BANKIEBILL
-
Posts
2,085 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by BANKIEBILL
-
-
Think with Talbot having so many games to play in so short a space that Beith are still favourites. However this time next week we could have a champion
0 -
3 hours ago, jimbaxters said:
Could be wrong but sure they were referring to Gartcairn there.
0 -
On 22/04/2024 at 12:02, Big Davy Boy said:
are youse wanting to become the most hated club in the league?
No that's our job big Davy. Mon tae fcuk
1 -
On 20/04/2024 at 23:17, glenmuir said:
Been watching Glenafton all my life worst venue I’ve ever watched football
I think Loch Park's a decent place to watch football. Decent raised terrace, esp on one side, seating, good food outlet, bar inside ground. Think you're being harsh on your old girl.
2 -
30 minutes ago, Shanner said:
Is anyone else not Alex?
I'm a Bill or a William ... and according to some a Willie but that's their own prejudice kicking in
3 -
8 minutes ago, An Absolute Imposter said:
That's a fair point to make re multiple leagues below, not saying I agree but I get your viewpoint on it; but I'd like to think we agree the club finishing bottom of the higher league do not deserve another chance to escape as is the case with club 42.
The number of clubs promoted I suppose should be dependent on the number of clubs relegated. That is a decent discussion topic.
It is more relevant in SPFL2 with only the 10 clubs. But there is enough 'space' in the LL to accommodate automatic promotion from 2 league's.
3 is maybe just stretching it too far.
It's noticeable to me that most posters on any point to be honest look at from their own clubs perspective but it is also dependent on which league they occupy at ti's present moment.
As an outsider I find this quite amusing.
Well given its really only an issue at Tier 4 to 5 and 6 to 5 then that's where focus is. You win a league then - if there's a league above and its part of same progression - then you should be promoted subject to meeting criteria. Self interest kicks in mibbee with regards to declaring an alternate if the Champion Club - in this case - is not licenced. I think I come down on the make Tier 6 licenced side. Then it's not an issue as it brings it entirely under control of the West set-up
0 -
6 minutes ago, Shanner said:
Ha you're right.
Guy that runs P&B is a St Mirren fan ... coincidence ? I leave you to draw your own conclusions
1 -
1 minute ago, Shanner said:
aye right.
It's true ... try it
0 -
Just now, Casper Wilson said:
But, obviously if I was him, that's what I would say anyway.
Well I'd hope that someone running for League President and looking to represent all clubs wouldn't be going around telling porkies ... or indeed slagging off member clubs on forums.
4 -
Just now, Casper Wilson said:
Yes I did and I'm not.
Cheers
0 -
Just now, Casper Wilson said:
I've already given a simple answer.
Have you ? To the question are you Alex McDowell ? Forgive me, I didn't see it. Can you answer again please. Yes or no is fine
0 -
2 minutes ago, FairWeatherFan said:
For the sake of the return to two-legged semis there's been 8 Premier games played on a Saturday. Teams left idle, games squeezed into midweek.
All so that the SJFA could take the bulk of the gate money and pay it back as prize money. I still find it surprising they were able to get away it when every other cup competition is cutting out replays and even extra-time in a lot of cases.
They were allowed to do it. At the clear detriment of a club's title chances
1 -
2 minutes ago, Casper Wilson said:
People? What people?
Your name has come up on threads. It's a simple enough question though. Are you he ?
0 -
12 hours ago, andy25 said:
You've hardly pumped us. You've won by one goal every time.
The "bedshitting" run we went on was 4 single goal defeats
2-1 away to the current and champions elect again
1-0 at home ( 86th minute goal ) to a team that apparently have spent next to no money in acquiring a superb squad - I wish I knew how they did it
3-2 at home to a team that have gone on fantastic run to 3rd place
1-0 away ( late goal ) to team that are in Junior Cup Final and have spent a fortune on what is still a v good side.
So if that's bedshitting then you need to accept some slagging as well
0 -
@Casper Wilson... are you Alex McDowell. People seem to be suggesting that you are.
0 -
1 minute ago, BANKIEBILL said:
My apologies to @virginton... the edit won't allow me to correct the autocorrect. No aspertions were meant
Hmmm there appears to be no way round this. I @ you and it still changed it. Not deliberate
0 -
3 minutes ago, BANKIEBILL said:
OK if we can all put virginton on ignore that would be nice. They cnuts didn't even have the decency to Cuff Airdire so why should we waste breath on arguing on the head of a pin with him.
What I'm concerned about - and hopefully others are too. Is that one of the most realistic licenced title contenders now have to play 8 games in space of 17 days to have a tilt at the league and that's not allowing for postponements. However it came about - and Junior Cup has played a factor here - that's surely not an acceptable situation to have come to. Its a fail whatever way you look at it. This is self-evidently not about Clydebank as we had plenty of time to play games going out early ish in cups and now being in a 4 week hiatus. It does have to be looked at - in interests of sporting integrity if nothing else. The league must be of paramount importance or its back to the old days we go.
My apologies to @virginton... the edit won't allow me to correct the autocorrect. No aspertions were meant
0 -
OK if we can all put virginton on ignore that would be nice. They cnuts didn't even have the decency to Cuff Airdire so why should we waste breath on arguing on the head of a pin with him.
What I'm concerned about - and hopefully others are too. Is that one of the most realistic licenced title contenders now have to play 8 games in space of 17 days to have a tilt at the league and that's not allowing for postponements. However it came about - and Junior Cup has played a factor here - that's surely not an acceptable situation to have come to. Its a fail whatever way you look at it. This is self-evidently not about Clydebank as we had plenty of time to play games going out early ish in cups and now being in a 4 week hiatus. It does have to be looked at - in interests of sporting integrity if nothing else. The league must be of paramount importance or its back to the old days we go.
5 -
1 hour ago, Hillonearth said:
I'm on here far less often than in the past - GN has been a bin fire the last couple of years for starters - but we'd actually been talking about this thread after the game on Saturday down at Largs.
And aye, trust me to turn it into Dictionary Corner
There's zero chance of an SJFA league sitting at Tier 5 ... zero. The only issue at point here is the Junior Cup. It obviously still gets a number of people excited and in current context - 1200 and 1400 ish crowds are decent ( although in truth I expected the Beechwood crowd to be a lot higher and the photos look busy but ... ) . I don't think it's my business to tell other people what can float their boat. I do have a right to be concerned about what the Junior Cup does to the league.
If the SJFA were serious about a Junior legacy then they could get on their bikes and go round trying to persuade all the "non-league" leagues and teams that a national cup was in their interest and attractive. If it was an all-in and replaced the North and South Cups then maybe we'd avoid a situation where a Junior Cup - is given precedence over league, where teams - less than a month from drop dead end date of league still have games to be scheduled. I see some games have started to be moved around and others pencilled in - but part of the problem is the disruption caused by the Junior Cup. Talbot could easily have played Darvel on the Tues / Weds last week but because of the free week nonsense it's still to be scheduled. It's not only that of course but we have a situation where we're sitting in middle of a 4 week idle period with 2 games left and we have others with 7 or 8 games to go. It's not a good way to be finishing what has been a great league campaign and one that is effectively ruling Talbot out the race. Which is a shame as it would be nice to have someone in the play off
7 -
8 minutes ago, Hillonearth said:
The whole thing seems like a bit of a storm in a teacup TBH, and it was put to a vote to fall back under the auspices of the SJFA I'd be surprised if the level of support for it to pass was actually there.
I've always said that you could tell where clubs stood on the matter by referring back to the old "Junior football - what is the future?" thread and seeing roughly in what order the dominoes fell...the last 15 or 20 clubs to declare for the WOS clearly only did so reluctantly when it became clear what kind of hellscape they'd be left playing in if they didn't. There's no reason to believe many of them have changed their minds in the interim, as in most cases it'll likely be the same people in charge.
On the other side of the coin, there are probably the same number of clubs who were on the other side of the argument at the time and just as anti status quo as the first lot were pro. You can add in another 15 or 20 new clubs who have joined since and thus have no previous history - and it follows no atavistic emotional attachment - to the SJFA.
There also no doubt will be a lot of clubs who don't feel that strongly either way, and just want somewhere well-run to play in. By and large, there's been an uptick in the quality of governance since the advent of the WOS - you don't need to look that far back to the days when we got drip-fed on a Monday night who you were playing the next weekend to give an obvious example.
In a way you can compare it with the working from home thing over COVID. Once things were getting back to normal there were those who pushed hard to get everybody back in the office five days a week because that what they felt most comfortable with - they thought everyone felt the way they did, only to find the appetite to do so was nowhere near as universal as they thought it would be.
Damn - why didn't I think to use atavistic in P&B post ... Always enjoy the too rare posts from you my friend
0 -
4 hours ago, Dean Learner said:
How many were at Beechwood on Friday?
Sorry if already posted and I've missed it.
1185 ... surprised it wasnt more tbh
3 -
3 hours ago, Cairn Cheerleader said:
Paying thousands for a McShane and a Ferguson first of all didn't happen however for the benefit of your constant poking at my club let's just say it did. We have 20 year old in goals 22 year old cm a 19 year old left winger who all start plus 2 or 3 under 21s in the first team squad who benefit extremely well playing and training with your Ian Mcshanes's, Ross Dunlops, Mark McGuigan's and Thomas Reillys of this world. I'm sure the Clydebank boys are playing for nothing and didn't cost a penny. The big bad bankies even paid over 10k for an AIRDRIE boy Truesdale who can't get a game.
your best just concentrating on your own teams failings instead of trying to look for everyone else's. We deservedly took 4 point from 6 off Clydebank this season with a model off the park that allowed us to do that on the park.
im also really glad you guys mucked it up this season and didn't win the league so we can welcome your brilliant 100 fans back to MTC Park
Look mate. Asides from this thread and partly in reaction to the "car share" video where I've posted a couple of things that imply criticism of your model - im not sure ive mentioned Gartcairn before. That reaction's mainly with regards to Alex McDowell ( with a paid position should he be connected with a specific team ? ) implying that it was a model that could be replicated. Its not. It's wholly dependent on a bunch of folk chucking money at it. It's not a pathway unless kids are coming through. If your keeper and centre mid have some through your academy then that's a legitimate retort. I suspect there's not much evidence of it though from a club that's based on a boys club.
Re not spending £000s on players - give me a break. Its not illegal but McDowell gave the game away himself in the video. Chucking money at a team is not new - in fact it's becoming more prevalent. Its been happening since at least the 90s - Kilwinning, Bathgate, Meadow, Hurlford, Darvel, Johnstone Burgh, Drumchapel, St Cadocs and now you. There's probably more of it around and the inevitable end result is backers back out and the club has to face reality. As I say- it's not illegal but it has had the effect of clubs having to either accept they can't compete at same level or overreach and get into bother. Pollok seem to be an example of that. I'm sure there are others that are hiding it better.
So tbh I don't pay that much attention to Gartcairn unless we're playing you. I wasn't at either game for family reasons. Guys at 1st game were complimentary at the start you made and that we were fortunate to get a point. 2nd game - which I saw on stream - there wasn't much in it. Given your struggles over season then a 1 point return was probably disappointing but you have some smashing players.
I don't have any particular ill will towards Gartcairn - there's every chance that you'll be among front runners next season and we'll have to deal with that. I'm not sure what your end game is or the motivation of the guys involved but it's a legitimate club. Just don't pretend your something you're not. 200 fans doesn't count for much in the way of income or justify the kind of wages you'll be paying - you're entirely dependent on the input of a few guys. Best of luck with it
6 -
21 minutes ago, GordonS said:
The defences of Gartcairn and similar sides here read like someone with a trust fund from the bank of mum and dad complaining that those pointing out their unfair advantages are just jealous.
Football is a zero-sum game and every winner needs a loser. If a club is getting boosted by cash going into their playing squad from anything other than matchday income, market-rate sponsorship and so on then they're not having success on merit, and other clubs that can only spend what they've earned through their own efforts are bumped down the league system below them and miss out on cup wins or runs too.
A secondary impact that's apparent in England and will be repeated here if it continues is clubs in an arms race, being forced to whore themselves to rich guys looking for a hobby, leading to increasingly sketchy chancers taking control of clubs. The risks to their existence is obvious.
If locals with money want to put invest in things like youth development or facilities that's great. If they put it into the first team squad they're just skewing the competition.
Asking people to "applaud the ambition" is pretty insulting. There's nothing ambitious about having money fall into your lap. It's sheer blind luck.
Other new clubs are working with what they earn, like (afaik) BSC Glasgow and Inverkeithing Hillfield Swifts. If you care about fairness and meritocracy in sport, that's who you should be be applauding.
As long as they're working within the rules, being transparent with relevant authorities and to an extent - not preaching to everyone else - then there's not too much can be done - in absence of any financial fair play or anything approaching. Talbot ( and their fans obvs ) can be annoying of course but everything is done on a sustainable basis and on back of previous success, good management and a lot of hard work. It's hard to emulate and will take some time. Let's not kid ourselves on though. The business chucking tens of thousands at a new or small club, isn't emulating what Talbot have done. It's not a model for anyone other than what can be done when a group of guys decide to chuck some money at something. Gartcairn and St Cadocs aren't offering a pathway by spending thousands on a McShane or a Ferguson or by buying the entire East Kilbride side most of whom had senior experience I believe ?? It's happened elsewhere. If a legacy of facilities and organisation is left to build on then you can at least point to something positive. If not then of course it skews the playing field. The Drum haven't brought through talent, neither have Johnstone Burgh - they've been able to operate purely by chucking money at something. Its not against any rules, its incredibly frustrating if you are not following that "model" and you have to question what's the final goal for it , but we just have to try and compete. Just don't gaslight folk by calling it a model and imply that it can be done by everyone. No amount if Social Media is bringing fans to these clubs. That'll take years, decades. How long will these businessmen hang about ?
5 -
Big upsets in both semis ... Arthurlie v Darvel final
1
Tonight's scores
in West of Scotland Football League
Posted
Got to think that with calibre of player they have available ( and not had to pay for obvs ) that still flirting with relegation has got to be very disappointing. 2 games against us they've looked decent ( caveat I'm getting info on 1st game 2nd hand ). Maybe they're just playing season out.