shawfield shed boy Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 Hats off to Brigton Clyde for taking the time and effort to try and start something to save our clubs famous name while other constantly bicker,Post snide remarks at every turn and do basically fuk all.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_BullyWee Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 Hats off to Brigton Clyde for taking the time and effort to try and start something to save our clubs famous name while other constantly bicker,Post snide remarks at every turn and do basically fuk all.... That may be the case but going by the way the guy posts he doesn't go to games anymore and anytime we lose he is usually on pretty quickly to make comments about Alexander and last week he start posting about the meeting that was going to take place and would be the start of trying to help start something about sorting out things at the club and going by his earlier post tonight he has wrapped it already. As pointed out that 257 of 307 people voted for the name change but I feel that if this vote was to take place again soon I don't think the vote would be anything like the same. There is also something like 388 members now according to the main website the last time I saw it. I wasn't a member at the time of the vote but I would have voted Yes but I will be joining as a member in the new year and if a re-vote did take place I would probably vote No after what has happened with the lack of progress with the move. We need as many people to join the CIC and get as much ideas as possible to take the club forward and if yesterday has started something then hopefully more things will happen as a result of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garrowhillclyde Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 who cares Me. And you too I suspect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Haddock Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 I'm with you Garrowhill and I'm sure Jim is too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clyde4life Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 If I may offer a small opinion, based purely on a little confusion more than anything else. Firstly I don't agree with any fishwives comments, if anyone is out there trying to improve the situation at the club they should not be ridiculed. Secondly, it's no secret that Brigton and I very rarely see eye to eye, but the day we are both denied opinions, is a very bad day. Now, here's where I get confused! I ventured over to the area at half time to listen to what was going to be said, and all I seen was a couple of regular supporters, a less than part time supporter who has regularly brought my children into "debates" and that was about it. I walked back to where I sit and saw the chairman speaking with maybe 5 or 6 guys. So in my opinion only, any action or anything else moving forward would be a very small measure. As I said, I did not take part or was privy to any of the "meeting" but what I gather from posts is that it may be a resolution to prevent any name change ever. Correct me if I'm wrong. As I have stated previously should a vote ever come about again I don't think there's any way it would go through. What I am confused about is why this is coming to fruition just now, when the name change has actually been shelved for lack of a better term. You even have the most anti cic on here in Cannibal stating he may join to register his vote on such a topic. So again I ask why now? Is it because of on field matters, was the vote clouded by a better performing team at the time? Personally I would take an educated guess that I would not vote in favour of a name change should it come around again, but would still like to be in possession of all mitigating facts at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShawfieldAggro Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 After having zero direct contact with anyone who was actually present on Saturday, a few interested individuals in my work, including three once-active supporters, and half a dozen relatives and friends of supporters, related largely the same version described by C4L. What may have appeared a necessary action, has either come too late for many, or been a bit too ambiguous to catch the imagination. Anything i've heard has only served to strengthen Alexander's position. He must have looked great going back to his seat after approaching and dispersing the assembly of three or more individuals, knowing he has the lot tied up like a Tory backbencher in a basque and stilletoes with an orange in his mouth. Now, if its a numbers game, then the walkout of 2009 got a lot more of the message through, even saw board members crack under the strain, and had the weight of a large number of supporters behind its motive. Or maybe BC is right....no one gives a solitary shit any longer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfcuk Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 Clyde 4 life I think the complete reversal of the name change vote could be a starting point to try and get the fans together again , it was extremely divisive and as you know I was fervently against it from day one . THe biggest problem I see at the moment is that fans have been disengaged with the club I am in the CIC but don't feel a greater clyde than before I joined I am like everyone a Clyde man till I die The big thing for me is we need something to rally around and get the fans enthused again , how achieve that ? I think we do need a far more charismatic chairman and a bit more dynamism on the board a clear plan of where we want to be in 5 to 10 years a community to get involved with . There are good things going on at the club but it's a all fragmented Finally the present board have done a lot good things but I feel it does need change Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cannibal Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 If I may offer a small opinion, based purely on a little confusion more than anything else. Firstly I don't agree with any fishwives comments, if anyone is out there trying to improve the situation at the club they should not be ridiculed. Secondly, it's no secret that Brigton and I very rarely see eye to eye, but the day we are both denied opinions, is a very bad day. Now, here's where I get confused! I ventured over to the area at half time to listen to what was going to be said, and all I seen was a couple of regular supporters, a less than part time supporter who has regularly brought my children into "debates" and that was about it. I walked back to where I sit and saw the chairman speaking with maybe 5 or 6 guys. So in my opinion only, any action or anything else moving forward would be a very small measure. As I said, I did not take part or was privy to any of the "meeting" but what I gather from posts is that it may be a resolution to prevent any name change ever. Correct me if I'm wrong. As I have stated previously should a vote ever come about again I don't think there's any way it would go through. What I am confused about is why this is coming to fruition just now, when the name change has actually been shelved for lack of a better term. You even have the most anti cic on here in Cannibal stating he may join to register his vote on such a topic. So again I ask why now? Is it because of on field matters, was the vote clouded by a better performing team at the time? Personally I would take an educated guess that I would not vote in favour of a name change should it come around again, but would still like to be in possession of all mitigating facts at the time. I can't speak for anyone else but I am not anti-CIC in principle, so I cannot be the most anti CIC in here. I am anti the actions of the current board and failed to see the point in paying 30 quid to get access to a members forum, and to be honest had I been a member I would probably have "resigned" in disgust after the previous vote. Anyway, that is another discussion. When you say the name change has been shelved you are COMPLETELY WRONG. The Chairman has engineered a situation where he can claim he is acting on the instructions of the owners to seek a move to EK and change our name. Yes, these plans may have come to nothing so far but that IS the situation. Changing the name of our club is his JOB as instructed by the owners by a huge majority. The ONLY way to stop it is to have another vote. That is why I would consider joining I also think we need to unify the fans here - that is when fan ownership can work. We might have to move again - we might not. What we can't do is be split into factions or lose any more of our fanbase so outside influences can take control (or finish) our club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Burton Posted December 2, 2014 Share Posted December 2, 2014 I don't think you would have much difficulty in having the vote on the name change reversed. The problem you will find is finding some willing to take the lead and drive it forward. The fan base is split, a large number no longer attend and there is a general feeling of apathy around the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the bigger picture Posted December 2, 2014 Share Posted December 2, 2014 As one who no longer attends after a lifetime of supporting the cause, maybe an open meeting held somewhere in Ruggie may entice a few more than the brave few on Saturday. Noticed one poster berated for accusing the chairman of manipulating on field events. Not so crazy as it sounds. Who employs any staff at the club. Can choose anybody he likes, membership have no say because it is not a true members club. Just remember the Third Lanark fiasco. Act soon and good luck . Would back anything that restores the only name there should be! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.