DoofersDad

Interesting choice of word here DD. The implication being that those who vote NO do not have courage and therefore are . . . cowards? I am not averse to use of over-exaggeration, perhaps not as good as Paxman granted, but this is exactly the kind of terminology used by the SNP for decades and now by the YES campaign to make people vote for them by using rhetoric that implies if you don't, you are less of a Scot or worse, a traitor to your people. Or even less of a human being. Still like your posts on ICT matters though! There is a big difference between lacking courage and being a coward. The fact is that it often does take courage to embrace change whether it be in the politics or personal matters. Take someone in a steady job living in a comfortable house who gets an offer of a job somewhere else which whilst offering lots of potential, lacks security. You need courage to take the risk. Some will decide that they don't want to take the risk for whatever reason and will settle for what they have. It doesn;t make them cowards - it just means they have a different attitude to risk. We know what it is like being part of the UK and most people will think it's OK. Some of those people like the idea of independence and will think things could be better but are worried that there are too many uncertainties to risk it - so they will vote no. Better the devil you know and all that. That is actually an important point because it explains the drop in the polls for independence. Previously people who liked the concept would say they would vote for independence but now that they have the chance to make that reality they are not prepared to take the risk. The challenge for the "Yes" campaign is twofold. Firstly they need to sell the concept and secondly they need to convince people that the risk is worth taking - and for most people that means they need to be convinced that it actually isn't much of a risk at all. This brings us back to the very reasonable question that Kingsmills asks because as Charles knows all too well, the fact is that in other countries where people have voted for change, they haven't lived to regret it. In other words, it was a risk worth taking. And if those who are attracted by the arguments of the "Yes" campaign can be persuaded that the risk of voting "Yes" are small, then the tide will turn and Independence will be a very real possibility. I should say that I say all this as a genuine undecided voter. I may be seen to be siding with the "Yes" campaign here but that is only because the arguments of the other side on this point simply don't wash. If Charles or others in the "No" camp wish to gain the vote of another floating voter it would be a good idea to provide a nice long list of countries in answers to Kingsmill's straightforward and very pertinent question. On the subject of the "No" camp I see Lionel Messi is voting with his feet again. A couple of cracking goals for Barcelona tonight.

Alex, if you look at the matches you have identified in your post and then look at the results I have postulated, all 5 clubs can overtake us. There aren't actually many matches between these 5 teams. Dundee Utd play both Aberdeen and St Johnstone and that's it. Kilmarnock and Hibs don't actually play against any of the other teams in that group. Aberdeen would need at least a point out of Dundee United and Dundee United would need to beat St Johnstone. Assuming they all win their games against us and the clubs above and below then they would all overtake us. Can't see it happening mind you but it has been a very unpredictable season. If we can still be 9th at the split, I for one am certainly not counting my chickens about being top 6 yet.

Absoultely not. What Kingsmills' proposition implies is that as long as Scotland voted for separation, then that would make it a good thing simply because it had come to pass. That is attempting to use "after the fact" justification of something which is currently before the fact. You can't simply say "Well look chaps, if you vote for separation, then that will make it good so therefore it is good, so therefore vote for it". That doesn't hold water. Rubbish. What his proposition implies is that once people have voted for separation they don't want to go back. I agree with you when you say "You can't simply say "Well look chaps, if you vote for separation, then that will make it good so therefore it is good, so therefore vote for it". That doesn't hold water." - But that is not what is being said by the separatists. What is being said is that if you think it is a good idea, vote for it because others who have had the courage to vote for change have not lived to regret it.

Charles, you contradict yourself. If people did repent at leisure after separating in haste then there would be countries who voted for independence and now wish to revert to their former status. It is therefore a perfectly reasonable question to ask. If you are unable to name any then that suggests that any country that may have separated in haste is, in fact, enjoying their independence at leisure.

I don't think we are yet in the realms of miracles being needed to thwart us. In fact, it is quite possible that at the split we could be 9th. We have 3 very tough games ahead of us; County are flying whilst Hibs and St Johnstone are fighting hard to gain a top 6 slot as well. So let's say that we lose our next 3 games and remain on 44 points, then let's have a look at what the teams below us need to do to better that. If St J beat us then they can afford to lose to Dundee Utd and still be ahead of us. If Hibs beat us, then they need 2 points from their 2 games against the top 2. Dundee Utd need 6 points which they get by beating Dundee and St J. They can afford to lose against Aberdeen and still be ahead of us. Kilmarnock would need 7 points from matches against County, St M and Dundee. Aberdeen would need 7 points from their matches against Celtic, Hearts and Dundee U. So Mathematically still quite feasible to be 9th at the split so top 6 is certainly not a given. We need a result against County to make things comfortable and to restore pride and confidence. Saturday's game is the most important game of the season so far so let's get behind the team and show them just who the best team in the Highlands is.

Our position has been helped by Euan Norris's fine decision not to award a goal to Hibs following Griffith's free kick. Makes a nice change to say "well done" to a referee!

Or is the pitch needing some work on it to recover from the mauling by the rugger b*ggers?

With Wigan being drawn against championship opposition in the semi-final, it could be that Roman Golabart will run out at Wembley for an FA Cup final. One to keep an eye on.

Really? I didn't realise that. County are currently on 11 - did we go longer? That's not what I meant. If we win next week we will be 5 games currently undefeated in the league, Dundee Utd are also curently on 4. County may be on 11 undefeated at the moment but next week they will be on zero ganes undefeated.

With us playing the bottom side today and County playing the top side, for them to get two more points than us and leapfrog us into third has to make it a bad day. But let's look at the positives. The teams in mid table seem to be doing all they can to avoid being in the top six. If we win next week and other results go our way we could confirm our top six slot. If we win next week then we will have the longest unbeaten run in the league. And who would ever have thought that the two Old Filth teams would be gubbed by such small town teams as Ross County and Annan Athletic on the same day. Now that just has to be good for Scottish football.

OK Andy, listen up and listen up good 'cos I ain't gonna say this again. Birmingham! WTF! Adam went there a couple of years ago and now struggles to get a place on the bench at Swindon. Just what is the attraction? Ah! Money! I can understand that the Blues are offering a lot more than ICT and that's attractive when a playing career is so short. But it's not that short. Ask Adam what he's been offerred next year. Not half as much as you I'll bet and that's what'll be offerred to you in a couple of years after warming the bench at a club that has no hope of winning anything and where players are not much in the public eye. ICT can't offer you as much money next year but it's more than may players are getting. But they can offer you a lot more than just the money. For a start you'll be playing in the top flight of a national league and perhaps also in a European competition. That will increase the profile of the team and all the players. But next year promises so much. With several top players signed up already and with your former mates in blue still in the football wilderness, there is a tremendous opportunity for this team to develop and be a real contender for a clear second place next year. Who knows, a place in a cup final or even better is a distinct possibility if you all stick together! What's that you say? Sounds good but you need the money? Hold on, I was just coming to that. You've been offered quite a bit more just now but if you stay in Inverness and continue to develop then the long term prospects will be much better. If you are seen as the creative attacking midfield general of a successful ICT next year and get a dozen or so goals for good measure, then you'll have a lot better teams than B'ham Sh*tty looking to sign you. You'll be a sought after young man. You'll have the double benefit of enjoying another great year in Inverness with regular first team games together with a much better deal with a club with real prospects in the season to follow. What's not to like about that? What's that? You'll stay? Good lad, you'll not regret it!

Playing that oval ball game on a football pitch is like putting lemonade into a 25 year old malt. As I drove past the hallowed turf on my way home from work today my heart sank as I saw the abomination of rugby posts thrusting up into the early evening sky. The TCS is no place for these rucking scrumbags.

The thing about his headed goals there is his composure and the deliberate and accurate placement of the ball. Lots more to come methinks. Great signing.

If we win a European place then it will be an early start to the season and we will need to be at our best if we are to get through one or even two rounds. The more of the current squad we can retain the better the chance of this so recent contract signings are really good news. Hopefully they, and the prospect of a wee European adventure will persuade other key players to sign up for at least another year. There is the makings of a team that could come a clear 2nd next season.

As usual we have a total over-reaction from Man U about a decision which went against them. Let's look at the facts. Nani had his eyes firmly on the ball and lifted his foot to control the ball. There was absolutely no intent to foul. There does not need to be any intent in order to send a player off for what is deemed by the referee to be reckless or dangerous play. Whilst Nani had his eyes firmly on the ball he should still have had an awareness of players round about him. Before the ball was played he would be looking around and would know roughly where players were and he really must have been aware that a Real player would also go for the ball. Nani was turning away from his line of sight with his foot raised chest high and it is not unreasonable for the referee to consider that as reckless. The referee sees the incident just the once in real time. It looks on the reply as though Nani maybe caught the Real player high on the arm and not in the chest despite the chest clutching and rolling around, but really that is irrelevant in terms of the decision against Nani. If it was deemed to be reckless, it was reckless wherever it happened to catch the opposing player. He may have caught the player on the arm or the chest but it could just as easily been his throat. In mitigation, it is clear that Nani was attempting to control the ball with his foot rather than kicking it and therefore the consequence of any contact with the opposing player would be significantly less than it might have been. In other words, the incident will have looked worse than it actually was. In my view their can be no doubt that at least a yellow card was warranted and whilst I think a red card was maybe harsh, I can understand why the referee made the decision. Man U were possibly hard done by but these things happen and they just have to get on and deal with it. And whilst there can perhaps be a little sympathy for them over the decision, there can be absolutely none for the way they behaved afterwards. Firstly, whilst they are blaming the decision for changing the game, I think that is actually not the case. They lost to two very good goals. The first by Modric was a magnificent strike and the second soon after was a well worked goal - neither were a consequence of being over-run being a man over. Ferdinand applauding the referee right in his face at the end and other players pointedly refusing to shake his hand at the end was simply pathetic as was Ferguson's petulant refusal to speak to the media afterwards. I for one sincerely hope they have some sanctions imposed against them for that as to my mind that sort of behaviour brings the game into disrepute.

Must be Barrowman's wages.

Why would you tell a player from Pakistan to feck off back to Canada?

I sort of agree with you, but the point about the unnatural position is that the player deliberately places his arms in a position where the ball is more likely to hit, and so whilst the ball may hit the hand or arm, there remains a deliberate intention in the action. It is important to have that clarification otherwise, as suggested above, you could have defenders at corners or free kicks with their hands (or one of them at any rate!) above their heads. Apparently Cardinal O'Brien had his hand in an unnatural position and now he's paying the penalty - although in his case it appeared to be a clear case of hand to ball.

How about having a read of http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/rules_and_equipment/4524354.stm Obviously not deliberate. He's charging the ball down and turns away to avoid injury so that he's facing the opposite direction. Is his arm in an unnatural position? Possibly for a brief moment but entirely consistent with the turn he's making. There is no deliberate holding of his arm in an unnatural position to increase the chance of the arm blocking the ball. Did it even hit his arm? Probably not as the ball made a very solid sound and then bounced away in the opposite direction to what it would have done had it hit the arm. Not a penalty in a million years.

Having seen the highlights there is no way that is not a foul. I'm not sure you could actually go down deliberately like that if you tried. It's right on the line and whilst it should be a penalty I can can understand a referee not awarding a penalty but awarding a free kick right on the edge of the box instead. As someone else said, the referee should be sure before awarding a penalty so a free kick would have been a fair decision. Adams was going on about County being denied a penalty when Lawson shot struck Meekings. Complete nonsense.

2 goals from Sutherland as well. See, he can score. He's going to be a real asset when he finds his scoring boots at first team level.

Stonewall penalty IMHO But then, I wasn't able to get to the game

With the interest it would bring, could we afford not to?

We'll need to play better than that against County. Tonight was 2 pretty evenly matched sides with Utd just edging it for me. A fair bit passing it across the pitch and running across the pitch, then stopping and running back from where they had just come from. Nothing like the penetration of earlier in the season. Often seemed rather devoid of ideas. There's a nervousness about the play which they need to get out their system. Not the performance of a team that is 2nd in the league - which is why we aren't 2nd in the league any more. Just glad not to have lost, I guess. I've never been particularly impressed by A Shinnie but I felt he was the best in midfield / attack by a country mile tonight. Devine and Meekings looked solid at the back

Maybe it's just me? I wouldn't swap any of our cup record. I think we have created 12 upsets in 11 years in the lower leagues. Two semis at Hampden plus a replay. Beating Celtic twice. The first time was 10 years before Cownty and it was our first ever season in div 1. More wins at Tynecastle, Fir Park etc. Coming from 3 down to beat Ayr. Reaching the quarters as a div 3 side. Taking DUFC to 210 mins as a div 2 side. Swap all this for what? One cup run beating Hibs and Celtic to reach a final, and then forgetting to turn up. Don't think there's a conflict of opinion. I never suggested I would swap our cup history for theirs and I certainly wouldn't - but that doesn't stop it wrankling that they have got to a final and we haven't.