The Falkirk FC Thread

[HopeStreetWalker]

Now that we have signed McCann what is the point of having Sneddon on the books.

if the guy is not going to get a game move him on to a team that will and free up a wage.

[ShaggerG]

1 hour ago, HopeStreetWalker said:

Now that we have signed McCann what is the point of having Sneddon on the books.

if the guy is not going to get a game move him on to a team that will and free up a wage.

Because we're starting a development squad (allegedly), so I would imagine he'd be involved with that. We also need a back-up for McCann so we may see him do that rather than have to move Dixon wide.

[Harry Kinnear]

44 minutes ago, MSG GTF! said:

Agree with this wholeheartedly. The only criticism I have of the patrons is that they should be shouting from the rooftops about what’s gone on. It’s the only way the wider fanbase is ever going to get an understanding of what they are up against. The CI showed them the way with their recent statement, it’s a shame the patrons appear to have taken the decision lying down and aren’t up for a fight.

I agree with this totally. I’ve already stated that I won’t be renewing as I have been told personally about some of the goings on by individual’s involved in the patrons bid but I can fully appreciate the wider fan base who have not been privy to such information deciding to renew. I can also understand that some fans are not interested in the business side of the club and just want to watch their football every second week. I think it would be good and maybe help everyone understand both sides of the argument if everyone could be made aware of the patrons and clubs points of view by way of statements.

[Andy Dufresne]

16 minutes ago, HopeStreetWalker said:

Now that we have signed McCann what is the point of having Sneddon on the books.

if the guy is not going to get a game move him on to a team that will and free up a wage.

I can't see him being on a big wage anyway.

[Shadwell Dog]

12 minutes ago, keithgy said:

I can't see him being on a big wage anyway.

The rate that employees are bailing out I'm sure they'll find something for him to do soon. Maybe an assistant for corzo.

Edited June 14, 2021 by Shadwell Dog

[Shadwell Dog]

57 minutes ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

The big problem at the moment both for the ‘jar half empty’ and the ‘jar half full ‘ types is the lack of any meaningful communication from the club.

I think we can all agree on that.

Gary - get it fixed.

Gary-resign would be a better option.

[Shadwell Dog]

37 minutes ago, HopeStreetWalker said:

Now that we have signed McCann what is the point of having Sneddon on the books.

if the guy is not going to get a game move him on to a team that will and free up a wage.

He's murder and nowhere near good enough as was pointed out when we signed him.

Edited June 14, 2021 by Shadwell Dog

[AL-FFC]

12 hours ago, Ecosse83 said:

Well that was some lovely Monday morning reading. There is some right miserable b*****ds on here! 

It's times like this you wish One F was still around

[Proudtobeabairn]

1 hour ago, Harry Kinnear said:

I agree with this totally. I’ve already stated that I won’t be renewing as I have been told personally about some of the goings on by individual’s involved in the patrons bid but I can fully appreciate the wider fan base who have not been privy to such information deciding to renew. I can also understand that some fans are not interested in the business side of the club and just want to watch their football every second week. I think it would be good and maybe help everyone understand both sides of the argument if everyone could be made aware of the patrons and clubs points of view by way of statements.

Seems like every man and his dog have got the intimate details of exactly what the Rawlins have said or done to the Patrons & CI guys bit no-one is willing to share?  What harm would posting some actual details on here do at this stage? As others have said it may give folk like me an others more reason to galvanise against the owners if they really are out to destroy the club. 

I don't doubt the CI guys have been treated shabbily but their statement said nothing really about the reasons the board have given them or what actually happened.  All we've heard from the Patrons bid is that someone (Mrs Rawlins?) took a swipe at their character but no actual details for us to judge. 

Based on the information we do have I completely understand why the Rawlins wouldn't accept the conditions attached to the Patrons bid.  If there's more to it then get the details out there, until then it all just sounds like bumped gums and playground stuff.  

 

[Harry Kinnear]

1 minute ago, Proudtobeabairn said:

Seems like every man and his dog have got the intimate details of exactly what the Rawlins have said or done to the Patrons & CI guys bit no-one is willing to share?  What harm would posting some actual details on here do at this stage? As others have said it may give folk like me an others more reason to galvanise against the owners if they really are out to destroy the club. 

I don't doubt the CI guys have been treated shabbily but their statement said nothing really about the reasons the board have given them or what actually happened.  All we've heard from the Patrons bid is that someone (Mrs Rawlins?) took a swipe at their character but no actual details for us to judge. 

Based on the information we do have I completely understand why the Rawlins wouldn't accept the conditions attached to the Patrons bid.  If there's more to it then get the details out there, until then it all just sounds like bumped gums and playground stuff.  

 

I totally agree with you. Statements should come out from all sides outlining what actually happened. I would never post on here what I've been told as I'm nothing at all to do with the patrons group and for me it needs to come from the horses mouth. The same can be said of the board, it would be good if they came out and told the fans the reason for rejecting the fans offer and the reason for the issues with the Crunchie initiative. They need to try something to get us all singing from the same hymn sheet.

[Shadwell Dog]

1 minute ago, Proudtobeabairn said:

Seems like every man and his dog have got the intimate details of exactly what the Rawlins have said or done to the Patrons & CI guys bit no-one is willing to share?  What harm would posting some actual details on here do at this stage? As others have said it may give folk like me an others more reason to galvanise against the owners if they really are out to destroy the club. 

I don't doubt the CI guys have been treated shabbily but their statement said nothing really about the reasons the board have given them or what actually happened.  All we've heard from the Patrons bid is that someone (Mrs Rawlins?) took a swipe at their character but no actual details for us to judge. 

Based on the information we do have I completely understand why the Rawlins wouldn't accept the conditions attached to the Patrons bid.  If there's more to it then get the details out there, until then it all just sounds like bumped gums and playground stuff.  

 

Shouldn't be up to the Rawlins whether the club accepts the patrons bid though anyway. They only own 26 percent of the club. Noone seems to have asked the other 74 percent what they want . Rules were brought in  specifically to prevent any individual getting control of the club quite rightly but this has simply been circumvented by  Deans and his band of merry men .   They need to be taken to task over this but having promised a q and a last month have now reneged on that completely. There has to be checks and balances in place no matter who owns the club but currently that is not the case. How the feck can the person deemed to be  running the club just simply vanish for a fortnight and think that's not an issue FFS. 

 

 

[Harry Kinnear]

1 minute ago, Shadwell Dog said:

Shouldn't be up to the Rawlins whether the club accepts the patrons bid though anyway. They only own 26 percent of the club. Noone seems to have asked the other 74 percent what they want . Rules were brought in  specifically to prevent any individual getting control of the club quite rightly but this has simply been circumvented by  Deans and his band of merry men .   They need to be taken to task over this but having promised a q and a last month have now reneged on that completely. There has to be checks and balances in place no matter who owns the club but currently that is not the case. How the feck can the person deemed to be  running the club just simply vanish for a fortnight and think that's not an issue FFS. 

 

 

He has gone very quiet recently. I don't agree with much DPB posts but he is 100% right in calling for Deans to get communicating with us.

[Proudtobeabairn]

Who has vanished for a fortnight?   Where are you getting this info?  

Maybe SA and MR have been hounded (quite rightly imo) over the last few years to the extent that they have stopped trying to intervene in board decisions?  

Maybe unsettling a few folk and making a few unpopular decisions is what we need after years of boardroom failure?  We'll find out soon enough.  

Edited June 14, 2021 by Proudtobeabairn

[Shadwell Dog]

1 minute ago, Harry Kinnear said:

He has gone very quiet recently. I don't agree with much DPB posts but he is 100% right in calling for Deans to get communicating with us.

It's not him I'm talking about that disappeared.

[Harry Kinnear]

Just now, Shadwell Dog said:

It's not him I'm talking about that disappeared.

Who is it ?

[JulioBairn]

4 minutes ago, Proudtobeabairn said:

Seems like every man and his dog have got the intimate details of exactly what the Rawlins have said or done to the Patrons & CI guys bit no-one is willing to share?  What harm would posting some actual details on here do at this stage? As others have said it may give folk like me an others more reason to galvanise against the owners if they really are out to destroy the club. 

I don't doubt the CI guys have been treated shabbily but their statement said nothing really about the reasons the board have given them or what actually happened.  All we've heard from the Patrons bid is that someone (Mrs Rawlins?) took a swipe at their character but no actual details for us to judge. 

Based on the information we do have I completely understand why the Rawlins wouldn't accept the conditions attached to the Patrons bid.  If there's more to it then get the details out there, until then it all just sounds like bumped gums and playground stuff.  

 

.

Everyone keen to talk in code about how they’ve been hard done by but nobody willing to actually give any details.

I am no fan of the board but from what I know of the Patrons bid it seems obvious they would reject it. Not sure why they don’t want to give their side? Not entirely sure why they didn’t get the fans on board with their “fans bid” before actually submitting the bid either . What I do know is the whole “Mrs Rawlins was nasty to me but you’ll find out for yourself one day” is getting a bit tiresome.

These people were practically out canvassing to get the Rawlins in now there seems to be a massive change. Surely us less wealthy fans deserve to know why??
 

[Sarcastic Bairn]

18 minutes ago, Proudtobeabairn said:

I don't doubt the CI guys have been treated shabbily but their statement said nothing really about the reasons the board have given them or what actually happened.  All we've heard from the Patrons bid is that someone (Mrs Rawlins?) took a swipe at their character but no actual details for us to judge. 

Based on the information we do have I completely understand why the Rawlins wouldn't accept the conditions attached to the Patrons bid.  If there's more to it then get the details out there, until then it all just sounds like bumped gums and playground stuff.  

 

So we have two different sets of Falkirk fans trying to do something positive for the club,  but you are taking the side of someone from across the Atlantic with zero attachment?

[Shadwell Dog]

1 minute ago, Sarcastic Bairn said:

So we have two different sets of Falkirk fans trying to do something positive for the club,  but you are taking the side of someone from across the Atlantic with zero attachment?

I do find it quite remarkable how some folk would rather back chesty Morgan who has no link to the club/town whatsoever and has only a small investment at stake over guys who are fans through and through and have supported the club for years. It's a funny old game right enough.

[Proudtobeabairn]

30 minutes ago, Sarcastic Bairn said:

So we have two different sets of Falkirk fans trying to do something positive for the club,  but you are taking the side of someone from across the Atlantic with zero attachment?

FFS its not about taking sides - its about giving folk some information and detail.  

As @JulioBairn says above, our support were so sick of the way the club was being run that we did everything we could to get the Rawlins in the door. 

Now, we're being told they are out to ruin the club despite on the face of it having more experience of decision making in successful football clubs than anyone else involved at the club.  
Normal fans being asked to 'take sides' with the Patrons when
(1) we don't even know who the 'patrons' are (just some secretive chat about there being a 'football man' involved etc... I mean - that's got to be the very least they could reveal surely?!?
(2) Nobody is actually telling us why The Rawlins approach = BAD
(3) we've been wanting a clear out for years, we now have one
(4) Most of those speaking out against the Rawlins sound like they've had their nose put out of joint and have taken the hump.  
 

Edited June 14, 2021 by Proudtobeabairn

[Proudtobeabairn]

6 minutes ago, Shadwell Dog said:

I do find it quite remarkable how some folk would rather back chesty Morgan who has no link to the club/town whatsoever and has only a small investment at stake over guys who are fans through and through and have supported the club for years. It's a funny old game right enough.

Martin Ritchie and Sandy Alexander have supported the club for years and look what happened when they were calling the shots. 

Just because someone is a fan doesn't mean they are the best person to make decisions and run a successful football club. 

I like the idea of the club being fan owned but I like the idea of Falkirk being successful more.