Clyde V East Stirlingshire

[StevieB]

I've managed 8 this season (not as many as I'd like but sometimes Uni and work gets in the way) - that's including the tanking at Ibrox and Spartans, so I can see for myself that things aren't great just now. People are quick to draw comparisons between Duffy and Ferguson, but conveniently forgetting the former's first two seasons in charge which were absolutely diabolical. However we did see that over the course of a few seasons, he managed to build a squad around the same core players which gave us a bit of squad consistency for the first time in years and arguably, it was the key to last season's success. There is absolutely no reason why Ferguson shouldn't be given the same opportunity, especially seeing as our league position is nowhere near as bad as people are making it out to be. Say what you like about our Board, but they demonstrated some tremendous patience with Duffy and it paid off - I think they'll do the same with Ferguson. Unfortunately, it'll be the people who are calling for his head from the stand, taking very little into account when doing so that will have the final say I imagine.

But it's the quality of the performances that are the problem. I agree that it's too early to write him or the team off, but it's really not clear whether we are going to be challenging for the playoffs or whether we're going to be sucked into a relegation fight. To be fair, we could be doing both, if things continue to be as tight as they are. Even best case scenario, it seems that we're competing for 4th spot, i.e. one playoff spot, given that 1st, 2nd and 3rd are a fair distance ahead. That's disappointing.

The thing is, we've already been beaten by Elgin and East Stirling (twice). On reflection, the opening win at Queens Park seemed like a fairly solid performance, built on a combination of the old and the new, and I think a lot of us hoped that this formula would see us through the season.

And I make the point again, I'm worried that he's paying the players' wages and that, as a result, we're in a John Brown situation again (and I'm not necessarily saying BF is the same as John Brown in other ways).

Finally, and once again, why isn't he playing?!

[Clyde4life]

But it's the quality of the performances that are the problem. I agree that it's too early to write him or the team off, but it's really not clear whether we are going to be challenging for the playoffs or whether we're going to be sucked into a relegation fight. To be fair, we could be doing both, if things continue to be as tight as they are. Even best case scenario, it seems that we're competing for 4th spot, i.e. one playoff spot, given that 1st, 2nd and 3rd are a fair distance ahead. That's disappointing.

The thing is, we've already been beaten by Elgin and East Stirling (twice). On reflection, the opening win at Queens Park seemed like a fairly solid performance, built on a combination of the old and the new, and I think a lot of us hoped that this formula would see us through the season.

And I make the point again, I'm worried that he's paying the players' wages and that, as a result, we're in a John Brown situation again (and I'm not necessarily saying BF is the same as John Brown in other ways).

Finally, and once again, why isn't he playing?!

He's not paying any wages and he's needing an operation.

[BrigtonClyde]

So we assess it at Xmas so from now on we give any new manager 18 games

Ok, just so I understand what you're saying. For whatever reason you have faith in Ferguson, & who knows, maybe that'll be justified

So let's say in early March they're in the bottom 3. Is your argument that he should still be given a chance as he's only been in the job 8 months and it takes time for the players he brought in to gel - plus its only giving another manager 2 months to try & save them? Do you extend it out & say even if they end up in the Lowland League he'll deliver a much brighter long term situation?

I think people are saying Xmas to assess things then in case it was a serious position & gives someone else a reasonable amount of time to avert disaster.

[cfcuk]

Ok, just so I understand what you're saying. For whatever reason you have faith in Ferguson, & who knows, maybe that'll be justified

So let's say in early March they're in the bottom 3. Is your argument that he should still be given a chance as he's only been in the job 8 months and it takes time for the players he brought in to gel - plus its only giving another manager 2 months to try & save them? Do you extend it out & say even if they end up in the Lowland League he'll deliver a much brighter long term situation?

I think people are saying Xmas to assess things then in case it was a serious position & gives someone else a reasonable amount of time to avert disaster.

I can see where you are coming from there is obviously a point where you pull the panic button but we are a long way off that i cant see us being anywhere near the bottom of the league

But going by the decision making of our board if they had to.make a change it would be too late ????

[Clyde01]

Can't understand why people keep comparing to duffys first two seasons. Duffy had to build a team from nothing and it took time to develop.

Ferguson took over a much stronger team with many decent players for this level and a defined system of play. In his infinite wisdom he chose to tear that all up and alienate or get rid of our best players. He has brought in a bunch of loanees and players without the required dig and fight for this level.

I dont think it was unreasonable to expect a strong season given the base we had to build on from last year and by changing things so dramatically ferguson has put himself under pressure. Right now it certainly doesnt look like all his changes have made us a better side.

[salute]

Quick question for everyone, if the unimaginable happened and we did finish bottom (something I honestly don't think will happen) would we beat Edinburgh City or Spartans over two legs with the set of players we currently have?

more sleepless nights

[ScottR96]

Unless I'm missing someone blatantly obvious, I'd probably only take back McCluskey, MacDonald and McColm* from the world beaters that Barry has allegedly torn apart. McColm being the only departure out of those three that Ferguson has presided over. The rest (Sweeney, Capuano, McKinnon et al) had their merits but were nothing special.

*and Pat Scullion, obviously.

[BrigtonClyde]

I can see where you are coming from there is obviously a point where you pull the panic button but we are a long way off that i cant see us being anywhere near the bottom of the league

OK, we'll put aside the fact we were all getting told in the summer that the aim was to kick on again from last season

Just based on what you've said there. Certainly true it's a very tight league, which has helped Clyde reach 5th by mid November having won only 1 game at home and amassed 41% of the points available. But theyre still only 6 points ahead of Elgin, which isn't a long way off being bottom.

But we know the consequence of finishing last. Yes that can apply to at least 4 or 5 other sides, but that's their problem. Clyde need to take care of their own business and not rely on others. So if by Xmas there's more of a gap between Clyde and bottom spot then that could suggest he's been turning things around and there's at least an argument he should be given time.

But if it's still tight by then, or even closer, do you stick with him on a gut instinct he might at some point turn it around? If so, how long? January? February? How long is reasonable for someone else to come in and try & sort it out?

To answer Scott's point above. In theory I don't have a problem replacing last year's team with better players. By definition you wouldnt be in Scotland's lower leagues if you had world beaters. The only way you can judge what's been brought in is through results. Are these better than last season's? Do you think you need more than 3 or 4 months for a side to gel?

The hope is that by Xmas things have improved, and they might do. But surely it's reasonable to consider options by then if they haven't.

[ScottR96]

To answer Scott's point above. In theory I don't have a problem replacing last year's team with better players. By definition you wouldnt be in Scotland's lower leagues if you had world beaters. The only way you can judge what's been brought in is through results. Are these better than last season's? Do you think you need more than 3 or 4 months for a side to gel?

No, they aren't better than last season's. At this stage last season we were only one defeat better off. I don't really think drawing comparisons between this season and last is relevant in any case, almost every circumstance imaginable changes invariably. The most blatant one in our case being the fact we have a new manager. Whether you like a manager or not, he's going to need time to install his ideas into the team whether it's the same squad as last year or a different squad. So yes, I do believe a squad needs that length of time to gel. The league doesn't begin to take shape until after Christmas anyway; since we love comparing this season's division to last years', it'll be worth noting that Peterhead never got to the top until they beat us in January/February I'm sure. They ended up winning the league at a canter. I suspect we'll see a similar situation this time around too with Arbroath only having a 2 point lead at this stage.

The nature of some defeats under Ferguson have been disappointing. Rangers and Spartans in particular were nothing short of embarrassing but I'd argue we've improved somewhat since the start of the season. We hit the ground running with decent performances off Ayr and Cowdenbeath and an opening day win at Queen's Park. After pretty poor subsequent performances, Ferguson changed the formation about a bit before finding one that suited us and we started to see results. Now we need to try and get a bit of consistency in our results. We're definitely getting there so it's ridiculous to suggest a manager should be given his jotters so soon when it's clear he's implementing changes when necessary and is still on track to achieve the start of season target of a top 4 finish.

[BrigtonClyde]

No, they aren't better than last season's. At this stage last season we were only one defeat better off. I don't really think drawing comparisons between this season and last is relevant in any case, almost every circumstance imaginable changes invariably. The most blatant one in our case being the fact we have a new manager. Whether you like a manager or not, he's going to need time to install his ideas into the team whether it's the same squad as last year or a different squad. So yes, I do believe a squad needs that length of time to gel. The league doesn't begin to take shape until after Christmas anyway; since we love comparing this season's division to last years', it'll be worth noting that Peterhead never got to the top until they beat us in January/February I'm sure. They ended up winning the league at a canter. I suspect we'll see a similar situation this time around too with Arbroath only having a 2 point lead at this stage.

The nature of some defeats under Ferguson have been disappointing. Rangers and Spartans in particular were nothing short of embarrassing but I'd argue we've improved somewhat since the start of the season. We hit the ground running with decent performances off Ayr and Cowdenbeath and an opening day win at Queen's Park. After pretty poor subsequent performances, Ferguson changed the formation about a bit before finding one that suited us and we started to see results. Now we need to try and get a bit of consistency in our results. We're definitely getting there so it's ridiculous to suggest a manager should be given his jotters so soon when it's clear he's implementing changes when necessary and is still on track to achieve the start of season target of a top 4 finish.

Ive not said he should be shown the door at the moment. I have said it's wise to assess things around Xmas, as unlike last season there are far bigger implications for a team should they end up bottom. So the risk factor has increased.

The point about the players is simple. Had he been working with primarily the same group of players as last year, and results / points total were more or less in line with last year, then that's pretty consistent. Or even had it been the case that a large section of the team had been sold on and he was starting from scratch, again that's fair enough. He has made the decision that many weren't good enough, and replaced them with what he'd deem better. So it's reasonable to expect improvement on last year on that basis.

I don't agree at this level it should take many months for a team to gel. Plenty of examples in our own history where that wasn't the case. But certainly getting his main forwards back should help. It could be it starts moving in the right direction, and if it does, ideal. I'm only asking that if it doesn't, and the team are in among the bottom 3 by the turn of the year, does it remain everyone's opinion he should be given the whole season to at least keep them up? If not, what's the cut off date?

[cfcuk]

Ive not said he should be shown the door at the moment. I have said it's wise to assess things around Xmas, as unlike last season there are far bigger implications for a team should they end up bottom. So the risk factor has increased.

The point about the players is simple. Had he been working with primarily the same group of players as last year, and results / points total were more or less in line with last year, then that's pretty consistent. Or even had it been the case that a large section of the team had been sold on and he was starting from scratch, again that's fair enough. He has made the decision that many weren't good enough, and replaced them with what he'd deem better. So it's reasonable to expect improvement on last year on that basis.

I don't agree at this level it should take many months for a team to gel. Plenty of examples in our own history where that wasn't the case. But certainly getting his main forwards back should help. It could be it starts moving in the right direction, and if it does, ideal. I'm only asking that if it doesn't, and the team are in among the bottom 3 by the turn of the year, does it remain everyone's opinion he should be given the whole season to at least keep them up? If not, what's the cut off date?

we did lose mcdonald and mccluskey they certainly werent replaced before he took over if the club are to believed John Sweeney had to be persuaded to come back for the new season , so think it inevitable that he would go . I dont think scullion was a great loss as was only really an impact sub Good argument to say that mccolm should have been kept (again dont know about him travelling for training 3 nights a week ) Capuano again not the worst and probably better than some of the midfielders we have brought in.

I agree there is a point where you would look at his position , when I would say with say 8 or 9 games to go but for me it would be second bottom or bottom of the league and say 4 /6 points from safety

He is also on a three year contract dont know if he would asked to be paid ,would doubt it

Once we get the strikers back I think we will challenge for the play offs is that good enough ?

[Clyde01]

As long as we are closer to the playoffs than the bottom he should get more time. However this season is looking transitional again rather than a progression from last.

With regards to the players perhaps only mccolm and Sweeney were a loss but more concerning is the treatment/banishing of barclay, marsh, mcqueen, daly and fergie. All of whom are very capable at this level and played a massive part last season. Yet this season they have been sidelined or played out of position leading to loss of confidence on what should have been the spine of the team.

[BrigtonClyde]

I agree there is a point where you would look at his position , when I would say with say 8 or 9 games to go but for me it would be second bottom or bottom of the league and say 4 /6 points from safety

That was all I was really asking. So you're thinking would be that if by roughly early March, Clyde were either bottom or second bottom of the league, and at least 4, possibly 6 points from 3rd bottom, then might be the time to think about doing something about it

ok