Fat Sally

f**k me. Why did he take that interview at this time?

Possibly the ballsiest thing Barry Ferguson did as Clyde manager was to show the level of respect that you mention for the Challenge Cup. He held a training session for the First Team on the pitch outside Broadwood whilst he sent the Under 20s team and coaching staff to face Partick Thistle Colts. Clyde got thumped but the point was made. If other managers showed the competition that level of respect then it would be binned very quickly. The media keep talking about how successful the new Challenge Cup format has been and have ignored the fact that fans, players and managers hate it.

A reminder that 74.4% of respondents to a Supporters Direct survey rejected the idea of Colts teams in the league. Would assume the majority of people who backed the idea were supporters of Old Firm clubs. Clyde provided the largest number of responses to the survey. http://www.scottishsupporters.net/results-of-supporter-led-consultation-on-colt-team-proposals/ Supporters being ignored again.

This has been a done deal for ages. John Robertson was even on the BBC at the beginning of the season talking about his plans for ICT and mentioned preparing to have a Colts team next season. Malky Mackay when questioned on Radio Scotland claimed that only Rangers and Celtic would likely take up a Colts team due to the costs involved. I think he's wrong in that as the costs will not differ much from running their existing Under 20s. Actually there will likely be greater financial reward compared to the Development League. I've been amazed at how much the mainstream media have ignored opposition to Colts teams over the last year. They keep describing the Irn Bru Cup as a massive success when supporters have voted with their feet and the Colts teams dumped out in the early rounds. Hopefully TNS or Crusaders win this year's Irn Bru Cup and the sight of the prize money disappearing out of Scottish football might wake some people up to the nonsense of that competition.

The decisions in which that can occur normally revolve around what type of biscuits should be ordered for board meetings.

Minor inconvenience. The Premiership clubs can outvote the total of the League One and League Two clubs due to the weighted voting system and so that rule will be changed if it exists.

SPFL clubs don't get a say in who gets admitted to the Lowland/Highland Leagues or the feeder leagues below them so would not be able to knock it back. The pyramid system has made it possible that Colt teams can be added into these lower leagues and work their way up into the SPFL without any say from the clubs currently residing there. It's a stitch up and it's going to happen and it's probably going to happen next season. John Robertson is already quoted as saying he is planning for a Colts team with Caley Thistle next season.

Old Firm Colts will be in the Lowland League next season. No need for an SPFL vote. It's a done deal.

I wonder if Clyde appointing Jim Chapman who is involved in Project Brave will change their previously strong stance against the introduction of Colts teams into the league or cup competitions. As a fan owned club I would hope that the appointment of a manager doesn't change the clubs stance which has so far mirrored that of the vast majority of supporters.

Manager posts have to be advertised per league rules.

David Douglas isn't a club official and doesn't even hold a volunteer position so he can do and say what he wants. Norrie Innes on the other hand is the Chairman and everything should be done through official channels. I get the feeling he has been ambushed by Douglas following Douglas' Facebook post at the weekend. A baptism of fire into the politics of Clyde Football Club.

In what way? I'm quite within my rights to question why someone who stood down as CEO is still telling people he is CEO. I'd assume one of the next announcements will be Heartfelt renewing their shirt sponsorship for next season....

What relevance has David Douglas to anything?

And again you still manage to avoid stating any actual evidence. You just made it up. Enjoy your evening. I'll check in tomorrow for the next installment of the voices inside your head. Remember to take your meds.

Plenty of evidence yet you seem unable to provide us with any specific examples. You said you had heard that Innes is unpopular with the current board. Please tell us where you heard this or admit you made it up. Did you hear it from a director? Second hand, third hand? Maybe the voice inside your head told you? It's a simple question. If he's unpopular with the current board then we should know why. Tell us.

Ok, I understand that you don't want to drop your handler in it by divulging your sources. Maybe then you could ask them to explain why if Innes is so unpopular did the board vote for him twice to install him in the role of Chairman? Report back to us here. Thanks.

What makes you say that Norrie Innes's appointment is unpopular amongst the board? Back your statement up with facts or its nothing more than made up nonsense.

Of course the season has been a shambles. They should have got rid of Barry after the Stirling Albion game. You are setting the new chair up to fail if you tell him to get rid of the current board though. That's obvious. He's already going to have to find a new management team and a new commercial director and now your asking him to replace all the other directors as well? Whilst doing this you expect him to also relocate the club? That's a massive amount of pressure to put on the guy. Where will these new directors come from? Will you expect him to find these replacements from his business contacts, persuade them that it's a job worth doing for free and then hope they hit the ground running? He's going to have to piss with the cock he's got and we have to support him otherwise it's fucked. Time people got realistic.

For a man who constantly derides others you think are friendly with board members, how would you know that Innes's appointment is unpopular with board members? Innes has been co-opted on to the board by a majority vote of board members, he was then made Chair by a majority vote of board members. At the AGM he will have to be ratified by a majority of owners. If they are unhappy then board members will have had 3 chances to vote against his appointment by the end of the next AGM. Be honest. You just made that up didn't you?

Well done. Keep up the good work!

You are laying out the ground for him to fail already. He will be bound by the same commercial confidentiality as any other previous chair. He will be subject to the same online rumour mill. I can see it now. Innes announces we are in discussions with GCC for a bit of land. Thistle then appear and want the same piece of land to build their new training ground or worse still try and get us to share with them. Glasgow Warriors will want land, Glasgow City will want land. These things come about over lunches and by shaking hands with the right people. There will be setbacks and there will be problems to over come. Targets and deadlines will be missed. Doing it in the public eye will not make it easier. I don't want weekly, monthly or quarterly updates on what they have been doing. I just want them to get on with the job. The guy has an extensive CV and is clearly qualified to deliver. If any posters on here think they match his experience and skills then get them involved. I'm happy to leave him to it. I'll judge him on of he manages it not how much info he gives me. I don't need to know the ins and outs because I'll elect board members to do that for me. I'm a shareholder in a few large companies, I don't scrutinise every decision and transaction. People are employed to do that on my behalf. The timelines make it clear that the current board will have been involved in identifying potential sites and it was the current board who brought in Innes. I don't see what good it would do to start "clearing out" the very people he signed up to work with. Hopefully he can add to skills that are already there.

Bit off topic but I've been moving house and just discovered my ticket from the Clyde 2 - 1 Celtic game and noticed we paid £20 for that match. That was 11 years ago and so £20 seems steep and it's obvious the Clyde board back then were cashing in on the expected big gate. Obviously for the end result I would have paid any amount but it got me thinking, would the club get away with charging such a high price these days? I think that in the modern age of social media a club hiking the prices so much like we obviously did back then would be the subject of much criticism and boycott threats from away fans and our own supporters. Fans probably complained back then but with less mediums to have their voice heard then it probably fell on deaf ears.

The Arbroath Thread for this pish.

That's the Reverend John McKinnon who is Chairman of the Clyde Community Foundation and Club Chaplain alongside Norrie Innes. Unless we are now consulting God on new management teams then I think you are jumping to the wrong conclusions. Although given our recent history of appointing managers we could do with some divine intervention.

Considering he has signed on amateur terms I doubt they are spending any money. That would be against the rules. An experienced manager should have been brought in but it's obviously not because of Goodwillie taking the wages instead.