Jump to content

The Falkirk FC Thread


Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, FFC 1876 said:

Telfer, Tidser and Buchanan they all couldn't wait to leave your shit mob for the seaside league and we continue to live rent free in your tiny wee head.  Must've really hurt seeing your club legend walk out the door for a big team in the seaside leagues ae?

Telfer was deliberately kept off the starting eleven by the board on the final day of the 18/19 season because they had no interest in giving him another contract, you imbecile.

By all means tell us how your Tidser move panned out as well while you're at it though. Another blundering failure from the gift that just keeps on giving.

ainsley-harriott-birthday-lorraine-a.jpg.c764bbf957abb54428cdf8b5f8f41081.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Shadwell Dog said:

The head to head says it all . Falkirk miles ahead of the Morton.

 

The fact that you're seaside league permadiddies having been relegated on your own midden by The Famous says it all actually.

Spoiler

giphy.gif&key=66a2b1f9712b2628f1554160c4

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact of the matter is every club were aware at the start of the season to budget for the worst case scenario and the ones in trouble have clearly ignored that stance. We've been innovative as a club by creating ways left right and centre to bring money in to decrease the shortfall from no fans being in the stadium. We sold 2500 season tickets and I'd imagine we'll sell a decent number of the half year virtual season tickets too. We have the cardboard cutouts, the 50/50 tickets, the player celebration sponsorships, the names on the steps. You could probably pay to get your name on one of our toilet seats if you asked nicely.

Poorly run clubs shouldn't be getting any sort of a bailout as they were aware of the situation yet didn't sort themselves or put their hands up at the start. Dundee United for me are the best. They paid money for fuchs and also splashed out for Mcnulty on deadline day then a week later they asked their staff to take a pay cut? Then to make matters even more ironic their chairman was straight out in the press with his begging bowl talking about how his club couldn't survive. I feel for the fans but I have absolutely no pity for the clubs putting themselves into this position and our goverment shouldn't be handing them a silverplatter to keep them sweet for political votes.

Edited by FFC 1876
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, virginton said:

Telfer was deliberately kept off the starting eleven by the board on the final day of the 18/19 season because they had no interest in giving him another contract, you imbecile.

By all means tell us how your Tidser move panned out as well while you're at it though. Another blundering failure from the gift that just keeps on giving.

ainsley-harriott-birthday-lorraine-a.jpg.c764bbf957abb54428cdf8b5f8f41081.jpg

You do realise who scored the goal you keep sharing ae?👀

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, FFC 1876 said:

You do realise who scored the goal you keep sharing ae?👀

Erm yes. And Buchanan also played his one good game in the whole of 2019 that day as well. Some gullible, moronic football club decided to sign the pair of them off the back of that - which has worked out so, so well for you.

Just keep on giving.

A507576A-00E4-4BD1-BAD0-FF4BC5C5B220.thumb.jpeg.9f47449e99922f6c72fd556f864c42c5.jpeg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, virginton said:

'We signed your player who relegated us' is a rather interesting attempt at a comeback btw, but you can only blame the Grangemouth schools for that.

My point was that anyone of your players would trade your diddy club in for a gig in the seaside leagues with us but you can spin it whichever way you want to make you sleep at night. We relegated ourselves that season so I'm going to have to take that massive achievement in your diddy clubs history away from you i'm afraid. Rent free baby, rent free.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, FFC 1876 said:

My point was that anyone of your players would trade your diddy club in for a gig in the seaside leagues with us 

Except there was nothing for him to trade because we even got rid of a manager to make sure that he wouldn't get a new deal. 

Used to put you to the sword.

Discarded.

Picked up by bottom-feeders.

A truly stunning win for you.

IMG_1576962560.451370.jpg.10ebb265f92f5a0547901406540577bb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not surprised this is a shambles with that absolutely incompetent lightweight Gov minister in charge  - Joe Fitzpatrick , I have never observed anyone so out of their depth in their job since ....well me!!

Sport and Health should be 2 different responsibilities anyway.

I see he has now resigned/got bulleted after the recent drug deaths figures. Totally hopeless , obviously Mulraney has walked all over the top of him before he left.    

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reading the last few pages and once again find myself wondering if the trolls on here, Facebook, Twitter and social media in general act the same in real life or are ok in real life but for some reason act differently online. Fortunately loads of drink this weekend will blot out the more inane posts from some of the recent visitors to our thread! Also we'll have a game to talk about as well, thankfully 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bantabairn said:

Probably a good time to finish this discussion, at the end of the day the championship 10 got payback for voting against reconstruction, and the betterment of Scottish football.........another scandalous act by the bent, twisted and corrupt people that run our game.

 

The reconstruction proposals would not have improved Scottish football in any way. They were all comically transparent attempts to save Hearts and I'm surprised anyone genuinely thinks differently, including the chairman of my club who voted for the last one at least.

 

On the subject of the cash, I can see where the Falkirk fans are coming from but can also see the arguments against their point.

The argument is that it would set a silly precedent that would end up with the money going only one way. If Falkirk were given more than Alloa and Arbroath, Dundee could say that they should get more than Queen of the South. In turn Hearts could say they should get more than Dundee.

Going in to the Premiership Hibs and Aberdeen could say that they should get more than Livingston and Ross County for example but then Sevco and Celtic should say they should get more than anyone and should indeed get the majority of all the cash.

There isn't a perfect way to distribute the money but the way it's been done is probably the best.

 

Also players aren't signed for Falkirk over Morton because of some silly 'bigger club' stuff. They're doing so because they'll be getting paid more. It's why Gretna signed a load of players that SPL teams at the time also tried to sign whilst they (Gretna) were in the lower leagues. There's loads of other examples throughout the history of Scottish football. 

Nothing wrong with that either (players signing for clubs for more money I mean; obviously there was a lot wrong at Gretna!).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, DA Baracus said:

The reconstruction proposals would not have improved Scottish football in any way. They were all comically transparent attempts to save Hearts and I'm surprised anyone genuinely thinks differently, including the chairman of my club who voted for the last one at least.

 

On the subject of the cash, I can see where the Falkirk fans are coming from but can also see the arguments against their point.

The argument is that it would set a silly precedent that would end up with the money going only one way. If Falkirk were given more than Alloa and Arbroath, Dundee could say that they should get more than Queen of the South. In turn Hearts could say they should get more than Dundee.

Going in to the Premiership Hibs and Aberdeen could say that they should get more than Livingston and Ross County for example but then Sevco and Celtic should say they should get more than anyone and should indeed get the majority of all the cash.

There isn't a perfect way to distribute the money but the way it's been done is probably the best.

 

Also players aren't signed for Falkirk over Morton because of some silly 'bigger club' stuff. They're doing so because they'll be getting paid more. It's why Gretna signed a load of players that SPL teams at the time also tried to sign whilst they (Gretna) were in the lower leagues. There's loads of other examples throughout the history of Scottish football. 

Nothing wrong with that either (players signing for clubs for more money I mean; obviously there was a lot wrong at Gretna!).

Have to vaguely agree with you, sadly. I don’t think we have earned the right to more money than an alloa, arbroath or QOS just because we are a “bigger” club (more Gate income, better infrastructure, typically bigger wage budget). What kind of message does that send out? That the SPFL will look after a “bigger” club even after they’ve stooped to a league below their level due to their own incompetence, and shaft “smaller” clubs in leagues above them? Not great! 
 

I also don’t think there’s really a fair way of sharing the money. One idea would’ve been to look at clubs who really need the money to “survive” e.g Morton and make them prove they need it for that sole purpose. But then how far does that go? Maybe they need it to survive because they budgeted poorly and signed too many players? Should the grant just bail them out? Seems unfair on clubs who cut their cloth and did budget accordingly.

In the end, too, 150K is a lot of money to most teams in league 1. The fact that Partick and falkirk get a bit shafted is a by product of the fact we both shouldn’t be in this league. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, DA Baracus said:

The reconstruction proposals would not have improved Scottish football in any way. They were all comically transparent attempts to save Hearts and I'm surprised anyone genuinely thinks differently, including the chairman of my club who voted for the last one at least.

 

On the subject of the cash, I can see where the Falkirk fans are coming from but can also see the arguments against their point.

The argument is that it would set a silly precedent that would end up with the money going only one way. If Falkirk were given more than Alloa and Arbroath, Dundee could say that they should get more than Queen of the South. In turn Hearts could say they should get more than Dundee.

Going in to the Premiership Hibs and Aberdeen could say that they should get more than Livingston and Ross County for example but then Sevco and Celtic should say they should get more than anyone and should indeed get the majority of all the cash.

There isn't a perfect way to distribute the money but the way it's been done is probably the best.

 

Also players aren't signed for Falkirk over Morton because of some silly 'bigger club' stuff. They're doing so because they'll be getting paid more. It's why Gretna signed a load of players that SPL teams at the time also tried to sign whilst they (Gretna) were in the lower leagues. There's loads of other examples throughout the history of Scottish football. 

Nothing wrong with that either (players signing for clubs for more money I mean; obviously there was a lot wrong at Gretna!).

It's not so much that alloa and arbroath are getting more cash it's the fact that there is such a huge amount of money being given to championship clubs leaving very little for the rest of Scottish football. The whole allocation has been based on keeping one or two championship clubs in business and stuff the rest basically.   Over 3 times the amount given to league one sides is ludicrous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, bairn88 said:

Have to vaguely agree with you, sadly. I don’t think we have earned the right to more money than an alloa, arbroath or QOS just because we are a “bigger” club (more Gate income, better infrastructure, typically bigger wage budget). What kind of message does that send out? That the SPFL will look after a “bigger” club even after they’ve stooped to a league below their level due to their own incompetence, and shaft “smaller” clubs in leagues above them? Not great! 
 

I also don’t think there’s really a fair way of sharing the money. One idea would’ve been to look at clubs who really need the money to “survive” e.g Morton and make them prove they need it for that sole purpose. But then how far does that go? Maybe they need it to survive because they budgeted poorly and signed too many players? Should the grant just bail them out? Seems unfair on clubs who cut their cloth and did budget accordingly.

In the end, too, 150K is a lot of money to most teams in league 1. The fact that Partick and falkirk get a bit shafted is a by product of the fact we both shouldn’t be in this league. 

On the other hand this isn't prize money. It should have nothing to do with how good your team is on the football park.  

Edited by Shadwell Dog
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...
  • Recently Browsing   1 member

×
×
  • Create New...