DoofersDad

HT 1-1 FT 2-2 ICT Walsh Opp Rudden Crowd 2297

It’s a really important game for us today. Given the league table it is a game we should win but Falkirk are fighting for survival and will bring a sizeable and vocal support with them. If we are in any way distracted by the prospect of the County game on Tuesday or the forthcoming semi final then we will likely get beat. We really need the fans to get behind the team today and help keep the momentum going.

That's really bad news. Let's hope for his sake and that of the team that it is not as bad as feared. He's been playing pretty well recently. At least having Walsh back is a plus. We have a pretty small squad and we need key players staying injury and suspension free.

I guess they are expecting it will be either Inverness or Aberdeen for the show for the final.

BBC Radio Scotland have contacted the Supporters Trust today regarding a special edition of Sportsound which will be broadcast live from the hospitality suite at Tyncastle on Thursday 11th April between 6,30 and 7.30pm. Panellists will include John Hughes and Gary Locke together with Rangers and Celtic "legends" yet to be confirmed. The BBC is looking for fans of the 4 clubs to be in the audience either to ask questions or simply just to enjoy the show. Anyone attending will need to arrive at the main reception area for 5.30. There is a pay bar available. This is ideal for ICT fans in the Edinburgh area to get to an event but obviously anyone is welcome to apply for tickets. If you are interested, please contact the Supporters Trust Secretary, Jennifer Aitchison at [email protected]. A great opportunity to remind the Hearts fans of how we beat them with 9 men the last time we played them in a semi-final, and to remind the Celtic fans of the last occasion we played them at Hampden (and other cup triumphs as well!).

What pleased me about the performance last night was the way we played as a team. For the bulk of the game there was good movement and passing when we had the ball and good pressing of the opposition when we didn't. We were dominant and had our shooting been a bit better we would have had 3 or 4 by half time. But we were not as sharp after the break and allowed Alloa some hope. The third goal should have snuffed that hope out and seen us comfortably see the game out. We had been in complete control in midfield with Chalmers, Welsh and Doran all having excellent games. but their departure completely changed the midfield dynamic allowing Alloa back in. Accepting that Welsh's substitution was enforced, it is still a bit of a worry that we didn't adapt better, didn't show a bit more composure and that some players didn't up their work rate in order to see the game out safely without conceding. Goal difference may well be important at the end of the season, yet at the end of the game we were all mightily relieved to hear the final whistle. Let's hope Welsh's injury is not serious because he is growing into his role well and is becoming increasingly important to the team. Just a word on Alloa. They may be bottom but at least they try to play good attacking football. None of the hoof and hope for them. They tried to get the ball down and play a passing game and often did that very effectively.

HT 1-0 FT 2-0 ICT Doran Opp Kirkpatrick Crowd 1984

HT 0-2 FT 1-2 ICT Doran Opp McDonald Crowd 2129

That is simply not true. The Annual Report stated that 58% of total expenditure was spent on first team footballing resources. That compares pretty favourably with other clubs. It will be the case that some of the expenditure relates to previously negotiated contracts on which the current regime has little control, but nevertheless, with such a large drop in turnover, it seems to me that the Board is protecting the playing budget as much as it reasonably can. Running a football club has a variety of unavoidable costs which inevitably represent a higher proportion of total costs for smaller clubs. We would all like to see more money being spent on the team but this will only happen if costs can be further reduced and/or income increased. Reducing income by not attending matches will not help.

Sorry not to have been able to post anything before now. I attended along with Jen Aitchison on behalf of the Supporters Trust. There were around 50 people attending . I am sure you will understand that the AGM is not a public meeting and therefore I am not in a position to give as much information as people might like. The Chairman (Graham Rae) spoke to the Annual Report and Financial Statements and then fielded questions from the floor on a number of topics including the less than healthy accounts and recent staff departures. It is no secret that the reduced level of income which can be expected in the Championship is simply not enough to maintain desired levels of expenditure. The Board has to balance expenditure with it's ability to generate a steady and reliable income stream, together with occasional windfall payments (cup runs, transfers etc) and cash injections from Directors and others. There are inevitably differences of opinion as to how best to go about achieving this balance, but nobody spoke specifically against any of the resolutions and all were passed overwhelmingly by a show of hands. As for recent departures, the Chairman quite rightly said that the reasons for any individual's departure must remain confidential. The two new Directors, Liam Dalgarno and Ross Morrison both spoke passionately about why they have agreed to join the Board and I am sure they will be a real asset to the Club as we move forward. John Robertson was present and answered a couple of questions at the end. He said he feels we are a better footballing side than Hearts and is confident we can beat them. He also spoke about artificial pitches and again spoke highly about the one they use for training at the Rugby club. From a Supporter's Trust perspective, I had a brief chat with Graham Rae prior to the meeting and he expressed a wish to establish a regular programme of scheduled meetings with the Trust. It is good that the Board now seems keen to engage with the Supporter's Trust and we'll keep you updated on how that goes.

I believe the club were expecting to receive the tickets today.

You can watch some extraordinary games on TV, but the games that really stick in the memory are the games you actually attend.

I'm afraid that I don't know what the Board's rules would say about your first question. My guess would be that there are no rules to specifically prevent the Board from co-opting back any member that had been voted off, but if they did so, they would have a fair bit of explaining to do. On the second question, the answer is no. There are 4 resolutions being put forward by the Board. We will have to see what transpires at the meeting, however, the role of the Supporters Trust is to work with the Club Board and not to takes sides in any Boardroom politics. We may vote to support non contentious motions or simply abstain. There would need to be a clear and compelling reason for the Trust to vote against any resolution put forward by the Club Board.

No. I am sure someone will correct me if I’m wrong, but my understanding is that members of the Club Board are appointed by the existing Board members and are only subject to any democratic process when their term of office is up and they need to seek the approval of shareholders to continue as Directors. This year, both the Chairman, Graham Rae and Gordon Fyfe are seeking the support of shareholders to continue as Directors, and there are resolutions on the agenda to that effect.

Communication from the club seems to be very hit and miss. The Club's AGM takes place on Monday 18th March but there is no notice of it on the Club's website. The only reference I can find to it is right at the bottom of a news item titled ""Culture change is key to positive future for ICT", which now appears on page 2 of the latest news items. It appears the Club is issuing notice of the meeting to shareholders by email this year (presumably to save money) but neither I nor my son have received the relevant email. I am in contact with the club about this and have in any case been forwarded a copy from a colleague on the Supporters Trust Board.. But I do have a concern that there may be shareholders who are unaware of the forthcoming meeting either because they, like me, have not received the email, or because the email has gone into an unmonitored junk folder. This is not just poor communication, it runs the risk of the legitimacy of the AGM being called into question. As a Supporters Trust Board member, I would be interested in hearing if any other shareholders have not received notification, regardless of whether or not they have any intention of attending the meeting. It may be be that our failure to receive the email is an isolated glitch but it would be important to know if it was not. Please either let me know via this thread or PM me if you prefer.

The problem is that options are so limited and Hampden is not a great venue. From an Old Firm perspective it is far from ideal as it only has a capacity much the same as their own home grounds. Other football stadia in the country can only hold just over 20,000 at most. There is no ground with a capacity between just over 20,000 and 50,000. As things stand The big two always play semis in their own city. I would like to see Murrayfield brought into use when they are playing or, better still, pack them off down the road to Manchester to an even bigger ground so they can understand what travelling to a big game entails. Can’t see the good folk of Manchester agreeing to that though!

HT 1-1 FT 1-2 ICT Doran Opp Dobbie Crowd 1178

According to public records at companies house it is not her husband's company as he only has 25% of the shares. It's her company as she is listed as a 75% shareholder and the sole Director!

Personally I feel Hampden should be reserved for the Final. Having said that, there is a need to be clear about where the semis are going to be played ASAP. One way to achieve that would be to play the quarter finals to a finish at the first time of asking. That way a venue appropriate to the geographical location of the teams and the anticipated crowd could be quickly decided. That would also help in reducing fixture congestion and in keeping costs down for fans.

The people who should be punished are those who commit the offences. At the games where these offences are most obvious there are dozens of police officers and dozens of stewards. If they did their job properly then large numbers of the perpetrators could easily be identified and prosecuted. That would soon have a major impact. All it needs is the political will. Clubs cannot be held responsible for the behaviour of individual “fans” but it is reasonable to expect them to help the police to identify perpetrators and to ban them. If they fail to do their bit then sanctions should be imposed but not such as to hurt the players (e.g. points deductions) or the majority of decent fans (stand closures).

HT. 0-0 FT. 2-1 ICT. Brad Mackay Opp. Pawlett Crowd. 4611

I would see role of the Trust being to work with the club on behalf of supporters to develop a scheme and negotiate on how any financial input from supporters translated into influence in the club. I would also rather see any crowdfunding contributions going direct to the club.

Ross, a question. Is your suggestion just flying a personal thought or is this something the Board has tasked you to raise here? I agree with Caleyboy that the Supporters Trust would be the channel for fan involvement with the idea. Personally it is an idea which I think might be worth exploring but I cannot speak for the Trust Board as it is not something we have discussed as yet.

HT. 0 - 0 FT. 0 - 0 ICT. Walsh Opp Millar crowd. 2047

HT. 0-2 FT. 1-3 ICT. Walsh Opp. Mckay crowd. 3281