Jump to content

The Falkirk FC Thread


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Bairnardo said:

I wish folk would rap this "not good enough to play in the Championship" patter. I really do.

The majority of our new signings simply aren't good enough to play in the championship going by the evidence so far. You can pretend otherwise if you want, but a lot of them will be leaving in January if we can find someone to take them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, DeeBairn said:

Don't you just hate going fishing and you catch the wrong fish? Latapy leaving has nothing at all to do with the slide we are on. It's been a decade of shite managers, shite board decisions and shite signings. Latapy was physically done when he left us, he likely couldn't have played on even if he had wanted to at any appreciable level. 

 

We'll never know what Stainrod would have been like in the top flight with us, but for me at least he was a far more exciting player to watch. Your mileage may vary. 

 

Ritchie clearly needs to get to f**k then, those bums should be getting chased up fucking sand dunes until they win again. Proper fitness training would probably get another yard out of Harrison. Proper nutrition and work ups and downs would help with all those niggles everyone keeps having. 

 

I think Mitchell is still rehabbing from injury at the moment? 

 

I think 2 goals to the league leaders is an improvement over 3 to Queens, especially on a day when Queens were riding Ayr ragged. Next game will prove that, or give the lie to it. 

 

 

Stainrod played in the top flight for Falkirk, despite touting himself for a move in the summer, he had some  great moments like the diving header v Celtic and the halfway line goal. The side didn't suffer too much when he moved to Dundee. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The majority of our new signings simply aren't good enough to play in the championship going by the evidence so far. You can pretend otherwise if you want, but a lot of them will be leaving in January if we can find someone to take them.
You, and everyone else quite simply havent seen enough of them in the league to say that. Hartley took 3 league games of shuffling, playing people out of position and throwing blame to reach a full blown meltdown.

His assistant was seemingly able to provide more cohesion and organisation away to the best team in the league in his one game, two days before leaving the club.

Reasonable to assume then that at worst, they are not as bad as they may have appeared. So once you reach that logical conclusion, one can then surmise that our knowledge of these players quality as it pertains to this league may not be as full as we thought.

And before you spout your happy clapper shite, I am not saying they are good, I am saying you dont know the limits of thier ability any better than I do, so its time that patter, along with "we need a miracle" got shelved for now until it has some basis in knowledge and experience.

Ken?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

You, and everyone else quite simply havent seen enough of them in the league to say that. Hartley took 3 league games of shuffling, playing people out of position and throwing blame to reach a full blown meltdown.

His assistant was seemingly able to provide more cohesion and organisation away to the best team in the league in his one game, two days before leaving the club.

Reasonable to assume then that at worst, they are not as bad as they may have appeared. So once you reach that logical conclusion, one can then surmise that our knowledge of these players quality as it pertains to this league may not be as full as we thought.

And before you spout your happy clapper shite, I am not saying they are good, I am saying you dont know the limits of thier ability any better than I do, so its time that patter, along with "we need a miracle" got shelved for now until it has some basis in knowledge and experience.

Ken?

Pretty much where I am at in my glass is half full and not half empty. A formation, player(s) in a certain position can make even the average player look above average or greater.

Petra is the only one I have made my mind up about at right mid, he may change my mind in another position but he really doesnt have the skillset for right mid for me.

The defence does concern me especially with McGhee out for a bit. I will wait and see what instructions and suggestions to our defence McKinnon installs and same applies to midfield/attack.

We are due a new manager bounce.....!!!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, MrDust said:

Pretty much where I am at in my glass is half full and not half empty. A formation, player(s) in a certain position can make even the average player look above average or greater.

Petra is the only one I have made my mind up about at right mid, he may change my mind in another position but he really doesnt have the skillset for right mid for me.

The defence does concern me especially with McGhee out for a bit. I will wait and see what instructions and suggestions to our defence McKinnon installs and same applies to midfield/attack.

We are due a new manager bounce.....!!!

 

If we end up playing hoofball (god forbid, but at this stage who knows), could there be a place for him up front, chasing past the defence to get on it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bridge of allan bairn said:

he's also appalling in the air and if you watch him is lucky if he gets six inches off the ground when he jumps. I don't get the defence of him on here by some in the past 2 years. even the Ross county fans singled him out as our weak link again yesterday. if you are going to be that slow you need to be brilliant at everything else.

who would I have at right back instead? Russell or McGhee.

Kidd was never slow with us. You are right he is poor in the air and he is a far better wing back than full back but he is a functional full back.

Edited by Skyline Drifter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kidd was never slow with us. You are right he is poor in the air and he is a far better wing back than full back but he is a functional full back.
in his defence he is a better midfielder than right back or wing back. i get more iritated when he is asked to play defence and cover back where he frequently gets caught out. in his defence my understanding is hed prefer to actually play midfield and as such there his passing of the ball is decent and has fairly intelligent use of the ball. his lack of speed and aerial ability are less crucial when not defending. however there are other players, even in our limited squad I think merit a midfield slot over him
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, bridge of allan bairn said:
8 minutes ago, Skyline Drifter said:
Kidd was never slow with us. You are right he is poor in the air and he is a far better wing back than full back but he is a functional full back.

in his defence he is a better midfielder than right back or wing back. i get more iritated when he is asked to play defence and cover back where he frequently gets caught out. in his defence my understanding is hed prefer to actually play midfield and as such there his passing of the ball is decent and has fairly intelligent use of the ball. his lack of speed and aerial ability are less crucial when not defending. however there are other players, even in our limited squad I think merit a midfield slot over him

None of our options at right back are remotely acceptable.

That's a shocking indictment of Hartley. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Rocco said:

Greenwood up top? Just because he can dribble towards goal doesn't mean he'd be good up top. It's a totally different position and one where he wouldn't get the ball in much space so you'd see very little dribbling from him.

 

Who played right back yesterday?

 

I just want McKinnon to play a basic formation like 442 that all the players understand

no, not just because greenwood can dribble, but because he seems (granted from the little that I've seen so far, but he has scored as many goals as any forward we've played) to have a desire and eye for goal. Anything would be better than what we've seen from the old little and large show we've been getting................last time I recall us having a good double scoring team up front was loy/baird, so I guess I was trying to emulate that, two faster players who can score instead of a big fella to knock the ball down for someone.

and who played right back yesterday, Kidd I guess.......to be honest I'm not sure since it swapped from a back 4 to a back 3, but it looked like Kidd/dallison/harrison/brough in the first half 4/4/2 set up...........either way, what's your point, we should stick with muirhead at right back, or Kidd?

i agree with the 4/4/2, that's the formation I suggested. 

Edited by squeekybairn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, MrDust said:

back line looked decent yet you are not impressed with Dallison....so you are saying the backline looked decent bar Dallison ?

Harrison and Kidd looked shoddy also today

As I have said elsewhere, 2nd goal today was how not to defend, I blame Fasan for the first tho

Today's team was not really the next step for us, credit to Young for making us a lot more credible than last week especially with the 11 out on the park.

I am a little concerned only little that Haber bossed seaside league team centre halves and for a 20min spell v ICT and has looked ordinary/useless post that, that said we shouldnt be looking for one player to be superman against a defence as it usually ends up in defeat more so in a league game where most teams are beatable

McKinnon does have his work cut out but we didnt start McGhee, Irving, Robson and Greenwood and at least 3 out of that 4 would be in my first 11.

The positives v County are we didnt need a double sub scenario to fix the mess we have made of the starting 11, it was 0-0 at half time, there was more fight and buzz about the team and altho Froxy wasnt amazing, he had a few flashes(he was always gonna be a budget Latapy).

The squad is very much unbalanced and poor in areas, I still think some players can come through albeit not be held in the same level as Jak, Nelson etc but they can do a job if the team structure has set them out to do so, the defence worries me more tho, you can keep a team in competition with a defence that can defend, we cant and cant since god knows when

 

yes, the back line looked 'decent' like I said, not great or not good enough for me moving forward, and Kidd/Dallison looked the poorer 2 , then Robson didn't look great either in the 2nd half, that's why I said I'd try him further up the park..

what would be your back line, given what we've got?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We really must have set some kind of record. We have a clear out in April/May, and here we are, the 2nd of September, desperately in need of a clear out.

Its the sheer scale of what Hartley got wrong that is so amazing. He has even managed to defeat the law of averages where one in four would be a step up in quality. He has managed none out of sixteen.

I know that come across as mean spirited, but hells teeth, it’s bad.

Edited by Duncan Freemason
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bridge of allan bairn said:

he's also appalling in the air and if you watch him is lucky if he gets six inches off the ground when he jumps. I don't get the defence of him on here by some in the past 2 years. even the Ross county fans singled him out as our weak link again yesterday. if you are going to be that slow you need to be brilliant at everything else.

who would I have at right back instead? Russell or McGhee.

Russell because he is at least a full back/wing back. Ok, he'd be on the wrong side of the park but we'd have to hope that he is maybe semi competent with his right foot. We've seen a few players over the years that have played right back despite being left footed and vice versa.

 McGhee needs to play as a centre back because the Harrison/Dallison combo hasn't worked.

I would also persist with a back 3. Yea, it hasn't looked good so far but, as far as I can remember, we haven't tried Muirhead, Harrison & McGhee together in there yet?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

can't believe this season has started even worse than last. despite being a season ticket holder o think it was about January before I saw us win a game (missed 1 win at home before that I think). last season and this same issues struggle to see where a goal would come from and terrible to watch. hopefully McKinnon will sort this out quickly a fluky early win would settle nerves and boost confidence

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no, not just because greenwood can dribble, but because he seems (granted from the little that I've seen so far, but he has scored as many goals as any forward we've played) to have a desire and eye for goal. Anything would be better than what we've seen from the old little and large show we've been getting................last time I recall us having a good double scoring team up front was loy/baird, so I guess I was trying to emulate that, two faster players who can score instead of a big fella to knock the ball down for someone.
and who played right back yesterday, Kidd I guess.......to be honest I'm not sure since it swapped from a back 4 to a back 3, but it looked like Kidd/dallison/harrison/brough in the first half 4/4/2 set up...........either way, what's your point, we should stick with muirhead at right back, or Kidd?
i agree with the 4/4/2, that's the formation I suggested. 
I get what your saying but I honestly think he'd be lost up there. I could be wrong but I doubt we'll find out.

Young said he played a 4321. I was just wondering who was at right back as it could've been Muirhead, Kidd or Russel looking at the team sheet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, squeekybairn said:

yes, the back line looked 'decent' like I said, not great or not good enough for me moving forward, and Kidd/Dallison looked the poorer 2 , then Robson didn't look great either in the 2nd half, that's why I said I'd try him further up the park..

what would be your back line, given what we've got?

I wouldnt use decent, the fact we have kept one clean sheet so far v Forfar suggests its far from decent. I actually have no idea of our best defence, Id thought along the lines of a back 5 to shore things up but it just brings teams on to you and having more bodies in there wont solve it.

Id like to see Russell given a shot at right back and see how that goes, McGhee plays right back like a centre half, left back Id say I prefer Robson but I can see how Hartley dropped him as defensively he isnt the best but decent at going forward, Brough was probably the pick of the defenders yesterday.

We are missing an experienced head at the back who leads and organises the defence, I never rated Watson but as it stands his replacements are a downgrade as well as Grant, the fact a few on here have a central defence of Muirhead and McGhee points no one has confidence in either Dallison or Harrison

Im just hoping McKinnon can coach a decent defence out of what we have, as it stands I wouldnt trust our defence to hold for a clean sheet against anyone in this league

 

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
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...