DoofersDad

When McNaughton went off, it was the slowest walk to the touchline I've ever seen. It seemed pretty obvious it was not the sort of knock you can simply run off so I wonder why he wasn't taken off on a stretcher? Apart from the fact that trying walk was obviously very painful for the poor lad, putting any weight at all on it surely risked making the injury worse.

HT 2-0 FT 3-1 ICT Boden Opp Watt Crowd 16,118

Sadly, I doubt that there is any hope of Sturgeon behaving like a responsible political leader rather than as a mouthpiece for a single agenda pressure group. She continues to bang on about needing to speak up and act on behalf of the majority of the the Scottish electorate who voted to stay in the EU, yet completely ignores the wishes of the larger number who voted to remain in the UK. She says she is doing all she can to address the uncertainty caused by the Brexit vote but yet has it in her power to remove the biggest single element of uncertainty by finally respecting the wishes of the Scottish people and ruling out another indy referendum for the foreseeable future. Her pressure group rhetoric has reached new depths of cynicism this week by referring to the UK's refusal to guarantee EU citizens here the right to stay as "disgraceful". She then went on to say that it "breaks my heart" that she cannot guarantee their future in Scotland. It all sounds lovely and makes her sound like a compassionate and caring leader. But the vast majority of people in this country appreciate the contribution EU citizens make to this country and would also like to see them stay. That includes the Prime Minister and leaders of other political parties - it even includes most of the more prominent Brexit campaigners! But what we have to remember is that there is also the parallel issue of UK citizen's abroad and we have to consider them as well. The Prime Minister has already stated that she fully expects EU citizens who wish to remain here will be allowed to, but that their status needs to be determined following negotiations regarding the status of our citizens who wish to remain in the EU. Clearly that doesn't immediately give people the assurance that they would like but it must be the correct approach. If the UK Government meekly gave in to the pressure group rhetoric of the SNP, our citizens abroad would become negotiating tools in the Brexit negotiations and would be used to lever concessions from Britain which would result in a less favourable outcome for us. The UK Government understand the reality of this and are acting accordingly. By stating that she "fully expects" people will be able to stay in the country they have chosen to live in, the PM has not only confirmed her support for these people, she has laid out a firm negotiating position which will put pressure on political leaders in the EU to accept this common-sense approach. That demonstrates a far greater level of political leadership than the SNP's posturing. Sturgeon's seemingly compassionate approach will no doubt make her come across as "our caring wee Nicola" to those voters who simply don't think beyond the headline grabbing sound bites the SNP come up with. But the reality is that it creates huge uncertainty for our citizens abroad, it undermines the wider negotiations and is designed simply to drive a wedge between the Scottish people and the UK Government. This isn't caring Nicola at her compassionate best, it is heartless Sturgeon at her cynical worst.

... subject to cost.

Where on earth does all this talking Scotland down nonsense come from? Competing in team GB gives Scotland's top sportsmen and women the opportunity of competing in teams which are capable of competing and winning at the highest level. They and those in individual events all benefit from the top level training set ups which are funded at a UK level. As part of team GB, Scottish athletes therefore have an opportunity for success which supporters of independence would deny them. This is not "talking Scotland down" - it is talking Scottish people up and giving them the opportunity to maximise their potential on the national stage. As Charles says, the Olympics really does encapsulate that we are all "Better Together".

Hmm. The tactic of not marking Boyce didn't really work, did it? Disappointing result and very definitely 2nd best. It was crap but at least it wasn't boring. Foran is clearly on a steep learning curve, but in his defence I would say that between the Arbroath and the County games we have already had about as much incident as we had in the entire season last year under Hughes. An absolutely sublime strike by Drapes for the 2nd. The player we are missing most from last season? Danny Devine.

Developing the youngsters has far more benefits than any transfer fees we might one day get for them. Over the years several youngsters have been good enough to be valuable members of the first team squad. Some, like Polworth, manage to become regular starters whilst others like Brown and Sutherland spend more time on the bench than on the pitch but are capable of doing a job if called upon. Were they not in the squad there would be a need to bring in players for cover who would only be available on higher wages. There are also the unquantifiable benefits of a youth development system in embedding the club in the wider community. The involvement of the youngsters in the club brings the club closer to the friends and families of those youngsters. It makes the community more likely to support the club. The economics of a youth development system are very hard to quantify, but what I do know is this. Stop the youth development system and you rip out the very heart and soul of the club.

I think the club has tried just about all it reasonably can to adapt to be able to compete at the top level in this very difficult market. But there may well come a time when despite the best efforts of all concerned it is simply not possible to survive at the current level. At some point we may have to face the bitter reality that spending to survive would risk bankrupting the club and the sensible adaptation is to accept that we can only survive at a lower level. Unless by some miracle the crowds increase by 50% or we get a rich benefactor, we will always be a club which is unable to hold onto players whose performances lead to offers of much more lucrative contracts elsewhere. We will survive at this level only if we continue to unearth and develop players with ability who are under-performing elsewhere, and if we can produce quality players through the youth system. That's a very tough ask because all clubs, rich and poor will also be doing the same.

With TV pouring ever more money into the game UK wide, players are demanding and getting ever more and more money. The effects filter down to our level where any extra we may receive through these channels is more than accounted for by the money players demand. We cannot compete with teams from the lower reaches of the English league financially. I would imagine, therefore, that significant sums of money have been used simply to extend contracts of existing players. And whilst I would like to see longer contracts, players will only sign those if the salary makes it worth their while. To offer players such contracts is a gamble the club cannot afford to take. The blunt economic truth is that you need to spend more just to stand still.We will do very well if we can manage to retain our top flight status in the next 2 or 3 years and unrealistic expectations simply add to the pressures.

We have had a couple of disappointing performances and results but I guess the feeling of disappointment is felt more acutely as a result of the high expectations generated by outstanding performances in the 2 previous games. It's important to keep a bit of perspective here. Regardless of whether criticism of the Board is justified (some probably is and some probably isn't) the fact remains that given the resources available, our club has been kicking above it's weight for several seasons now. We have been helped by the problems some of the biggest clubs have created for themselves by their own financial mismanagement but they are now all on their way back (or, in The Rangers case, replaced by a clone club - The Clone Rangers) and this will make the top flight more competitive again. Top six will be a major achievement in the future and just staying in the top flight represents success for a club of our size. Our situation is also affected by the managerial position. Whilst some refer to Hughes as being our most successful manager ever, the reality is that the club has gone backwards considerably under his tenure. When he took over we had a great squad playing attractive football and who were 2nd in the league. He left the club with us relieved to have narrowly escaped the relegation dog fight in a weaker league. He transformed the playing style to one which bored the pants of most fans. And he oversaw the departure of many of our better players and, despite a bigger budget, was unable to recruit players of the quality of those departing. It is now left to Foran to pick up the pieces. Would we have beaten Alloa if Hughes was still manager? No! Had Hughes still been manager we would not have been playing Alloa as I doubt we would have got out of our qualifying group. What the Dunfermline and Arbroath games demonstrated is the kind of entertaining attacking football Foran would like to deliver. What the games against Partick and Alloa demonstrated was how difficult it will to deliver that vision on a regular basis against better and more organised teams, This is going to be a long hard season. We will all have our hopes and dreams, but the reality is that not being relegated will be a decent outcome for us. No doubt as the season progresses I will express exasperation at some of the things Foran does (for instance, like others. I think Draper needs to be starting) but I think we need to trust in the Board's judgement and in their faith in Foran in giving him a long term contract. He's been left a very difficult task by the previous manager and we need to give him our full support and be realistic about what can be achieved this season.

Well, it wouldn't have been 1-0 to Alloa, that's for sure.

No, It's nothing to do with any affiliation I may or may not have had. I just feel the name and the strip are far more important symbols of what the club is and where it has come from. If people feel we really must continue with the identity of the two clubs which merged then I would suggest the name of the club and the current strip do that very well. And if we must have a badge as well, then something completely un-associated with the 2 former clubs would perhaps reflect a more forward thinking ethos. Something along the lines of that iconic image of dolphins leaping out of the water under the Kessock bridge would be a symbol of a modern successful and ambitious club from a modern successful and ambitious Inverness. Surely far more appropriate than this constant fixation with 2 former clubs of rather parochial ambition?

It's funny how different things matter to different people. Personally I couldn't care less whether the club had a badge/crest at all, let alone what is on it or under it or whatever. It seems to me that it is the kit that best identifies the club - it is certainly much more visual than the little badge on it! But yet we somehow now expect the kit to change every year just to satisfy commercial purposes and nobody complains that fans are not involved in the decision making process for that. Much as I would like the strip to remain the same year after year as a more tangible symbol of identity, I accept it just ain't going to happen these days. It doesn't bother me though. What bothers me is what goes on on the park.

HT 0-0 FT 1-2 ICT King Opp Laney Crowd 890

HT 1-1 FT 2-1 ICT Vigurs Opp Curran Crowd 4866

I would suspect (although I can't be *rsed to check) that the home closest to ICT's ground is actually closer to Clach's ground than it is to ICT's. Is this, therefore, evidence that proximity to Highland league grounds has a much greater beneficial effect on house prices than proximity to a Premiership ground? Of course not. House prices are affected by a variety of factors, but unless a house is very close to the ground, being in the same vague post code area as a football stadium will not be one of them.

The report states "The biggest increases in value have been seen in properties close to Caledonian Stadium where the average home value has risen by 90 per cent over the decade, from £122,685 in 2006 to £233,664 in 2016. " er... what homes?

Held his nerve well. Surely that should cement a Ryder cup place for him. Talking point of the tournament must be the 58 shot by Jim Furyk in the last round. That's the first time anyone has shot a 58 in USPGA history. Prior to that Furyk was one of only 6 to ever shoot 59. I'm happy just to get under 60 for 9 holes.

This is actually a very significant poll if it is a true reflection of the nation's views. It would be good to see this repeated with a variety of survey methodologies. The SNP have been boring us all with their claims of an outraged Scottish electorate following a very clear majority of Scots voters voting to stay in the EU. But despite the pro-EU vote, the poll suggests that nearly 20% more of the electorate would rather accept the UK Brexit vote if it meant staying in the UK, than retain EU membership by gaining independence. There are 2 explanations for this. Firstly there are voters, like me, who voted no to independence and then to remain in the EU, but who feel that it is more important to remain as part of the UK than as part of the EU. Secondly, there must be people who voted for independence and to leave the EU but who feel that leaving the EU is more important than leaving the UK. Not only does this blow the SNP's arguments out of the water, it also demonstrates the extent of the anti EU feeling amongst the supporters of independence. This has profound implications for SNP strategy because the poll suggests that the SNP could lose an independence referendum unless it abandons it's pro EU stance. However, if it abandons it's pro EU stance, it loses the the only grievance it has to justify another referendum. There is, of course a third and better option. It could actually accept the democratic will of the people in the 2 referendums and start doing what it was elected to do - focus on providing some government from Holyrood.

Just one point off top 6. We can still do it. Believe.

I was amused by the bewildered and miserable expressions of the handful of old folk on the steps behind. It looked as though they had been removed from a care home on the promise of a day out. But in some ways it is a bit sad that nutters like James Scott seem to have no conception of the fact that their actions actually do real harm to the causes they so earnestly campaign for. On a similar note, the SNP would do well to muzzle Salmond sooner rather than later. I note that he has been offered lots of money to appear on "I'm a celebrity". To his credit, he has turned the offer down, but the point is that the fact that he has been made the offer at all is a reflection of the public perception of the man. He is seen as someone to be ridiculed and made fun of, not someone who is still a serious political figure.

The matchday thread is for comment on all the games in the current round of matches. It's just that folk usually don't comment on other games. The game at Ibrox does have some relevance though. What with Partick beating us yesterday and Celtic winning today, it means The Rangers are still just the 3rd team in Glasgow.

HT 1-2 FT 2-3 ICT Vigurs Opp Doolan Crowd 3490

Presumably, in the context of the thread, you are referring here to John Mason?

Clearly one can see the funny side of this pathetic behaviour, but there is a much more serious issue here. Whilst Mason has rightly been condemned for his comments by representatives of other political parties, an SNP spokesman simply said "“All individuals and businesses are entitled to express their point of view and contribute to political debate, and we do not seek to influence people’s consumer choices on the basis of those views.” So, the SNP, whilst expressing the politically correct view, failed to express any criticism of Mason for doing exactly the opposite. In other words, they passively condoned what he said. That, rather than the comments themselves is what anyone who values their freedom and our democracy should be worried about. During the election Charles raised the issue of SNP behaviours having parallels in the rise of National Socialism in Germany. I steered clear of that aspect then but Charles was absolutely right in what he said. It is surely a given for any democrat that discriminating against people because of their political views is wrong. Where does it stop? A boycott today, graffiti tomorrow, a brick through the window next week, a petrol bomb next month? Mason's behaviour is just the sort of activity which will inhibit people from voicing opposition to the SNP because they will worry it will affect their livelihoods or that they will be subject to abuse or physically threatened. Of course, nobody is suggesting that anyone in the SNP would wish to emulate the evil that the Nazis perpetrated, but what is becoming increasingly evident is the acceptance by the party of intolerance to views different from their vision of the true path. It's the next step down the slippery slope from the obnoxious mantra of being accused of "talking Scotland down" whenever someone disagrees with the SNP's perceived wisdom. Now, if you are "talking Scotland down", you are fair game for discrimination and intimidation. Had Mason said he was boycotting a travel agent because the owner was a Muslim, there would have been widespread outrage and the SNP would have severely censured him. So why do they tolerate the same behaviour when directed against someone who has a different view on a political issue? At what point does discrimination and intimidation of people who don't agree with the SNP's distorted view of political correctness become unacceptable to the SNP? In the interest of freedom and democracy, that point should be a zero tolerance towards these behaviours. The fact that an elected SNP MSP behaves in this way and is not subject to censure by his party is profoundly worrying.