Big Fifer
-
Posts
3,107 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Big Fifer
-
-
Glad to see this proposal binned, and delighted it's before we potentially embarrassed ourselves tomorrow. Sincerely hope the club reassess not only the way they were intending to vote but the way in which fans were consulted and/or informed of the clubs position.
3 -
Absolutely delighted at this outcome and thoroughly embarrassed at the manner in which my own club handled this.
1 -
39 minutes ago, O'Kelly Isley III said:
That's a very interesting post. The Board of East Fife can of course vote the way they choose but if they endorse or oppose the Conference proposal without prior notice to their supporters it would IMO be disrespectful.
And if they DO endorse it then I certainly hope there won't be any abuse, but they may have to contend with their club being held in contempt by fans of peer clubs and beyond, and for quite a long time.
Indeed, but frankly as chairman of a football club it's your job to make the tough decisions, even if it comes with a backlash (and I'm speaking generally, not just about the conference proposal). The solution isn't simply to go into hiding, make no public statement on your decision and complain that some people might not like what you say. I also think that, whilst we do have a relatively moany support (myself included) our board are not that great at taking criticism generally.
33 minutes ago, The Moonster said:It's sad to see some chairman believing that they don't have No as an option. In what possible world can they say "we're changing things no matter what and here's your 3 options"? That's not how this works.
Yes, agreed. As I say, a simple "we're voting no" was all I was looking for. Instead the conversation lasted around 20 minutes. I too am concerned that either our chairman, our board or multiple chairmen don't really understand what they're voting for. I say that as a person that's not on the inner circle so I've not seen the proposals, but the fact so many clubs are voting it down but we seem to be under the impression that isn't an option is very strange.
0 -
Based on conversations folk including myself have had with our chairman, I am concerned and suspect that we can be filed in the bad guy list for this vote.
0 -
2 minutes ago, Cosmic Joe said:
Okay. Thank you.
I'm not sure what you think was odd about my manner of response.
I'm sure it will go to a vote at the next Board Meeting.
I felt the "your words" was a bit snarky, perhaps I misinterpreted the tone. My apologies.
As I understand it, the SFA AGM and therefore this vote is on the 6th June. I can't imagine we'll have a full board meeting in between this time. I think we're about to make a bad decision, frankly.
0 -
14 minutes ago, Cosmic Joe said:
Okay. You've spoken to the Chairman directly, as have numerous others - your words.
What was the Chairman's response following your conversation?
OK, for whatever reason you want me to walk you through it piece by piece, and I will.
I emailed on the 30th May. My email was simply asking (for confirmation really) whether or not we would be voting no and providing a statement stating this. If you want a copy based on your odd manner of response, let me know. The response was rather confusing. The chairman called me at work on the Tuesday I think, I called him back as I was busy at the time of his call. The chairman took me through the story of the how this idea was first touted a year ago, how there were three options on the table, two of which involved B teams in League 2 and the other one was the conference, how it's mainly being pushed by Rangers more than anyone, how he's pushed back against Robertson (Stewart?), how he fought for concessions to ensure there were at least 7 Scottish players in any 'B' team etc. Quite why this point was relevant I'm not sure as I was only asking whether we would be voting no. There would be no reason to seek concessions for something we are voting against.
His entire response was a lot of words about how he was against B teams in the SPFL but at no point did he say we would be voting no to this vote for the creation of the conference. He actually spoke about the fact that this league is a slight buffer for a small team like ours when you compare it to the dreaded lowland league. Overall, the chat suggested that "no" was not an option available to us, and that the conference was the best of a bad bunch of ideas. I suggested at least twice that the club put a statement on the website. I was told this wouldn't be happening as we've done this in the past and it's led to "abuse", whatever that means. I might be forgetting some points, but the above is the gist. A lot of in depth conversation but at no point saying we are voting no to the conference league.
ETA - at the beginning of the call, the chairman said only myself and one other had contacted the club about this upcoming vote. Further people contacting him/the club happened after this call (now checked, it was on Wednesday).
0 -
1 minute ago, Cosmic Joe said:
Who are these numerous people you mention?
I'm not quite getting your angst on this particular issue.
Well I'm one of them, and others claim to have spoken to the chairman directly as well.
I'm angsty because there's a proposal on the table that I feel strongly against, as do most SPFL clubs and their supporters, for a variety of reasons. For whatever reason we're opting not to engage publicly with it, which seems very odd considering the number of clubs openly declaring their intentions.
0 -
Numerous people have had calls with the chairman over this. The fact that so many SPFL clubs are coming out declaring "we are voting no" and we seem unable to do so is incredibly concerning. If our board are against it, it's a very simple two line effort on the website. If they're for it, without having had any fan engagement, I will be beyond disappointed and my small contribution to the managers fund will be binned. There's no excuse for supporting such a terrible idea.
4 -
Congrats Annan, well deserved!
0 -
I think my overall review of it is "fine". It's good to keep the core of the squad together, and very happy not to be in the position we were in last year scrambling around for players. Few of the extensions raised the eyebrows but hey ho. Losing Steele is a shame, of all the players in the squad he's the one we'd have at the top of the list wanting to keep a hold of. I think if we're going to compete at the top end of the league next season we'll need to make at least 4 or 5 quality signings before we consider the loan market. Looking forward to seeing who we have lined up next week.
1 -
Genuine question - what is going on with that social media post about the contract extension? 410k impressions? Nearly 5k likes mainly from EPL fanboy accounts?
1 -
48 minutes ago, 1320Lichtie said:
Heard further on Austin. DC not keen after talking to him by sound of it so will not be coming here
Aye I would have been surprised if he ended up at you guys. You can obviously offer more money and a better league but I think Fash is now nearly 30, was out injured a lot last season as well. He can almost certainly still tear it up in L2 but not sure he was every quite Championship standard. The convenience of Bayview being 5 minutes down the road from his house will likely also play a factor at this stage of his career, particularly with him having two young weans.
0 -
1 minute ago, CM. said:
Big Fifers laptop
I have just slowed it down to half speed and he clearly hits him in the napper. Red card. Everyone relax.
1 -
1 minute ago, Skyline Drifter said:
You realise he doesnt actually need to have made contact for it to be a booking at least right?
Although it looks pretty clear to me that he did and he certainly leads with his elbow.
If he leads with the elbow and makes no contact it's a yellow? If so, then yes its a yellow and a subsequent red card. Calm down lads, honestly the angle we had at the game it looked like a completely fair challenge which is why I'm questioning it so much!
0 -
14 minutes ago, Skyline Drifter said:
Not sure if serious?
It looks a VERY clear red card. In fact it looks like it should be a straight red.
I've looked at this on the laptop and I still can't tell if there's contact mainly because of the camera quality, so I'm not sure how others can tell, but have to base it on all players reaction including Shepherd himself so must have caught him. If so, it's a red.
0 -
I honestly still can't tell from those Clyde highlights. He definitely leads with the elbow, can't actually tell if it makes contact though. I am on my phone so will look tomorrow.
0 -
21 minutes ago, macclyde+ said:
Congratulating us then ripping us a new one. Seems like salty tears tbh.
Yes we weren't very good first half, however poor finishing from your guys, apart from the goal obviously.
Couple of changes and we were better 2nd half, better team even prior to the red card .
Agree with you on Shepherd though, no idea why it wasn't a straight red tbh.
Also thought it strange EF fans booing Lyon when he was clearly smashed in the face
Indeed, make no mistake, my tears are 99% salt at this moment in time. I am incredibly bitter. You're right, we dominated opening 30 mins but from there it was more even and we came out second half and looked rotten and you lot were on top. We could barely string a pass together for some reason. I think that game would have went all the way to pens without the red. As I say, fans bias kicks in for the red, maybe it was a clear elbow from your lots side of the ground but the view we had it just looked like an aerial challenge. Guess we can see something in the highlights!
1 -
Sad not to get a crack at the final but hey ho. Onto next season.
Fleming, Steele, Denham, Newton, Healy, McManus, Walls, Schiavone, Shepherd - keep
Slattery, Murdoch, Millar - Not sure on these 3, they've been good players for us over the years but Murdoch I think might be on the wane and the other two haven't featured much.
Beveridge, Omar, Trouten, Cunningham, Mansouri, Page, Williamson, Gallacher (if he's still here) - I'd let all these guys go. A few haven't featured, a few just don't look good enough, guys like Page shouldn't be in our squad anymore and Trouten looks done in.
Loans - I'd keep Quinn if we could, we'll never keep Ferguson, Denholm looked like he might have something. Taylor Steven and Connor Young haven't had a chance to feature so I'd guess we won't keep them on.
Hopefully we're a bit sharper on the squad building this year. Last summer was torture waiting for signings.
0 -
Firstly, congrats to Clyde, couple of cup finals coming up for you now.
Secondly, Clyde are absolute muck and I'll be very surprised if Annan don't turn them over. But ultimately, if we can't beat that Clyde team over two legs we don't deserve to go up. The fact we were in the play offs after (IMO) one of the worst summer recruitments/squad build we've had in recent years was a bit of a minor miracle, if we went up this year we'd have been straight back down.
As far as that game is concerned, we looked very comfortable first half but we really needed to get the second before half time. Trouten looked so good in the first half but second half his legs were away and he looked done in. I'll be interested to see the highlights for the red, the first yellow card it sounded like he got to the ball and the elbow we couldn't see much in it. If it was for an elbow rather than just a foul shouldn't it have been a straight red? Shepherd is good at getting centre backs rattled by continuously getting in front of them, and even better at rattling opposition fans. Once he was gone we had no focal point and it was just a waiting game frankly. McDonald was clearly keeping Trouten on for pens but you have to actually get to the penalties for him to be useful and given his legs were done in from 45 mins in that was an odd tactic. Clyde didn't look up to much even with the man advantage but we just sat back the entire time.
Ach well. Always next year.
1 -
I think we're more than capable of winning this tie but I'd be surprised to see us as the team that goes up. On our day we can look like a really good team but we've a lot of young guys in the side so the consistency just isn't always there. Won't make tonight as I need to be in the office in Glasgow tomorrow, so hoping we're still in with a shout by 10pm tonight.
0 -
1 hour ago, Burnieman said:
The fact none of these players would end up in the first team was immediately identified by fans but it's taken years for the gid fitba boys to finally get it.
0 -
Succession
in US TV
At least twice the camera was zooming in on Shiv, including right at the end. Something's afoot!
0 -
1 hour ago, The_Judge said:
I just had a look at Dalbeattie Star's squad for this season, they have 13 players previously/currently on the books of a Premier, Championship or League 1 club. This fantasy football lark might be tougher than it looks although maybe if they just pay them more they'll try harder
I assume you mean the players are on DS's books and were previously at clubs at that level?
Difference of course being, as I'm sure you know, I'm referring to players like Tam Reilly, Nathan Austin, Tam Scobbie, Michael Tidser, Grant Anderson, Dylan Easton, Darren Jamieson and Higginbotham who were all established L1/Championship players having played consistently at that level for a good duration rather than players who just happened to have been on the books of a Premiership club at one point in their career. At the time, all of those players would have easily played at L1 level but didn't because of Kelty's cash.
Other than that though, you make a great point.
0 -
3 minutes ago, Cowden Cowboy said:
But part of the rationale is that SPFL lower league teams are backing the idea as they are relegated into a league where teams get c£50k per annum prize money as opposed to current Tier 5 where there is nada.
It might be part of the rationale from the SFA/SPFL point of view, but it still has to be agreed on. And as was pointed out to people at the time when the B clubs first came in - that 50k figure will just keep going up in an attempt to break some of the lower league clubs into accepting. I sincerely hope they do not. That money may help in the case of relegation, but it doesn't replace the fans who stop going to matches if the club ends up being promoted again.
0
Conference League Good Guys List
in Lowland League
Posted · Edited by Big Fifer
With regards the perpetual requests and "demands" for B teams and access, it's great news that this has been binned but it does seem to keep coming back and back and back. What are the next steps? How do we as fans look at getting the idea thrown away entirely? Pretty much every argument put forward by the SFA in support of B teams can be torn to shreds within minutes, are the representatives of the clubs doing this or are they just saying "no" all the time? Maxwell doesn't strike me as someone that would be able to defend these plans under even the slightest bit of pressure in having to justify the excerpts I've seen from that SFA document.