The Falkirk FC Thread

[Guest Peter LaFleur]

13 minutes ago, Zbairn said:

Want to post on why the current BoD are so great ? Why you actively have a negative comment on anything that perhaps asks questions of Rawlins and the BoD ? Maybe you may want to post on my previous question I posed to you re Fulston ? 

I’ve posted numerous times that I don’t think Deans should be the chairman. For the Rawlins, I don’t think they’ve been in place long enough to make a difference. Neither for or against them tbh. I’m not being negative to the fans group at all, I just know nothing of it to make a proper judgement. You’re doing absolutely no good in helping them either with the cult like behaviour. 

Edited June 15, 2021 by Peter LaFleur

[Guest]

Really sad to see everyone at each other’s throats. Caused simply by poor stewardship over a number of years. I said earlier in the day these divides will not be easily solved. They have got worse since the collapse in March and April. 
It is incredulous that no one at the club has taken responsibility for the collapse. It really is. 
Again people are giving Falkirk fans who are trying to HELP turn the club around stick. Why? I really cant see the reason for that other than being friends/associates of the current regime.  

Edited June 15, 2021 by Back Post Misses

[BooBairn]

Club? Pish. Deans? Pish. Holt? Pish. Sheerin? TBC. Falkirk TV? Pish. FalkirkTV Questions? Pish. Board of Directors? Pish. New Players? Meh. More ex Morton. So probably pish. 
 

Zero point emailing a question cause they’ll be vetted and the guy Lewis wouldn’t dare. Waste of f**king time. 

[Guest]

On 28/05/2021 at 23:39, Brockvillenomore said:

 

Some facts to ponder.

1.        Gary Deans has been on the board for over two years, most of that time as Chairman.

2.        The Board as it looks now has been running longer than a year plus, there was a shadow Board as Gary Deans pushed to the side those members that eventually left, they were all out of the picture for months and the current board members were working with Gary.

3.        Gary Deans prepared a root and branch review, remember the statement, this is his board, handpicked. They all look the same, sound the same and have the same background – consultancy, accounts and PR. Soft skills, nobody used to working at the sharp end in an industry where cost control and profit is on a knife edge and you need to think on your feet.

4.        This board have been in place for at least18 months; all this talk of them being "new" is a distraction. If we failed in our jobs as the club did last season we’d get the bullet – why haven’t they resigned? I would.

5.        There one success was the Rawlins, wasn’t it? Then you start to get a sense of what these two are like, now I’m not so sure.

6.        I’ve seen the paperwork for the Navy Blue group of local businessmen, shareholders, sponsors and fervent supporters of Falkirk FC.

7.        They had discussions looking to invest as much as £600k in cash.

8.        The MSG, as was, agreed to the idea of diluting their shareholding and take a step back.

9.        There was tentative discussion about the MSG and the Navy Blue Group giving the supporter’s group shares to get it going as they wanted supporters to always have control of the club.

10.    Let’s face facts. 20/21 season was a disaster, an embarrassing failure. If I was on the board and presided over that disgrace I’d resign. Sorry, they should be ashamed. But they stayed.

11.    It was clear to anybody who knows the game that after the first round of games we were found out, we couldn’t beat Partick when they had a full team missing and when they got their players back, we were in trouble. So it proved.

12.    It wasn’t clear to the Board, or the management team though, was it.

13.    The Board the Navy Blue guys decided there had to real change and proposed a new, independent Chairman of  a sensible sized board, suggesting  changes that would see two join and three leave, no names were tabled by the Navy Blue group.

14.    The choice was then for members in the board to do the right thing for the club, stand down and £600k is invested.

15.    They would also have brought with them somebody with real football knowledge, playing, managing and board experience. He was also an investor. 

16.    Despite making their intentions clear from the get-go the Rawlins acted as the proposed changes didn’t exist and continued happily along essentially avoiding dealing with it, as if their charm and sales pitch would somehow convince these guys what they wanted wasn’t all that important. But they didn't want seats on the board, they wanted change and help drive the club forward.

17.    It came to a head in the middle of the week when it became clear the Rawlins were supporting the board, sweeping the failure under the table as if it was trivial and unimportant. Clearly more important than the £600k.

18.    The Navy Blue group announced they were walking away as they were both so far apart it would be daft to carry on, maybe not the words they used to be fair.

19.    The Rawlins reaction was petty and, in my view, childish. Suggesting in as many words the bid was wasting their time and they had a record of offering to invest 4 or 5 times and then walking away.

20.    This is utter BS, and the only conclusion is this BS was given to them by the Board. Sad and pathetic stuff really.

21.    One of the guys in the group emailed the Rawlins privately and very nicely explained they were wrong. Challenging people’s motives and intentions when these are Falkirk supporters through and through, supporting the club for 50 and 60 years in some cases was bang out of order; very nicely he asked them to explain who told them the BS and please list out the 4 or 5 times they were referring to. As far as I know he’s had no response.

22.    Honestly, I’m worried about the club. Rawlins has 26%, a puppet board who do as he says and they’re turning down a £600k investment and introducing guys who can help the club but will challenge and not just rollover to what the Rawlins or anybody else says. I’m speculating of course, but it looks that way.

23.    Also, the shareholders of the Club should be asking if the Board of Director’s acted in the best interests of the Club by declining the opportunity to stand aside in order to attract such a significant investment. £600K FFS. 

24.    That’s their duty as directors under company law, act in a way that protects the company, before your self-interest. Did they do that, or are they just holding onto the status of the positions and Rawlins coat tails.

Only time will tell.

For those who still claim they know nothing about the Navy Blue investment - read this and stop trying to kid on you have no idea what it was about.

[ShaggerG]

1 hour ago, Caractacus Potts said:

Shagger why talk of new accounts that criticise the club and not of those that blindly seem to support the board? You seem to be doing your best to discredit new posters like myself and not those who defend the board. There’s been several new posters on that side too by the way! 
 

I think a lot has been said about things that have went on. All that’s been said here, do you not think the board has a lot to answer for and are you convinced that things are better now than before? Why keep asking questions of fellow fans and not the club? 

Edit to add: I joined as I was pissed off at the way things were going at the club. There was a lot of anger back then(April) but it seems to have dissipated quickly. I can’t stand what I’m hearing and I can’t believe anyone can continue to stick up for the board. Also nothing that is happening makes me think things will change anytime soon. 

Yes, you make a valid point. I think there are two new accounts who have questioned some of the anti board stuff but I wouldn't say they were 'blindly' supporting them. Like me, I think they're just asking questions but I'm certainly not going to trawl through everything to find out.

I'm not 'doing my best' to discredit anyone, I'd just like to know what's happening from all sides.

[Guest Peter LaFleur]

9 minutes ago, Back Post Misses said:

For those who still claim they know nothing about the Navy Blue investment - read this and stop trying to kid on you have no idea what it was about.

Who was all involved? Was there any truth in that the group wanted Rice or McKay over Sheerin? Deans and Holt to be replaced with the investment also? 

Edited June 15, 2021 by Peter LaFleur

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Peter LaFleur said:

Who was all involved? Was there any truth in that the group wanted Rice or McKay over Sheerin? Deans and Holt to be replaced with the investment also? 

It is for others to reveal their own names. However of the 11 involved they currently hold circa 200,000 shares in the club so have invested before. The Group had no input into the managerial appointment. Have you read the post. They wanted an independent chairman. Holt’s position was initially questioned but the group compromised on this and we’re happy to work with him. 

Edited June 15, 2021 by Back Post Misses

[Guest Caractacus Potts]

34 minutes ago, Peter LaFleur said:

I’ve posted numerous times that I don’t think Deans should be the chairman. For the Rawlins, I don’t think they’ve been in place long enough to make a difference. Neither for or against them tbh. I’m not being negative to the fans group at all, I just know nothing of it to make a proper judgement. You’re doing absolutely no good in helping them either with the cult like behaviour. 

Ofcourse you have to throw something like that in to put people off the scent Peter. You consistently mark down any anti-board posts and question the fans group rather than the board and try to cast scorn on those involved. 
 

Think those who are questioning the board have a lot more justification, given the way things have went. The only justification to fervently stick up for the board is that you have a close connection with someone on it or indeed on it yourself. 
 

You’re also just as new an account as some others but somehow move outside of Shaggers gaze! You also used the same criticism trying to discredit new posters despite having only joined the end of February yourself. 

Edited June 15, 2021 by Caractacus Potts

[RC55 FFC]

10 minutes ago, Back Post Misses said:

For those who still claim they know nothing about the Navy Blue investment - read this and stop trying to kid on you have no idea what it was about.

Hadn’t seen any of this as just returned back to the forum but 13. answers my query about the board shuffles as is different to what I’d read on the FB page. 
 

Any idea what % MR & SA had agreed to go down to mate? 

[ShaggerG]

1 hour ago, Harry Kinnear said:

It's very difficult just now due to Covid restrictions but boy do we need some kind of fan meeting as soon as its viable. Fans at each others throats is doing none of us any good. We all need to know what's going on. Deep down we all love the club and want the best for it. There is no doubt Falkirk FC has potential but until we are all working together it's never going to happen.

Well said.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, RC55 FFC said:

Hadn’t seen any of this as just returned back to the forum but 13. answers my query about the board shuffles as is different to what I’d read on the FB page. 
 

Any idea what % MR & SA had agreed to go down to mate? 

They would have come down to around 15% between them and were happy to be diluted even more. The group had extensive discussions with both MR and SA. They were both very much wanting this to go through 

[RC55 FFC]

1 minute ago, Back Post Misses said:

They would have come down to around 15% between them and were happy to be diluted even more. The group had extensive discussions with both MR and SA. They were both very much wanting this to go through 

Ta. Surprised by them but it’s about time. 

[Guest Peter LaFleur]

4 minutes ago, Back Post Misses said:

It is for others to reveal their own names. However of the 11 involved they currently hold circa 200,000 shares in the club so have invested before. The Group had no input into the managerial appointment. Have you read the post. They wanted an independent chairman. Holt’s position was initially questioned but the group compromised on this and we’re happy to work with him. 

Points like the compromise of Holts position are interesting and it certainly looks even more suspect as to why the board have turned it down. Never knew about SA and MR being so willing to sell up either. Thanks for the response.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, RC55 FFC said:

Ta. Surprised by them but it’s about time. 

If I am honest I believe they could have put more pressure on to help get it over the line but they pretty much left it to the group and the Board to crack a deal. 
From the outset the group ask Rawlins and his wife to judge us on the approach and park all the history. They clearly didn’t do that in the end and resorted to questioning people’s motives and integrity when it all broke down 

[Guest Ecosse83]

f**k sake was hoping to come on here and see some more rumours about players signing.

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, Peter LaFleur said:

Points like the compromise of Holts position are interesting and it certainly looks even more suspect as to why the board have turned it down. Never knew about SA and MR being so willing to sell up either. Thanks for the response.

Why when a group compromises is it more likely to turn things down? 
Let’s be clear. In the end it was the Groups choice to walk away because despite compromising on 3 or 4 things the Board refused to budge. In the end there was no point in continuing to talk when you are fundamentally so far apart. 
 

Edited June 15, 2021 by Back Post Misses

[Guest Caractacus Potts]

25 minutes ago, ShaggerG said:

Yes, you make a valid point. I think there are two new accounts who have questioned some of the anti board stuff but I wouldn't say they were 'blindly' supporting them. Like me, I think they're just asking questions but I'm certainly not going to trawl through everything to find out.

I'm not 'doing my best' to discredit anyone, I'd just like to know what's happening from all sides.

Yeh fair enough. I’m pretty satisfied by what has been said on here and on Facebook to have a large degree of truth to it.
 

Don’t think you’ll ever get proper evidence on here so if you are seeking more information then maybe try contact the club or ask questions at the Q and A or try to PM anyone on here that seems to have revealed some info?

[Bula Bairn]

31 minutes ago, Back Post Misses said:

For those who still claim they know nothing about the Navy Blue investment - read this and stop trying to kid on you have no idea what it was about.

Just reads like a petty attack without much substance tbh. 

[Guest]

Just now, Bula Bairn said:

Just reads like a petty attack without much substance tbh. 

A bit like your post I guess 

[ilostmyself]

I'm not sure how anyone could support the decisions of the board in the last 5 years or so but Im definitely in the camp of thinking we can't judge the Rawlins or even Holt until we see where we are this time next year.
I do agree with the point of new accounts that only seems to post about the board and the fans group, maybe a compromise could be a new thread about the Falkirk board where they could talk about the board till the end of time and the rest of us can talk about signings and football etc.