The Clyde FC 2018-19 Thread

[haufdaft]

 

 

 

McStay is just young and still learning. He is one of those players who always takes a risk and when he plays a poor pass, his next couple of passes are similarily ambitious which means he attracts criticism.

He is still exceptionally talented and he has played really well the last two games. The same people who want him dropped would have him back in the team the next game.

 

A couple of posters have stated that Currie is a good/decent shot stopper. I can't agree. Rarely does he pull off a save you wouldn't expect him to.

 

He plays as we have no better alternative.

 

 

I'm sorry but McStay is not "exceptionally talented". League two is his level.

 

Like Currie, he plays as we have no better alternative.

 

 

 

[Officer Barbrady]

14 minutes ago, haufdaft said:

 

A couple of posters have stated that Currie is a good/decent shot stopper. I can't agree. Rarely does he pull off a save you wouldn't expect him to.

 

He plays as we have no better alternative.

 

 

I'm sorry but McStay is not "exceptionally talented". League two is his level.

 

Like Currie, he plays as we have no better alternative.

 

 

 

Each to their own, and its difficult to disagree that he is in any sort of form commanding the opportunity to play at a higher level. Indeed, we've taken another player of once international quality and made him look flatly ordinary in six months. 

 

But prior to that, CMS in particular showed signs of an incisive midfield orchestator while DG was in equally deadly form. Personally i'd persevere with him if offered a suitable direct replacement for Currie, than offered ANOTHER midfielder while BC continues unabated and seemingly above criticism while we stumble around in 3rd or 4th place, or more importantly potentially double figures of points behind by Christmas. That's not the result of one or two players in rocky form, but of other factors.

 

Of course, if my double figure prediction comes up, those flatly denying we have a problem never mind discussing it then get to blitz us with their tyranny of positivity just like last year. Much like what a friend of mine referred to as the "Steve McLaren: Middlesbrough in Europe" theory.

 

It almost worked when Lennon hit the ground running last year but unfortunately has given our lunatic fringe the belief that just means we need to keep on bloody doing it.

[the_bully_wee]

Squad depth, certainly in the context of a title-challenging side, is a bit of an issue for us, particularly when we have an injury in a fairly important area and a number of players who are prone to inconsistent performances (Lamont, especially, of recent starters).

Grant's distribution from left back is sound and I've quite liked it when he has played there and come inside to supplement the midfield in transition, but when he hit the post on Saturday that is pretty much the first time he's ever looked comfortable advancing into the opponent's third. Defensively he is poor in the wide areas and doesn't have a burst of pace to compensate for that. Contrasting all of that with Stewart, who - while not by any means Marcelo - is a natural left back and has performed consistently well since signing for us, and adds an advancing threat down the left side (see Stirling away). The current set-up leaves us a bit imbalanced and predictable going forward.

As much as performances haven't been good enough, we've been very profligate with chances of late. Saturday's was probably the most extreme example of this, but in front of goal Goodwillie has been bang out of form for some time now and his poor finishing has hampered us. If he'd had his shooting boots on at the weekend he could have won the game on his own. Even at his worst he is still valuable, though, but he has to be more of a team player no matter how desperate he is to get back to the goalscoring form he's capable of.

BrigtonClyde has been calling for a back three for a while, but I don't think Lennon has even tried it out in a competitive game with us, even when he first came in and we'd been playing that way for a while. I doubt we will ever see him employing such a system and, even if he were to, we don't have anyone other than Stewart who could effectively fill a wing-back role on the left side.

Lennon has had two windows of signings really and the failure rate of the second is akin to the success rate of the first. Ferns was rank, Gorman appears similar, Rumsby is adequate as back-up. Rankin, when played in the right role, looks a very good acquisition. Lyon is only 20 so may be one for the future but I don't think he's enough about him to stake a serious claim at present, and Karim smacked of being a panic signing as we needed *someone* capable of playing up front. Full of tricks, but I have concerns over his tactical awareness. The jury is out on Syvertsen I'd say but he's not currently taking up a wage.

It's hard to all-out lambast Lennon for this as he did what every fan wanted in keeping together the team which finished last season, and most probably thought that would be enough to sustain a title challenge this season. For several reasons, though, it hasn't been, so I think in January we will see a handful of transactions with the aim of getting more bang for our buck and shifting some dross/adding a few players capable of making an impact. If Lennon gets that - and his tactics - right then there's no reason why we can't go up via the playoffs as at worst.

[Officer Barbrady]

1 hour ago, the_bully_wee said:

Squad depth, certainly in the context of a title-challenging side, is a bit of an issue for us, particularly when we have an injury in a fairly important area and a number of players who are prone to inconsistent performances (Lamont, especially, of recent starters).

Grant's distribution from left back is sound and I've quite liked it when he has played there and come inside to supplement the midfield in transition, but when he hit the post on Saturday that is pretty much the first time he's ever looked comfortable advancing into the opponent's third. Defensively he is poor in the wide areas and doesn't have a burst of pace to compensate for that. Contrasting all of that with Stewart, who - while not by any means Marcelo - is a natural left back and has performed consistently well since signing for us, and adds an advancing threat down the left side (see Stirling away). The current set-up leaves us a bit imbalanced and predictable going forward.

As much as performances haven't been good enough, we've been very profligate with chances of late. Saturday's was probably the most extreme example of this, but in front of goal Goodwillie has been bang out of form for some time now and his poor finishing has hampered us. If he'd had his shooting boots on at the weekend he could have won the game on his own. Even at his worst he is still valuable, though, but he has to be more of a team player no matter how desperate he is to get back to the goalscoring form he's capable of.

BrigtonClyde has been calling for a back three for a while, but I don't think Lennon has even tried it out in a competitive game with us, even when he first came in and we'd been playing that way for a while. I doubt we will ever see him employing such a system and, even if he were to, we don't have anyone other than Stewart who could effectively fill a wing-back role on the left side.

Lennon has had two windows of signings really and the failure rate of the second is akin to the success rate of the first. Ferns was rank, Gorman appears similar, Rumsby is adequate as back-up. Rankin, when played in the right role, looks a very good acquisition. Lyon is only 20 so may be one for the future but I don't think he's enough about him to stake a serious claim at present, and Karim smacked of being a panic signing as we needed *someone* capable of playing up front. Full of tricks, but I have concerns over his tactical awareness. The jury is out on Syvertsen I'd say but he's not currently taking up a wage.

It's hard to all-out lambast Lennon for this as he did what every fan wanted in keeping together the team which finished last season, and most probably thought that would be enough to sustain a title challenge this season. For several reasons, though, it hasn't been, so I think in January we will see a handful of transactions with the aim of getting more bang for our buck and shifting some dross/adding a few players capable of making an impact. If Lennon gets that - and his tactics - right then there's no reason why we can't go up via the playoffs as at worst.

A highly unorthodox (for the thread) and fully reasonable post indeed. 

 

One difference (or proof of the theory) is that only two of nine signings since June 1st have played in a decent number of matches, and the vast majority of those signed in the summer had played under Lennon before. Rumsby and Rankin of course being two of those who hadn't, and both feature in virtually every game.

 

Contrast this with January's half dozen who were retained in June. Three are first picks, Boyle and Lang returning from injury to hopefully fill gaping wounds in the team as it stands, but Love out the picture seemingly. Yet Ally is the only one to have played under him before. Twice, as it goes.

 

Any meat on the bones from these findings, to suggest the recruitment may be the issue if blindly handed to the manager to peruse and sign players accordingly?

[FREDDYFRY]

It’s patently obvious we are in a much better position performance wise from the Ferguson era, but I am as inpatient as anyone to get a team together that can get out of this league. Unfortunately  it’s not easy to win a league and its pretty obvious that the present  team are two or three players (at least) short of doing that.  If it’s possible to do anything in January we might still have an outside chance.

As ever it will depend if the manager can move some guys on; Gorman,  Duffie, Belmokhtar being the obvious ones. Love and Syvertson being the others at a push although I do think they still much to offer. Syvertson I would like to see wide where we have seen glimpses of a player there.

I also think that it’s time to perhaps persevere with Jack Boyle as a starter for a run of half a dozen games. I think he has been injured but as a young player he will be inconsistent but sometimes you just have to give a run to these guys and live with it to ultimately get the best out of him. To me one of the biggest issues other than full back is that we desperately need an Nicol type player but one who is actually able to do something constructive in an attacking sense or can keep the ball better, not blaming him personally I can understand why Lennon plays him, for physical presence I presume, but playing that role requires a bit more if we are to be a title winning side. 

 Finally on Currie, he is not the worst we have had but  again title winning teams don’t have a keeper who makes the mistakes as regularly as he goes simple as that, if we could get hold of someone better he would be an excellent back up, won’t happen though.

[the_bully_wee]

1 hour ago, Officer Barbrady said:

A highly unorthodox (for the thread) and fully reasonable post indeed. 

One difference (or proof of the theory) is that only two of nine signings since June 1st have played in a decent number of matches, and the vast majority of those signed in the summer had played under Lennon before. Rumsby and Rankin of course being two of those who hadn't, and both feature in virtually every game.

Contrast this with January's half dozen who were retained in June. Three are first picks, Boyle and Lang returning from injury to hopefully fill gaping wounds in the team as it stands, but Love out the picture seemingly. Yet Ally is the only one to have played under him before. Twice, as it goes.

Any meat on the bones from these findings, to suggest the recruitment may be the issue if blindly handed to the manager to peruse and sign players accordingly?

I think the reality is that the loss of Lamont/Boyle's full-time sharpness has meant that we were always likely to suffer a wee bit in terms of intensity from the end of last season. Boyle's failure thus far to show what he's capable of on a consistent basis (though he could perhaps have received more suitable opportunities to stake a claim) means he's probably right to be on the bench. It's hard to pick out one individual player you'd have him starting ahead of right now; I don't think our attacking play has been too bad of late, we've just struggled with final balls and finishing. I don't know if Boyle and Cogill are a package deal or what their out-of-football situations are, but I doubt they'd relocate up here to play part-time for a pittance. Cogill is representing value at the moment, but I don't really think Boyle is. Hopefully he can improve and not go down the Scott Ferguson route. Lang also came in at the start of January, amid interest in his services from Peterhead. I doubt he will be on a small wage either, and despite having excellent physical attributes, I'm not convinced he is good enough in any of the three positions we've used him in to justify that. At centre back, he is third choice at best, at right back I would equally have him as third choice, and as a defensive midfielder he would be way down the pecking order. A bit harsh, maybe, but depending on his wage maybe one to look at moving on. Love is a tricky one; he will similarly, one would imagine, be on decent money but I don't believe he really fits into the picture. However, he started his career as a left-back prior to being utilised further forward. Could that be something worth looking into if Stewart's absence is long-term?

I'm not sure what the situation with recruitment is; I could be wrong, but going back a while to his time at Arbroath was Allan Moore not known for having good contacts within the game? He took Jordan Lowdon there after he'd been in Australia and it could be the case that a few of our "out of nowhere" signings (McStay and Grant, Syvertsen) were down to him. Lennon obviously brought Boyle and Cogill in due to a contact at Huddersfield, and had worked with Love (albeit long ago as a youngster in a different position), Ferns and Gorman. 

Our squad is better than good as it is, but we're not getting the best out of it at the moment and I think that it could - and should - be better; I don't think we are in a noticeably stronger position than we were in April with regards to squad strength/depth, which should be the aim window-on-window. In each individual position of our strongest XI I would say we possess players who would get into the sides of most other clubs in the division, which is about as much as you can ask for without a huge budget. I think Currie is becoming a bit of a scapegoat for poor performances; he's had a couple of howlers this season but his distribution is excellent and, in a bigger-picture sense, important to have within the framework of how we play, almost like a tinpot faux-Ederson. His shot-stopping is good and his decision-making has improved markedly since Lennon arrived. I think it's incredibly harsh that folk are having a go at him for the second goal on Saturday when an opposing player was free, on the by-line, in acres of space due to collective brain farts from at least two outfield players. He's no Alan Martin but he's probably the second-best regular 'keeper we've had since David Hutton. 

9 minutes ago, FREDDYFRY said:

As ever it will depend if the manager can move some guys on; Gorman,  Duffie, Belmokhtar being the obvious ones. Love and Syvertson being the others at a push although I do think they still much to offer. Syvertson I would like to see wide where we have seen glimpses of a player there.

I also think that it’s time to perhaps persevere with Jack Boyle as a starter for a run of half a dozen games. I think he has been injured but as a young player he will be inconsistent but sometimes you just have to give a run to these guys and live with it to ultimately get the best out of him. To me one of the biggest issues other than full back is that we desperately need an Nicol type player but one who is actually able to do something constructive in an attacking sense or can keep the ball better, not blaming him personally I can understand why Lennon plays him, for physical presence I presume, but playing that role requires a bit more if we are to be a title winning side. 

 Finally on Currie, he is not the worst we have had but  again title winning teams don’t have a keeper who makes the mistakes as regularly as he goes simple as that, if we could get hold of someone better he would be an excellent back up, won’t happen though.

I would be shocked if, by the end of January, Joe Gorman is still a Clyde player. Probably the poorest signing made to date, as at least Eddie Ferns gave us a few laughs. Duffie is a toughie (sorry) - Cuddihy has made the right-back position his own but if he requires to be utilised in midfield then that leaves us with Duffie and Lang as alternatives. I don't like Lang there whatsoever, so it comes down to what Lennon values more - the "versatility" and relative youth of Lang or the dependency of Duffie at right-back. I think one of the two will depart. Belmokhtar going would be a bit revolving door, but I don't think he fits in to be honest and is a bit of a luxury player who was signed out of desperation. Love is one who I would personally allow to leave, and Syvertsen - as stated - is an amateur so (at the moment) he doesn't really affect things. Based on what I've seen so far though, I'd rather have him over Love and Belmokhtar. 

Covered Boyle a little above; I think he deserves some sort of an opportunity (if he's sorting/sorted his fitness/injury issues) but it shouldn't come during our next three games, two of which are on tight cabbage patches and the other against a very physical side in Annan. McStay is strong and a good ball-carrier; I think in this slightly deeper role he's figured in these last two games he could be the player you speak of. Whether it's his or Lennon's decision for him to try to play killer passes as frequently as he does, I'm not sure, but I think we'd benefit from him playing it a bit simpler, particularly when he's deployed deeper. Would also pair him with Grant for home games, particularly those against sides which don't pose a great aerial threat. 

[Replays]

A side-note but I never actually realised that Barry Cuddihy is only 21. I knew he was young but not quite that young. He’s undoubtedly developed really well under Lennon and he I think he’ll go on to have a good career (hopefully with us etc).

[David W]

Called it. Everything you'd want in a youngster; naturally fit, technically good, knows where to be in a defensive shape and plays with his head up.

He actually played a bit as a right back for St Mirren, so the fact he's done well there isn't much of a surprise.

[Pride Of The Clyde]

11 hours ago, David W said:

Called it. Everything you'd want in a youngster; naturally fit, technically good, knows where to be in a defensive shape and plays with his head up.

He actually played a bit as a right back for St Mirren, so the fact he's done well there isn't much of a surprise.

I’ll admit you did call it at a time when I never thought Cuddihy had anything about him, he has turned into a fine player and probably our most consistent player, he slotted in well at RB and could also be an asset in midfield.

[Adolfo Rios]

AGM last night was Interesting. Norrie was open and honest as always. Wants to open dialogue around the club structure and how we go forward, CIC limited by shares was mentioned as one possible option.

Keen that the club takes root in Cumbernauld but not forgetting our Glasgow DNA. Opened up the possibility of a wee update under that badge to include both Cumbernauld and Glasgow. Was keen to emphasise this would not be a name change. Just an aesthetic change to the badge. Two directors for re-election voted back in to the board.

Various other matters discussed but these(CIC structure and badge) were two of the main talking points. Someone with a better memory, and more than the 4 hours sleep I’ve had, may fill in the blanks better.

Pitch will be relaid in 2019. Take what you will from that regarding the other inhabitants at Broadwood [emoji6].

[haufdaft]

After the meeting last night I did wonder if there had been expressions of interest in investing in the club re. CIC Ltd.

I'm not keen on any change to the badge. I support the team not the town.

An interesting AGM.

[cfcuk]

AGM last night was Interesting. Norrie was open and honest as always. Wants to open dialogue around the club structure and how we go forward, CIC limited by shares was mentioned as one possible option.

Keen that the club takes root in Cumbernauld but not forgetting our Glasgow DNA. Opened up the possibility of a wee update under that badge to include both Cumbernauld and Glasgow. Was keen to emphasise this would not be a name change. Just an aesthetic change to the badge. Two directors for re-election voted back in to the board.

Various other matters discussed but these(CIC structure and badge) were two of the main talking points. Someone with a better memory, and more than the 4 hours sleep I’ve had, may fill in the blanks better.

Pitch will be relaid in 2019. Take what you will from that regarding the other inhabitants at Broadwood [emoji6].

Usual stuff aesthetic oh wasn't that what we were told about the name change ?
Pathetic beyond believe heard it went down well not surprised by that sane group of people who wanted to sell the clubs name for a the peppercorn rent at a stadium that was never built

Clyde fc now Clyde fc always

[scot-gcar709]

I would be interested in seeing exactly what they propose to change the badge because i can't really see how they could change it in a way that doesn't completely change is appearance which i doubt many fans would support

[Adolfo Rios]

Usual stuff aesthetic oh wasn't that what we were told about the name change ?

Pathetic beyond believe heard it went down well not surprised by that sane group of people who wanted to sell the clubs name for a the peppercorn rent at a stadium that was never built

 

Clyde fc now Clyde fc always

 

I personally feel this is completely different to EK fiasco. Norrie was adamant this was not now nor intended to be anything like a name change. We would still be Clyde FC. Only the badge to say two lines under this that shows were we play now and where we are from.

 

This isn’t a certainty to happen. This was to gauge opinion on what those present thought about it. Nothing more at this stage.

[Adolfo Rios]

22 minutes ago, scot-gcar709 said:

I would be interested in seeing exactly what they propose to change the badge because i can't really see how they could change it in a way that doesn't completely change is appearance which i doubt many fans would support

The mocked up version that was shown last night was as is but underneath "Clyde FC" it said in smaller font "Cumbernauld" underneath this "Founded in Glasgow 1877"   

Edited December 7, 2018 by Adolfo Rios

[haufdaft]

The mocked up version that was shown last night was as is but underneath "Clyde FC" it said in smaller font "Cumbernauld" underneath this "Found in Glasgow 1877"   

I think you mean founded [emoji16]

What other clubs not named after a town have the home town on the badge?

It seems to me it's a pointless exercise that only antagonises many of the support.

[cfcuk]

 
I personally feel this is completely different to EK fiasco. Norrie was adamant this was not now nor intended to be anything like a name change. We would still be Clyde FC. Only the badge to say two lines under this that shows were we play now and where we are from.
 
This isn’t a certainty to happen. This was to gauge opinion on what those present thought about it. Nothing more at this stage.

Yeah that's right EK Clyde was just a name we woukd still be Clyde
Anyway will save quite a few people money with them not buying merchandise with that fake badge on it

Clyde Fc accept no fakes

[Adolfo Rios]

1 minute ago, haufdaft said:

I think you mean founded

What other clubs not named after a town have the home town on the badge?

It seems to me it's a pointless exercise that only antagonises many of the support.

Oops..fixed.  

St Johnstone are the only ones I can think of.  

 

 

[Adolfo Rios]

15 minutes ago, cfcuk said:

Yeah that's right EK Clyde was just a name we woukd still be Clyde
Anyway will save quite a few people money with them not buying merchandise with that fake badge on it

Clyde Fc accept no fakes

I was never pro EK Clyde.  Far from it.  That would have been a completely different club to me and not just a name change.   

I understand many will have issues with an update to the badge.  The name on the badge would not be touched and if it was again i would be dead against.  But that is all Norrie was intending last night by putting out for discussion/thoughts.        

 

Edited December 7, 2018 by Adolfo Rios

[cfcuk]

Three things are sacrosanct

Club name, club crest, club colours

If people are that desperate to follow a club with cumbernauld on their badge go and watch cymbernauld Colts sure they would be delighted of your support .