Bsc Glasgow

[gav-ffc]

6 minutes ago, JagsCG said:

The “Si Ferry Meets…” content was usually the best stuff they produced IMO, although it seemed the general popularity came from the introduction of ‘Slaney’ and the podcast with him, Kyle and Halliday. You could probably make an argument that Slane has become as much the face of Open Goal now as Ferry, given they rarely produce a video without him involved and obviously he was assistant manager at Broomhill (& loosely part of the playing squad), therefore don’t suspect OG will face any real damage from this project ending other than the loss of the weekly Broomhill podcast and the documentary.  

I wouldn’t completely write Ferry off as a coach after 1 season but in the future he’ll need to separate his coaching from his podcast work, the combining of the two has evidently not worked (as most predicted). 

Agreed about Ferry, I know we were utter mince last season but we drew with Peterhead last season and it was one of the games Ferry was in the dugout for and I was very impressed with how organised they were that night and pressed us off the park. 
 

Needs to take himself away from the open goal brand being part of his management game which most people said back in May/June when it was announced. 
 

Saying that he was all about playing the game the right way but the minute they started losing games he would just stick Kirk Broadfoot upfront so who knows.

Edited March 24, 2023 by gav-ffc

[kingbob1875]

13 hours ago, FairWeatherFan said:

Getting ready for some podcast appearances.

People are allowed to leave he's right, if you are doing a project and it's obvious it gonna fail, then pulling out makes a decent amount of sense. However, what this guy is ignoring is if you start a multi-year project and quit after less than 12 months, the decent thing to do is to have some humility about it. Not release nonsense PR claiming it was secretly a massive success.

 

[DukDukGoose]

On 22/03/2023 at 23:12, Pie Of The Month said:

Who'd have thought thick as mince Kevin Kyle managing his under 8s at Red Star whatever would be the most qualified member of the Open Goal podcast to talk football come the end of the season.

My pal was on his 1.2 with him.

Was surprised someone who had played the game at the highest level was such a dipshit.

[DukDukGoose]

15 hours ago, Central Belt Caley said:

Wonder how all the folk that they’ve abused over the years in the name of “banter” on their podcast feel? 
 

To be fair, I used to like the one on one interviews Open goal done with Yogi, Jim Jeffries, Billy Brown etc 

I remember them bottling it when they had Considine on.

[superbigal]

14 hours ago, JagsCG said:

The “Si Ferry Meets…” content was usually the best stuff they produced IMO, although it seemed the general popularity came from the introduction of ‘Slaney’ and the podcast with him, Kyle and Halliday. You could probably make an argument that Slane has become as much the face of Open Goal now as Ferry, given they rarely produce a video without him involved and obviously he was assistant manager at Broomhill (& loosely part of the playing squad), therefore don’t suspect OG will face any real damage from this project ending other than the loss of the weekly Broomhill podcast and the documentary.  

I wouldn’t completely write Ferry off as a coach after 1 season but in the future he’ll need to separate his coaching from his podcast work, the combining of the two has evidently not worked (as most predicted). 

But Si continually told his players they were the best in the League.

As about 10 teams clearly have better players I call it abject failure.

[8MileBU]

Si Ferry and Slaney are a pair of weirdos. Open Goal is dreadful and their patter is rotten. The podcast after Bo’ness v Broomhill was a lot of absolute pisschat. Yes, they took utter pelters off the Bo’ness young team but the claims that shouts included “Yer maw’s a mattress!” and “I hope you die!” were complete jackanory and just simply didn’t happen.

[LongTimeLurker]

Slaney always comes across as a poster child for the effects of fetal alcohol syndrome. That's probably a significant portion of their target demographic right enough.

[Marooneye]

Vanity project making a mockery of a league that is already in the gutter thanks to the decision of certain clubs to back colts.

Good riddance to those idiots.

[craigkillie]

On 23/03/2023 at 16:57, Ivo den Bieman said:

Broomhill are at this level because when the LL was set up Kenny Moyes (Davie's brother) had a lot of influence at the SFA. No other reason whatsoever.

They're at this level because they applied when most others didn't, had a ground to play out, and a desire to get licensed.

[vikingTON]

19 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

They're at this level because they applied when most others didn't, had a ground to play out, and a desire to get licensed.

They didn't have a ground of their own to play out of and so should have been emptied straight away. 

[FairWeatherFan]

22 minutes ago, virginton said:

They didn't have a ground of their own to play out of and so should have been emptied straight away. 

Not only did they not have a ground. They were accepted on the understanding they would be playing at Ashfield's Saracen Park, only to never play there.

And while it's true the better supported non-league clubs didn't bother applying. The Lowland League did receive 7 applications that year. BSC were chosen over others.

[Pyramid Watcher]

42 minutes ago, FairWeatherFan said:

Not only did they not have a ground. They were accepted on the understanding they would be playing at Ashfield's Saracen Park, only to never play there.

And while it's true the better supported non-league clubs didn't bother applying. The Lowland League did receive 7 applications that year. BSC were chosen over others.

And your point is??

Braves etc get a bad deal on here, but they were all accepted and met licensing criteria, same as all the other clubs.

Edited March 25, 2023 by Pyramid Watcher

[FairWeatherFan]

13 minutes ago, Pyramid Watcher said:

And your point is??

Braves etc get a bad deal on here, but they were all accepted and met licensing criteria, same as all the other clubs.

There's actually a significant difference between Edusport/Braves and BSC/Broomhill.

One was accepted 1st time of asking on a shoogly peg and over other clubs that had been running adult age teams for years. While still being a bit of a nomad, wearing whatever flag of convenience they can muster.

The other was consistently knocked back by the Lowland as it was seen as a joke outfit. Ran out chances to apply, had to get there by winning promotion. Now have a ground and roots of their own.

[Pyramid Watcher]

23 minutes ago, FairWeatherFan said:

There's actually a significant difference between Edusport/Braves and BSC/Broomhill.

One was accepted 1st time of asking on a shoogly peg and over other clubs that had been running adult age teams for years. While still being a bit of a nomad, wearing whatever flag of convenience they can muster.

The other was consistently knocked back by the Lowland as it was seen as a joke outfit. Ran out chances to apply, had to get there by winning promotion. Now have a ground and roots of their own.

They were accepted as a licensed club, and met league criteria, is that factual? 

Edited March 25, 2023 by Pyramid Watcher

[Pyramid Watcher]

1 hour ago, virginton said:

They didn't have a ground of their own to play out of and so should have been emptied straight away. 

Ye ragin??

[FairWeatherFan]

3 minutes ago, Pyramid Watcher said:

They were accepted as a licensed club, and met league criteria, is the factual? 

Since they didn't play in the 2014-15 Scottish Cup, no it's not.

[Pyramid Watcher]

Just now, FairWeatherFan said:

Since they didn't play in the 2014-15 Scottish Cup, no it's not.

Pedantry at its finest and the sign of a losing argument. Can you point out where they have not met criteria?

[FairWeatherFan]

8 minutes ago, Pyramid Watcher said:

They were accepted as a licensed club, and met league criteria, is that factual? 

 

1 minute ago, Pyramid Watcher said:

Pedantry at its finest and the sign of a losing argument. Can you point out where they have not met criteria?

Pointing out facts is apparently the sign of losing an argument these days.

You jumped in saying they were accepted as a licensed club, but they weren't. Hell, it was probably starting the licensing process that identified that Saracen Park wouldn't meet the required standards. Which saw them flit to Maryhill on short notice.

That suggests they didn't meet the league criteria since everyone was supposed to be licensed by 2015. Something they couldn't have done with their 3 year lease at Saracen Park.

[Pyramid Watcher]

2 minutes ago, FairWeatherFan said:

 

Pointing out facts is apparently the sign of losing an argument these days.

You jumped in saying they were accepted as a licensed club, but they weren't. Hell, it was probably starting the licensing process that identified that Saracen Park wouldn't meet the required standards. Which saw them flit to Maryhill on short notice.

That suggests they didn't meet the league criteria since everyone was supposed to be licensed by 2015. Something they couldn't have done with their 3 year lease at Saracen Park.

So the league accepted them on these tenuous terms??

[FairWeatherFan]

17 minutes ago, Pyramid Watcher said:

So the league accepted them on these tenuous terms??

Basically, yes.

http://slfl.co.uk/bsc-glasgow-introduction/

They were accepted on the basis of a 3 year lease at Saracen Park. Which presumably everyone thought would meet licensing standards. People online certainly had doubts at that being possilbe due to the width of the pitch, the people writing the article seemed to be aware of that since the 2nd last sentence was otherwise quite random:

Quote

BSC Glasgow will kick off next season on the grass pitch at Saracen Park that is ninety two meters in length and fifty six meters wide.

Also in the article you can see that they didn't have a manager, didn't have a team. And there's actually a quote from the chairman at the time about starting the licensing process. Which beyond the lack of Scottish Cup participation shows they weren't in fact licensed when accepted into the league.

Quote

“We have also started the process for gaining a license and we are confident that a license can be achieved without any major issues.”

I suppose to try and keep this topic somewhat on track despite the old name.

Any ideas what the name will be next season? Club colours? Badge?

Thoughts on a new manager?  Any players signed on for next season?

Still playing at Broadwood next season? Since it was just a one year rolling lease and the club has just lost a major sponsor. Potentially all the other side sponsors that came with it. That's a hefty hit for most clubs at this level.