Jump to content

Fat Sally

Gold Members
  • Posts

    217
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Fat Sally

  1. 11 minutes ago, sydney said:

    I don’t believe for a minute that refs go out to make bad decisions, let alone bad decisions against any particular teams. The general standard is simply poor and I’ve seen crazy decisions going both for and against us. Just galling that in the last 2 home games we’ve seen two huge howlers against us but I’m sure we will see a howler or two go in our favour in the not too distant future. 

    David Goodwillie (PBUH) punched the ball into the back of the net against Montrose to keep us off the bottom and in existence. The karma from that one will take a while to even out.

  2. 3 minutes ago, cfcuk said:
    9 minutes ago, Bully Wee Villa said:
    Two have offered to resign and had their resignations rejected. 

    if you have any dignity you simply walk these characters will hang on with their finger nails to a seat on the board as said this is the second time in 3 years

    What part of offered to resign don't you understand?

    Their fellow Directors rejected their resignation. 

    David Dishon took full and sole responsibility for the f**k up 3 years ago, offered to resign and his resignation was rejected. It would be hypocritical for him now as Chairman to insist someone else resigns.

    Continue to back the manager and continue to back the Chairman and his decisions and we'll still get promoted. Keep the faith.

  3. 47 minutes ago, HibeeJibee said:

    Current averages:

    383     Kelty
    189     East Kilbride
    189     East Stirlingshire
    180     Spartans
    133     Gala
    127     Dalbeattie
    113     Cumbernauld
    107     Whitehill
       89     Gretna
       88     Vale of Leithen
       82     Edinburgh University
       81     BSC Glasgow
       79     University of Stirling
       72     Civil Service Strollers
       57     Edusport
      (46     Selkirk)

    Most of these attendances are woeful. Most averaging less than 100 home fans.

    Imagine the likes of BSC Glasgow in the SPFL with no ground and less than 80 fans. On what planet is that good for Scottish football?

    Great community club but that is their level. Your own ground should be an absolute minimum for new clubs entering the league setup IMHO.

    Not knocking those who follow those teams or the efforts of those involved in running them but how do we increase the attendances? 

  4. 28 minutes ago, Officer Barbrady said:

    Of course you don't!!

     

    How long has it taken for this to sink in?

     

    Is it that we are NOT a charity and never, ever were? No charity is stupid enough to advertise that it  insists on charging its most loyal "donators" £200-£450 just to sustain its 'business model', and not bothering to compete in its specific market, far less declaring war on those "donators" who step out of line by questioning the purpose of the club's decade of nihilistic chivalry. 

     

    Is it from watching the competitive team on the park, which we have as a result of a very different recruitment process from the one just three years ago where the club was plainly being used by complete charlatans to further their coaching and PR careers through individuals brought to the club via the fabled Clyde foundation (sic deliberately), and who nearly pissed us up the wall under The Manager Who Could Not Be Sacked? 

     

    Or is it the realisation now that it never had to be that way? 

    Very fair comment, i concede. Both however, possess an individual skill set greater than the rest of the board combined, a fact i'm sure was behind their acquisitions. And i'm throwing no shade at the others in expressing this view.

     

    Norrie's early wording was very Glasgowcentric, his line of business completely in sync with the view his predecessor described his vision for the club and still does on the SD page, of the club "based in a community in which it is relevant", and very clearly with one eye cast on placing roots in the city and relocating. I think the last fifteen months supercede the first four of Norrie's tenure in firmly simple terms, we're clearly in no hurry to leave and without the sideshow of any uncertainty of where the club thinks it wants to be (which suited an agenda previously and NOTHING ELSE), it appears to be slowly getting its act together in a community where it may yet again be "relevant". 

    Now that's just bloody stupid. 

     

    Part II

    But it isn't a choice, is it? Not according to your opening paragraph. If its so endemic in the game, and without a volunteer structure it will cease to exist, then it seems to be that the only logical outcome would be for everyone in the country who patronises the sport to become one in some way or another. Just do away altogether with the great evil, that is hard currency. Volunteer staff, volunteer security, volunteer players, managers, coaching staffs and volunteer match officials, the  whole lot. Everyone gets in for the same, and gets the same from it. The players, well, they get the privelege of entertaining us. And be thankful, too. 

     

    It's a policy that's worked wonders for world peace since 1917, wouldn't you agree Sally? 

    Again, a bewildering and rambling post that fails to address the point that I am making which is that volunteers should not come on forums and basically be called freeloaders because they get a free match ticket. I've done graphic design work for junior clubs local to me in the past and been offered match tickets (and sometimes even a pie) in return which I did accept on occasions. The work I did would have cost the clubs in questions a lot more than a match ticket. If that's freeloading in your opinion then call me what you want, but I view it as a gesture of thanks for services rendered which otherwise would have cost a great deal.

    People make their own decisions and live with them. If we all pull together and respect and understand each other's tasks and challenges, we have more than a fighting chance. 

  5. I have no idea what the above means. Strange post.

    I am not criticising Clyde for using volunteers. It is a symptom of a broken football industry. It's an industry which takes advantage of free labour in a similar way that charities do, except with one key difference in that football clubs are not charities. Even the largest clubs, FIFA and UEFA employ people as volunteers while paying players huge wages.

    As I said, people have different motivations for doing roles at football clubs. For some it will be a love of the club, others it will be ego, or to be involved in the game, CV building, to pursue a dream, free entry or simply just for something to do. I don't really care about their motivations so long as they do a good job. Our current Chairman and Financial Director did not take up their roles at the time because they were Clyde fans so it's wrong to assume that a love of the club is what motivates every person. Everyone is different.

    Volunteers are treated like employees because the law requires them to. They are subject to the same HR procedures and are just as accountable as paid staff. The wages someone is paid or not paid does not affect their ability to do a job or who they report to and no one should ever be hired for a volunteer role on anything other than their ability to do the role. A volunteer steward for example must abide by the same regulations as G4S.

    These volunteers are the lifeblood of the game, and without them then it would cease to exist. There is nothing wrong with club's offering a free season ticket in return for the work that people do and there is nothing wrong with that person accepting the offer.

    St Andrews Ambulance staff on a matchday are all volunteers. Are those suggesting that football clubs start requesting that these people pay to get in? Should ball boys pay to get in at clubs where Under 12s don't go free? How about matchday volunteers that might only see 20 mins of a game because of their duties?

    It's ridiculous and quite frankly embarrassing that some people should turn their attention to volunteers who might be getting rewarded with free entry.

    It's a simple choice for football clubs. Either pay a fair wage for services rendered or offer a gesture of free entry in exchange. If people don't want to take up the free entry and want to pay their way in because their financial situation allows them to then that's their choice.

    I'm much more open to the idea that we should get rid of comp tickets for player's families but the argument against that is we pay such low wages, if allowing a player's family to come and watch makes the player more comfortable and therefore play better then who really loses?

  6. 1 hour ago, cfcuk said:
    1 hour ago, Fat Sally said:
    I have no problem with volunteers getting into games for free. Football as a whole in Scotland requires volunteers to survive and quite honestly takes advantage of people doing jobs that they really should be paying them for. By all means insist on these people paying in but you need to then compensate them fairly for services rendered.
    Quite simply the club could not operate at the level it does it and offer the service it does without volunteers. Let's not ask them to give up what can be quite a considerable amount of time and energy then force them to pay a season ticket. Entirely false economy.

    So basically you are saying they are volunteering to get into games for nothing and if they don't they will chuck it , interesting theory

    Undoubtedly there will be some for which that is their motivation.

    People volunteer for different reasons but football relies on volunteers giving their time and energy and gives very little in return. Some people put in the equivalent of a part time job into keeping clubs going and the cost of a free season ticket wouldn't even come close to reimbursing them financially. It's a gesture of thanks and if a club really needs to take money off these people to pay players then I'd suggest that something is wrong with the business model.

    Why should football players be the only people who get paid at football clubs?

  7. I have no problem with volunteers getting into games for free. Football as a whole in Scotland requires volunteers to survive and quite honestly takes advantage of people doing jobs that they really should be paying them for. By all means insist on these people paying in but you need to then compensate them fairly for services rendered.

    Quite simply the club could not operate at the level it does it and offer the service it does without volunteers. Let's not ask them to give up what can be quite a considerable amount of time and energy then force them to pay a season ticket. Entirely false economy.

  8. 9 minutes ago, haufdaft said:


     

     


    Was that statement not made in comparing last year's results to the previous years in which we had a decent cup run that resulted better financial figures?

    Correct me if I'm wrong but I'm sure it was stated at the meeting that we do not budget for a cup run.
     

     

    My apologies if that's the case and I'm delighted to hear it.

    How was the loss from last year explained? It wasn't just a drop in turnover. We actually had to take out a loan for working capital.

    My understanding from subsequent communications was that the lack of a cup run meant the budget was tight.

  9. 33 minutes ago, Gene Wilder said:
    2 hours ago, cfcuk said:
    So you know we budgeted to go out the cup first time of asking ?

    Thats exactly how it works and its been confirmed before. You dont budget for income thats not guaranteed.

    Exactly, budgeting for income that's not guaranteed is dangerous.

    It's been hinted that budget pressures are a result of having no cup run which looks like we may indeed have gambled on having a cup run when signing players.

    Last year's loss was explained as a result of no cup run. There wouldn't be a loss if a cup run wasn't budgeted for in the first place.

  10. 11 minutes ago, FREDDYFRY said:

    Yea, did raise a bit of consern when I read it. I assume that is why we have not added during the window. 

    Performance wise and squad quality that is fine we don’t need to add to the squad if finance is an issue. Reinforces the fall out from the Scottish Cup exit.

    Probably the one big mistake made  (and he has had justified criticism ) by Danny since arriving that he did not put 100% into the Cowdenbeath game in terms of team selection. 

    Excluding the Old Firm and Aberdeen, clubs at any level don't normally budget for cup progression and certainly David Dishon is on record in the past as saying that Clyde don't budget for it so that shouldn't really be an issue when it comes to finances.

    Danny did get his team selection wrong in the Scottish and Irn Bru Cups and he's made it harder for himself in that he's not had the luxury of extra funds above his budget to strengthen. We're doing just fine with the players we've got anyway.
     

  11. 1 hour ago, SouthLanarkshireWhite said:

    I am mildly surprised any bank would see us as a good bet for repaying a loan given the history of the past 15 years. Assuming they did I am mildly concerned that failure to get promoted will leave us in debt again.

    Two concerns:

    1. Taking out a bank loan to fund the playing squad isn't something we should be taking lightly,  especially on the back of a £60k loss. It does seem like we have gambled heavily on promotion and takes some gloss off what we have been told is increased revenue streams allowing us to challenge at the right end of the league.

    2. In the news article of July 31st it was mentioned that Norrie Innes's company had been granted planning permission for a cafe and restaurant at Broadwood. I am uncomfortable about a serving Director benefiting financially from the club remaining at Broadwood which would undoubtedly be the case if this was to go ahead. I seriously hope he rethinks this. The proposed plans are on NLCs website. ETA: I don't think there is anything underhand going on here but I think it's unwise and creates the conditions for judgements to be clouded by other factors than what is the right decision for the club. He has my backing in what he is trying to do but this project is a mistake in my opinion.

  12. 6 minutes ago, Adolfo Rios said:

    I posted here as I thought it would likely be brought up at one point given it had been said by the manager on an open forum to Clyde fans (and possibly non Clyde fans) in attendance at the Arria Lounge. A genuine mistake on both fronts.
     

    Stop fucking apologising. If the manager says something into a microphone in front of a packed Arria Lounge then it's in the public domain.

    Some people just raging they didn't hear it first from their pet club official.

  13. Adding Cumbernauld to the badge is just a short jump away from adding Cumbernauld to the name.

    Fortunately the Third Resolution added at the time of the EK vote makes it extremely difficult to change the name now, and it wasn't exactly an easy task before that.

    However the Chairman also proposed changing the CIC structure. The change he proposed is a move away from supporter control which means changing the name becomes a whole lot easier.

    Join the dots. Cumbernauld Clyde is on its way.

  14. Last I heard of Kevin Harper was 2016 when he was claiming that he couldn't get a management job due to institutional racism in the Scottish game despite having only just achieved his coaching badges at the time.

    Major gamble for the Rovers board to hand the future of the club to a man with an assault conviction who has never managed or coached at any level and been out of the game for so long. Not even a generic quote from the board as to why he was the chosen candidate.

  15. 8 hours ago, maxruby said:


    If you ask nicely, perhaps a portion of sour grapes can be made available at HT and a doggy bag to take home any cold shoulder and grouse left over from the buffet in the Boardroom.

    Ignoring the cheap digs at someone who paid out a lot more than I normally do when I saw the advert and wanted to back the management. When I return from Canada then I will be the first person in the Arria Lounge giving Danny my support.

    I've read the chairman's statement and I am fully behind him.

    Despite being fully behind him; I am still allowed to be critical when things go wrong. It seems to be now that if you are unhappy or disappointed in the club then you are unwanted or a "failure fanatic". Ally Love being a case in point. That is unhealthy. Every regime should be open to criticism, then they should improve. I'm positive about the future off the pitch but more so about it with Danny Lennon on the pitch. It's a football club, not a cult.

  16. 6 minutes ago, maxruby said:

    So “similar” means “same”?

     

    As for a pro Chairman post. Remind them they work for us seems a tad aggressive. You’ll have told Norrie this is how you feel? Put him and his fellow directors firmly in their place with that comment!

    Well they do. That's just a fact. Nothing aggressive about it. I'm sure Norrie and his fellow directors would agree.

  17. 30 minutes ago, maxruby said:


    What is the difference in our ownership structure compared to the clubs you mention at the start of the post I have quoted?

    Very little in practice. Of the clubs I named, FC United of Manchester are the most like Clyde in that they operate as a Community Benefit Society on a one member, one vote basis.

    Many, many more clubs are owned by their Supporters Trust which members pay an annual fee to be part of, on a one member, one vote basis. Operating the same way as Clyde do in all but name.

    I would bet my life on the fact that Clyde owners will have closer access to Directors and information than any supporters of Motherwell or Hearts ever will but their fans seem to be embracing the idea of supporter ownership much more keenly than some of ours.

    @Billy Reid Fan Club No one can own more than one part of the CIC. Its a legal impossibility. If anyone has more shares then they will be Foundation Shares which are symbolic and worthless. Also, please stop proposing to liquidate the club when we are going for the title.

    Tried a positive, back the chairman/board post and it took a turn for the worse so I'll leave it at that. Yay. Go Clyde.

  18. 1 hour ago, cfcuk said:

    Interesting view on the membership scheme , what exactly do you think we own ? Personal opinion the success of the club doesn't depend on the CIC numbers in fact does the money from the membership scheme go directly to the club ? . It will be built upon fans coming back to matches , buying catering, sponsoring shirts etc

    The fans are backing the club very well at the moment flying starts , supporters clubs

    Sponsoring strips Maybe your point could be owners backing the club , how many owners ( myself included) pitched in for the refurbishment of the Arria lounge ? How many chipped in to provide accommodation for the loan players from England?

    I agree we do have to back the club but I doubt 40 quid membership is the be all and end all

     

    Having given NI stick at the start of his reign as chairman I have eaten an entire humble pie . Look at the strides the club has made in a year , look at the squad , think he is doing a pretty good job so far

     

    As for some from supporters branch standing for election I think that's a great idea and hope someone takes up the challengeemoji106.png

     

    We own the club in a similar way that supporters of FC United of Manchester, AFC Wimbledon, Clydebank, Stirling Albion etc already do. Similar to how Hearts and Motherwell very soon will be. We aren't unique in being owned by supporters.

    If we don't own the club, then who does?

    I agree that the £40 fee is not the be all and end all but lets give the board and chairman the physical numbers and show them we back them. A chairman or board member being elected by 500 owners has a bigger mandate than being elected by 188. And if they stray off course we can be right there to remind them who they answer to.

    Fans of other supporter owned clubs are proud to sign up. I don't get why we have such a resistance from some in our support. Personally believe its largely down to poor marketing from the club at the outset.

  19. 39 minutes ago, Jaggy Snake said:

    "in recent weeks"???

    Last years membership expired less than 2 weeks ago. The new season hasn't even started yet, and some people will still be away on holiday/saving money for going away.

    Whilst it would be nice to increase the number of memberships this year, instead of the normal slight decline, it is way too soon to analyse anything.

    Point taken. I had not realised only 2 weeks had passed since renewal. This close season is going too slowly!

×
×
  • Create New...