"The ICT Thread - From the Premiership to the Seaside"

[Shodwall cat]

19 minutes ago, Otis Blue said:

I'd agree with some of this. However, I'm not sure that it's "ludicrous" for clubs to seek betterment and get "to the promised land" - isn't that the whole basis of sporting endeavour and merit? That ambition is what fans want to see.

Is the problem not that clubs want to get to the promised land, but instead that the promised land is too small, too exclusive and so the cost of getting there and attempting to stay there is unsustainable for medium sized clubs in a country the size of Scotland?

Yes but some clubs are willing to risk the future of the club to do it.  If smaller clubs like ICT want to get into the top flight then instead of spunking money they don't have  as I said  they either need to grow their support, increase their commercial revenue, bring through a crop of talented youngsters or get a manager in that over achieves on a break even budget.  You could increase the premiership to 16 teams but ICT would still not be guaranteed to get into it on a break even budget.  Average attendance wise last season they were about 17th I think. They will have dropped even further this season.  Sometimes expectations far outweigh realism unfortunately.

[Sortmeout]

I’ve done everyone a solid and asked if we can have more greenies per day for the next few weeks.

[velo army]

5 minutes ago, Jacky1990 said:

I dont think any genuine fan of scottish football takes any glee in something like this happening. If nothing else because we all know we are all a year or so of bad decisions away from the same fate. 

More just a piss take because thats what we do.

Only two clubs in scotland deserve any sort of genuine glee if they go to the wall. 

Good point. Ross County fans also talk funny.

[Otis Blue]

5 minutes ago, Shodwall cat said:

... If smaller clubs like ICT want to get into the top flight then instead of spunking money they don't have  as I said  they either need to grow their support, increase their commercial revenue, bring through a crop of talented youngsters or get a manager in that over achieves on a break even budget ...

Well, in football terms you grow your support and increase revenue by putting a better product on the park ... and that requires investment and costs money, money that these medium sized clubs don't have. Hence, the financial risk taken to try to get there.

I think it's quite sad that the north and the south of the country can no longer sustain a top league club (we all know why County are currently there). My lot were once something of a fixture in the top league, but have never even got close again since restructuring created the small leagues. Sadly this wasn't done by accident, it was done by design.

[Cowdenleith]

1 hour ago, Fraz said:

Great question. And one that most ICT fans can't seem to reconcile. If we're spending so much, where? We've made zero improvement to infrastructure or the 'match day experience' we've had no big marquee signings. All I can think of is spunking cash for gardening leave as at one point we were paying for Robbo (to do nothing), Dodds (fired 6 games after extending his contract) and Ferguson (relegation specialist on initally £3k a week.) Plus related assistants.

Fans complained repeatedly about these poor decisions and wastes of money. However the board/CEO's manta was something between shut up and know your place and to ignore any negative opinions and label outspoken fans as 'clickbait proponents'. The Supporters Trust was also sidelined by Gardiner and labelled 'not representative'. 

I'm not sure what else fans could have done as many have been concerned for quite some time. 

Is the constant narrative with Inverness not that to attract full time players of decent quality (and you can argue whether that had been achieved) you have to pay them more than the equivalent team in the central belt, plus accommodation costs to get players to uproot?

That could add substantially to the wages and expenses side of things, and getting no discernible extra benefit out of it. I suppose that’s where the curious Kelty idea grew from.

[forkboy]

1 hour ago, Fraz said:

I'm not sure what else fans could have done as many have been concerned for quite some time. 

Aye, if the board are hellbent on leaving an incompetent like Gardiner in charge who has nothing but contempt for ticket buying punters then what can fans do to make then listen?

They can refuse to buy season tickets, like happened this summer over the move to Kelty, but that's always going to be a last resort because if they have to go through with it then the financial situation only gets worse.

Ultimately there's a fundamental problem with football club ownership, where one person can decide to do a Brooks Mileson and then they die or decide to call in their debt or whatever and that's the club and fans up shit creek. (Or for an example closer to home, the owner appoints a manager who a small section of the fans find reprehensible...)

And it's unrealistic to expect fans to just not be happy when the club wins even as you know things are unsustainable, nobody can be miserable and moan all the time.

f**k knows what the solution is.

Edited Saturday at 09:11 by forkboy

[Shodwall cat]

15 minutes ago, Jacky1990 said:

I dont think any genuine fan of scottish football takes any glee in something like this happening. If nothing else because we all know we are all a year or so of bad decisions away from the same fate. 

More just a piss take because thats what we do.

Only two clubs in scotland deserve any sort of genuine glee if they go to the wall. 

The thing is though it's beginning to rightly piss off the fans of clubs that continue to pay off their dues that this financial doping is still going on despite numerous teams having been supposedly punished for it in the past.  What is forgotten completely is that whilst this effects the club put into admin the financial doping has an effect on numerous others. We lost to ICT in a cup semi final 18 months ago. An ICT side that we now find was being financed by smoke and mirrors. Now the 500k plus we lost out on that day would've made a huge difference to our club but we missed out to a club that were basically cheating.  Difficult for many now to suddenly feel sympathy for clubs behaving in this manner.

[The Moonster]

Threads always improve when the Falkirk fans turn up to lecture people on financial stability. 

[PB1994]

10 minutes ago, Shodwall cat said:

The thing is though it's beginning to rightly piss off the fans of clubs that continue to pay off their dues that this financial doping is still going on despite numerous teams having been supposedly punished for it in the past.  What is forgotten completely is that whilst this effects the club put into admin the financial doping has an effect on numerous others. We lost to ICT in a cup semi final 18 months ago. An ICT side that we now find was being financed by smoke and mirrors. Now the 500k plus we lost out on that day would've made a huge difference to our club but we missed out to a club that were basically cheating.  Difficult for many now to suddenly feel sympathy for clubs behaving in this manner.

When was the last time Falkirk made a profit?

[cb_diamond]

13 hours ago, itzdrk said:

The inevitable result of idiocy and misplaced arrogance. 

Enough about you, what about the Caley?

[MazzyStar]

1 minute ago, The Moonster said:

Threads always improve when the Falkirk fans turn up to lecture people on financial stability. 

Truly a fanbase like no other. Mind when they punting 10 year season tickets so they didn’t have to go part time? 

[itzdrk]

1 minute ago, cb_diamond said:

Enough about you, what about the Caley?

No heard from you in ages, how's the season going? 

[cb_diamond]

Just now, itzdrk said:

No heard from you in ages, how's the season going? 

It's a sight better than The Caleys that's for sure.

[yoda]

On 03/10/2019 at 21:56, sophia said:

Alan Savage turned up and asked how much of a bridging loan does the club need to see it through to the end of the season and the answer was £250k. Cash flow is a problem.

Five years ago, by the way (btw) 

[Dunning1874]

22 minutes ago, Shodwall cat said:

The thing is though it's beginning to rightly piss off the fans of clubs that continue to pay off their dues that this financial doping is still going on despite numerous teams having been supposedly punished for it in the past.  What is forgotten completely is that whilst this effects the club put into admin the financial doping has an effect on numerous others. We lost to ICT in a cup semi final 18 months ago. An ICT side that we now find was being financed by smoke and mirrors. Now the 500k plus we lost out on that day would've made a huge difference to our club but we missed out to a club that were basically cheating.  Difficult for many now to suddenly feel sympathy for clubs behaving in this manner.

Didn't Falkirk budget a £400K loss last season?

[Tartan Dave]

 

[Hugh Hillshaveyes]

1 minute ago, Dunning1874 said:

Didn't Falkirk budget a £400K loss last season?

We did...& While you're at the whataboutery that's a significantly smaller loss than the 1 million Dunfermline lost winning the same division...we have budgeted to break even this season & with home gates where 5500-6000 will be the norm i think we will 

[Fraz]

41 minutes ago, Cowdenleith said:

Is the constant narrative with Inverness not that to attract full time players of decent quality (and you can argue whether that had been achieved) you have to pay them more than the equivalent team in the central belt, plus accommodation costs to get players to uproot?

That could add substantially to the wages and expenses side of things, and getting no discernible extra benefit out of it. I suppose that’s where the curious Kelty idea grew from.

Has it been a constant narrative? I don't recall anyone raising it as a significant issue until this year. We're  30 years in and it's only be brought up a few months ago. Of course there's always been the issue of attracting players in competition with central belt teams. Charlie Christie himself says that we've always managed just fine. 

The issue of paying for accommodation also flys in the face of recent actions from the club too. I.e. binning local players at the end of last season to bring in ones from further afield. Which makes zero sense if it is a significant burden.  

[lichtiemike]

15 minutes ago, Hugh Hillshaveyes said:

We did...& While you're at the whataboutery that's a significantly smaller loss than the 1 million Dunfermline lost winning the same division...we have budgeted to break even this season & with home gates where 5500-6000 will be the norm i think we will 

Needing an average attendance that Falkirk haven’t exceeded for over 20 years just to break even doesn’t seem very sustainable to me, albeit from the outside looking in. 

[Fraz]

44 minutes ago, forkboy said:

Aye, if the board are hellbent on leaving an incompetent like Gardiner in charge who has nothing but contempt for ticket buying punters then what can fans do to make then listen?

They can refuse to buy season tickets, like happened this summer over the move to Kelty, but that's always going to be a last resort because if they have to go through with it then the financial situation only gets worse.

Ultimately there's a fundamental problem with football club ownership, where one person can decide to do a Brooks Mileson and then they die or decide to call in their debt or whatever and that's the club and fans up shit creek. (Or for an example closer to home, the owner appoints a manager who a small section of the fans find reprehensible...)

And it's unrealistic to expect fans to just not be happy when the club wins even as you know things are unsustainable, nobody can be miserable and moan all the time.

f**k knows what the solution is.

What I find absolutely incredible is that to this day Ross Morrison seems unrepentant and feels that Gardiner has been 'villified. Truly unbelievable. Nobody has taken any responsibility to this day aside from a limp apology from Grassa around how the outgoing players were treated.