Jump to content
Kris.

The Falkirk FC Thread

Recommended Posts

i know this is a wind up attempt but in the interest of sporting integrity i'll reply! only 1 club in the sfl still has sporting integrity and that's the club who voted against "newco" being readmitted to the sfl. all others whether they voted yes or no (and we don't know how the vast majority did vote) sold out.

airdrieonians were refused membership on the grounds that the sfa/sfl did not want a precedent where clubs walked away from their debts and reformed as a "newco" that's why airdrie united had to buy clydebanks membership to gain entry to the league. they were refused their own membership, unlike "rangers". therefore any team that voted differently from the time airdrie were liquidated are treating "rangers" as a special case. every club that voted "newco" for entry into the 3rd sold out, just a matter of degree how much.

people are moaning about the clubs who either voted or are rumoured to have voted yes, sticking to the principle of sporting integrity (like this is meant to be about!!) and there's only 1 club with integrity and therefore not worth boycotting etc....i think most people talking about not going to games are just looking for excuses not to go anyway!!

Sweep sweep sweep

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Alloa haven't issued a statement since the vote to say that they voted no then?

They don't need to. They made a clear statement before the vote stating clearly how they would vote. The main reason they made the statement IMO was as a courtesy to their customers - us fans.

You presumably have launched your wee attack on the Falkirk board because you believe that they voted yes and that they're trying to cover it up. That's your opinion which, of course, you're entitled to but you may not necessarily be correct.

Yes. That's right.

Just to clarify. As I've alluded to before. I go to several Falkirk games a year, when we aren't playing. So I'm not just picking on Falkirk. I'm interested because effectively they are my second club.

Edited by printer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Alloa actually haven't confirmed how they voted? Just a statement of their general intentions before the vote.

Good grief. What does it matter that the statement was the night before the vote rather than the day after? :lol:

"General intentions?" Get a grip!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sweep sweep sweep

lol!! how about coming back with an informed arguement showing why airdrie newco were refused their original membership and therefore not readmitted to the league but rangers newco are being allowed their original membership back into the league? where's the sporting integrity there?

i'll type slowly now to help explain things. if the club being liquidated was say berwick (or another small club) not glasgow rangers, the newco would've been refused re-entry to the sfl. sporting integrity (nice catchphrase!) if it were being satisfied would mean rangers newco are refused entry to the sfl, ANYTHING ELSE SPECIAL TREATMENT FOR NEWCO RANGERS. this leaves 1 club in scotland with their sporting integrity intact, every other club who voted to allow newco rangers into the 1st or 3rd division have to different degrees compromised their sporting integrity. (and no-one knows for certain how most teams actually voted)

there, not only did i type slowly, i even put some words in the big letters, even thought about underlining some words (underlining words is just taking it to far though, lol)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol!! how about coming back with an informed arguement showing why airdrie newco were refused their original membership and therefore not readmitted to the league but rangers newco are being allowed their original membership back into the league? where's the sporting integrity there?

i'll type slowly now to help explain things. if the club being liquidated was say berwick (or another small club) not glasgow rangers, the newco would've been refused re-entry to the sfl. sporting integrity (nice catchphrase!) if it were being satisfied would mean rangers newco are refused entry to the sfl, ANYTHING ELSE SPECIAL TREATMENT FOR NEWCO RANGERS. this leaves 1 club in scotland with their sporting integrity intact, every other club who voted to allow newco rangers into the 1st or 3rd division have to different degrees compromised their sporting integrity. (and no-one knows for certain how most teams actually voted)

there, not only did i type slowly, i even put some words in the big letters, even thought about underlining some words (underlining words is just taking it to far though, lol)

So - your point - I think - is that 24 of the clubs who voted NO had already compromised their sporting integrity by allowing Sevco to join the league in the first place and therefore it doesn't matter that they voted NO to the second vote unsure.gif

So, by your logic, it wouldn't have mattered if they'd all voted YES huh.gif

I'm not sure I follow - perhaps you should underline some stuff in your reply !?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good grief. What does it matter that the statement was the night before the vote rather than the day after? :lol:

"General intentions?" Get a grip!

Possibly because they're playing a game and want the fans to believe they would vote no when, in fact, they didn't?

You seem like a reasonable guy so I'm sure you can see what I'm getting at!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So - your point - I think - is that 24 of the clubs who voted NO had already compromised their sporting integrity by allowing Sevco to join the league in the first place and therefore it doesn't matter that they voted NO to the second vote unsure.gif

So, by your logic, it wouldn't have mattered if they'd all voted YES huh.gif

I'm not sure I follow - perhaps you should underline some stuff in your reply !?

jumping to conclusions a wee bit there. the clubs that voted no have compromised their sporting integrity, using this logic the logical conclussion is newco rangers not getting in the league. no or yes is just a matter of degree, although it's being shown as no=good, yes=bad. i'd say no is a better vote than yes but all the talk of not going, boycotts etc for clubs that voted yes is wrong as all clubs have compromised (except 1) by allowing newco into the league sporting integrity was compromised as it's seen as having newco in the league is financially better than not having them (due to tv money etc)

as things are a deal has been done not on fairness or sporting integrity but to attempt to least upset all clubs fans while keeping tv, sponsors happy. integrity= no newco at all. i don't see how people can say they wouldn't go back if we voted yes but would if we voted no, it's only a no admittance vote that is being 100% principled

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While accepting that the statement is open to interpretation, my suspicion remains that we voted Yes.

I would be appalled if this is the case.

Falkirk fans attempting to defend this is like the Lib Dems defending the Chancellor this week over the latest economic figures.

If they were not connected, they would be publicly as critical as Labour.

Likewise, fans would be highly critical of other Yes voters if their club had voted No.

In no way could I let this affect my support for the team, but it does weigh heavily.

It could also be argued that clubs who voted No stand to benefit from having Rangers in the lower leagues,

so it may not have been completely altruistic in some cases.

I would hope this is not true, but would align with the accusation that the Yes voters were voting selfishly.

C'mon Brechin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alloa. :thumsup2

This is how you do it when you care about your fans.

Proud!

This is how you do it when you get offered a couple of home league games against Rangers next season, the chance of split Ibrox gates in the Ramsdens and early League cup rounds, and a split of the telly money. Sporting integrity my arse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kris Faulds just tweeted saying we beat Watford under 18s 1-0.

Probably most of the team that played second half Wednesday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

fud

^^^ sobbing uncontrollably

i know this is a wind up attempt but in the interest of sporting integrity i'll reply! only 1 club in the sfl still has sporting integrity and that's the club who voted against "newco" being readmitted to the sfl. all others whether they voted yes or no (and we don't know how the vast majority did vote) sold out.

Pish. Stranraer's response was of course the best route to go: but there is a vast yawning chasm between those who decided to admit Sevco at Third Division level and at First Division. Our club made its position clear that we'd have supported a Sevco admission at SFL3 level - not a stance I can agree with, but not one that would lead to a boycott. As it happens, a combination of little time before the league campaign starts, and the deliberate engineering of the issue voted for, left a new admission procedure by the wayside.

None of that is even remotely comparable to swallowing every single lie and delusion from the SPL, in order to get Sevco in SFL1 and your own thirty pieces of silver into the bargain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pressley just had a 10 min interview on Sportsound, worth listening to on iplayer or podcast later, about 10 mins in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is how you do it when you get offered a couple of home league games against Rangers next season, the chance of split Ibrox gates in the Ramsdens and early League cup rounds, and a split of the telly money.

All true, but set against 1) The prospect of an SPL2, set up by clubs of greed like Falkirk and yes, Morton also, and 2) The proposed cancellation of the Annual Settlement, which constitutes a large share of turnover for the smaller clubs in the system. Next to none of them folded under the pressure. On the other hand, Falkirk didn't need to fold: they deliberately sold out in the hope of gaining from the outcome.

So when it comes to lectures on sporting integrity, Falkirk will never have a leg to stand on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All true, but set against 1) The prospect of an SPL2, set up by clubs of greed like Falkirk and yes, Morton also, and 2) The proposed cancellation of the Annual Settlement, which constitutes a large share of turnover for the smaller clubs in the system. Next to none of them folded under the pressure. On the other hand, Falkirk didn't need to fold: they deliberately sold out in the hope of gaining from the outcome.

So when it comes to lectures on sporting integrity, Falkirk will never have a leg to stand on.

I don't know how Falkirk voted, and to be honest, I don't really care. There were good arguments for voting either way, depending on what was on offer. It just depended on what bribe you preferred.

My breaking point would be Falkirk having anything to do with SPL2. I'm all in favour of acting out of self interest and realpolitik, but that would be a cynical betrayal of everything the club has claimed to stand for. Thankfully it seems Doncaster's sleazy proposal has been dropped.

Edited by welshbairn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know how Falkirk voted, and to be honest, I don't really care. There were good arguments for voting either way,

Utter nonsense. There was not one good reason for voting yes. Not one.

If you don't care that your board have absolutely no respect for the vast majority of your fan base then that's fair enough but I'd be absolutely furious if my board had treated the support as an utter irrelevance on this matter.

Share this post


Link to post
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...