Jump to content
Kris.

The Falkirk FC Thread

Recommended Posts

Hartley got carried away with the amount of freedom he was given. Did he argue the case for that all on his own, or did he have someone justifying this to the BoD on his behalf?

If he did it on his own, then fair play, he must either have incredible skills of persuasion, or he had someone in the employ of the club doing it for him. Someone with George Craig’s  DNA who loved playing around being a football club mover and shaker, but who in reality, didn’t have a clue what they were doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, RC55 FFC said:

This BOD (inc CEO) have allowed Hartley to sign multiple players he hadn’t physically seen (Chair confirmed this) which is unheard of by most football managers. They are as much to blame as he was for our current plight. They sacked him when asked as they fucked up & knew it.

 

 

Hartley was given a playing budget by the Board of Directors and then allowed to spend that budget. The idea that the board at any club will analyse every potential signing's history, ability and potential and then permit or refuse the signing as some on here seem to be suggesting is utterly ridiculous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, EdiBairn said:

Hartley was given a playing budget by the Board of Directors and then allowed to spend that budget. The idea that the board at any club will analyse every potential signing's history, ability and potential and then permit or refuse the signing as some on here seem to be suggesting is utterly ridiculous.

Pretty sure that was the job of the scout to scout the lower leagues of England to try and find the "QUaLITY" we were looking for there are a  lot to blame for the current predicament BOD for the Mitch  debacle, Hartley for the signing them and more or less the whole f**king team for being an abomination of an excuse for football players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, EdiBairn said:

Hartley was given a playing budget by the Board of Directors and then allowed to spend that budget. The idea that the board at any club will analyse every potential signing's history, ability and potential and then permit or refuse the signing as some on here seem to be suggesting is utterly ridiculous.

Wrong wrong wrong. What is ridiculous is to allow any single person complete autonomy to do as they pleased with a season’s budget. The very fact that he could deliver such a crock of shit tells you the process is completely and utterly flawed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Telling that put of the three worst teams in Europe, Hartley has recently been involved with two. Guincamp must be shitting themselves. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Duncan Freemason said:

Wrong wrong wrong. What is ridiculous is to allow any single person complete autonomy to do as they pleased with a season’s budget. The very fact that he could deliver such a crock of shit tells you the process is completely and utterly flawed.

Yeah i'd love to know what the signing talks were like between bod and manager. Its obvious to most of us on here that his original plan of small squad better quality went out the window as soon as he saw the players he signed to start with.  Hartley quickly realised they were gash and so continued to sign more and more players to try to cover up his feckups. Unfortunately these signings have also been murder and so we're left with a big pile of shite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Duncan Freemason said:

Wrong wrong wrong. What is ridiculous is to allow any single person complete autonomy to do as they pleased with a season’s budget. The very fact that he could deliver such a crock of shit tells you the process is completely and utterly flawed.

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 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.

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.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

I think the big question for me is, if we win on Saturday, will this thread become any more bearable?

Here's hoping. Onef looks like a ray of sunshine compared to this place. 

I keep reading the same posts over and over and over :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, RC55 FFC said:

This BOD (inc CEO) have allowed Hartley to sign multiple players he hadn’t physically seen (Chair confirmed this) which is unheard of by most football managers. They are as much to blame as he was for our current plight. They sacked him when asked as they fucked up & knew it.

 

 

IMO an effective BoD makes sure checks and balances are in place; constructively question the decisions of Management to ensure they aligned to strategy  and are not just a rubber stamp.  I have attended Board Meeting where the non-executives ask Management the difficult questions and address the elephants in the room. Non executives are not necessarily subject matter experts  but bring to an organisation their experience of matters impacting the business. Did our BOD demonstrate any of these functions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 by FFCinthearea

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

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...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...