Kelty/ Is this a joke - merged thread

[+jagster]

I found this quite funny tbh

[CELTIC1CALEY3]

Ferguson's roots are in or near Stirling. Driving back from Inverness to Liverpool from his Loch Ness chalet adds a few hours to his journeys after home games.

Presumably given the fact he is never at the club . quote unquote, that suggests Gardiner does not live in or near Inverness.

[bishbashbosh]

42 minutes ago, CELTIC1CALEY3 said:

Presumably given the fact he is never at the club . quote unquote, that suggests Gardiner does not live in or near Inverness.

When I went to the stadium to get tickets for the home Accies game the club shops front facing door was closed so entry was through the main entrance.

HE held the door open for me as he was heading into work at the same time ?

no jokes please that that should be his role in the club. That would be petty as their are more important things going on the now. 

[Hearach]

1 hour ago, CELTIC1CALEY3 said:

Ferguson's roots are in or near Stirling. Driving back from Inverness to Liverpool from his Loch Ness chalet adds a few hours to his journeys after home games.

Presumably given the fact he is never at the club . quote unquote, that suggests Gardiner does not live in or near Inverness.

 

1 minute ago, Hearach said:

Near

 

[bdu98196]

15 hours ago, old caley girl said:

A lot of us don't live in Inverness

Interesting.

[+Fraz]

6 minutes ago, bdu98196 said:

Interesting.

How so?

[bdu98196]

10 minutes ago, Fraz said:

How so?

Demonstrates the wide demographic and geographic fan base

[+Fraz]

2 minutes ago, bdu98196 said:

Demonstrates the wide demographic and geographic fan base

Around where I sit there are folk from Invermoriston, Ardersier, Nethy Bridge, Tornagrain, Tomatin and Aviemore. 

[old caley girl]

10 hours ago, RednBlackComeback said:

Can't be bothered with politicians tbh. They're all only in it for themselves!

Emma Roddick is a ST holder so entitled to her opinion 

[Jack Waddington]

4 hours ago, CELTIC1CALEY3 said:

Presumably given the fact he is never at the club . quote unquote, that suggests Gardiner does not live in or near Inverness.

Well that was a waste of 7 quid for me to send a clown costume for him to the stadium via Amazon

[ICTPaisley]

19 minutes ago, Jack Waddington said:

Well that was a waste of 7 quid for me to send a clown costume for him to the stadium via Amazon

Send one to Kelty as well

[old caley girl]

56 minutes ago, Jack Waddington said:

Well that was a waste of 7 quid for me to send a clown costume for him to the stadium via Amazon

He definitely lives in Inverness during week. Well up to this point 

[CaleyCiuin]

Others may know for sure in terms of what element of staff will remain in Inverness and those needing to be in Fife, but an assumption would be the manager, assistant manager, coaches, physio, sports scientist, kit man etc to be down the road. Who does that leave up here?, the grounds man only now looking after the one pitch now that fort George won’t be used and the shop staff???? What happens on press day (normally a Thursday I think), where they come to the stadium and speak with Duncs? I suppose they could do it over Zoom or something! It all seems quite disjointed and a huge gamble to attract a better quality of player. I would like the board to put out a statement confirming they back this venture or otherwise !!!!

Edited May 26 by CaleyCiuin

[ClickbaitProponent]

3 hours ago, bdu98196 said:

Demonstrates the wide demographic and geographic fan base

Demonstrates that some us are serving in the forces ...

[+DoofersDad]

1 hour ago, old caley girl said:

He definitely lives in Inverness during week. Well up to this point 

Tornagrain. 

[+MrCaleyjag]

1 hour ago, CaleyCiuin said:

I would like the board to put out a statement confirming they back this venture or otherwise !!!!

I find it highly unlikely that will happen, the Chairman's statement speaks on behalf of the board.

Anything otherwise will show a split in the boardroom and show that someone or more are going rogue.

On the basis this took months of planning without even a slither of info leaking, suggests to me that the board is united in this decision and everything before it.

[CaleyCiuin]

10 minutes ago, MrCaleyjag said:

I find it highly unlikely that will happen, the Chairman's statement speaks on behalf of the board.

Anything otherwise will show a split in the boardroom and show that someone or more are going rogue.

On the basis this took months of planning without even a slither of info leaking, suggests to me that the board is united in this decision and everything before it.

In that case they are all culpable including those locals such as Scot Young & Graeme Bennet etc! 

[Stephen Malkmus]

https://www.change.org/p/keep-inverness-caledonian-thistle-in-inverness

[STFU]

26 minutes ago, CaleyCiuin said:

In that case they are all culpable including those locals such as Scot Young & Graeme Bennet etc! 

Rumours are that Bennet has resigned.

[Hiro]

Having had a couple of days to think about this abomination the only additional thought I've had is that this is step one in a move to part time status.

It only makes sense for a part time club to do this. Players cannot make training in the evening if they have a bigger commute to make and it would severely limit the playing pool. Despite 'Drake's' protestations there is nothing else logical about this.

Edited May 26 by Hiro

[STFU]

If any journalists are reading you can have this one on me.

SuperCaleysBatShitCrazyKeltyPlanAtricious

[+DoofersDad]

12 minutes ago, CaleyCiuin said:

In that case they are all culpable including those locals such as Scot Young & Graeme Bennet etc! 

This is such a controversial issue, that if any of the Board members were not in agreement with the majority decision and can't persuade their colleagues of the error of their ways, they should resign.

If they were in agreement, then why?  When it seems that just about everyone thinks the plan is absurd for a wide range of reasons, what is it that convinces the Board members that it is a good idea?  The club statement says very little and there has been no subsequent attempt made to answer any of the concerns.  The only issue the statement refers to is the difficulty in persuading players to move from the central belt - a fact we are all perfectly well aware of already.  The proposed solution to the perceived problem looks unlikely to attract the calibre of player we would like, whilst actually making it far more difficult to attract players through the routes which have, over the years, produced our best and longest serving players.

Board member Scott Young is the clubs designated Supporter Liaison Officer.  Scott did have the guts to be out and about and chatting to fans both before and after the Hamilton game and that was appreciated by fans. So please Scott, will you do some more liaising now and address the numerous concerns voiced on this site and elsewhere?

 

[+DoofersDad]

29 minutes ago, Hiro said:

Having had a couple of days to think about this abomination the only additional thought I've had is that this is step one in a move to part time status.

It only makes sense for a part time club to do this. Players cannot make training in the evening if they have a bigger commute to make and it would severely limit the playing pool. Despite 'Drake's' protestations there is nothing else logical about this.

I don't think that is the plan, but it may be the consequence.

[Charles Bannerman]

1 hour ago, MrCaleyjag said:

I find it highly unlikely that will happen, the Chairman's statement speaks on behalf of the board.

Anything otherwise will show a split in the boardroom and show that someone or more are going rogue.

On the basis this took months of planning without even a slither of info leaking, suggests to me that the board is united in this decision and everything before it.

Do we know when the board meeting was where the final decision to relocate was made, how many votes were for and against the move or better still which directors voted in which direction, the timescale of the entire decision and whether the directors were given the opportunity to express views before it was published on a statement that says that the club is “DELIGHTED” to make the announcement?

[Yngwie]

15 minutes ago, DoofersDad said:

This is such a controversial issue, that if any of the Board members were not in agreement with the majority decision and can't persuade their colleagues of the error of their ways, they should resign.

If they were in agreement, then why?  When it seems that just about everyone thinks the plan is absurd for a wide range of reasons, what is it that convinces the Board members that it is a good idea?  The club statement says very little and there has been no subsequent attempt made to answer any of the concerns.  The only issue the statement refers to is the difficulty in persuading players to move from the central belt - a fact we are all perfectly well aware of already.  The proposed solution to the perceived problem looks unlikely to attract the calibre of player we would like, whilst actually making it far more difficult to attract players through the routes which have, over the years, produced our best and longest serving players.

Board member Scott Young is the clubs designated Supporter Liaison Officer.  Scott did have the guts to be out and about and chatting to fans both before and after the Hamilton game and that was appreciated by fans. So please Scott, will you do some more liaising now and address the numerous concerns voiced on this site and elsewhere?

 

Agree that when the Board agreed to this, however long ago that was, any member who was strongly opposed should have stuck to their principles and resigned at the time.

We have to assume/hope that the decision wasn’t just taken on a whim one day, and instead a well researched and costed proposal was put to the Board that gave more details of the challenges for recruitment at varying salary levels and how this idea would result in a better squad and/or cost savings, whilst also considering impacts on youth teams, Highland based players/coaches, and how the club could mitigate the further loss of community relations. Surely they did something one that?
 

The Board could then compare the plan with the status quo, and choose the best (or least bad) option. No doubt Gardiner was behind the proposal, but it was approved by a Board who are all ICT fans and who are presumably better informed on the issues, financial budgets etc than we are, and they must have concluded that the pros outweigh the cons?