Jump to content

Scottish Cup 2023/24


Marten

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, invergowrie arab said:

If Clydebank don't want to play at night and can't play the previous week and the SFA won't sanction a later tie or reversal I'm genuinely at a loss as to where their fans think the game should be played.

It should have been for the SFA to sort out. I can understand fans feeling that their interest in all of this has been overlooked and the extra travelling and cost given not a consideration. The time it's taken to sort out hasn't helped either - Golspie has been rumoured for over two weeks, why wait until yesterday? Fort have buried their heads in the sand for weeks then move the tie miles away. They may not have many fans to consider but I think we would have taken 250 up there on a Saturday afternoon. Be lucky if 100 travel to Golspie.

 

I guess it is what it is and we'll have to play the tie up there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 10menwent2mow said:

As has been mentioned previously. The date for the Ben Nevis race was in place way before the dates for the Scottish Cup. I've no idea of the prestige of the Ben Nevis race but welshbairn has mentioned several times, international competitors. Should we just expect these guys to change their travel and accomodation plans because there is a Scottish Cup preliminary tie that day where there are plenty of alternatives to playing at Claggan Park. Maybe we should just shift Ben Nevis for the weekend. 

I agree with some of what you say however FW were fully aware that they could be drawn at home and should have been communicating potential contingency plans in advance of the draw, not sending a Facebook message after it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, not man of the match said:

I agree with some of what you say however FW were fully aware that they could be drawn at home and should have been communicating potential contingency plans in advance of the draw, not sending a Facebook message after it.

Oh, this f**k up lies entirely on Fort Bill and they should 100% have had a contingency plan in place. They should also have sorted it a lot quicker than they did. What I disagree with are folk going, just move the hill race. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) I have no problem with the Ben Nevis run taking precedence. It is not a "fun run" but a long standing prestigious athletic event.

2) Given the 50/50 chance of a home draw though FW should have had at least one alternative option available

3) I would not consider the two other alternatives proposed as "reasonable" either for the Club or fans

4) If we had been drawn against Golspie away then not a problem, however we were not. We were drawn against FW away with an expectation of a couple of hours travel

5) I was initially sympathetic to FW as small clubs are regularly having to overcome problems not confronted by the larger teams (particularly if they do not owntheir park)  however there seems, at minimum, to be a lack of goodwill on behalf of FW by identifying Golspie as a venue- over four hours travellling. Surely there should be some onus on them to identify a suitable park that would avoid such an increase in travelling time for the Bankies. By identifying Golspie they appear to be trying to create an advantage for themselves when they are at least partly culpable through their own lack of proactive planning to deal with this possibility.

6) I would imagine that a fair number of the FW players are based in Inverness ( A few seasons ago they had a number on Inverness players on loan) so Golspie will suit them down to the ground

Does tend to leave a bad taste in the mouth!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Southside Bankie said:

5) I was initially sympathetic to FW as small clubs are regularly having to overcome problems not confronted by the larger teams (particularly if they do not owntheir park)  however there seems, at minimum, to be a lack of goodwill on behalf of FW by identifying Golspie as a venue- over four hours travellling. Surely there should be some onus on them to identify a suitable park that would avoid such an increase in travelling time for the Bankies. By identifying Golspie they appear to be trying to create an advantage for themselves when they are at least partly culpable through their own lack of proactive planning to deal with this possibility.


Wouldn't the nearest suitable grounds which are slightly closer to Clydebank be something like Dumbarton or Stirling? It's not as though there are a vast array of grounds in the West Highlands or Argyll and Bute which are being overlooked here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, craigkillie said:


Wouldn't the nearest suitable grounds which are slightly closer to Clydebank be something like Dumbarton or Stirling? It's not as though there are a vast array of grounds in the West Highlands or Argyll and Bute which are being overlooked here.

Strathspey? Oban? Even move it into Perthshire so its same distance for these Invernessian superstars down the a9.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Inanimate Carbon Rod said:

Strathspey? Oban? Even move it into Perthshire so its same distance for these Invernessian superstars down the a9.

Strathspey is available as far as I can see but I can’t see how it stops all the moaning, Oban isn’t licenced and jeanfield and st Johnstone are both at home so no Perthshire venues available either.

Edited by parsforlife
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, parsforlife said:

Strathspey is available as far as I can’t see but I how it stops all the moaning, Oban isn’t licenced and jeanfield and st Johnstone are both at home so no Perthshire venues available either.

I'm not sure if it has to be licensed, it just says 'registered' in the rule book. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did golspie not draw hawick? Puts things in to perspective.

It has been handled terribly by fort William, basically gambling they would get an away tie.

Least we have a venue now and dont think it will advantage them, with the extra travel and i assume having to pay golspie for use of the ground they will be losing money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, not man of the match said:

Those splits will be far less given the additional distance now involved and the issues of getting to and from by public transport. There are no train connections from Clydebank on the day that will get you there for the second half kicking off never mind the first half and can only get back as far as Queen Street on the return. FW are the hosts, it is their home game. It should not be confused with the splits for a neutral ground.

Fort fans can't get there by 'train' until 8.42pm that day. For a home game, I'd say they've got it worse. Of course, buses exist and that's where home advantage counts, so they could actually make kick off, but also can't get home same day.

All Fort appear to have done is phone round the teams in the NCL to see who's got a free pitch. Doesn't strike me as some sneaky conspiracy against Clydebank as I'm sure it's a pain in the arse for them too. 

They'd probably have got a half-decent attendance with the Bankies at home, so they'll be annoyed too. Bit of an overreaction on here, though.

 

Edited by morrison
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Nowhereman said:

Why would the sfa not allow it to be played on the Sunday?

It wasn't the SFA, it was Clydebank who refused. The Fort William manager:

Quote

We asked whether we could play the game at home on a different date. Clydebank didn’t want to play on a different date, so we couldn’t play the Sunday, Monday or Friday. They were not up for it.

https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/sport/football/scottish/6056116/closer-club-denied-fort-william-chance-to-host-scottish-cup-tie-before-golspie-switch/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, F_T_Y said:

Did golspie not draw hawick? Puts things in to perspective.

It has been handled terribly by fort William, basically gambling they would get an away tie.

Least we have a venue now and dont think it will advantage them, with the extra travel and i assume having to pay golspie for use of the ground they will be losing money.

Not sure FW are as to blame as you suggest here. 50% change of away draw…then, once home draw confirmed, they looked at other matches and contacted possible available venues…no luck, contacted team drawn against and offered to reverse fixture (which would have been possible in surely at least half the possible draws)…denied…offered to move the match a day or two…denied.

To be totally honest, from the data available, I’m not sure what FW could have done “better”. There’s literally no way to determine what alternate venue might be available until the draw is complete…there’s no way to know if a change of time/day/home team might be acceptable until the opponent is drawn…etc.

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...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...