The Falkirk FC Thread

[Bairnardo]

If you want someone at board level to veto signings you need a director of football not a group of non footbalk people who couldn't identify a player.
Continually you see break downs in relationships due to board members who have never played the game thinking they know more than a manager.  

Look at you, greener than grass thinking that this common sense type post will gain any traction on here currently.

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, EdiBairn said:

Every manager(certainly at this level) will have control of the playing budget. Would you rather Margaret Lang had said "you know what, we're not going to let you sign Paul Paton, but you can have this player we've found for you instead". No manager would accept that and they'd be out the door instantly.

Y’see, you are putting forward completely the wrong scenario....a totally farcical one on order to try and be right.

The level of change in the summer required more control than a situation where a manager was bringing in a couple of players to freshen things up. Given Hartley had absolutely zero track record in carrying out this level of instant change anywhere else, there was absolutely no reason to feel warm and cosy about him doing it last summer. The board needed football knowledge input on an ad hoc basis to give them assurance or otherwise that Hartley was on the right track. Simple as that. Had it been in place, this madness might never have happened.

[Bairnardo]

Just out of interest, with the exception of MAYBE Turner and Brough, which of the signings does anyone here think Hartley and Mitch would have had a difficult time selling to the board, had they decided to have a wee nosey into what was going on?

All of this inane drivel is getting talked on here, but can someone explain to me how they think it would have played out?

Sammut the Chelsea U23 captain? Petra with international caps? Dallison who gained universal approval as looking like a very good signing.

Even if you think the BOD should have stuck their nose in, why does anyone think Hartley wouldnt have got his way anyway? Pure revisionism.

[DeeBairn]

7 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

10 minutes ago, Tynierose said:

If you want someone at board level to veto signings you need a director of football not a group of non footbalk people who couldn't identify a player.
Continually you see break downs in relationships due to board members who have never played the game thinking they know more than a manager.  

Look at you, greener than grass thinking that this common sense type post will gain any traction on here currently.

I'm fairly certain we hung common sense from a lamppost just before pre season kicked off. 

[Gaz FFC]

5 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

Just out of interest, with the exception of MAYBE Turner and Brough, which of the signings does anyone here think Hartley and Mitch would have had a difficult time selling to the board, had they decided to have a wee nosey into what was going on?

All of this inane drivel is getting talked on here, but can someone explain to me how they think it would have played out?

Sammut the Chelsea U23 captain? Petra with international caps? Dallison who gained universal approval as looking like a very good signing.

Even if you think the BOD should have stuck their nose in, why does anyone think Hartley wouldnt have got his way anyway? Pure revisionism.

Be funny as f**k to think about Margaret or Ritchie sticking their noses in back in July and telling Hartley that the players he signed aren't very good.

Given Hartley has played at the top level in this country and internationally be really something to have a suit tell him  what's what

[FFCinthearea]

This whole debacle is like a bad version  of Claude Anelka's 2004/2005 season with Raith Rovers.  For the youngsters on here; he signed a whole team of players with exciting names from France, and got sacked after 3 months - they got relegated winning only 3 games.   The only difference is that they had managed to scrape a draw at this stage in the season.

We are in deep trouble.  Hartley's reign will have set us back at least 5 years and possibly consigned us to league 1.  

It's  a big shit sandwich and we're all going to have to take a bite.   

Edited September 24, 2018 by FFCinthearea

[DeeBairn]

5 minutes ago, Gaz FFC said:

Be funny as f**k to think about Margaret or Ritchie sticking their noses in back in July and telling Hartley that the players he signed aren't very good.

Given Hartley has played at the top level in this country and internationally be really something to have a suit tell him  what's what

Also funny as f**k to assume that because someone can score goals or pick out a sweet pass that he knows the first thing about picking out a player or motivating people. Thankfully his last two jobs will have kept him out of football for a long, long time. 

[Bairnardo]

Y’see, you are putting forward completely the wrong scenario....a totally farcical one on order to try and be right.
The level of change in the summer required more control than a situation where a manager was bringing in a couple of players to freshen things up. Given Hartley had absolutely zero track record in carrying out this level of instant change anywhere else, there was absolutely no reason to feel warm and cosy about him doing it last summer. The board needed football knowledge input on an ad hoc basis to give them assurance or otherwise that Hartley was on the right track. Simple as that. Had it been in place, this madness might never have happened.

I think I recall the Dundee fans on here saying right at the start, be prepared for an entire squad overhaul in the summer. So I guess he did have a track record of doing it.

He also presided over a relatively successfull smaller scale overhaul in the January window where he replaced numerous players who werent kicking there arse with ones who did, and dragged us up from what had been a horrific few months.

Once again, dont you think Hartley would have been able to sell notion rather easily that both a major overhaul was required, amd he was able to do it effectively?

[Marshmallo]

The BoD should not be vetoing signings, but the people they appointed to make those signings and build the squad have failed monumentally. For that reason they should be held accountable and out the door too.

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Bairnardo said:

Just out of interest, with the exception of MAYBE Turner and Brough, which of the signings does anyone here think Hartley and Mitch would have had a difficult time selling to the board, had they decided to have a wee nosey into what was going on?

All of this inane drivel is getting talked on here, but can someone explain to me how they think it would have played out?

Sammut the Chelsea U23 captain? Petra with international caps? Dallison who gained universal approval as looking like a very good signing.

Even if you think the BOD should have stuck their nose in, why does anyone think Hartley wouldnt have got his way anyway? Pure revisionism.

Got to disagree. Firstly, not the BoD “sticking their nose” in. They own the business, we pay the running costs. First thing was the proposal itself. “Get rid of everyone” is a risky strategy is it not? How was that managed, and by who?

If this is just after the event revisionism, then do you believe that given a chance to do it all again, we would it in exactly the same way...i.e., “here’s your budget, go fill your boots”? Really? By that premis, with the only check and balance being in or out of budget, if Hartley had decided to bring in ten juniors, and one player on £5k a week, no concerns would be raised? The process was wrong. That it could give us the outcome that it has clearly demonstrates this.

Edited September 24, 2018 by Duncan Freemason

[ShaggerG]

2 hours ago, oot_the_loop said:

Don't we? Muirhead is a better centre back than right back, Brough looked a better centre back than left back and I wasn't there but didn't Russell do well in the reserve game at cb? 

Not a pop by the way, just seems to me we have plenty of options. They all just happen to be shite. 

That's what I meant. He won't have anyone better available until McGhee's fit, whereas Mutch is instantly a better option than Fasan.

Edited September 24, 2018 by ShaggerG

[Guest]

31 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

I think I recall the Dundee fans on here saying right at the start, be prepared for an entire squad overhaul in the summer. So I guess he did have a track record of doing it.

He also presided over a relatively successfull smaller scale overhaul in the January window where he replaced numerous players who werent kicking there arse with ones who did, and dragged us up from what had been a horrific few months.

Once again, dont you think Hartley would have been able to sell notion rather easily that both a major overhaul was required, amd he was able to do it effectively?

Whatever he sold the BoD was therefore a lie, and if the BoD were suckered by a straightforward lie, then shame on them. All it would do is once again highlight that the decision making process is gubbins.

[Harry Kinnear]

Trialist playing for the reserves today.

If the name being mentioned on FB is true we are in for yet more piss taking.

[EdiBairn]

Just now, Harry Kinnear said:

Trialist playing for the reserves today.

If the name being mentioned on FB is true we are in for yet more piss taking.

Willo Flood would be an immense improvement on the quality we currently have. 

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, ShaggerG said:

That's what I meant. He won't have anyone better available until McGhee's fit, whereas Mutch is instantly a better option than Fasan.

From McGloves to Fasan is one hell of a descent in a few short years.

[Guest]

Be funny as f**k to think about Margaret or Ritchie sticking their noses in back in July and telling Hartley that the players he signed aren't very good.
Given Hartley has played at the top level in this country and internationally be really something to have a suit tell him  what's what

I haven’t seen one person saying that the Board should be choosing players merely that a structure should have been in place to make sure I’s were dotted and T’s were crossed.

Could you see The Brown’s at St.Johnstone allowing this sort of shambles to develop?

[Guest]

1 minute ago, EdiBairn said:

Willo Flood would be an immense improvement on the quality we currently have. 

Would be a stand out at the moment which is utterly hilarious.

[bridge of allan bairn]

Trialist playing for the reserves today.

If the name being mentioned on FB is true we are in for yet more piss taking.

a goal down in first two minutes. mutch in goal today for reserves

[Harry Kinnear]

Willo Flood would be an immense improvement on the quality we currently have. 

I agree but the piss taking from other fans would be off the scale given the abuse some of our fans dished out when the Pars signed him.

[ilostmyself]

3 minutes ago, Harry Kinnear said:

Trialist playing for the reserves today.

If the name being mentioned on FB is true we are in for yet more piss taking.

It's surely a joke though. Isn't it the same guy who was making up signings almost daily during the summer?

That said, i'd trade Paton for Flood in an instant. Jesus wept.