The Falkirk FC Thread

[Springfield]

Getting a bit concerned about our two CBs. We are a fart away from our opening fixture with very little information, which makes me suspect that both players appear to have little chance of being available. Fully understand that the manager will protect the players, however would be good to get some kind of update. 

[Hughsie]

5 hours ago, Blane Fonda said:

If we are a fan owned club why are we kept so in the dark vis-à-vis injuries?

You think if the Chairman or CEO went to the Manager and Physio and asked when is player X returning and they said no idea boss. That would be acceptable? 

I do understand corporate responsibility and how saying our two first choice centre backs our injured for months, could mean, players, agents, clubs etc.. could hold our feet to the fire when trying replace them.

BUT this is the downside of having 1000 owners not 1 or 2 guys who could offer soft loans 

If we need players come out and say it, if we the fans, don't pony up the dough we cannot greet if we  get bad results.

 

 

 

Sorry, but that’s a load of nonsense.

[BPM]

6 hours ago, Blane Fonda said:

If we are a fan owned club why are we kept so in the dark vis-à-vis injuries?

You think if the Chairman or CEO went to the Manager and Physio and asked when is player X returning and they said no idea boss. That would be acceptable? 

I do understand corporate responsibility and how saying our two first choice centre backs our injured for months, could mean, players, agents, clubs etc.. could hold our feet to the fire when trying replace them.

BUT this is the downside of having 1000 owners not 1 or 2 guys who could offer soft loans 

If we need players come out and say it, if we the fans, don't pony up the dough we cannot greet if we  get bad results.

 

 

 

I have read some drivel on here. This is up there

[Roboccop]

There are good reasons not to tell the world everything about the football club. I think John is often too honest about our injuries: we need to keep other teams guessing. As a club we are remarkably transparent. 

[Grangemouth Bairn]

7 hours ago, Blane Fonda said:

If we are a fan owned club why are we kept so in the dark vis-à-vis injuries?

You think if the Chairman or CEO went to the Manager and Physio and asked when is player X returning and they said no idea boss. That would be acceptable? 

I do understand corporate responsibility and how saying our two first choice centre backs our injured for months, could mean, players, agents, clubs etc.. could hold our feet to the fire when trying replace them.

BUT this is the downside of having 1000 owners not 1 or 2 guys who could offer soft loans 

If we need players come out and say it, if we the fans, don't pony up the dough we cannot greet if we  get bad results.

 

 

 

What a lot of pish mate.

[Shodwall cat]

7 hours ago, Blane Fonda said:

If we are a fan owned club why are we kept so in the dark vis-à-vis injuries?

You think if the Chairman or CEO went to the Manager and Physio and asked when is player X returning and they said no idea boss. That would be acceptable? 

I do understand corporate responsibility and how saying our two first choice centre backs our injured for months, could mean, players, agents, clubs etc.. could hold our feet to the fire when trying replace them.

BUT this is the downside of having 1000 owners not 1 or 2 guys who could offer soft loans 

If we need players come out and say it, if we the fans, don't pony up the dough we cannot greet if we  get bad results.

 

 

 

Quite right . Actually fss in my opinion should hold a poll every Monday where fans can vote on the side mcglynn has to pick on the following Saturday. We're putting the cash in after all

Edited July 21 by Shodwall cat

[Bigbrbairn]

1 minute ago, Shodwall cat said:

Quite right . Actually fss in my opinion should hold a poll every Monday where fans can vote on the side mcglynn has to pick on the following Saturday. We're putting the cash in after all

In the era of online polls why cant we vote at half time and get the under performances removed?

[Shodwall cat]

6 minutes ago, Bigbrbairn said:

In the era of online polls why cant we vote at half time and get the under performances removed?

Why not indeed.

[Captain Chugwash]

7 hours ago, Blane Fonda said:

If we are a fan owned club why are we kept so in the dark vis-à-vis injuries?

You think if the Chairman or CEO went to the Manager and Physio and asked when is player X returning and they said no idea boss. That would be acceptable? 

I do understand corporate responsibility and how saying our two first choice centre backs our injured for months, could mean, players, agents, clubs etc.. could hold our feet to the fire when trying replace them.

BUT this is the downside of having 1000 owners not 1 or 2 guys who could offer soft loans 

If we need players come out and say it, if we the fans, don't pony up the dough we cannot greet if we  get bad results.

 

 

 

Aside from the fact this is the biggest pile of bollocks I’ve ever read, McGlynn actually stated in an interview a couple of weeks back that Lang has a knee issue (which he said there was no timescale for) and Donaldson has a groin issue (which they’re still trying to get to the bottom of and said they had no timescale on a return for him either). I’m not sure what more information he can give?

[Shodwall cat]

17 minutes ago, Captain Chugwash said:

Aside from the fact this is the biggest pile of bollocks I’ve ever read, McGlynn actually stated in an interview a couple of weeks back that Lang has a knee issue (which he said there was no timescale for) and Donaldson has a groin issue (which they’re still trying to get to the bottom of and said they had no timescale on a return for him either). I’m not sure what more information he can give?

I'd heard they were hopeful the three players would be back for the league campaign but no manager is going to say that publicly and then face a backlash when they aren't.  If they aren't fit to face stenny to some extent though I'd be surprised if they are going to face queen's park.

 

[Higgenarse]

28 minutes ago, Captain Chugwash said:

Aside from the fact this is the biggest pile of bollocks I’ve ever read, McGlynn actually stated in an interview a couple of weeks back that Lang has a knee issue (which he said there was no timescale for) and Donaldson has a groin issue (which they’re still trying to get to the bottom of and said they had no timescale on a return for him either). I’m not sure what more information he can give?

I think he wants Mcglynn to publish their medical records.

[GunnerBairn]

Adding to the CF debate. Wasn’t at the game but based on the highlights, MacIver had tons of chances and never finished one. Shanley comes on and rockets his goal in his limited time on the pitch. Don’t get me wrong, I like both lads, but  maybe rotate them more often and give Shanley more minutes. 

[HopeStreetWalker]

1 hour ago, Captain Chugwash said:

Aside from the fact this is the biggest pile of bollocks I’ve ever read, McGlynn actually stated in an interview a couple of weeks back that Lang has a knee issue (which he said there was no timescale for) and Donaldson has a groin issue (which they’re still trying to get to the bottom of and said they had no timescale on a return for him either). I’m not sure what more information he can give?

The players will come back when they are ready. Would rather they sat out a few games more just to be safe than come back early and end their season. 

[NavyBlueArmy1876]

McGlynn has been one of the most honest and open about injury timeframes of any manager I can remember. Sounds like Morrison was more precautionary than anything which is good, playing two tough games in 3 days was always likely to flare up his knee a bit. Adams will be back for Stenny as well which is good and from the last update McGlynn was confident McCann would make the start of the season. I'd assume as there's been nothing on Lang and Donaldson they won't be back any time soon.

On MacIver, he just needs to work on his finishing a bit. Every other aspect of his game is good and he will be a real handful for defenders this season 

Edited July 21 by NavyBlueArmy1876

[Disco Duck]

26 minutes ago, GunnerBairn said:

Adding to the CF debate. Wasn’t at the game but based on the highlights, MacIver had tons of chances and never finished one. Shanley comes on and rockets his goal in his limited time on the pitch. Don’t get me wrong, I like both lads, but  maybe rotate them more often and give Shanley more minutes. 

Shanley was not on the pitch long but was not great, he largely just stood offside.  He did one thing - that goal.

Highlights don’t show the running, flicks and knockdowns that MacIver gets (which is the main part of his game) to bring the midfield into the game.  Yesterday that didn’t work so well with no Morrison, Miller deeper and a much deeper defence.

Admittedly he didn’t have his shooting boots on yesterday.  But this opinion is nonsense.

[Shodwall cat]

Bad day at the office finishing for MacIver but you just need to look at his header that leads to the move for the first goal to see what he adds to the side.

[Proudtobeabairn]

MacIver does very well and his link up play is excellent but he'll need to be more clinical when the league starts.  We won't get the amount of chances we had on Saturday in games and nicking 1 or 2 might be the difference between 3pts or none.  

I think we'll see another striker in on loan and maybe signed if we get through the group.  

Ayr v Stenny a big game on Tuesday.  Stenny won't be a walkover for them or us.  

[GunnerBairn]

Appreciate I wasn’t at the game and I do like MacIver and know all the hard work he does. Just noticed a good few chances which fell to him with none taken, and looked frustrated. Point taken on Shanley with a decent finish nonetheless. 

Edited July 21 by GunnerBairn

[PedroMoutinho]

2 hours ago, GunnerBairn said:

Adding to the CF debate. Wasn’t at the game but based on the highlights, MacIver had tons of chances and never finished one. Shanley comes on and rockets his goal in his limited time on the pitch. Don’t get me wrong, I like both lads, but  maybe rotate them more often and give Shanley more minutes. 

I think there’s a good reason why Shanley hasn’t come close to dislodging Maciver from the team. Yes, he could be more clinical but Maciver’s link up play adds a lot to the team and I don’t think 18 goals last season is to be sniffed at.

With respect, I haven’t seen much if anything from Shanley to suggest he’s going to offer a lot at championship level. I do therefore think a loan signing is needed in that position (to cover for Maciver being unavailable if nothing else).

Edited July 21 by PedroMoutinho

[Springfield]

17 minutes ago, PedroMoutinho said:

I think there’s a good reason why Shanley hasn’t come close to dislodging Maciver from the team. Yes, he could be more clinical but Maciver’s link up play adds a lot to the team and I don’t think 18 goals last season is to be sniffed at.

With respect, I haven’t seen much if anything from Shanley to suggest he’s going to offer a lot at championship level. I do therefore think a loan signing is needed in that position (to cover for Maciver being unavailable if nothing else).

Agree. Absolutely no question that MacIver is really good at linking up play.

His reading of the game is good, and can work the space that others can exploit. Although it was great to see others on the scoresheet, on another day he could have easily had three. McGlynns FH interview pretty much sums this up. Mention to Hogarth yesterday, thought he was really good and two very good stops, looked more confident and didn’t have a chance with a well taken strike.