Charles Bannerman

Hamish... you just don't seem to have grasped the "a' oot o' step but oor Jock" reference.

Aye Hamish.... they're a' oot o' step but oor Jock!

Yes, that one always intrigued me... Caley Hotel Saturday night, St. Columba High Church Sunday morning. In fact I think that on Christmas Eve Tom would be playing in the Tenerife until closing time and would then move straight along the road for the Watchnight Service. I think we had a discussion about the Tenerife Trio on another thread recently. Tom, on keyboards, Les Munro on guitar and on drums the chap Walker whose life we used to make a misery when we were noisy kids in Dalneigh. A great band. My best memory of the Tenerife was back in the days when on Hogmanay the pubs used to close an hour early (ie 9pm) and wee used to indulge in the reverse of the modern practice of "front loading" and stock up there in the pub on Carlsberg Specials to see us over the 3 hour hiatus before carryouts at the bells.

The BBs! Now there's another topic worthy of a thread of its own!

Given that the margin by which SNP gained the right to form the current administration amounts to nothing more than a few thousand votes, maybe even less, it's in effect certain that they are there on the strength of tactical voting. I'm rather amazed that there seems to be the belief here that the SNP alone among the parties is immune to the effects of tactical voting and that only people who want full independence vote for it. And yes Moomkin, I am VERY happy that the status quo continues and is likely to do so for the foreseeable future! Now that's positive! And never happier than when winding up the Nats. :015:

I agree with me too! :004: BTW... is Mee actually claiming that everybody who voted SNP, the entire 32%, had this fundamental, burning desire for independence?! Struth! So there's absolutely NOBODY out there that might just have seen fit to vote tactically?

Mee.. you mean the SNP becoming biggest minority party by one seat at the end of a campaign where they totally hid the independence question, where there was a significant anti Labour protest vote completely unrelated to the independence question and in the background of a large majority who would vote "No" in any referendum (bring it on!) consitutes a Damascene conversion on the part of the Scottish people? On your other point, I was merely stressing that the Scottish people as a whole don't exactly seem to be jumping up and down to become independent... the "political ideal" to which you refer just doesn't ever seem to have grabed a huge number of people up here. This is, of course, despite the repeated assertions Salmond used to make that every SNP win in a Community Council by election was "a referendum on the constitution." Quite frankly, people in Scotland have far more important things to concern themselves about. PS - you said "wide range of policies".. indeed, and all created with indecent haste in an attempt to obscure the SNP's sole raison d'etre which on its own is an election loser. In practice, is the SNP still not really a single issue pressure group whose latest tactic in its attempt to achieve electability (rather like Labour's abandonment of Socialism) is pretending to be intertested in other things too? :015: PPS - I too am glad I'm not a history or especially modern studies teacher because it would be so difficult to avoid the temptation of exposing the sillier aspects of all the political parties, not only the SNP! Fundamentally I am very sceptical about politics and politicians as a whole. It just happens that, given the subject matter of this particular thread, it's nationalism that's on the receiving end here and nationalists tend to be more easily wound up than most. :004: I am equally scathing, for instance, about New Labour's incredible and opportunist departure from Socialism.

Sophia.. if the question you refer to is the one about the Irish, then if I had realised that it was other than rhetorical, I would most certainly have given you an immediate answer. You cannot possibly use what the Irish think to create a case for independence for Scotland. The backgrounds and histories are so utterly different - for instance the only people in Scotland minded to form paramiltary organisations, keep guns in the attic and occupy Post Offices were the likes of Willie Bell's loony mates in the 1970s, whereas Irish nationalism was popular enough for all these things to have happened to a significant extent. Indeed, is it not far more relevant to consider what the result of such a referendum in Scotland would be, which is where we started with this thread? I think we all know the answer to that question - a resounding preference for the status quo - and that's why the SNP are in no hurry to hold such a vote, hoping instead for some kind of Damascene conversion on the part of the Scottish people over the next few years. Kingsmills.... your analogy with Thistle and Caley is intriguing and very relevant, but it's perhaps best looked at from the point of view of the "Act of Union" of 1994. It is far more likely that Inverness football being stuck in the Highland League would have happened in the absence of such a joining of forces. I would have thought that this comparison might have been quite compelling to a one time member of a smaller entity who is now enjoying the major benefits of Union with a larger merger partner. (Even if the merged body is sometimes annoyingly referred to as "Caley" ...rather like "England" - the analogies here are fascinating.) Indeed, is the outstanding success of Caley Thistle following an unequal merger in 1994 not a wonderful allegory for the value of the Act of Union of 1707?!

The only reason for tracking back 300 years was in response to kcj's claim that one of the factors leading to the Union was that the English sabotaged Darien. Otherwise my arguments are vey much up to date and centred on the principle that it ain't broke so don't bother trying to fix it.

I would fully back what Scotty has just said and done. The original post named an illegal substance in conjunction with a turn of phrase which implied guilt. Theoretically that could be actionable. I really can't overstate the complexity of the situation in which some posters are in danger of placing themselves. The law in relation to what you can and cannot say publicly in a situation like this is quite extensive and complex and it's an area best kept well clear of.

A "Race Night" just won't be the same again after the passing of Bernard Manning.

I suppose I'd have to given the wonderful holiday I had at **** Campbell's villa in Spain. (Which I didn't declare to my employers.)

:015:

I trust that's a joke and not a simplistic attempt to make a generalisation between belief in the union and the Lodge, which I dislike with a vengeance.

Donmac... I actually took more exception to the first sentence there than the first! It implies, as I said, some kind of deficiency or moral inferiority on the part of the majority who did not hold Mr. Sillars' point of view and that in my book qualifies as narrow minded nationalist arrogance. By the way It's just occurred to me to my horror that some people might think I am arguing this from a Labour party perspective or even a Tory one, which I most definitely am not. I support no party at all and only trust a small minority of politicians since there are so many who are only in the business out of self interest. However, without espousing any political party at all, I have been a convinced lifelong unionist with a small "u"!

I do think that, in addition to any shortage of funds or fiscal prudence, there is the huge extra factor of geography. On the last day of the season, Sportsound - in the absence of rights to broadcast the FA Cup Final - ran a very comprehensive Pundits' Roundup of the various SPL clubs. Caley Thistle's reveiws from the likes of Craig Paterson, Gordon Smith and Murdo MacLeod were very good indeed. So was the pundits' perception of Inverness as a good place to live and to play football. But they could not deny what we have known for a long time - that the relative remoteness is a major disincentive for players to come here. Caley Thistle gets hit by a double whammy. There's not a huge amount of money around and at the same time, for any given level of quality, I'm sure they have to pay more than their rival clubs in the central belt. Caley Thistle also has an outstanding record for improving players whose careers look doomed. So, what has happened on a number of occasions is that underachieving players (Dodds and Dargo come immediately to mind) will come here because their current form means they are unable to meet their wage aspirations down south. During their time at ICT they are helped to realise their true potential again so by the time they reach the end of their contract here, they once again are able to compete in the central Scotland market. Also by that time they feel they have done their time "in the sticks" and want back home again. So now ICT find themselves in the completely opposite situation of a player whose status in the wage market place has now gone up and who in addition feels he needs more financial incentive still to extend his stay in the north. Stated simply, the club with the most limited financial resources is the one which, because of geography, has to pay over the odds for players, some of whom then want back home after a two or three year contract. Stated more simply, ICT, apart from having the most limited resources in the SPL, is also the club which, because of remoteness, has to pay over the odds for players who even then will want to get back home after a two or three year contract. By the way, I don't wholly subscribe to the theory that Craig Dargo was completely financially driven. The strong desire of his girlfried to locate wholly back south was, I believe, a VERY important factor as well. I also had a discussion along similar lines with Roy MacGregor last week. But as far as Inverness are concerned, the idea of leaving for a better wage down south doesn't always seem to work in practice... as former players and managers have found out!

Ah.. so the media are against you as well as the English then?

Alex... the 1979 Referendum, with its attached Cunningham Amendment, wasn't on the question of independence it was on the question of whether there should be a devolved assembly.... and even for that, it only attracted 52% support. Rosco 17.... I note that you have fallen into the traditional nationalist trap of stating that certain small countries are more successful than Scotland and then making the totally unsubstantiated assumption that this is because they are independent. Look at the other side of the coin... if these countries are alrerady more successful than Scotland, then how much worse would things get after Scotland lost its current substantial Westminster subsidy from the Barnett Formula and after the oil runs out in a few years' time?

Mantis, you mean Chic Allan was in the SNP but Alex Neil had never heard of him? kcj... yes, of course it's ALWAYS the fault of the English. (That was also the favourite whinge of Salmond until he put independence and his Whingeing Jock persona on the back burner pre May 3rd to make himself electable.) But what did the Darien people expect? If the guy in the shop next door is trying to expand, it's just sensible business to do everything within your power to scupper his plans. However if the guy next door happens also to be utterly incompetent, you shouldn't really even have to bother. William Paterson and friends would have screwed up anyway with their abysmally thought out scheme which saw them sally forth rather like prototype Argentina-bound Ally MacLeods, or perhaps latter day James IVs heading south for a doing from England Reserves at the Stadio del Flodden. These people squandered the wealth of the nation by going out there and trying to sell combs and mirrors to the inhabitants of a swamp! And unfortunately they didn't have radio in these days so they couldn't call up HQ to say "Sh!t lads, the game's a bogey.... DON'T send the second lot of ships!" They were about as clued up on international trade as Alex Salmond is about the Olympic Games, if you remember that rather sorry episode from his very first week in office. donmac298... your comments and Jim Sillars' are fairly typical of the sort of narrow minded nationalist arrogance that your views are the only right ones and there's something deficient about anyone who doesn't share them. Perhaps you should remember that there has never been anything other than a very significant majority AGAINST independence so you would do well at least to respect the views of the large majority of Scots, even if you don't agree with them. Anyway, Dame Margaret Rutherford in her reincarnation as leader of the Scottish Conservatives says they won't be backing a referendum.

So the total failure of the Darien Scheme had nothing to do with complete Scottish incompetence then?

I wish you Nationalist chaps would make up your minds! A decade and a half ago we had Salmond whingeing on urgently about "Free by 93" (whatever happened to that?!) And now the Nats have got the chance of the referendum they bleated about the Libs depriving them of, they're still not happy because they know **** fine they won't win it. The Tories have basically called the SNP's bluff. Remember Salmond is minority First Minister because... he has one seat more than the second biggest party, he waged a campaign which kept independence right out of the limelight because it's a vote loser... and he benefited hugely from a massive protest vote against Labour on completely unrelated issues (which apparently even had some members of THE ORANGE LODGE voting SNP!!! :015:) Hardly indicative of a groundswell in favour of going it alone.

So did you, like me, ever sit in English Room 7 (where you got the loudest blast, presumably because it was nearest the Welders) and when it went off you realised you only had 15 minutes to go until lunch time?

Sophia.. Pele made a huge number of excellent signings, but in addition had one or two pressed on him from "board level" who maybe weren't all that brilliant. Vetle, as I understand it, was one of these. Martin Glancy was another.

The extreme difficulty in answering this question is a tribute to the host of excellent signings Steve Paterson and his successors have made over the years. On the other question, the number of "duffers" is much, much smaller, hence a much shorter list of candidates for Worst Ever. It's fair also to say that this list features players who the managers of the time really didn't want but who were "given" to them. Vetle springs to mind as a prime example.

HC that's a relief! I would have to say that Darran Thomson was anonymous enough for me to have forgotten about him but I just couldn't imagine anyone going for Brian Thomson. I think we'll have to disagree rather less extremely over Mark McCulloch.