DoofersDad

Of course the OF distort the figures, but just leaving them out of it makes interesting reading. If you look at Germany who are 13th in the list, the current World Cup champions and who have a superb top flight league, the % watching is listed as 1.63%. Now if you divide the Highlands in 2 and say the potential fan base of ICT and County was 100,000 each, then at German levels of attendance we could expect home gates of 1,630. For all the moaning we do about how poorly the Inverness public support the club, this would suggest that compared to international levels, our level of support is pretty good. The down side of this is that one might therefore expect the support to drop significantly in line with support elsewhere rather than rise. Incidentally, I note that the number of divisions counted in preparing the table is listed as 5! Does this include the Highland League, I wonder? If so, then add in Wick, Brora, Clach, Nairn, Strathspey and Fort William onto the figures for ICT and County, and Highland clubs probably have a higher percentage of the population watching live football than Scotland as a whole - OF included.

A proper development team too and not one full of fringe players. Very encouraging.

With respect, Bughtmaster, there is every reason for you to explain yourself. This is a forum which exists to allow people to share and discuss various viewpoints. But when folk express views which are critical of the manager you come on here and criticise them for voicing those views. You don't address the particular points folk raise, you just say they shouldn't be expressing them. That is really rather discourteous. You are also highly inconsistent in what you say. Your gripe about Barry Wilson seems to be that his reports on matches (even when completely objective) will not encourage new people to attend games. But then when others express the view that the football on display is not very entertaining and make suggestions for a more attacking style which might attract folk through the gates, you criticise them for voicing those views. Of course, it may be that you feel the fare on offer has been thoroughly entertaining. You are, of course, entitled to your view. But if that is your view then kindly either explain what it is about it that you find entertaining, or refrain from having a pop at those with different views.. On that front, I asked you a question about Tuesday's game which gives you an opportunity to justify your criticism of others but you chose not to answer it.

Might I remind you that it was you who criticised others for having their say and not the other way round. Of course you are welcome to have your say, but rather than simply having a pop at others for making critical comments, it would be far more positive to enter into some kind of debate and respond constructively to the points they make. For instance, RiG asked you a specific question which you have chosen to ignore. And others on this thread have criticised the manager for taking Storey and Mutombo off and replacing them with Williams and Vincent. Perhaps you would care to explain how taking off our 2 most attack minded players and replacing them with midfielders when we have yet to score is going to encourage folk to come and watch the team?

Barry Wilson is employed by the BBC to comment on games as he sees it. If he thinks the game is awful then of course it is right that he says so. Are you seriously suggesting that because he used to be employed by ICT he should lie about the games and say how wonderful ICT were when they were poor? If you think his comments are not an adequate reflection of the game then complain to the BBC. And what on earth gives you the right to imply that just because some posters are critical of the certain aspects of the club that they are not supporting the club through thick and thin? The reality is that because they do care passionately about the club, they are anxious that problems get addressed. and therefore voice their concerns. You accuse Kingsmills of attacking you and then in last comment you make an inappropriately snide comment about him. Far from displaying your level of understanding, your comment displays a lack of understanding of the importance of constructive criticism in improving performance. An increasing number of folk who support the team week in and week out are getting very concerned about the way things are going and particularly about the level of entertainment being provided. We are the ones who pay Yogi's salary and we will continue to plough money into the club long after he's gone. We therefore have every right to voice our concerns.. And please don't continue with your nonsense of equating criticism with negativity. It is, after all, the negativity of the style of play that people are criticising.

I assume the minute attached to the notification refers to the AGM of 2016 and not of 2015 as actually stated on the minute. That being the case, reading the minute will clarify the reason for an EGM. I also assume that there is a requirement to give not less that 2 weeks notice for an EGM and if so, this notification just meets that requirement. However, if the need for an EGM was agreed back in February and the meeting is not taking place until 9 weeks later, it would have been good to get a little more notice. Short notice always impacts on attendance. It doesn't exactly encourage folk to get involved. No doubt the "mess" that is referred to in the minute is a consequence of one or two folk not really appreciating the importance of adhering to the rules of the organisation even for a small and relatively informal group like CJT. When people give of their valuable time it can often seem unnecessarily time consuming to follow the rules to the letter, but failing to do so clearly does lead to difficulty. Hopefully folk can learn from any mistakes and forgive others for theirs. CJT can then move on in a rather more disciplined way which, in turn, might encourage others to get involved. Discontent amongst fans over one or two issues is evident on other threads and therefore it is important that CJT is functioning on a sound footing in order to act as an effective liaison group between the fans and the club.

Personally I think agents are a real cancer in the modern game. But having said that, there should be nothing to stop the club informing the player that they want to keep him, that an offer has been made and that there is a deadline for the completion of any negotiation over terms. It would then be for the player to instruct his agent to negotiate within those parameters, to keep the player informed of progress and to consult with the player over relevant detail. I appreciate agents will want to drag negotiations out but negotiations will only drag on if both sides allow them to. The club needs players signed up and if a preferred player does not sign then they need to open talks with someone else. The longer "negotiations" continue, the weaker the club's position become as other available players get signed up elsewhere. If the club was to adopt a no nonsense policy of setting deadlines and sticking to them, then that would concentrate the minds of players and their agents. After the deadline, there would be no further negotiation but the offer could remain on the table until an alternative signing has been made, at which time the offer would be withdrawn.

I couldn't get to the rearranged game tonight but I agree that attacking football has not been on display a lot at TCS this season. However, at the moment, I think it is all about picking up enough points to ensure safety and I really don't care if the football that achieves it is not very pretty. I do share your concern for the future though. Unless the football on display is more entertaining to watch, people will stop coming and it will be hard to attract them back

Beat Killie and we are 11 points ahead with 12 points to play for. Can't see them winning all four and us losing all 4.

Kilmarnock v Utd as the last game of the season could be a bit tasty depending on what happens before.

No doubt IHE knows more about "grooming" than me, but I can't see Foran taking over from Hughes as good idea. Whatever his potential as a manager may be, he first either needs to be in charge at a lower level or be appointed as number 2 at a bigger club. He needs the first hand experience and to prove he can do the job.

It was a great Masters. Tremendous drama on the final day. A British winner, No less than 6 Brits at equal 10th or better, Ernie Els 6 putting from about 3 foot on the first hole - and this - http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/golf/36011707 It is a shame Russell Knox did not make the cut but hopefully he will bounce back and get another opportunity to shine at this wonderful tournament.

I don't know how many people heard BBC Radio Scotland's phone-in this morning, but I think Louse White must have been sitting in the studio with her "The Rangers" top on. The question being asked was "Do you welcome Rangers' return to the Premiership?" White was getting very aggressive with folk who calmly pointed out that Rangers had been liquidated and that "The Rangers" were a new club who will be entering the top flight for the first time. Her stock answer was "Yes, but it's the same club". Well done Willie from Inverness who made the point very well! Will the presence of The Rangers make the top flight stronger next year? Very probably, yes. But that is not the point. The point is that Rangers went into liquidation as a result of years of incompetent and criminal mismanagement leaving many individuals and small businesses with unpaid debts. The appropriate authorities then allowed a new club to be formed and gifted them the assets of the former club. The appropriate authorities then failed to apply their own rules about clubs applying to the SFL to have a minimum of 2 years audited accounts, and allowed "The Rangers" immediate entry into the league structure. The appropriate authorities then decreed that a man who has several convictions for fraud was a fit and proper person to be chairman of The Rangers. The appropriate authorities have since allowed the Rangers to buy success. They have allowed the club to operate with a massive operating loss so that it can borrow large sums of money to pay better players. Finally after all this collusion by various "appropriate authorities" "The Rangers" have finally made it to the top flight. Meanwhile all these various authorities collude with others, including the BBC, to call the new club "Rangers" as if it is exactly the same club and that the whole shameful episode was just a temporary blip in the history of the club. Of, course, the only regard in which the club does not want to be considered one and the same with the old club, is in honouring the debts of the old club. Honest folk who provided services to Rangers are left out of pocket and honest tax payers look on whilst massive tax debts remain unpaid. So, do I welcome the arrival of "The Rangers" to the Premiership? No, It shames Scottish football and it shames those various authorities who have failed to apply relevant legislation and regulations. Today's phone-in also shamed the BBC.

https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/sport/football/spfl/880755/fon-williams-looking-sign-new-caley-thistle-contract/ Fon Williams sounds very keen to stay in Inverness. He didn't have his finest 94 minutes on Saturday but hopefully he can be signed up soon.

Trust me. I'm a Registered Nurse.

Wouldn't surprise me if Raven went to County the way he appears to be being treated here. They have been shipping goals badly this season. I think he would suit their style of play. That would be a real sickener. Hughes, Cameron - get this fine young player signed up ASAP.

Good post. People have complained about the impact of injuries this season but it's interesting to compare our best current team with the team that took to the park on Hughes' first match in charge. Ross, Shinnie, Watkins and McKay were the four players who started then who have since left. In the meantime, Christie has burst into the side and has left. Vincent and Williams who were also here when Hughes arrived are leaving at the end of the season. Other Butcher signings like Tansey and Raven may also leave. Hughes (or the Chairman) has brought in new players, but of those who show even any potential to match those who have left (Storey, Roberts, Vigurs, Mutombo) none are yet signed up for next season. The stark truth is that the talent available to Hughes when he took over was significantly better than what is available now. And as things stand, we will be significantly weaker again at the start of next season.

I actually don't have a problem with this. To be fair to Hearts, they really have no particular reason for wanting to duck the game. They are in 3rd place 12 points behind Aberdeen and 12 points ahead of Motherwell. They are going to finish 3rd and they are out of the cup. I appreciate that with the size of their squad they probably could field a side, but there is a likelihood of other players falling ill in the next 24 hours and a trip up and down the A9 in a coach would not be a good idea in the circumstances. It is certainly against any medical advice they will be getting. The nature of the problem makes this quite a different issue than shortages through injury - it is about preventing spread of the outbreak and not just about player availability. With that in mind, there is also the point that if Hearts were to field infected players then the illness could be passed to our squad. In any case, the game has been re-scheduled for a week tomorrow when it is likely that their squad will still not be fully fit (but no longer infectious). What also benefits us is that we now don't have a match prior to the Utd game and can therefore prepare fully for that without risking further injuries or suspensions. Saturday's game is a massive game and will be a huge step towards securing our survival if we win. By the way, I think the problems started with Oshaniwa on Saturday. He got sent off and went for an early barf.

Saints preserve us from any one who thinks they are "immortal"! I think there's a lot of truth in what you are saying but would add that for managers who have been very successful as players, they also seem to have an expectation that they should be managing at the same level with the same success. When the team does not achieve that, they start to blame everyone except themselves. In his interview after the game on Saturday, Hughes was bemoaning the fact that poor defending and an inability to get the ball over the line at the other end cost us a game we dominated. Of course individual players make errors, but just who is it that chooses to play one of our two best central defenders at right back and our only striker on the wing? Hughes may justify the decisions based on what limited options he has, but whose fault is it that we don't have adequate cover in these positions? Whatever talents Hughes may have, it does seem that getting the right mix of players signed up on contracts is not one of them. And frankly, if you do not have the right mix of players signed up, it really doesn't matter what your other talents are, you are not going to have success. Hughes needs to demonstrate some success in getting current players onto new contracts and signing some better players from elsewhere. If he can't because the Board is cutting back on the budget then he at least needs to use the budget he has to get a better balance within the squad. He shouldn't be publicly bleating on about how limited our budget is and he certainly shouldn't be deflecting the blame onto the players. Actions speak louder than words and we need some action from the manager on the contract front - and soon.

Couldn't agree more. Can't help but feel that a fit Raven at right back yesterday would have given us more width and penetration going forward. Meanwhile, Meekings back in the middle with Warren would have given us a bit more solidity at the back. It would be absolutely crazy not to offer Raven a contract.

If Kilmarnock and Dundee Utd go through the rest of the season winning the same number of points per game as they have till now, then we could lose all our remaining games and still stay up. I'm sure at least one of them will do better than that, but even with pretty poor form we should pick up enough points to stay ahead of the two of them. It's next season I'm worried about.

Well said. After two games you can see what the problems are, but Yogi's been around all season and still doesn't seem to have a scooby. "Frustrating" certainly sums it up although having watched rather more games than you, I would put another word in front.

We weren't good today but I thought we were unlucky to lose. Motherwell surprised me both by how poor they were and how negative they were. It looked like they were playing for a draw and wasting time from the start, although to be fair to them, that was probably good tactics as a key outcome for them was not to lose against a team challenging them for a top six spot. We wanted the result more than them but we just didn't have the rub of the green. We should have beaten Motherwell today although it was not a top six team performance. I thought both Fon Williams and Storey had their poorest games that I've seen. Meekings is not a right back and seemed reluctant to get beyond the halfway line. Draper is effective when he surges forward - Yogi needs to tell him to get forward a lot more. Mutombo does a lot that is good and positive but far too often he then chooses the wrong option and undoes all the good work. I didn't see Liam Hughes at County but I thought he put in a good shift today. I have no idea why Hughes took him off when we were chasing the game and needed height in the box. My MOTM was Tremarco. Always gives 100%, put in some decent crosses and also got into great positions at the back post, Whilst were generally a bit more positive than sometimes, our problem remains that we do not get forward enough with pace and as a result we allow the opposition to get lots of bodies behind the ball. We then simply do not have the quality to open them up.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/35940884 This doesn't help either. Also it looks as though Hughes is resigned to losing Storey at the end of the season.

I'm surprised nobody else has commented on this. I agree it is not the greatest survey, but it is an attempt by the SPFL to get the views of supporters on a range of issues. Results will be broken down to club level so it is a good opportunity to show that supporters of ICT care about the future of the game. If supporters across Scotland don't give their views, how are the SPFL supposed to know what we think? If there aren't thousands of replies saying we support safe standing areas, for example, then the SPFL will assume that we are all happy with the way things are. As the OP says, it only takes 10 minutes so it is a great opportunity to give your views on a range of issues facing the game today.