Jump to content

The Falkirk FC Thread


Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, D.A.F.C said:

How would you vote though?

If I was pars chairman I would vote against because it means losing dundee united and Falkirk. We also have a very slim chance of making the playoffs.
Flip side we get hearts down and rovers up.
Slightly worse off.

If you're league one side chairman would you not vote for because it means the team with the biggest support stays in your league?

Clubs will vote for money reasons ahead of sporting integrity.

Not to labour the point but presumably the prize money available to keep clubs afloat.now trumps calculations of gate money 4 months down the line. Presumably that's what various clubs have told the SPFL, presumably that's why this scenario has gotten as far as a vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The prize money in league one is a complete and utter pittance so I'd be quite happy for them to dole it out as is and then finish off the season at a later date if that's what they're wetting their pants over. A loss of perhaps18k is hardly going to make a big difference when you consider the money at stake for playing in the championship. Prize money now trophy later.

Edited by Shadwell Dog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Shadwell Dog said:

The prize money in league one is a complete and utter pittance so I'd be quite happy for them to dole it out as is and then finish off the season at a later date if that's what their wetting their pants over. A loss of perhaps18k is hardly going to make a big difference when you consider the money at stake for playing in the championship. Prize money now trophy later.

It's not even remotely 'a pittance' for clubs who have been without a source of cashflow for weeks and need to keep the lights on now. Which is why the comfortable majority of clubs will vote for the measure, including most of those in play-off spots that are never going to be held anyway. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, virginton said:

It's not even remotely 'a pittance' for clubs who have been without a source of cashflow for weeks and need to keep the lights on now. Which is why the comfortable majority of clubs will vote for the measure, including most of those in play-off spots that are never going to be held anyway. 

Not the crux of my point . Why not just pay out prize money now to keep clubs afloat but then finish the season when possible?  As I said if we went on to win the league we'd miss out on 18k but I'm sure we'd be happy to do that. Best of both worlds surely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Shadwell Dog said:

Not the crux of my point . Why not just pay out prize money now to keep clubs afloat but then finish the season when possible?  As I said if we went on to win the league we'd miss out on 18k but I'm sure we'd be happy to do that. Best of both worlds surely.

Good for you but the vast majority of clubs would not. Particularly when it is perfectly obvious to everyone including the tiny handful of aggrieved parties here that lower league football will not be resuming any time in the near future and so clinging on to a set of outstanding fixtures would simply f**k over next season's schedule as well. All of which is compounded by the distinct possibility that the coronavirus comes round again for a second swipe in autumn/winter and shuts down football for another period of time.

Most clubs are quite sensibly looking to a draw a line under this mess in a way that allows them to survive now and plan for the future with a reasonable degree of certainty, which is why this proposal is on the table.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, virginton said:

Good for you but the vast majority of clubs would not. Particularly when it is perfectly obvious to everyone including the tiny handful of aggrieved parties here that lower league football will not be resuming any time in the near future and so clinging on to a set of outstanding fixtures would simply f**k over next season's schedule as well. All of which is compounded by the distinct possibility that the coronavirus comes round again for a second swipe in autumn/winter and shuts down football for another period of time.

Most clubs are quite sensibly looking to a draw a line under this mess in a way that allows them to survive now and plan for the future with a reasonable degree of certainty, which is why this proposal is on the table.

If your drawing a line your as well null and voiding the season then everyone is treated the same.  We start over again whenever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Erm no, you can just apply automatic promotion and relegation to the leagues as they are and say 'hard lines' to the literally three football clubs out of 42 who will  likely pursue a grievance about that decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, virginton said:

Erm no, you can just apply automatic promotion and relegation to the leagues as they are and say 'hard lines' to the literally three football clubs out of 42 who will  likely pursue a grievance about that decision.

I think there will be more than three plus your now going to tell the likes of Kelty who have pumped money into their team that their not getting a shot at promotion just like that. Rangers, hearts, falkirk, partick, dundee, Edinburgh perhaps ICT could all look at voting no for starters. Think it could be tight due to the way the vote is carried out.  Only 3 champ sides need to say no and its fecked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kelty don't have a vote on the matter and if you think that the likes of Edinburgh City and even Inverness have the luxury of posturing about 'sporting integrity' rather than just battling to keeping the lights on right now and for next season as well then you've got little grasp of how this crisis is impacting Scottish football.

Edited by vikingTON
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don’t see why anyone would be overly concerned about Kelty Hearts being hard done by. A Barry Ferguson managed side, spunking way more money than they can afford on average lower league players, being screwed over is a positive as far as I’m concerned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, R.R.FC said:

Don’t see why anyone would be overly concerned about Kelty Hearts being hard done by. A Barry Ferguson managed side, spunking way more money than they can afford on average lower league players, being screwed over is a positive as far as I’m concerned.

If your basing it on clubs spunking more than they can afford then going by the number of clubs out with the begging bowls in recent weeks after only a months inaction there would be a long list. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, virginton said:

Good for you but the vast majority of clubs would not. Particularly when it is perfectly obvious to everyone including the tiny handful of aggrieved parties here that lower league football will not be resuming any time in the near future and so clinging on to a set of outstanding fixtures would simply f**k over next season's schedule as well. All of which is compounded by the distinct possibility that the coronavirus comes round again for a second swipe in autumn/winter and shuts down football for another period of time.

Most clubs are quite sensibly looking to a draw a line under this mess in a way that allows them to survive now and plan for the future with a reasonable degree of certainty, which is why this proposal is on the table.

Finishing the season would not f**k over next seasons schedule. 8-10 games to finish the season, that could be done over 4-5 weeks. In the big scheme of things that timeline is neither here not there. As for season 20-21 that depends on when life gets back to normal. Minimum before a game could be played would be 4 weeks notice from the ruling body. Stadium and pitches brought up to standard. The signing merry go round, training and bounce games to get fitness and match sharp. So you could start 20-21 season 8-10 weeks from normality. Now depending on the start date it could be a shortened season - drop a cup competition - summer football or a combination of all 3. Not perfect- far from it. But it is workable, fair to all and importantly no dispute on who has won and lost what.

It's a solution, any thoughts folks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Shadwell Dog said:

If your basing it on clubs spunking more than they can afford then going by the number of clubs out with the begging bowls in recent weeks after only a months inaction there would be a long list. 

This is disturbing Shadwell, we are agreeing more and more. Clubs going burst could only be a few days-weeks away. If one goes then that is the dam burst Lenders, Banks and Soft Loans will call them in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, HopeStreetWalker said:

Finishing the season would not f**k over next seasons schedule. 8-10 games to finish the season, that could be done over 4-5 weeks. In the big scheme of things that timeline is neither here not there. As for season 20-21 that depends on when life gets back to normal. Minimum before a game could be played would be 4 weeks notice from the ruling body. Stadium and pitches brought up to standard. The signing merry go round, training and bounce games to get fitness and match sharp. So you could start 20-21 season 8-10 weeks from normality. Now depending on the start date it could be a shortened season - drop a cup competition - summer football or a combination of all 3. Not perfect- far from it. But it is workable, fair to all and importantly no dispute on who has won and lost what.

It's a solution, any thoughts folks.

Literally everything that you have outlined involves fucking over the 20-21 schedule and making up a new one on the back of a fag packet. Which is of course exactly what we should be doing given that we i) don't actually know when football matches will be given the go ahead to take place again and ii) don't know whether there will be a second wave of infection in the usual seasonal virus peak of winter 2020-21 or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Falkirk fans should be focusing their anger on the clowns in the boardroom who retained McKinnon and gave him a comparatively massive budget to piss up the wall on the dullest shitehouse of a team imaginable.

We should be at least 6-7 points clear and then this wouldn't be an issue. Instead we watched muck like Doyle, Telfer and Sammon plod around endlessly drawing games against sides with 10% of our crowds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, HopeStreetWalker said:

Finishing the season would not f**k over next seasons schedule. 8-10 games to finish the season, that could be done over 4-5 weeks. In the big scheme of things that timeline is neither here not there. As for season 20-21 that depends on when life gets back to normal. Minimum before a game could be played would be 4 weeks notice from the ruling body. Stadium and pitches brought up to standard. The signing merry go round, training and bounce games to get fitness and match sharp. So you could start 20-21 season 8-10 weeks from normality. Now depending on the start date it could be a shortened season - drop a cup competition - summer football or a combination of all 3. Not perfect- far from it. But it is workable, fair to all and importantly no dispute on who has won and lost what.

It's a solution, any thoughts folks.

Well, I mentioned a few issues in a previous post:

1) if lockdown doesn't start to be lifted until early June, it's doubtful that a decision on mass spectator sports would be taken before July.

2) that's a 4 month lay off for players who are used to a 1 month lay off and then a two month pre season. We'd be giving them a 4 month lay off, then a 4 week crash course to get fit. Can only imagine we'd end up with more injuries in the short term that way. 

3) however, allowing for a minimum 4 week restart from cold we are looking at August to re-start season 19/20. Assume high intensity two games a week, and with play offs you'd have it done in 5 weeks. So, early September before the new season can begin. October if we give them something like a proper pre season to get ready. 

4) with that in mind, how do you truncate the season? Play three rounds? Two rounds to maintain home and away fairness? The latter ends up throwing away a lot of income. Especially as we are probably chucking the league cup (or at least it's current format with the group guaranteed incomes for lower leagues) to fit in.

5) the major issue though for me is that we are re starting, possibly with very different squads,  possibly even different managers not necessarily with all clubs left to fulfil the fixtures. It's not really a continuation of the previous season, so the idea that this is fair takes a knock in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, virginton said:

Literally everything that you have outlined involves fucking over the 20-21 schedule and making up a new one on the back of a fag packet. Which is of course exactly what we should be doing given that we i) don't actually know when football matches will be given the go ahead to take place again and ii) don't know whether there will be a second wave of infection in the usual seasonal virus peak of winter 2020-21 or not.

20-21 season is workable depending on the date we start and a bit of flexibility on the games played. One home one away for example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...