Benny Factor

Aye ok sherlock

I was at that game and thought the buffs were the better side by a good bit. knee jerk reaction imo but we’ll never know. Certainly a poorer side 2nd half of the season going by performances and results

That’s fair enough, and it’s all about opinions but I played and watched enough to have one and you can’t tell me that they have improved under the new man, unless points and performances don’t count

Don’t follow anyone in particular tend to pick games saw buffs four or five times under Gormley Tranent, Pollok, Forfar, and was at Clydebank when it was pretty even until they gave away a penalty down to 10 men and one player sold two goals on top of that, and thought they were a decent side to watch. Have seen them under Aitken three times and to me they don’t look like a team. I thought Gormley got rid of McCalman and Aitken brought him back. 1st division will not be an easy league to get out of.

Gormley’s team pre Xmas were a better side than what you finished with imo, and would not have lost to half the teams that beat the buffs in the 2nd half of the season. Out of interest how many that started tonight were Gormley’s signings ?

I know on a previous post you said you didn’t know about budgets. I do know that when a budget is set for the season it is divided by roughly 40 weeks at x amount per week which determines players weekly pay budgets are not blown in a oner at the start of the season. if your weekly wage bill is maxed out to bring another player in you need to get one out the door if your budget is cut then you need to get players out and can’t get anyone else in. The new boss could have got players out and brought players in unless……. Hope that helps clear that up.

Firstly not related to any of the previous management in any way and secondly the reason I asked you to watch the Cumnock game was Cumnock’s first 3 goals were goalkeeping errors whether it be from a 35 year old or 19 year old makes no difference and yet the manager and the defence got your blame. I watch a lot of games at this level and know a lot of people at this level hence the reason I’ve been privy to information that is not necessarily public knowledge all I read was a manager carrying the can for results 3 months after he’s left the club and in my opinion should have been given more support when it was needed. In my opinion he would have collected a good few more points than the 6 points that have been gathered in the 9 games since he left considering a number of them were against so called weaker teams at home. I also see that 3 of the defence that played last night were not his players yet still blamed.

so your also a detective as well as an Uber fan

Good, get it all off your chest gents, anything else ? what about the budget being cut ? what about being told to play certain players ? What about asking for a centre half when it was needed and be told no. What about asking for a goalkeeper when the no 1 got injured and told no won’t fit your agenda will it

Bitter, not at all makes no odds to me whether the buffs stay up or go down but what I did find distasteful was the assassination of a decent guy and a hard working young manager who got some things right and some things wrong and by all accounts did not get the support he needed when it was required.

I left the debate to avoid a circus, remain respectful, and not shoulder the blame on individuals when there was a lot wrong throughout the club. as for the point per game again without being disrespectful what’s the current regimes point tally per game ?

Player merry go round, they couldn’t field a team for a cup final due to previous going ons. Things started to go wrong in league game number 9 on ten points and in all cups bar the Scottish. You crack on if it makes you feel better, I’ve only dealt with the facts I know of. Over and out.

Cumnock highlights are on youtube if you want to watch them and change some of your comments !

Your prerogative to blame who you want to blame but with 60% of the season I find it strange you pin it on someone not there. As for well backed financially by the committee I believe that was the case to start with but changed very quickly hence not allowed to bring a goalkeeper in when requested and on that note the young goalkeeper was replaced by not one but two different trialists immediately after the Cumnock game. So who was it that let him down badly...........

Already played Darvel home and away.....!

Easy to pin the blame on individuals but I've heard it all now, under David Gormley the team had played 12 games with 13 points and for a number of them had to play the U20's keeper as per the committee. The team had 18 games left and were not in the position they now find themselves. The new regime have played 8 games with 5 points against on the whole so called weaker teams so rather than improve they have going by their results got worse. Knee jerk reaction is why they are in their current position.

U21 football is disappearing for a few reasons, the first one being that there will be a number of boys already playing in the development league that you mention and because of the lack of money in the junior game their squads are littered with younger boys who would have been playing 21's, although if your good enough then your old enough. It also doesn't help that the 21's also play on a Saturday afternoon. The development league is a great opportunity for clubs to ensure that they are capturing good boys coming through, however meeting the criteria may be difficult for a lot of clubs wanting to go down this route.

Good result, although referee more than made up for the 9 players who left. Worst I've ever seen.

The 2nd was a foul on the goalkeeper, the 3rd was a very soft penalty and the wrong man got the red card it should have been the talbot player for shoving. Other than that it looked a one way street.

Pretty fair assessment it was definitely a good defensive display in the second half by Larkhall and in particular the goalkeeper however felt had the right choices been made in the final third by larkhall in the first half the game would have been over as a contest by half time.

At no point have I said anything is acceptable. I am only stating the fact that there was an incident prior to the alleged cheap shot and it was not a clash of heads. The picture you paint might be slightly different from what actually happened.

The cut head came before the alleged cheap shot. Hope both boys are ok but no point in stating only half a story..

Larkhall player took a cheap shot punch at the Carluke player off the ball when the young guy wasn't looking....coward Would that be the Larkhall player who is off to hospital to get a number of stitches in the back of his head that happened when he wasnt looking

Maybe was other side from me but so should have Larkhall player in the first half but there can be no argument the better team won on the night Disappointed as I thought Larkhall tried to play a bit more football, however St Rochs were more direct and looked more threatening in the final third and the striker took both his chances well. Been the same story so many times in the 2nd half of the season.

It's the wonderful Tam Hanlon previously of Ballieston , Shotts and Pollok among others Should have seen red last night............