Jump to content

The Falkirk FC Thread


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Bairn in Exile said:

Your opinion means f*ck all to me mate.

that doesnt surprise me because facts don't seem to mean much to you either.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Jimmy1876 said:

I think you're the only one that thinks getting in another quality striker that can challenge McIver means anyone wants him replaced. It absolutely means having some positive competition which is firstly good for the team and secondly good for McIver.

In general you have some strange perceptions of other people's discussion. Someone saying we could do with another centre half as back up to Lang and Donaldson does not mean anyone also thinks we are in a terrible situation. It would just mean that we would get to see Keelan Adams in his preferred position. 

I have never said anything of the such, all I disagreeing with was one of the Falkirk daft guys saying we needed an upgrade. 
competition is healthy 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the exact quotes were

5 minutes ago, BPM said:

I have never said anything of the such, all I disagreeing with was one of the Falkirk daft guys saying we needed an upgrade. 
competition is healthy 

Presented without comment after listening to it just now, the exact quotes were the priority was "a big strong striker" , "a level above Ross" and then later "a grade above"

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, BPM said:

No that is not what was said. One on Falkirk Daft said we needed an upgrade on MacIver. That is not saying we need competition but replacement which is clearly unfair on MacIver 

No sensible manager who has an opportunity to bring in a better player in a particular position is going to turn them down to avoid being ‘unfair’ to an existing player.

Of course that doesn’t mean the new signing goes straight into the starting 11 but it is good for the squad to have extra depth and good for the current player as it keeps them on their toes.

No one is advocating getting rid of Maciver, but for me it’s the one area of the squad where we don’t currently have great depth. It’s not about ‘replacing’ Maciver but giving him competition and also back-up when he is unavailable (which he will be at some stage).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the end of the day it's a great position to be in. Three weeks to go until the start of the season and we're talking (arguing) about 1 or 2 additions to supplement the existing squad which is looking sharp. And not needing 4 or 5 bodies and being short on quality in several areas. Huge credit to McGlynn & night and day between his appoach to recruitment and the last few managers we've had 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BPM said:

I have never said anything of the such, all I disagreeing with was one of the Falkirk daft guys saying we needed an upgrade. 
competition is healthy 

You've literally two posts ago said that the FD guys were advocating for him being replaced which is not at all the context of that conversation and is a misrepresentation. All they have said is it would be great to have another striker and it would be great if they were an upgrade? And either way, are you really disagreeing that getting an upgrade on any player would be a good thing? I do not understand that at all. I'd be really concerned for the state of football if teams stopped looking for upgrades to be fair to players whether they have performed well or not. If Lawrence Shankland rocked up to TFS I wouldn't be saying no because MacIver did really well in league one. 

Edited by Jimmy1876
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, NavyBlueArmy1876 said:

At the end of the day it's a great position to be in. Three weeks to go until the start of the season and we're talking (arguing) about 1 or 2 additions to supplement the existing squad which is looking sharp. And not needing 4 or 5 bodies and being short on quality in several areas. Huge credit to McGlynn & night and day between his appoach to recruitment and the last few managers we've had 

Absolutely. Just to add I think MacIver will do really well and was my man of the match yesterday. 

Edited by Jimmy1876
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, AJ1981 said:

the exact quotes were

Presented without comment after listening to it just now, the exact quotes were the priority was "a big strong striker" , "a level above Ross" and then later "a grade above"

 

John meant in addition to Ross MacIver, not instead of. You’ve not mentioned the quote where John says he likes Ross which is important for context too. Also if Ross were to get injured there isn’t a suitable replacement, which I agreed/agree with. 

FWIW I think Ross MacIver will get a large number of goals for us this season, like he did last season. Whether he gets 30 is up for grabs however 😉😂

Edited by RC55 FFC
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Jimmy1876 said:

You've literally two posts ago said that the FD guys were advocating for him being replaced which is not at all the context of that conversation and is a misrepresentation. All they have said is it would be great to have another striker and it would be great if they were an upgrade? And either way, are you really disagreeing that getting an upgrade on any player would be a good thing? I do not understand that at all. I'd be really concerned for the state of football if teams stopped looking for upgrades to be fair to players whether they have performed well or not. If Lawrence Shankland rocked up to TFS I wouldn't be saying no because McIver did really well in league one. 

No one said we needed an upgrade 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, BPM said:

I have never said anything of the such, all I disagreeing with was one of the Falkirk daft guys saying we needed an upgrade. 
competition is healthy 

3 minutes ago, BPM said:

No one said we needed an upgrade 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, RC55 FFC said:

John meant in addition to Ross MacIver, not instead of. You’ve not mentioned the quote where John says he likes Ross which is important for context too. Also if Ross were to get injured there isn’t a suitable replacement, which I agreed/agree with. 

FWIW I think Ross MacIver will get a large number of goals for us this season, like he did last season. Whether he gets 30 is up for grabs however 😉😂

i'm not taking sides that's what presented without comment means, people can make their own decision. 🥹

what nobody is talking about is the tactical change yesterday that saw us being more direct and Ross MacIver playing a vital role in winning the ball in the air. he was really important yesterday 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, AJ1981 said:

i'm not taking sides that's what presented without comment means, people can make their own decision. 🥹

what nobody is talking about is the tactical change yesterday that saw us being more direct and Ross MacIver playing a vital role in winning the ball in the air. he was really important yesterday 

He absolutely was yeah. MOTM for me behind Adams, with Nesbitt, Tait and Spencer all having strong shouts too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, AJ1981 said:

i'm not taking sides that's what presented without comment means, people can make their own decision. 🥹

what nobody is talking about is the tactical change yesterday that saw us being more direct and Ross MacIver playing a vital role in winning the ball in the air. he was really important yesterday 

Selective comments are presenting one side of things though are they not?

I think many people have been talking about the vital role MacIver had yesterday and how excellent he was. Also how important he is to the front 4 with Morrison and Miller relying on MacIvers play.

Edited by Jimmy1876
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jimmy1876 said:

Selective comments are presenting one side of things though are they not?

it was indeed a team effort yesterday with everybody playing their part, but the subject under discussion was how important MacIver is. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, AJ1981 said:

it was indeed a team effort yesterday with everybody playing their part, but the subject under discussion was how important MacIver is. 

Which is why I emphasised how important MacIver is.

Edited by Jimmy1876
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Frankly I don’t think we need to expand the squad. The next three games should be easy covered by the current fit players and one would expect recovery from at least one player before the Queens game. Loans will then become an option and I’d expect one then. Money is still very tight this year and in 2 weeks time FSS has to start paying back the govt (£18k). Im sure we’ll see others in as loans but it might be better to wait and see where we need strengthening at the start of the league. Given yesterday’s performance,  players regaining fitness wouldn’t go straight back into the team anyway. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Roboccop said:

Frankly I don’t think we need to expand the squad. The next three games should be easy covered by the current fit players and one would expect recovery from at least one player before the Queens game. Loans will then become an option and I’d expect one then. Money is still very tight this year and in 2 weeks time FSS has to start paying back the govt (£18k). Im sure we’ll see others in as loans but it might be better to wait and see where we need strengthening at the start of the league. Given yesterday’s performance,  players regaining fitness wouldn’t go straight back into the team anyway. 

good points but i would like a little more depth up front and at CH unless the manager feels the youngsters can step up if needed, maybe he does, but who knows.

i trust his judgement, we were all worried about yesterday and look at the performance and result. 

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
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
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...
×
×
  • Create New...