Jack Burton

Does anyone know if season ticket holders need to buy tickets in advance? I can't find anyway of having the season ticket discount applied. There is also no way of buying an under 12 ticket as they aren't available on the app/ticket website and the Clyde website has them as only been available to buy with cash on the day of the game.

There was plenty Clyde fans against signing Goodwillie first or second time round as well. Yet he's still happy to label all Clyde fans as scum and by extension all Dumbarton fans, including himself, must be scum too. Goodwillie is obviously far worse but when you are having to resort to our sex offender isn't as bad as yours then I don't think anyone comes out looking good. Layne hasn't been able to pick up another team because he isn't very good and injury prone rather than his baggage. He played for both Peterhead and Dumbarton while on the register.

It's a very serious situation but as with back then Logue would have to have a good reason to forgo the rental income paid by Clyde. There's hardly a queue of teams waiting to rent an 8k seater stadium in Cumbernauld.

I don't think Dumbarton fans are in a position to comment. There was a registered sex offender playing for them for the previous two seasons and the fans didn't bat an eyelid.

The whole board has to go after this. Most of them should have really gone by now. In the last 5 years or so we have had the missing tax payments, the Fitzpatrick registration issue, the Norrie Inness saga and now this. As you said the big issue is who replaces them. The problem with us being fan owned is that most that have the drive or knowledge to serve on the board have already done it and we've been left with the last 5 or 6 lingering way past their sell by dates. There's no chance anyone external will want to get involved.

There is a clause in the contract which allows the council to ban from Broadwood anyone they deem to have exhibited unacceptable behaviour. You could argue that it is pretty flimsy and Goodwillie has been playing at Broadwood previously up until January 2022 but you would like to think that even our board aren't stupid enough to double down on their stance and come out swinging for the council.

There is council elections coming up in May and with the amount of media attention this is getting it was inevitable they would have to be seem to be doing something.

We've only got him on loan till the end of the season at which point he surely returns to Raith Rovers. I wouldn't put it beyond our board to have contractually agreed to re-sign him in the summer giving how fucking stupid their decision making has been.

What relevance does any of that have to the Clyde situation? The council don't own Airdrie's stadium just because its in North Lanarkshire doesn't mean they can do anything.

Yes we do and we deserve everything we get. Well done to the Glasgow Branch and the sponsor, bunch of fucking morons, and the board for being utterly spineless and bowing to their demands. You only had to look at the reaction to Raith Rovers to see what was coming.

The board had already turned down Raith Rovers offer to sign him back on loan so why would a vote be required? The fans don't normally get a vote every time we sign a player so why should we on this occasion?

50 out of 400 owners is nowhere near a majority. I'm on the Glasgow Branch Facebook page and there will be plenty others on it against it too. Everyone I've spoken to is against it.

So your post about the Glasgow Branch backed by 250 members is basically bollocks? What's likely happened in reality is a dozen or so fans and the sponsor have pressurised the board into signing him.

I doubt many if any of those that defend him have ever bothered to read the report.

The owners vote was a small majority of 100 votes. How do you become a Glasgow Branch member and were they all consulated or are you just basing that on how many followers their Facebook page has?

We've just let a sponsor decide who we buy.

Things have moved on significantly in the 5 years since he signed with the Me Too movement etc. Goodwillie playing for Clyde had largely went on the radar but that will not be the case now. Its insane for the board to see what has happened at Raith Rovers and be happy to bring down the shitstorm of bad press and media attention on the club. Goodwillie will also be 33 this month and missing more and more games each season. Getting him off the wage bill and receiving a transfer fee was a great chance of building a much better balanced squad. Instead we will be back to an aging Goodwillie hovering up most of the playing budget with the rest of the squad padded out with players that wouldn't look out of place in the Lowland league.

It's got to be a troll. The username is a give away never mind the post.

Then why would the sponsor threaten to withdraw their funding if the club was already negotiating with Raith Rovers? It was pretty common knowledge on here that the board had rejected Raith's offer.

Have you actually read the report from the civil court case? There is plenty of facts there. Have you not seen the utter shitstorm of bad publicity and press directed at Raith Rovers? Which will now becoming our way and has already started with our landlords reviewing their position. On the football side, Goodwillie is undoubtedly a very good player for this level but he's nearly 33 and started missing a lot more games this season. Assuming we do resign him in the summer then he'll be back to commanded a significant portion of the playing budget and Lennon will be back to have to sign the next round of Munros, Balatonis etc to fill out the rest of the squad. Like a number of other Clyde fans I'm also fed up of the club only being well known for employing a rapist and a racist. This was a chance for a clean brake and to build a more balanced team that isn't just Goodwillie and 10 other c***s.

How's a daft comment? The board initially knocked back Raith Rovers offer. Goodwillie re-signing is being forced through by the sponsor. It does make you question what other decisions are being made by the sponsor rather than the board.

He clearly doesn't have the final say if the club sponsors can dictate who and who we can't sign.

What do you have to back this up and who are the 2 biggest sponsors?

It's a simple question have you read it or not?

Have you even bothered to read the report from the civil court case?