STFU

Ferguson's first job was to stabilise the team.  He did that by finding a starting 11 and formation that was working and getting results.  Dodds hadn't managed that.

That has been disrupted due to some of that starting 11 being unavailable for various reasons, and not having sufficient quality on the bench.  We'd already seen frailty with subs at the end if games.

We might have hoped to have got to January without these challenges, but not to be.

Unfortunately, I don't think the January window will bring the changes we'd like to see because we don't have money to be paying players off and bringing new ones in.  The fact we're taking free agents on trial in December indicates the market we might be able to shop in.

Ferguson has, to my knowledge, never talked about promotion play offs and has been fairly clear that he was tasked with survival.

The best we can hope for is that some of these fringe players improve with the game time they're getting and we cobble together enough to be above the relegation spots at the end of the season.  Given how things were looking a few weeks ago, I'd be content with that.

From watching the highlights, on another day it could have been a game with a dozen or more goals.

I don't use it, but the Travel Club seems to be about the only thing ICTFC related that's been run reliably the last few years

Don't tell Bobby Mann!!

I imagine they accepted it, maybe even requested it, just so they could post it online.  Such is the screwed up world we live in, where likes and shares on social media are so highly coveted.

Apparently we're now offering cremation services at the stadium.

https://x.com/FootyScran/status/1732099539027284396?s=20

10 hours ago, snorbens_caleyman said:

That would only work if the ball was on the ground.  And you can't have one law for when it's on the ground and one for when it's in the air!

There are no easy answers - no cheap ones anyway.

Even when on the ground, the length of grass and/or pressure of the ball against it would come in to play.

Referees are no better/worse today than they were before TV, they're just under infinitely more scrutiny post match.

Bring back the days before TV when things like this would be argued out in the pub based on where Bob or Jimmy were sitting in relation to the goal line.  Everyone would then agree to disagree and we wouldn't have pointless postmortems running on indefinitely based on dodgy video screen grabs that could have been from milliseconds before or after an incident and tell us nothing.

Seems like a lot of trouble to go to for a minor misdemeanor.

Surprised we've not had the "Provincial club from the North being victimised because we're an easy target" statement from our club CEO yet!

We have an available squad which lacks any quality in depth at the moment, and that limits our options when it comes time for subs or backfilling for unavailable players.

This won't be the last time we lose a game in this manner as a result of that, but hopefully Ferguson can find a way to improve the situation when the January window comes around.

Unfortunately, the way we're run off the pitch is likely to severely hinder the available finances for that, so it will likely need a great deal of creativity and wheeling n dealing.

There's good argument for both approaches.  The one used is higher risk, but gave better return in terms of game time and a proper look at fringe players.  The cost was entertainment value.

I'm sure Ferguson expected a bit more from the starting lineup and didn't intend to be relying on subs to win it, but he'll now have a better understanding of what he's working with.

2 hours ago, Robert said:

Devine was the captain today despite Welsh starting.

Is Welsh no longer the club captain?

In his absence, Mckay has normally been the captain.

With Welsh unlikely to have been on the park the whole game (Ferguson said post match he got longer than intended) and needing to focus on his own return, and Billy not starting, then I don't think there's anything to read into it.

Made a late decision to go after being offered a comp, and was regretting it at half time and almost decided to head home to the warmth.

Sheridan is awful.  Every move he made was towards our man with the ball, restricting options.  Can't recall a single time he ran into space, and if the ball wasn't to his feet he wouldn't move/chase it.  Welsh looked like he'd never played before and Delaney was a passenger.

Until the subs came on it looked like we were also a poor Lowland League team with nothing to play for.  We'd get to the final third, then pass it back, all the way to the keeper half the time.

A better team would have taken us apart in the first half, but Cowdenbeath were as toothless as we were

Thankfully we had a strong bench and the first 3 subs changed the tempo and the game.  Billy's goal was an absolute corker.and I hope we're working on getting Wotherspoon tied down a little longer.

Hopefully the game time will have helped the fringe players, and those coming back from injury, but man was it painful to watch.

Most important thing is, we're in the hat for the next round.  Onwards and upwards.

Confident we can do the business, but a little nervous by mention of 4 or 5 changes, especially involving players who haven't been playing, and unfortunately Max Anderson is cup tied, so not available for selection.

Still might stick a tenner on a win by 2 or more.

4 hours ago, Yngwie said:

Source? It was certainly mentioned as a good thing for the club, but huge? Not that I can recall.

That cover it?

45 minutes ago, DoofersDad said:

Nice idea.  And build a stadium that is actually fit for purpose on a more appropriate site?

I hear there's a stadium sized plot available up at Fairways where they were previously hoping for some Battery Storage

22 minutes ago, Yngwie said:

I presume that sort of deal was what was meant by “huge potential for the development of our site”?
 

Ta for finding those comments from the annual report. Regarding my question for STFU, that quote of having huge potential is very different to claiming that it is going to be huge.

I think underpinning the financial future of the club on it might lean things in favour of my interpretation, but you carry on splitting hairs

30 minutes ago, Jack Waddington said:

Thats because we need the financial incentives sooner rather than later, and I think it goes without saying we all know how horridly paced major government projects are on this side of Perth, and as a result all the business involved are sitting on their hands waiting for the expected outcome.

You're reading that wrong. It's not that the green port will deliver delayed benefit.  It will NEVER deliver any benefit for the club.

1 hour ago, Jack Waddington said:

You say that, but I'm not wrong am I. The Concert Co was only named as such because, as I said, we're the ones providing a venue and not much more.

And the GreenPort is a ScotGov/Westminster project and we just happen to be in the area with our car park being used as an overflow on occasion for the Port next door, what happens with that, whether it works or fails, is out of our hands. We might get a say in certain things going on within, but in all shapes and forms hasn't got anything to do with the club bar just being there

I know you are just trying to defend the club, and that's admiral to a point, but I'm afraid you are wrong/misinformed on much of what you have said on this thread.

Read it back in full and you'll see that there's information and links on things like business and resident objections to the Battery Storage unit, as well as independent consultations that state the application doesn't meet the criteria and the club not taking advantage of pre application advice which would have highlighted issues and allowed them to consider them before proceeding.

The concert company stuff is covered above.

The CEO told us the green port was going to be huge for the club, but now the chairman is saying he can see no way it will benefit us at all.

This is not a case of giving a pat on the back and saying they tried their best, everything above is riddled with evidence of mismanagement and incompetence.

The recommendation to take pre application advice from the planners was not taken up by ILI/ICTFC.

Naive, arrogant or both?

Having watched the meeting, I'm not convinced the decision will end up going in favour of the club.

When all is said and done, the application is to put an industrial operation on a protected open green site and all the noise mitigation and camouflage in the world isn't going to change that.

A decision to allow it regardless isn't a precedent that council will want to set unless there's wider reaching benefit which can also be placed as a condition on future applications of a similar nature.

A friendly councillor has managed to kick the can down the road by asking for the deferment, even if he also made it obvious that was primarily to buy time for ILI/ICTFC and not so much for the stated site visit.

2 hours ago, Jack Waddington said:

Neither of those are/were controlled by the club. ICTCC was created as a company just to try and make a wee bit off of making the stadium the cities primary concert venue, as opposed to a roundabout of The Bught, the Aquadome, Northern Meeting Park and ourselves, and lessons had been lost as it had been quite some time since the concert before it. As for the Green Port, thats not got anything to do with the club, and is only because we're in the Harbour/Port Area and have been included as we are one of the bigger companies in the area.

Tell me you base your world view from information on the ICTFC Twitter feed without telling me you base your world view from information on the ICTFC Twitter feed

10 minutes ago, Row S said:

The nearest houses are about 300 metres from the storage compounds. The Travelodge is about 50m away. No objections from the nearest residents, office occupiers or Travelodge.

Lobbying does work in some cases but is normally done by the applicants (ILI not ICTFC).

2 hours ago, rocky1 said:

I don’t remember seeing any of the owners/ occupiers of Fairways Business Park objecting . If there are noise issues it didn’t affect the planning for the Inverness Kart Raceway which is hardly a quiet operation!

23_00497_FUL-Warehouse_13_Limited-2973526.pdf

If only we could drink battery acid

I may be dreaming this as I can't find where I saw it, but I recall seeing something from Ferguson that said the team were being trained previously as if they were part-time, and it would take a little bit to get the squad fully up to a fitness level where they could play the way he wants for the full 90mins.

That could mean that subs are as much about that transition and not pushing players too hard for 90 mins, as opposed to it being tactical.

It's too easy to scream "big bad council".

I doubt there are many of us here would welcome a noisy, potentially dangerous, and ugly development, only 100 metres from our front door (only 30 metres from some offices).  And it's not going to do much for their property value.

Battery Storage is needed, but they can't just be plonked anywhere because the local football team will gain financially from it.

There's an interesting article here - https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-leeds-66584335