[Milevskiy]

Tonycraig, on Dec 16 2007, 01:54, said:

Your point? - Good or bad game - You got an opinion?

Read the very first post?

[snorkie]

What was your no. 11 name?

[Garrowhillclyde]

Tonycraig, on Dec 16 2007, 01:33, said:

You thought McLennan that was poor! - He may have run out of steam a bit at the end - but that guy is class - sorry but you obviously saw a different game from me (to say he was poor).

McLennan and I suspect his wee brother will make it in this game called football. If I knew how to do it I wouls mark this thread so that it came back to haunt you in future years - McLennan poor! - your avin a laugh!!!

Hi Ruari *Waves to Ruari!*

Yes, he was poor. He surrendered possession far to many times by collecting the ball, playing it a foot or two in front of him before deciding what to do with it and losing it. His indecision is something he needs to work on as he dithered quite a bit when shooting opportunities arose.

....I'd hardly say him having one poor game is grounds for something to come back and 'haunt' me I would obviously be delighted if he done a turn for Clyde.

[Garrowhillclyde]

snorkie, on Dec 16 2007, 10:53, said:

What was your no. 11 name?

Mikey McGowan. I thought he had a very good game.

[Livi_Lad]

Fuckin embarrassment.
Beat league leaders Hamilton, play them off the park and then lose to a side who seeminly cant score at home Typical Livingston.

[MCL]

ochil-clyde, on Dec 15 2007, 20:44, said:

I also heard that Gretna are getting rid of Grady but I've not been able to find anything.

Gretna Clear Out

Clyde deserved the victory on their second half performance. We should have been beyond them but didn't take our chances when on top in the first 20-30 minutes.

[Mushroom]

Demon Drawer, on Dec 16 2007, 14:07, said:

If it hadn't been for Colin Stewart you could have easily put us at the wrong end of our 8th 4 something game this season.

That a point I thought he was superb, especially saving Mastys free kick. When he gets it right they're not often saved!

As much as I dislike Grady, I think we should go for him, he can score goals. I know we have had bad experiences with strikers trying to get a bit more than their pension (Andy Smith, Willie Falconer etc.) but I think Grady could still do a job.

[Shawfield Boy]

ochil-clyde, on Dec 16 2007, 19:32, said:

That a point I thought he was superb, especially saving Mastys free kick. When he gets it right they're not often saved!

As much as I dislike Grady, I think we should go for him, he can score goals. I know we have had bad experiences with strikers trying to get a bit more than their pension (Andy Smith, Willie Falconer etc.) but I think Grady could still do a job.

Andy Smith was a superb signing for us. He made Harty the striker he was. Just thought I would point that out

[Mushroom]

Shawfield Boy, on Dec 16 2007, 21:06, said:

Andy Smith was a superb signing for us. He made Harty the striker he was. Just thought I would point that out

Thats the other point I somehow glossed over. As bad as Smith was fitness wise and wasn't a shadow of the player he used to be, he still bagged plenty of goals. Falconer even managed 4 from 10 starts.

This post has been edited by ochil-clyde: 16 December 2007 - 21:18

[Shawfield Stallion]

ochil-clyde, on Dec 16 2007, 21:16, said:

Thats the other point I somehow glossed over. As bad as Smith was fitness wise and wasn't a shadow of the player he used to be, he still bagged plenty of goals. Falconer even managed 4 from 10 starts.

I thought his fitness was fine for a player in his mid-late 30's. I don't know how you can be so dismissive of him- he was a perfect foil for Ian Harty and played an integral part in our promotion push that season.

Willie Falconer was shite though

[Wee Bully]

ochil-clyde, on Dec 16 2007, 19:32, said:

I know we have had bad experiences with strikers trying to get a bit more than their pension (Andy Smith, Willie Falconer etc.) but I think Grady could still do a job.

That one sentence has just invalidated anything you may ever want to say on the game of football. Andy Smith was superb for us.

[Shawfield Stallion]

Mon The Clyde, on Dec 15 2007, 17:16, said:

the ball fell nicely for McKewan I think?

No, the ball fell for McKeown. You've been spelling it wrong for ages and you're not getting the benefit of the doubt anymore.

See me after class

[Milevskiy]

Shawfield Stallion, on Dec 17 2007, 10:09, said:

No, the ball fell for McKeown. You've been spelling it wrong for ages and you're not getting the benefit of the doubt anymore.

See me after class

What a shame, I've just finnished exams

[Mushroom]

OK! I'll stop trying to cover my error - I just couldn't think of any more old strikers we've had.

[bully-wee]

i thought in the first half hour we where poor but the confidence grew as the game went on which was encouraging regardless of the scoreline. There was too much long ball stuff punted aimlessly at the strikers, but once we started to play more through the midfield and PASS the ball wide through Mick McGowen we seemed alot more dangerous, the first goal really was a good build up from the corner with a good deliver into Ruari, who swiped at it, but a great finished in the end by McKeown. Arbuckle was very poor but to be fair to him a would stick with him the service was still poor and we must work the ball through the midfield and create somthing the way we used to play, if arbuckle oto score like most strikers he needs good service , he had one chance! At least it was an entertaing game but lets try and build on it.