Oddquine

U-19s appear to have beaten Partick Thistle 6-0 in the SFA Youth cup. No idea of the ICT team........though I can flaming well give the list of Partick's starting team and subs.

But don't English clubs have the wit to make the EBTs extra to wages...as in payment for using their photographs on posters etc, for example..which is not payment for playing. Whether Rangers keep their titles has nothing to do with the legality/illegality of EBTs, it has to do with whether Rangers were upfront and honest with the football powers that be regarding WHY they were using them. If they can reasonably be interpreted as payment for playing....then their titles could be forfeit. Though, given oldco no longer exists, the titles no longer exist either! Seems to me all that needs to be done is to treat Sevco as a Newco, which they are, and consign oldco, along with their dubiously financed titles, to the dustbin of really bad memories!

What do you mean training with us? Isn't he signed to either the first team or U-20s yet? If he isn't, why is he playing in U-20 games and keeping signed players out?

Won 8-0 in the Scottish Youth cup. Youth cup is u-19s as opposed to u-20s, isn't it? There's a report on that game with squad lists here. http://www.ngrfoundation.co.uk/joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=27629&Itemid=1 See that new lad with the unpronounceable (for me) name was playing.

Mahonio, my lamb.......some of us never lost the faith. ......but welcome to the Happy Clappers Club............better late than never!

Yes they were very important, and the 2nd looked quite spectacular - but at the risk of sounding uncharitable, I would expect any SPL keeper to have made those saves. Even one who appears to have been signed as a forward according to the Squad list? Antonio Reguero Position: Forward Date of Birth: 04.07.82 Place of Birth: Spain Signed From: Gandia Date Signed: July 2012

Would be good....but if punters don't turn up for games so ICT get a decent income....chance would be a fine thing!

Roberts doesn't get penalties? Lol! Well done the boys...and now I'm going to have pretend I don't know the score because a dee fan, who has been avoiding the score like the plague, is coming down to watch the game on Alba. My face now composed, my tongue is bleeding because my teeth are meeting through it and the wee swally (or a few) is available to deaden the result for my mate!

Don't see the logic in If your view is: The Rangers/Sevco/Newco are nothing to do with Rangers and have no rights to their history and are only in the SFL3, not because of punishment, but because they are a new club. then The Rangers/Sevco/Newco shouldn't be punished for a completely different club and cannot be stripped of titles. They wouldn't have the titles won by the Oldco to be stripped from them in the first place, though would they, as a new club? Was there any punishment applied to Sevco really, in the end.......whatever your view is of whether they are new or an Oldco reincarnation? Either, Sevco is not Oldco and is not to be punished for Oldco's misdeeds......in which case SFL3 was a concession to them, imo. What other brand new club gets to start on the second rung of the ladder, rather than starting from the ground? It wasn't an option for Airdrieonians. Oldco attracted a player embargo and a fine for "bringing the game into disrepute" Was it a coincidence that the SFA decided to attach discretionary conditions to Sevco's SFA membership.....conditions to which Sevco agreed? Probably not...but that does not alter the fact that the SFA has that right. ( I would argue that the ability [of three different entities] to make policy on the hoof, because so many of the rules are written in so woolly a way as to be the product of some Government effort at compiling workable law, is a big part of what is wrong with Scottish football.) And Sevco have no history (bar they can put in their wiki that they rose from the ashes of a club which once played in the SPL, but no longer exists) and no titles to lose......they just have the bricks, mortar and grass assets of Oldco. or Sevco is Oldco..were relegated to SFL 3 as punishment for going into liquidation like other clubs have been...but the fact that Sevco is a continuation of Oldco means that, as it happens, there are issues other than the liquidation to be addressed.....and in that case, Sevco will just have to suck up whatever is decided. They can't have it both ways at the same time......though Sevco is trying. I'm inclined to think, as far as Green is concerned, what he really bought to engender profit for himself and his shareholders, was an enormous fan base which is not prepared to accept the demise of Oldco.......hence the insistence that Sevco is Oldco for money making purposes.....but not for taking responsibility/punishment purposes. Does anyone else see a dichotomy there?

How much do we make from selling players on, CaleyD? Is it still a minimum of £3000 a season compensation for youth players moving on? How much have we made from that over the years of our youth system, though? Did it apply to the likes of the laddies dunted last season, some with up to 10 years in the youth set up, and playing Highland League now, for example? Does the same compensation thing apply in the rest of the UK and Ireland? If so, how much have we spent over the last few years in compensation for development when bringing in young players from other clubs to our youth squad? When does a youth player stop being a youth player attracting compensation anyway? Tbh, I wasn't really thinking of the income side of it. Mine was more a response to the assumption that this "u-20" side is going necessarily to be any more of a future for ICT, in playing terms, than any other squad of annual contractees and loanees,....and I was a bit irritated at the digs at last years under 19s.

How? Unless you can guarantee that all the short-term contracts (and overage players) playing for the u-20s stay with ICT for a future in the first team....and on current retainment of players signed on short term contracts, that isn't a given..

I dunno. Do you think you have been smitting others on here? If anybody loved your post then they are clearly narcissitic - whereas I am an anti-narcissit: The concept of antinarcissism was proposed by Francis Pasche in 1964. The context was a theoretical debate seeking initially to define narcissism and then to describe its role in psychic development. The difficulties, complexities, and, for some, the aporias of narcissism led to two antithetical choices. Some abandoned the notion of primary narcissism, giving a fundamental role to the primary object-relation (this was true of the English school, Michael Balint, and John Bowlby). Others, like Paul Federn and Béla Grunberger, were led to separate narcissism from the libido. This, it seemed to them, was necessary in order to account for the ubiquity of narcissism in mental life. But this was not the opinion of Francis Pasche, who chose to reintroduce a duality, or even a dialectic, into the concept of narcissism itself (1965). Both narcissism and antinarcissism were characterized for Pasche by an object and a direction. The object was the same for both: the ego. The direction, however, was not the same: centripetal for narcissism, centrifugal for antinarcissism. Antinarcissism could be thought of as a centrifugal investment, in which the subject tends to be divested of the self, to give up their own substance and reserves of love, and to do this independently of any economic factors. In this sense, anti-narcissism is actually a manifestation of Thanatos, that is, of unbinding separation and dispersion, but not of aggressiveness. There is a striking convergence between Francis Pasche's conception of antinarcissism and what Sándor Ferenczi called, in his final writings, the "altruistic drive" (1949, fragment dated 24 August 1930).

I dunno. Do you think you have been smitting others on here?

But is that not what Scottish football is now? A two team domination which has not changed one iota in years, even though one of the two teams has now effectively died and theoretically no longer exists in the "real" world of the SPL or any other league under SFA auspices bar as a Newco (note the New) replacement in SFL3...and exists now only in the minds of Oldco fans, who have not inhabited the same world as the rest of us for around a century or so anyway, if truth were told..and among the cash greedy sycophants of Scottish Football.? What is the problem with the EUFA Fair play rules...bar they may not give a few (particularly two) teams an advantage over all other Scottish football teams? The main points of the EUFA concept...... • to introduce more discipline and rationality in club football finances; • to decrease pressure on salaries and transfer fees and limit inflationary effect; • to encourage clubs to compete with(in) their revenues; • to encourage long-term investments in the youth sector and infrastructure; • to protect the long-term viability of European club football; • to ensure clubs settle their liabilities on a timely basis. Can anyone else see any problem with that as a decent way to proceed in the future? Neil Doncaster paid lip-service to the concept back in March, while working at the time to ensure it didn't apply to Oldco/Newco.or anything remotely connected with the OF. Is the SFA/SPL/SFL the most embarrassingly hypocritical organisation in world football at this moment in time? Is the discarding of all morality worth allowing clubs with as little morality to be able to sign a footballer or two for really silly money, and pay them just as silly money weekly for doing what, in the scheme of usefulness in the real world.....is less than not a bliddy lot?

Butcher, with Motherwell, appeared fairly good at identifying and bringing on decent young players, and to an extent, it rather looks as if he is looking in that direction for the future of ICT. May work....may not....but what are his options if he doesn't do that, given we don't have the money to sign practically two full teams at silly money wages? The youngsters may not be anything but bench warmers in the short term...but who knows how they will perform if they get more than the last few minutes of a game? I'd have thought given the "no ICT mjnded players" complaints voiced on here a lot, every time past longer term signings, whatever their origins, are released,, most punters should have no problems with giving the ICT kids a chance, particularly if it prevents ICT emulating Rangers and entering administration.

How many of the two have you attended?

Maybe it's just me.......but what qualifications do IHE or a lot of the " Butcher is an incompetent twonk" posters have re football to think they know best bar they watch (some) football matches? I'm not denying that a lot of vociferous and unhappy punters can lose managers their jobs if they shout loud enough....but are a lot of vociferous and unhappy ICT punters the majority of punters, any more representative of the majority than Islamic fundamentalists represent the majority of Muslims? Way I look at it is that we have, for an area the size of Inverness and environs, a lamentably poor support. A lamentably poor support equates to a pretty crappy income. A pretty crappy income equates to being very limited as to the signing of the calibre of players the lamentably few punters who support think they deserve, because all of the above means ICT cannot afford players who can command the sodding ridiculous wages football players, who are perceived, by the businessmen who gather the profits, to be at least decent in their job in this over-priced business which has, if we are being completely honest, less to do with the actual abilities of footballers , and more to do with the money to be made eventually by hyping them, through the media, into the stratosphere of "selling this one will make us millions". When football stopped being purely a sport with people involved because they were interested in football, and became a capitalist method of making profit, however that was achieved......the sport of football effectively died........because those who were only interested in profit pumped the money they could get into making sure they were the only ones who could afford to be in a position to achieve anything......and the clubs without that monetary input signed and played only to survive in the leagues in which they took part. Butcher has, imo, done, so far, reasonably well regarding his remit.....because I am not convinced his remit is predicated on making 100% sure that IHE et al think he puts what they think is the best team on the field so they can be entertained..I'm more inclined to think that his remit is to keep ICT in the SPL whatever that takes.and if that means games punters don't enjoy, but stop us being relegated...........then just suck it up, people. Given his constrictions re player wages etc, I'm not as inclined as others to trash Butcher, because imo, he has done the best he can within the limits placed on him. But then, I think that if you support a team, you support a team......you don't support a team because they play pretty football....you don't support a team because they do what, in your infinite wisdom, you think they should, and play a team in a configuration you consider is the best one, from the basis of no idea as to anything which has occurred from the last time you saw them playing to the next game (or even the last time you read in this forum, the opinions of other people who did see them playing. in their last game). You support a team because it is your team, warts and all. It would be really sodding good not to read posts, just two games into the season, whining and moaning and carping. What is it about Highlanders......an inferiority complex?

Posting this without comment because I am speechless atm http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/19225698.

I wish I could believe that........I really do....but I'm afraid I don't. <rant mode on> After all, why would any punter expect that an SFA which permitted the OF to organise and implement a breakaway SPL, specifically to finance their ambitions to dominate Scottish football and earn a lot of money forever, and who is watching what is going on now, believe that the OF schmoozing mindset had changed? Why would any punter assume that an SFA, which not only allowed the OF to set up the SPL, but allowed them to set it up so the OF alone were in control of all income engendered through the media, to ensure those two clubs took the lion's share, and who is watching what is going on now, believe that the OF schmoozing mindset had changed? Let's be honest here...all the other teams involved in the SPL were deliberately, due to the division of income, designed to be the OF whipping boys....with little other purpose than to provide them with teams to beat to top the SPL table and get into the lucrative European market. It wasn't the removal of Oldco which placed the SPL clubs in a difficult position...it was the greed of those who originally agreed to form the SPL at their invitation in the first place which did that. Why would any punter who has watched the whole fiasco over the last six months since Oldco went into administration (and who could see this coming at some stage) logically assume that anything in the mindset of the football hierarchy, cares one toss about the prestige of Scottish Football, but are emulating our idiot bankers as in the idea that what we can make out of it for ourselves is more important than having any vestige of integrity? I have been sickened by the Scottish Football hierarchy and members of all three branches who had to be forced by fans to do what was right and not what was expedient to maintain their own jobs and their own teams, regardless of the laughing stock it made of the second oldest national Football Association in the world. I'd like to see us getting back to the pre-SPL days, as I kinda preferred it when we had no such fecking thing as an elite league...because we knew there were/are not 10 or 12 clubs so good as to be considered elite.....and you can't form a league out of basically two flaming teams buying success and 8 or 10 other teams making up the whipping dog numbers and call it elite...because it has proven that it is not. Have the other participants in the SPL been happy, really, to be the bit part players in the OF roadshow in the past, while knowing that, due to their own participation in the SPL, they were simply allowing the OF to increase their dominance of the league and Scottish football.......or did the increased income compensate for the fact that, instead of fighting for top place in a fair and equitable league, most teams outside the OF have been fighting all their SPL lives not to be chucked out of the lucrative machine? <rant mode off.....for the moment>

Maybe anticipating a rejig of Scottish football for next season with a 2 league system and the additions to the top league being by invitation, so that next year they will be back where they think they belong? Or does that sound extremely cynical?

Exactly, CaleyD......they can't have their cake and eat it! Either they are one or the other and not whichever one suits them at any particular moment in time. Oldco reincarnated, they take the punishments Oldco would have attracted if they hadn't inherited its mantle........and if they are Newco, they can take the goodwill of the fans, Ibrox and the SFA transfer of membership as an undeserved concession and work their way back to the top league....which I hope will not continue to be the SPL as set up currently. Would have been useful, though if the three sets of Scottish football management employees had had a vestige of a brain among them.because if they had we'd not have been spending since February talking about two clubs taking turns extracting the collective urine of the heid bummers with a foot pump. Calling the Scottish football hierarchy headless chickens would be unfair to chickens without heads.

Who's Sophia? Believe me, I'm me, not anybody else. There can't possibly be another me around, the world has done nothing to deserve it. (My family say they haven't either, but they're stuck with me. ) Maybe I over-reacted a bit...sorry. Didn't expect to come from a place where I'm perceived by some as an incomer/ white settler, and not in a nice way, to a place where, because I'm a white settler elsewhere, I'm perceived as a yokel.

Coming from someone who completely fails to comprehend (unless it includes :clown:) sarcasm, subtlety or nuances in any posts, and therefore flies off the handle, that's pretty rich. That would be because I can't read minds. Smilies are the way to ensure those who read posts can grasp the nuances we can't read in your minds. I read and respond to what I see...I don't assume that the person writing doesn't mean what he/she says.

Having an idea about anything would require the ability to think. Can you do that?