out! Separation is for ever - not just for Christmas!

Kingsmills I am rather less than sure about that. The SNP exists for the sole purpose of taking Scotland out of the UK and everything else comes a poor second to that objective. I am also sure that this will become even clearer as the referendum approaches - as will be their attempts to pick fghts wth "the Westminster government" which has become their latest bete noire now that they can no longer gripe on about "the English" since their Anglophobia count was getting dangerousy high.

How do you know? I seem to see an awful lot of pronouncements from the separatist lobby which appear to presume to dictate what future government policy of a separate Scotland would be. In practice, these pronouncements apparently amount to no more than a wish list on the part of the SNP regarding what they would do in the event of their continuing to be elected - which I certainly wouldn't bet on. Indeed much of the yes case seems to rely on populist promises based on the assumption that those making them would have the authority to carry them out. Indeed in the increasingly unlikely event of a yes vote, there would presumably no longer even be any need for an SNP since the only thing they give a toss about would have happened.

The building is still there, including the doors at each end. I am fairly sure it is currently the offices of Remax estate agents but I believe they are to relocate fairly soon. Happy days at the Hayloft! I seem to remember it about as far back as maybe 72 or 73 but it was certainly in its heyday in the mid 70s. In terms of beer prices I can maybe remember as low as about 30p for lager but some of it could be 70s p!sh like Skol. (By the way, the cheapest lager I can remember is also on Eastgate - 2/4d in the Lochgorm in 1970!) The Hayloft had a charisma all of its own and back in the day was a "must", especially on a Saturday night. Mind you it used to take ages to get served to the extent that the person whose round it was next often had to go up to the bar just as the previous round came back to the table (if you could get one!) I really don't know why the Hayloft declined but, in Inverness certainly, pubs tend to be like that - they have their day and then the fashion moves on somewhere else. On the other hand Foxes and The Den seem to be exhibiting a longevity all of their own at the moment!

It's on stv player as far as I can see. Can't post link. Stv news Aberdeen edition Just after quarter past six on North Tonight on 9.9.13. It included a fair bit of old footage from Highland League days - including, I believe, Urquhart's goal in the final derby in May 1994. On that subject it had always been in my mind that it weas a header at the left post but it seems it was at the right!

GJ... you may not be aware of the whole picture. This Sportsound item was actually the fourth different piece of national coverage that this anniversary got on Radio Scotland during the day - in addition to three items on BBC local radio. These seven different pieces spanned breakfast, lunch time, tea time and early evening. I would also point to Nicola McAlley's excellent package on STV so between them, these two broadcasters have actually given this significant anniversary a great deal of coverage.

If you listen carefully to the 1993 package which was rebroadcast at the start of that item last night you will hear, among others, the voice of an occasional contributor to this forum claiming that they were being "sold down the river... for nothing"! But there is something I would especially like to emphasise. Yes, it was important to mark the 20th anniversary of the events which allowed ICT to become a reality, and especially at a time when, two decades later, the team formed as a result of votes by two clubs in the Highland League sits at the top of the Premiership. But the direction in which to look is most definitely forward, which is what the last question in the feature about belief within ICT was all about.

Alex... we are talking here about a sport I have been deeply involved in for over 40 years. So yes, I am more than aware that commercial race organisers as a whole are also ripping off charities by charging them even more for places. And please be in no doubt that what the Loch Ness people charge runners is well, well above the norm for road races. I see far too many entry forms in the course of a year to believe otherwise. But please just understand that, having seen one sport taken for a financial ride by this company, the only reason I posted and all I am concerned about here is that my good friends in another one do not suffer the same fate - which more or less sums up the first couple of sentences of my first post.