clacher_holiday2

PRESENT I havent got a ticket yet mind.

Give him MArius's wages How many goals has Nicholson scored for his country and in Europe?

Been a couple of crackers despite the gash season. I'd nominate Black away to Dundee United and McBain v Gretna in the 4-0 game.

IHE's right, I heard it was 8.1 mill.

Roy MacGregor would be a welcome addition to the ICT boardroom IMO.

Used to live in Brighton. Went to a handful of games, dont think I'd ever travel all the way down there now to see a game though.

SP. I have spoken! I even said please.

No, he was clearly unfit and lacking in confidence, he was not going to shine for quite a time. The difference in his class/goal scoring would be the great leveller re his salary compared to the other players. He was unlikely to do this given the above and it was obviously going to create tension and resentment in the squad, which it clearly has. My question wasnt necessarily specific to Marius but rather a question of the boards ambition, in attempting a relatively high profile expensive signing. I think it was a bold move and was a risk worth taking. I think it couldve turned out very different if we were in a healthier state, had Marius come in during Robbo or Brews first spell we may have seen the best of from day one. As it happened we were going nowhere at the start of the year, if we finish this season strong, put thoughts of Wyness, Hart, Rankin, Wilson and go knows who else to bed over the summer then I've no doubt we'll see Nicolae fly out of the traps when the season starts in 4 months.

PLEASE NO

PS. Was the risk/experiment worth going through with at the start of the season? YES

Brilliant player but too expensive for us. He's probably the best forward we've ever had, the performances of Bayne and Wyness together in his absence shows us up. Rumors at the time of his arrival put his wages at MAinz on around 10k a year and over 16k at Sporting Lisbon (!) It wouldve been interesting to see Marius at ICT under healthier circumstances, I suspect he wouldve had much more of an impact.

Who is our mascot?

And I'm feeling... GLAD ALL OVER :clapping03:

Last week I saw somebody in Edinburgh with an ICT hat on, tried to make contact but they seemed more interested in the pavement, suppose that isnt rare now as the Edinburgh contingent is of a fair size these days. (wheres our supporters club btw? Must be somebody with a minibus stashed away in a drawer somewhere?) I once asked on the old rivals site who lived in Paisley, having seen a baldy man wearing an ICT top down by the High Street, turned out to be Seroas (think the name was!) Somebody shouted "Mon Thistle" at me while playing football a couple of months back, I had one of our Scotlrail tops on at the time. They couldve been supporting anyone mind. edit: I was in Dumbarton at the time.

Happy to see Inverness in Edinburgh again, I was planning on going to see whoever it ended up being on the 26th before the fixtures were decided, a homer for me so looking forward to it already. We should pick up a few points here if Brewsters statements regarding splits being sorted is true.

Does anybody have any info on this guy and his service? He was basically running a shop on wheels that would go round the ferry in the afternoon from 19xx to about 1994/5 (from possibly anytime and he covered anywhere else in Inverness but I wouldnt know), selling all kinds of things but definitely cakes, which I used to get as pudding after a meal.. :022: (cheers Finlay whoever you are) If my memory is serving me well he used to own a big blue van, but there was also a rival white and red one as a (skummier) rival, selling less decent desert cakes. Suppose my question is, what the **** ever happened to him and how did somebody manage to make a living driving a van round a scummy area like ours? I know later he ended up taking over a store on Lochalsh Road, think it was the farmers store, I do remember buying some lovely fresh sausages of him back in the days when I worked in the bookies next door. Maybe all I'm really after is a picture of the van :015:

Disagree Scarlo, its a time to draw a line in the sand, no matter which of the current protagonists are on the fans side, I dont want to be papering over the cracks by simply GETTING ON WITH THE JOB.... (of earning 3 points in a possible 33!) Either we get back to the old ICT ethos of hard work, unity and team spirit or we get relegated and dwindle into first division mediocrity for years. On the park its Black who opitimises these qualities and if what I'm hearing personally is true then it is not he who needs to stand down against Brewster, no matter what position Brewster holds. Craig isnt David Sutherland, he isnt Pele, he isnt Robbo... he hasnt achieved next to f#ck all as a manager and shouldnt automatically gain the respect of his players, many of whom he left in the lurch when he toddled of to United last time he was here. He has to earn respect and aslong as he hasnt then as far as I'm concerned Ian Black is entitled to have his say and stand by it. Anybody who doesnt show distress about the absolute shi1te thats being produced on the pitch, be it a Manager or Player, who doesnt have a serious problem with it, like Craig Brewster, will be an enemy of mine Until this is all resolved :003:

Hmm.. I'll need to re think that then.....!

Ask me tomorrow at 3.01 :)

KEEEEEEEEOOOOGGHHHHH KEEEOOOGH KEEOGGGHHH etc :)

If anybody here is really in touch with Ian Black could they please let him know he has plenty of support.. He's the one player in the squad who could easily move on and establish himself in another SPL team, we all know that, so the fact hes saying he wants to be with ICT is important to me and it should be to everybody else. As a player he is definitely a once a decade signing, considering where he came from and at what cost, plus his age and influence on the team.. the fact that the same player is willing to speak out and show commitment to us with his comments and the frustration he's obviously going through with regards to the state we find ourselves in is something we may not see again from a player for years. Brew, Savage and whoever else can seriously GTF. Are they all not Manchester and Dundee United wannabes anyway?

FRASER TOKELY PROCTER MUNRO HASTINGS BLACK COWIE DUNCAN IMMRIE NICOLAE BAYNE That line up wins us 3 points IMO. Wilson comes on for Cowie and Mcallister comes on for Bayne mid second half.

If I'd seen this topic earlier I wouldve deleted it. No chance the SPL would let them not put on some kind of show.

Nicked from one of those lunatic moon hoax websites... keep the faith lads. 1) Sceptics argue that the lack of stars on Moon photographs is acceptable, despite zero atmosphere to obscure the view. Yuri Gagarin, pronounced the stars to be "astonishingly brilliant". See the official NASA pictures above that I have reproduced that show 'stars' in the sky, as viewed from the lunar surface. And why exactly do you think there are hardly any stars visible on Apollo films taken from the Moon? The answers simple - Professional astronomers would quickly calculate that the configuration and distances of star formations were incorrect and so NASA had to remove them to make sure they could keep up the scam. 2) The pure oxygen atmosphere in the module would have melted the Hasselblad's camera covering and produced poisonous gases. Why weren't the astronauts affected? 3) There should have been a substantial crater blasted out under the LM's 10,000 pound thrust rocket. Sceptics would have you believe that the engines only had the power to blow the dust from underneath the LM as it landed. If this is true, how did Armstrong create that famous boot print if all the dust had been blown away? 4) Sceptics claim that you cannot produce a flame in a vacuum because of the lack of oxygen. So how come I have footage on this page showing a flame coming from the exhaust of an Apollo lander? (Obviously the sceptics are wrong or the footage shows the lander working in an atmosphere) 5) Footprints are the result of weight displacing air or moisture from between particles of dirt, dust, or sand. The astronauts left distinct footprints all over the place. 6) The Apollo 11 TV pictures were lousy, yet the broadcast quality magically became fine on the five subsequent missions. 7) Why in most Apollo photos, is there a clear line of definition between the rough foreground and the smooth background? 8) Why did so many NASA Moonscape photos have non parallel shadows? sceptics will tell you because there is two sources of light on the Moon - the Sun and the Earth... That maybe the case, but the shadows would still fall in the same direction, not two or three different angles and Earth shine would have no effect during the bright lunar day (the time at which the Apollo was on the Moon). 9) Why did one of the stage prop rocks have a capital "C" on it and a 'C' on the ground in front of it? 10) How did the fibreglass whip antenna on the Gemini 6A capsule survive the tremendous heat of atmospheric re-entry? 11) In Ron Howard's 1995 science fiction movie, Apollo 13, the astronauts lose electrical power and begin worrying about freezing to death. In reality, of course, the relentless bombardment of the Sun's rays would rapidly have overheated the vehicle to lethal temperatures with no atmosphere into which to dump the heat build up. 12) Who would dare risk using the LM on the Moon when a simulated Moon landing was never tested? 13) Instead of being able to jump at least ten feet high in "one sixth" gravity, the highest jump was about nineteen inches. 14) Even though slow motion photography was able to give a fairly convincing appearance of very low gravity, it could not disguise the fact that the astronauts travelled no further between steps than they would have on Earth. 15) If the Rover buggy had actually been moving in one-sixth gravity, then it would have required a twenty foot width in order not to have flipped over on nearly every turn. The Rover had the same width as ordinary small cars. 16) An astrophysicist who has worked for NASA writes that it takes two meters of shielding to protect against medium solar flares and that heavy ones give out tens of thousands of rem in a few hours. Russian scientists calculated in 1959 that astronauts needed a shield of 4 feet of lead to protect them on the Moons surface. Why didn't the astronauts on Apollo 14 and 16 die after exposure to this immense amount of radiation? And why are NASA only starting a project now to test the lunar radiation levels and what their effects would be on the human body if they have sent 12 men there already? 17) The fabric space suits had a crotch to shoulder zipper. There should have been fast leakage of air since even a pinhole deflates a tyre in short order. 18) The astronauts in these "pressurized" suits were easily able to bend their fingers, wrists, elbows, and knees at 5.2 p.s.i. and yet a boxer's 4 p.s.i. speed bag is virtually unbendable. The guys would have looked like balloon men if the suits had actually been pressurized. 19) How did the astronauts leave the LEM? In the documentary 'Paper Moon' The host measures a replica of the LEM at The Space Centre in Houston, what he finds is that the 'official' measurements released by NASA are bogus and that the astronauts could not have got out of the LEM. 20) The water sourced air conditioner backpacks should have produced frequent explosive vapour discharges. They never did. 21) During the Apollo 14 flag setup ceremony, the flag would not stop fluttering. 22) With more than a two second signal transmission round trip, how did a camera pan upward to track the departure of the Apollo 16 LEM? Gus Grissom, before he got burned alive in the Apollo I disaster A few minutes before he was burned to death in the Apollo I tragedy, Gus Grissom said, 'Hey, you guys in the control center, get with it. You expect me to go to the moon and you can't even maintain telephonic communications over three miles.' This statement says a lot about what Grissom thought about NASA's progress in the great space race. 23) Why did NASA's administrator resign just days before the first Apollo mission? 24) NASA launched the TETR-A satellite just months before the first lunar mission. The proclaimed purpose was to simulate transmissions coming from the moon so that the Houston ground crews (all those employees sitting behind computer screens at Mission Control) could "rehearse" the first moon landing. In other words, though NASA claimed that the satellite crashed shortly before the first lunar mission (a misinformation lie), its real purpose was to relay voice, fuel consumption, altitude, and telemetry data as if the transmissions were coming from an Apollo spacecraft as it neared the moon. Very few NASA employees knew the truth because they believed that the computer and television data they were receiving was the genuine article. Merely a hundred or so knew what was really going on; not tens of thousands as it might first appear. 25) In 1998, the Space Shuttle flew to one of its highest altitudes ever, three hundred and fifty miles, hundreds of miles below merely the beginning of the Van Allen Radiation Belts. Inside of their shielding, superior to that which the Apollo astronauts possessed, the shuttle astronauts reported being able to "see" the radiation with their eyes closed penetrating their shielding as well as the retinas of their closed eyes. For a dental x-ray on Earth which lasts 1/100th of a second we wear a 1/4 inch lead vest. Imagine what it would be like to endure several hours of radiation that you can see with your eyes closed from hundreds of miles away with 1/8 of an inch of aluminium shielding! 26) The Apollo 1 fire of January 27, 1967, killed what would have been the first crew to walk on the Moon just days after the commander, Gus Grissom, held an unapproved press conference complaining that they were at least ten years, not two, from reaching the Moon. The dead man's own son, who is a seasoned pilot himself, has in his possession forensic evidence personally retrieved from the charred spacecraft (that the government has tried to destroy on two or more occasions). Gus Grissom was obviously trying to make a big statement as he placed a lemon in the window of the Apollo I spacecraft as it sat ready for launch! 27) CNN issued the following report, "The radiation belts surrounding Earth may be more dangerous for astronauts than previously believed (like when they supposedly went through them thirty years ago to reach the Moon.) The phenomenon known as the 'Van Allen Belts' can spawn (newly discovered) 'Killer Electrons' that can dramatically affect the astronauts' health." 28) In 1969 computer chips had not been invented. The maximum computer memory was 256k, and this was housed in a large air conditioned building. In 2002 a top of the range computer requires at least 64 Mb of memory to run a simulated Moon landing, and that does not include the memory required to take off again once landed. The alleged computer on board Apollo 11 had 32k of memory. That's the equivalent of a simple calculator. 29) If debris from the Apollo missions was left on the Moon, then it would be visible today through a powerful telescope, however no such debris can be seen. The Clementine probe that recently mapped the Moons surface failed to show any Apollo artefacts left by Man during the missions. Where did the Moon Buggy and base of the LM go? 30) In the year 2005 NASA does not have the technology to land any man, or woman on the Moon, and return them safely to Earth. 31) Film evidence has recently been uncovered of a mis-labelled, unedited, behind-the-scenes video film, showing the crew of Apollo 11 staging part of their photography. The film evidence is shown in the video "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon!". and appears above in the 'Why Did Apollo 11 Astronauts Lie About Being In Deep Space?' section. 32) Why did the blueprints and plans for the Lunar Module and Moon Buggy get destroyed if this was one of History's greatest accomplishments? 33) Why did NASA need to airbrush out anomalies from lunar footage of the Moon if they have nothing to hide?

You want me to prove the Americans didnt goto the moon and lied about where a hundred billion dollars were spent? Sounds like a challenge... lets roll....