Clyde soccer trendy Posted June 17, 2014 Share Posted June 17, 2014 Serious question yes voters on this forum would you still vote for a name change ? Good Question!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clyde4ever Posted June 17, 2014 Share Posted June 17, 2014 Serious question yes voters on this forum would you still vote for a name change ? I would too. It's not as important for me as improving our prospects for the future (and that is from a supporter from Shawfield days). I trust the Chairman's judgment, as he has previously played a major part in saving us from going to the wall. I don't know of any other Clyde fan who could come in and do a better job. If you do, let's hear who they are. I'm happy to leave it to him and the rest of the Board, who, considering they are running the club in their spare time, are, in my opinion doing as good a job as any (realistic) alternative Board could. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vasily Zaytsev Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 I've lived and worked abroad for the past five years, during which time I've tried to keep abreast of club business. I mention that in order to qualify what I have to say - it mayn't be as 'in-touch' as the offerings of others.Overlooking that of Celtic and Rangers-reincarnate, it seems to me as though our support is the most balkanised in Scottish senior football. Proportionately, at least. I understand that balkanisation in the context of the past decade, beginning with our failed promotion bid in the final season of Alan Kernaghan's tenure. Recriminations and reprisals from thereon, punctuated by our near-extinction, consecutive relegations and manifold other public losses-of-face (e.g. Graham Roberts successful action against the club) have obviously undermined confidence in those who have steered the club at different times. I understand that there was some reconciliation at the point where the club became a Community Interest Company. Grievances were aired then, and bad blood underwent dialysis during the course of consultations with supporters. But hostility still lingers, or so it seems, and I think there is something besides the obviously poor form of the team which has contributed to that since the CIC conversion. In a number of communications by the club through its website, and as ventriolquised by its partisans on various forums, there has been a tone-of-voice in evidence which I think some supporters find affronting. Pleas, and they have been pleas, from the club for solidarity with its players and dugout team during eras of abysmal form read a little too much like injunctions to suspend criticism. Doubtless there are supporters who are determined to be critical - I know some! But whilst such pleas are understandable, in my opinion the club have been foolish to make them. Here's the important point: supporters are not inclined, and do not want to be told to temper their affections. It's especially difficult to stomach a tacit injunction to pity your team ('We're skint, don't you understand...'). And that is regardless of how reasonable the injunction is. Hostility is created by PR like this because its subtext is that some within the club's administration, who supporters perceive to have no more worth to the club than they do with their stake, have saw fit to tell the whole support-body to moderate their relationship to the team and management. What could be more arbitrary, patronising and disproportionate, after all? The old adage that the best way to answer your critics as a footballer is not with your mouth but with your feet is pertinent. The idea that at Clyde there's a uniquely critical or personally abusive support is bogus. I followed Morton with my father for several years and couldn't honestly say that there is any more vitriol at Broadwood than there was in the Cowshed not so long ago. Even young footballers backs are broader than most.My tuppence-worth on the move and name change is this: as a legal entity, the club has already underwent at least one name change, if it was to be reconstituted in much the same way as it is now but with 'EK' affixed to its name, I wouldn't interpret that as an erasure of the club's identity. Nor would I see it as a complete annexation of its identity to East Kilbride. It'd be more like a new chapter to me. Sure, the club's history has been a nomadic one. If there's compelling evidence in favour of the move then I think we would be masochistic not to act on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CK Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Have we witnessed the return of Sao Paulo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottR96 Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 BACKSPIN. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Clyde Man Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 I've lived and worked abroad for the past five years, during which time I've tried to keep abreast of club business. I mention that in order to qualify what I have to say - it mayn't be as 'in-touch' as the offerings of others. Overlooking that of Celtic and Rangers-reincarnate, it seems to me as though our support is the most balkanised in Scottish senior football. Proportionately, at least. I understand that balkanisation in the context of the past decade, beginning with our failed promotion bid in the final season of Alan Kernaghan's tenure. Recriminations and reprisals from thereon, punctuated by our near-extinction, consecutive relegations and manifold other public losses-of-face (e.g. Graham Roberts successful action against the club) have obviously undermined confidence in those who have steered the club at different times. I understand that there was some reconciliation at the point where the club became a Community Interest Company. Grievances were aired then, and bad blood underwent dialysis during the course of consultations with supporters. But hostility still lingers, or so it seems, and I think there is something besides the obviously poor form of the team which has contributed to that since the CIC conversion. In a number of communications by the club through its website, and as ventriolquised by its partisans on various forums, there has been a tone-of-voice in evidence which I think some supporters find affronting. Pleas, and they have been pleas, from the club for solidarity with its players and dugout team during eras of abysmal form read a little too much like injunctions to suspend criticism. Doubtless there are supporters who are determined to be critical - I know some! But whilst such pleas are understandable, in my opinion the club have been foolish to make them. Here's the important point: supporters are not inclined, and do not want to be told to temper their affections. It's especially difficult to stomach a tacit injunction to pity your team ('We're skint, don't you understand...'). And that is regardless of how reasonable the injunction is. Hostility is created by PR like this because its subtext is that some within the club's administration, who supporters perceive to have no more worth to the club than they do with their stake, have saw fit to tell the whole support-body to moderate their relationship to the team and management. What could be more arbitrary, patronising and disproportionate, after all? The old adage that the best way to answer your critics as a footballer is not with your mouth but with your feet is pertinent. The idea that at Clyde there's a uniquely critical or personally abusive support is bogus. I followed Morton with my father for several years and couldn't honestly say that there is any more vitriol at Broadwood than there was in the Cowshed not so long ago. Even young footballers backs are broader than most. My tuppence-worth on the move and name change is this: as a legal entity, the club has already underwent at least one name change, if it was to be reconstituted in much the same way as it is now but with 'EK' affixed to its name, I wouldn't interpret that as an erasure of the club's identity. Nor would I see it as a complete annexation of its identity to East Kilbride. It'd be more like a new chapter to me. Sure, the club's history has been a nomadic one. If there's compelling evidence in favour of the move then I think we would be masochistic not to act on it. The best post ever on this subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clyde4life Posted June 18, 2014 Author Share Posted June 18, 2014 I've lived and worked abroad for the past five years, during which time I've tried to keep abreast of club business. I mention that in order to qualify what I have to say - it mayn't be as 'in-touch' as the offerings of others.Overlooking that of Celtic and Rangers-reincarnate, it seems to me as though our support is the most balkanised in Scottish senior football. Proportionately, at least. I understand that balkanisation in the context of the past decade, beginning with our failed promotion bid in the final season of Alan Kernaghan's tenure. Recriminations and reprisals from thereon, punctuated by our near-extinction, consecutive relegations and manifold other public losses-of-face (e.g. Graham Roberts successful action against the club) have obviously undermined confidence in those who have steered the club at different times. I understand that there was some reconciliation at the point where the club became a Community Interest Company. Grievances were aired then, and bad blood underwent dialysis during the course of consultations with supporters. But hostility still lingers, or so it seems, and I think there is something besides the obviously poor form of the team which has contributed to that since the CIC conversion. In a number of communications by the club through its website, and as ventriolquised by its partisans on various forums, there has been a tone-of-voice in evidence which I think some supporters find affronting. Pleas, and they have been pleas, from the club for solidarity with its players and dugout team during eras of abysmal form read a little too much like injunctions to suspend criticism. Doubtless there are supporters who are determined to be critical - I know some! But whilst such pleas are understandable, in my opinion the club have been foolish to make them. Here's the important point: supporters are not inclined, and do not want to be told to temper their affections. It's especially difficult to stomach a tacit injunction to pity your team ('We're skint, don't you understand...'). And that is regardless of how reasonable the injunction is. Hostility is created by PR like this because its subtext is that some within the club's administration, who supporters perceive to have no more worth to the club than they do with their stake, have saw fit to tell the whole support-body to moderate their relationship to the team and management. What could be more arbitrary, patronising and disproportionate, after all? The old adage that the best way to answer your critics as a footballer is not with your mouth but with your feet is pertinent. The idea that at Clyde there's a uniquely critical or personally abusive support is bogus. I followed Morton with my father for several years and couldn't honestly say that there is any more vitriol at Broadwood than there was in the Cowshed not so long ago. Even young footballers backs are broader than most.My tuppence-worth on the move and name change is this: as a legal entity, the club has already underwent at least one name change, if it was to be reconstituted in much the same way as it is now but with 'EK' affixed to its name, I wouldn't interpret that as an erasure of the club's identity. Nor would I see it as a complete annexation of its identity to East Kilbride. It'd be more like a new chapter to me. Sure, the club's history has been a nomadic one. If there's compelling evidence in favour of the move then I think we would be masochistic not to act on it. Whether you agree or disagree with this, it's an outstandingly written post, and even incorporates Erasure! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bully Wee Villa Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Not sure how I feel about this new development. If changing the name to "EK Clyde" was so controversial, I can't see fans taking to the name "EK topic". How much are the chocolate company paying us for the name change? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clyde4life Posted June 18, 2014 Author Share Posted June 18, 2014 Not sure how I feel about this new development. If changing the name to "EK Clyde" was so controversial, I can't see fans taking to the name "EK topic". How much are the chocolate company paying us for the name change? Almost as funny as NLL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BullyWeeLad Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 If there paying us to change our name must be well into the millions #BigClub Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the bigger picture Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 I've lived and worked abroad for the past five years, during which time I've tried to keep abreast of club business. I mention that in order to qualify what I have to say - it mayn't be as 'in-touch' as the offerings of others. Overlooking that of Celtic and Rangers-reincarnate, it seems to me as though our support is the most balkanised in Scottish senior football. Proportionately, at least. I understand that balkanisation in the context of the past decade, beginning with our failed promotion bid in the final season of Alan Kernaghan's tenure. Recriminations and reprisals from thereon, punctuated by our near-extinction, consecutive relegations and manifold other public losses-of-face (e.g. Graham Roberts successful action against the club) have obviously undermined confidence in those who have steered the club at different times. I understand that there was some reconciliation at the point where the club became a Community Interest Company. Grievances were aired then, and bad blood underwent dialysis during the course of consultations with supporters. But hostility still lingers, or so it seems, and I think there is something besides the obviously poor form of the team which has contributed to that since the CIC conversion. In a number of communications by the club through its website, and as ventriolquised by its partisans on various forums, there has been a tone-of-voice in evidence which I think some supporters find affronting. Pleas, and they have been pleas, from the club for solidarity with its players and dugout team during eras of abysmal form read a little too much like injunctions to suspend criticism. Doubtless there are supporters who are determined to be critical - I know some! But whilst such pleas are understandable, in my opinion the club have been foolish to make them. Here's the important point: supporters are not inclined, and do not want to be told to temper their affections. It's especially difficult to stomach a tacit injunction to pity your team ('We're skint, don't you understand...'). And that is regardless of how reasonable the injunction is. Hostility is created by PR like this because its subtext is that some within the club's administration, who supporters perceive to have no more worth to the club than they do with their stake, have saw fit to tell the whole support-body to moderate their relationship to the team and management. What could be more arbitrary, patronising and disproportionate, after all? The old adage that the best way to answer your critics as a footballer is not with your mouth but with your feet is pertinent. The idea that at Clyde there's a uniquely critical or personally abusive support is bogus. I followed Morton with my father for several years and couldn't honestly say that there is any more vitriol at Broadwood than there was in the Cowshed not so long ago. Even young footballers backs are broader than most. My tuppence-worth on the move and name change is this: as a legal entity, the club has already underwent at least one name change, if it was to be reconstituted in much the same way as it is now but with 'EK' affixed to its name, I wouldn't interpret that as an erasure of the club's identity. Nor would I see it as a complete annexation of its identity to East Kilbride. It'd be more like a new chapter to me. Sure, the club's history has been a nomadic one. If there's compelling evidence in favour of the move then I think we would be masochistic not to act on it. A very eloquent post. Still can't agree with the last para though. It will not be a another chapter if it comes to pass, as is the popular conception that there will be a merger between EKFC and EK Clyde FC. I'm sure our learned friend would agree that in any merger something always gives. In this case I cannot see the 'EK' or the 'FC' part being dropped, which leaves only one option.... goodbye Clyde. The fat lady will have sung and we shall be a footnote in the history of the beautiful game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clyde4life Posted June 18, 2014 Author Share Posted June 18, 2014 A very eloquent post. Still can't agree with the last para though. It will not be a another chapter if it comes to pass, as is the popular conception that there will be a merger between EKFC and EK Clyde FC. I'm sure our learned friend would agree that in any merger something always gives. In this case I cannot see the 'EK' or the 'FC' part being dropped, which leaves only one option.... goodbye Clyde. The fat lady will have sung and we shall be a footnote in the history of the beautiful game. Third resolution made it nigh on impossible for a further name change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfcuk Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Third resolution made it nigh on impossible for a further name change. Really 90% ? Depends on how many members ,if the team change the name to EK clyde expect a load of fans to chuck it , que EK residents joining name change to EKFC , conspiracy maybe but I'm sure you and the like would still consider it Clyde or wouldn't bother as you would have a team in your beloved EK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfcuk Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Third resolution made it nigh on impossible for a further name change. Really you don't see the irony in changing the name but we stop it changing again Just shows you what spin can achieve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clyde4life Posted June 18, 2014 Author Share Posted June 18, 2014 Really 90% ? Depends on how many members ,if the team change the name to EK clyde expect a load of fans to chuck it , que EK residents joining name change to EKFC , conspiracy maybe but I'm sure you and the like would still consider it Clyde or wouldn't bother as you would have a team in your beloved EK Even for you that's poor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BullyWeeLad Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Tbh can see myself chucking it if there is a name change Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clyde4ever Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 A very eloquent post. Still can't agree with the last para though. It will not be a another chapter if it comes to pass, as is the popular conception that there will be a merger between EKFC and EK Clyde FC. I'm sure our learned friend would agree that in any merger something always gives. In this case I cannot see the 'EK' or the 'FC' part being dropped, which leaves only one option.... goodbye Clyde. The fat lady will have sung and we shall be a footnote in the history of the beautiful game. If there were ever to be a merger, my guess is it would be between EKFC and Clyde FC, with the resultant team being called EK Clyde. The "Clyde" will always be there !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfcuk Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Even for you that's poor Ok I will try harder next time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cannibal Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 Third resolution made it nigh on impossible for a further name change. All they have to do is tell the owners the club will die, etc. like they did last summer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy Reid Fan Club Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 I tell everyone on here. If the name change happens the support will half again. Plenty of people are still going as the name hasn't changed yet, once it does goodnight. To answer the question why people aren't going currently as the name hasn't changed yet, CLYDE FC has no future the chairman has sold the name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.