JulioBairn
-
Posts
807 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by JulioBairn
-
-
10 minutes ago, PedroMoutinho said:
Totally agree- seemingly the money earmarked for a right back has been spent on areas he considers higher priority.
He has also chosen to renew the likes of Oliver, Nesbitt and Mcginn who could have been moved on to free up budget so he can’t really complain about not being backed Imo.
Call it a day mate. Full of shit.
3 -
Pedro can you please confirm where you got the info that we have no plans to sign a RB?
I suspect this is absolute pish and would be willing to place money that we will indeed sign a RB.4 -
8 hours ago, ChrispPancake said:
serious question.
How many games do we give McGlynn if the team aren't in the top 2 and hunting for automatic promotion?
I'm suggesting any more than 6pts ie 2 wins of first place after 9 games and he's out on his ear.
There is no excuse I'll accept this season
I know you’ve started this with the words ‘serious question’ but this surely can’t be a serious question. Why don’t you wait and see how we’re actually getting on before planning your protest against the manager. You never know, you might not need to worry about it. Absolutely incredible.
4 -
1 minute ago, Springfield said:
If true McGlynn will know that Tumilty will have more than a few championship teams ready to offer a deal. I would therefore suspect if he is the one earmarked for RB, McGlynn would have nailed this early doors. Either a lot of toss, or the guy has better offers. Pure conjecture but I’d be disappointed that he wouldn’t be eyeing up a few at RB and not all eggs in the one basket.
I’m sure he’ll have his eggs in more than one basket but do you not try and get your first choice before moving on to your second? I’m sure he’s aware of more RB’s than just Tumilty.
0 -
I’ve heard Tumilty is the one he wants at RB but Tumilty probably sees himself as better than League one. Probably need a bit of patience with that one.
0 -
We just ignoring the fact that Bainsford Bairn has told us Smith is not training with us so we have an excuse for an argument aye
1 -
3 minutes ago, Van_damage said:
Think that based on what though?
So you not think it as unfair to just throw personal accusations at a player without any evidence?
Based on what I’ve seen and heard of the guy. Why you so upset about it? I think he’s a huffy c**t, you maybe don’t. That’s ok
0 -
1 hour ago, Van_damage said:
Burrell being a huffy b*****d is conjecture at this moment but if true I’m sure it would’ve been known before he signed. Football is a small industry and McGlynn will do his homework. I find it unlikely he would sign a disruptive influence, particularly one without a proven record, so probably best to leave the chat about that in the pub.
I don’t plan on going to the pub but I still don’t think Burrell is a great loss and I still think he’s a huffy b*****d.
I’m happy to leave the ‘conjecture’ to the courtroom and carry on expressing my opinion on a football forum.Thanks all the same tho
0 -
I love how Burrell being a huffy b*****d has suddenly become McGlynns fault. Outstanding logic.
1 -
48 minutes ago, AGPar said:
And if the "Burrell downed tools, we're well shot of him" theory carries any weight, it is every bit as straightforward and logical to extend that argument to incorporate another 12 players who we are still paying a wage to and who will be forming a considerable chunk of next season's squad. Which, given the importance of said season, is pretty concerning.
Ok but what I’m saying is that Burrell was out of contract and probably knew he wasn’t staying and I feel his performances reflected that. I also don’t think he is a great loss.
Am I ok to be of that opinion because you seem to have taken great offence to it?
0 -
7 hours ago, AGPar said:
Why is Burrell being singled out for this particular accusation? The whole lot of them had "quite clearly chucked it". Beat Ayr United in a Scottish Cup Q/F on the 14th March, decided that was enough and subsequently blew up what could have been a very productive end to the season in the biggest way possible.
In fact, from memory, he (in tandem with Oliver) had a very decent 90 minutes against the runaway league champions on 8/4 and came off the bench to score a last-minute equaliser against the other promoted side one week later. And on that basis alone, he contributed more in the run-in than plenty of the other charlatans and bottlers who offered the square route of f**l all in the final two months but are still hanging around creaming a wage.
Yet Burrell is specifically accused of having thrown in the towel. Or this insidious "bad influence in the dressing room" fantasy. Laughable stuff. I would not be n the least bit surprised if he returns to do us some damage next season.
Cos it’s Burrell we are talking about. He signed for Cove and was the topic of conversation and people were giving their opinion on him. Quite straightforward
3 -
Burrell was never the player some of our fans made him out to be and he quite clearly chucked it towards the end of the season.
3 -
I said a few weeks ago that we had a decent core to build from but good recruitment would be crucial. Todays business has been excellent and gives us every chance of finally getting out of here.
0 -
8 minutes ago, Rob1885 said:
Mcguffie's decent IMO.
He’s really not.
1 -
I fully expected QOS to have a better season than they did last year so to see them signing McGuffie is tremendous news.
2 -
2 minutes ago, 19QOS19 said:
Craig McGuffie, gents, any good?
Nope.
1 -
7 minutes ago, ebobsboy said:
That's what I'm thinking, Hogarth won't want to sit on the bench and neither will MacDonald. Which is why I'm leaning to it being one or the other. Given the circumstances and if we are only bringing in six or seven signings, i don't see the point in giving two goalkeepers a wage when one could be better spent in another area of the team.
We have no goalies or a Gk coach. Think it’s a fair bet that we’ll need to spend at least two wages on the goalkeeping department or the poor c**t will need to hit shots into himself all week.
1 -
5 minutes ago, FFC 1876 said:
Hogarth as the number 1 with Macdonald the back up and goalkeeping coach would do just nicely.
I wouldn’t be surprised if it was the other way round next season. MacDonald as number 1 with Hogarth getting a year to continue his development. Either way both are an improvement on last years two.
0 -
Just now, Big chungus said:
Jamie barajonas… meh wouldn’t know exactly how to feel with that one. Unsure if he’s box to box or a number 10?
If he kicks on he has the potential to be a very decent player. If he doesn’t he’d be very similar in standard to what we’ve already got. It’s probably a signing I’d be inclined to go for tbh.
0 -
I think Jamie McDonald is a certainty. Would love Brad Spencer but theres a good chance he’ll have better offers than us. Also think Lang might have better offers than us but time will tell.
If the “ITK guy” previously is correct I also wouldn’t class any of them as underwhelming.
0 -
24 minutes ago, Zbairn said:
OK, it’s not a con…...it’s a way of taking money from some fans for nothing in return. Is that better?
Nobody is taking money from anyone. Someone has to decide to donate. What’s the big deal?
2 -
15 minutes ago, Newbornbairn said:
New strip's a belter
Spill it then
0 -
Arfield wants to play for another 5 years. He has another move in him before he considers us. 2 or 3 years at Hearts or Aberdeen then back to us is how I’d imagine this plays out.
A couple of additions this week would be nice nonetheless
2 -
We must be the only club in the world where the fans actually want the board to interfere with the managers job. Absolutely incredible.
11
The Falkirk FC Thread
in Scottish League 1 General Chatter
Posted
I haven’t seen the team but I’m assuming that Franz Watson must’ve been playing. No way we’d keep a clean sheet with the other jobbers we’ve got