Jump to content

The Falkirk FC Thread


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Trump said:


I loved Yogi as a centre half. He was no nonsense and what we would give for someone like that now. I disagree that he was a ball playing centre half though.


Darren Dods was 36 when he joined us.
Yogi returned when he was 38.

Both did a fine job despite their age.

Darren Dods was comfortably one of our best centre halfs since our SPL days. Scored a good amount of goals as well from set pieces as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Shadwell Dog said:

Hughes played for both Celtic and Hibs two clubs that base their whole games on being able to play football. Yes he could mix it and could be no nonsense but he had far more ability than any of our 3 centre Half's we have just now. We then had players like Scott Mackenzie and Davie Nicholas playing beside him in that back 3 two players who had loads of football in their  locker. Compare that 3 to ATS, Mackay and bloody hall who can hardly kick their own arses never mind play a bit.

Hughes knew his limitations and that is a smart thing in a footballer not trying something you cant do.

Cracking player for us and a great manager it was sad how it ended for him just like Houstie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Shadwell Dog said:

Hughes played for both Celtic and Hibs two clubs that base their whole games on being able to play football. Yes he could mix it and could be no nonsense but he had far more ability than any of our 3 centre Half's we have just now. We then had players like Scott Mackenzie and Davie Nicholas playing beside him in that back 3 two players who had loads of football in their  locker. Compare that 3 to ATS, Mackay and bloody hall who can hardly kick their own arses never mind play a bit.

We had Kevin James in there too who wasn't a ball playing centre half either, it was a good blend of two aerial attackers and McKenzie can do the pretty stuff. I've long memory of 98% of Hughes passing, which was very much a delicate chipped hoof.

I personally think Hall isn't too bad on the ball, probably that got his move down south and I don't think anyone has seen enough of ATS to make a full judgement, the rule goes tho if you make one glaring mistake, you are then the worst.

59 minutes ago, Springfield said:

St J now in crisis, seven points adrift and defeated in last eight. Wouldn’t bet that Davidson is still in employment if he doesn’t win next league game ( Aberdeen away) 

A long contract might be the stumbling point, a great quiz question upcoming winning two cups and relegated 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Ecosse83 said:

Any one is us could make an argument for shite players having to whatever the formation! 
 

We’re now creating chances so 352 has been much better in that respect. Most in here moaned for 2 up top and we now have that. Let’s give this a chance and see what happens.

My only concern is we shape our squad to play 352 and Rennie doesn’t stay behind the season! 

Rennie and Miller being on short contracts will be a factor on players signing for us. In particular our track record on signings over the last 3 - 4 seasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, HopeStreetWalker said:

Rennie and Miller being on short contracts will be a factor on players signing for us. In particular our track record on signings over the last 3 - 4 seasons.

Certainly will add to the utter chaos with the club since dropping into the third tier of Scottish football. Think it’s a magician we need…..what a task he’s got  (Rennie)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Trump said:

‘Can’t believe we are playing 3 at the back in league one’

Worked out okay for McCall in 2002/2003, one of my favourite Falkirk teams.

‘Getting excited about a 35 year old topping up his pension’

What age was Latapy when he joined us?

Things in isolation and out of context don’t really mean anything.

It’s not to say every 3 at the back will end up with us winning the second tier, or any mid thirties signing will end up like Latapy, but seems to be taking any possible scenario/solution and then going to the most reactionary comments possible.

3 at the back is fine if played in the right way.

Signing older players is fine if complemented by other younger players making up for their deficiencies elsewhere.

Naturally we would be complaining about having a poor back 4 and needing an extra body, or signing youngsters with a lack of experience and leadership.

I've no idea why people get so hung up on this. No formation is inherently attacking or defensive. It's about the personnel and instructions as much as the shape. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, lanky_ffc said:

I've no idea why people get so hung up on this. No formation is inherently attacking or defensive. It's about the personnel and instructions as much as the shape. 

I agree in principle but you for sure get defensive formations and attacking formations. The latter tho is harder to produce.

Sheerinball was defensive,our recent visit to parkhead defensive, the stats back that up.

Our current three at the back is attacking, the stats again back that up

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, MrDust said:

I agree in principle but you for sure get defensive formations and attacking formations. The latter tho is harder to produce.

Sheerinball was defensive,our recent visit to parkhead defensive, the stats back that up.

Our current three at the back is attacking, the stats again back that up

Having 3 at the back really doesn't make a difference as to whether a formation is attacking or defensive. It is what it in front of them that matters

For example:

3 at the back with one holding mid and 2 forward thinking/creative players = attacking

3 at the back with 2 sitting midfielders = defensive.

The role of the wing back is typically the same regardless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, latapythelegend said:

Having 3 at the back really doesn't make a difference as to whether a formation is attacking or defensive. It is what it in front of them that matters

For example:

3 at the back with one holding mid and 2 forward thinking/creative players = attacking

3 at the back with 2 sitting midfielders = defensive.

The role of the wing back is typically the same regardless.

Having a back 3 depended on having wing backs that can get back to protect the wide areas. Making it as good as a back 5 under pressure. Dont think our fullbacks are good enough to make it work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Springfield said:

Looking like the chances of landing Craig ( if true) are not good according to Davidson press release. 

What he may have in his contract though is a clause to be released for a player/coach role. No idea if true but does happen. 

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...