The Clyde FC 2018-19 Thread

[Pride Of The Clyde]

8 hours ago, sydney said:

The AR game was before the QP game so that doesn’t work. If that’s the club’s argument then it’s only the QP game that’s relevant and they’d never allow that to be replayed as we could win it. 

I stand corrected, for some reason I got it the wrong way around.

[Officer Barbrady]

2 hours ago, Bullyme said:

There has always been a split in the clyde support. Can someone tell me why

Just the one? 

[Bullyme]

You seem to be the man in the know. Do you hold a position at the club

[Clydeontheup]

5 hours ago, Bullyme said:

There has always been a split in the clyde support. Can someone tell me why

I blame Bobby Blazer 

[Officer Barbrady]

50 minutes ago, Bullyme said:

You seem to be the man in the know. Do you hold a position at the club

Lol.

[Bullyme]

Just one of these idiots that likes to think they know it all. There are many like you at Broadwood. 

[Clydeontheup]

4 minutes ago, Bullyme said:

Just one of these idiots that likes to think they know it all. There are many like you at Broadwood. 

Seems a tad harsh ?

[Bullyme]

The truth can be harsh at times for some

[Officer Barbrady]

12 minutes ago, Bullyme said:

Just one of these idiots that likes to think they know it all. There are many like you at Broadwood. 

And yet, here are YOU, purporting to "know it all" about many at the ground. Why don't you f**k off and ask them, what the problems are? 

[Officer Barbrady]

9 minutes ago, Clydeontheup said:

Seems a tad harsh ?

No, no. Let him have his wee rant. A good back-and-forth will at least air some grievances. 

[Officer Barbrady]

27 minutes ago, Clydeontheup said:

I blame Bobby Blazer 

Tbf, it (or they) existed a long time before him. He was nowhere near personable enough to gain the trust required in order to engineer a split, of any sort, of his own. I'd go so far as to say his presence alone, was a by-product OF an already-split fanbase.

[clyde4ever]

I've just remembered why I stopped visiting this site.

The same Clyde fans (some now with different aliases) spouting the same crap, a lot of it needing an Enigma machine to decipher, doing their best to wind up other Clyde fans.

Even when we've got a decent team, on a winning run, they still feel the need to stir things up.

I was there on Saturday, and I've no idea what "quite a cancer among the support on Saturday" refers to either .

[Bullyme]

It was a simple question. Why has there always seemed to be a split in the support. Always seemed a few think they are aloof.  I'm not winding anyone up. Best season in years but some still not happy. 

[strichener]

21 hours ago, haufdaft said:

 

 

JS, I agree with most of your post apart from the section above.

If the rule is that responsibility for ensuring eligibility falls entirely on the club, it should not matter a jot what the SFA told Peterhead.

 

Just to be clear here, the club discharged that responsibility by calling the governing body that is responsible for issuing the list of ineligible players to check if the player was eligible or not.  The SFA confirmed (later denied) that the player was eligible to play for the club.

I think it is rather simplistic in the current climate of loans etc. for the clubs to be held responsible for the inability of the governing bodies to keep on top of their admin.  Taking this to it's logical conclusion - if you cannot trust the SPFL/SFA to tell you which players are and are not eligible after specifically asking then no player can be guaranteed to be eligible.

Edited April 3, 2019 by strichener

[shawfield shed boy]

Just to be clear here, the club discharged that responsibility by calling the governing body that is responsible for issuing the list of ineligible players to check if the player was eligible or not.  The SFA confirmed (later denied) that the player was eligible to play for the club.
I think it is rather simplistic in the current climate of loans etc. for the clubs to be held responsible for the inability of the governing bodies to keep on top of their admin.  Taking this to it's logical conclusion - if you cannot trust the SPFL/SFA to tell you which players are and are not eligible after specifically asking then no player can be guaranteed to be eligible.

[emoji122]

[cfcuk]

Just to be clear here, the club discharged that responsibility by calling the governing body that is responsible for issuing the list of ineligible players to check if the player was eligible or not.  The SFA confirmed (later denied) that the player was eligible to play for the club.
I think it is rather simplistic in the current climate of loans etc. for the clubs to be held responsible for the inability of the governing bodies to keep on top of their admin.  Taking this to it's logical conclusion - if you cannot trust the SPFL/SFA to tell you which players are and are not eligible after specifically asking then no player can be guaranteed to be eligible.

difference was I don't think anybody at our club checked with the SPFL / SFA had they and we had been told the player was eligible then we would have a very strong case. Just need to see what happens with the appeal, bottom line it was our own fault nobody else. The debate really is around the punishment and at the end of the day I'm sure we will try and put up the strongest case possible to appeal the punishment . The nightmare scenario for us we lose the appeal and we end up 3 points behind the eventual league winners I really hope that doesn't happen mostly for the sake of the players who through the fault of the club would have missed out on a winners medal.

[Officer Barbrady]

6 hours ago, Bullyme said:

It was a simple question. Why has there always seemed to be a split in the support. Always seemed a few think they are aloof.  I'm not winding anyone up. Best season in years but some still not happy. 

I'll assume the second sentence is a question.

 

Far from being a "know it all", i have no idea why a"few think they are aloof". There's very little societal differences among the support (now, or 30 years ago) to justify why anyone would be "aloof". Perhaps this observation of yours is of a personality nature, than a class-related one. 

 

And even if it were the "best season in years", perhaps where a "few think they are aloof", others aren't as fickle, to simply go with the flow on it, and are "still not happy" for a reason. 

 

But as i said, i'm no "know it all", so i can only pre-empt any questions you have.

[Only one David Marsh]

Paul Shields is eligible 

[Bullyme]

11 minutes ago, Officer Barbrady said:

I'll assume the second sentence is a question.

 

Far from being a "know it all", i have no idea why a"few think they are aloof". There's very little societal differences among the support (now, or 30 years ago) to justify why anyone would be "aloof". Perhaps this observation of yours is of a personality nature, than a class-related one. 

 

And even if it were the "best season in years", perhaps where a "few think they are aloof", others aren't as fickle, to simply go with the flow on it, and are "still not happy" for a reason. 

 

But as i said, i'm no "know it all", so i can only pre-empt any questions you have.

I'm not a member of any branch but have noticed over the years that a good few fans think the Glasgow branch guys are nothing but an embarrassment to the club. Yes they can be a but rowdy but the vast majority I believe are good clyde men who have been going for years. 

[Officer Barbrady]

6 minutes ago, Bullyme said:

I'm not a member of any branch but have noticed over the years that a good few fans think the Glasgow branch guys are nothing but an embarrassment to the club. Yes they can be a but rowdy but the vast majority I believe are good clyde men who have been going for years. 

I believe this to be true, but unfortunately it's just one of those things. You should see some of the garbage on the official site, for proper embarrassment.