The Clyde FC 2018-19 Thread

[Pride Of The Clyde]

11 hours ago, Hampden Diehard said:

You don't really do that well against us even when we're pish, do you? Careful what you wish for.

 

Nothing to lose with a replay, lose and nothing changes, draw or win would leave us in a better position than we are atm.  Doubt we will get a replay anyway.

[BullyWeeLad]

20 hours ago, nickCFC58 said:

U for real?

Is what for real ?

[Bulstrode]

Pumping Annan animals with 10 men is the real deal.

[BroadwoodBoy]

Do we have our points back yet ?

[BullyWeeStonehouse]

Stuart Millar away to Airdrie as Director of Football... 

[SouthLanarkshireWhite]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/47697708

 

Never a truer word. Indescribably poor and amateurish organisation throwing their weight around against smaller Scottish clubs whilst Rome burns ( mixing my metaphors)

Meanwhile - the Old Firm will again behave wonderfully this weekend.

[David W]

Whilst I'm always up for SFA bashing, it was the SPFL board that "threw their weight around". 

 

[shawfield shed boy]

SPFL made original decision.


SFA have the chance to put this right. Im not holding my breath..

[jagr68]

SPFL made original decision.


SFA have the chance to put this right. Im not holding my breath..

Will probably remove the points from QP & Rovers and double the fine whilst not giving us the 4 Pts back or replaying the games.

[Officer Barbrady]

44 minutes ago, SouthLanarkshireWhite said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/47697708

 

Never a truer word. Indescribably poor and amateurish organisation throwing their weight around against smaller Scottish clubs whilst Rome burns ( mixing my metaphors)

Meanwhile - the Old Firm will again behave wonderfully this weekend.

Sorry SLW- its a fine article, but the mention of OUR name in amongst two disgustingly toxic groups- one, being the giant big incestuous family called by some as the "Old Firm" (clue is in the title- a pantomime rivalry), and the other, the patrons of the largest trough in the country, only now being found out for their density and inability to relate- the mention of us, is a cheap and extremely disrespectul tactic by yet another shitehawk reporter who'll soon be firmly involved with the second group listed above when promised the 'exclusives', leading to a similar role in amongst the first if he keeps his nose clean. The journo could not give one f**k about us, doesn't even name the player or the significance of the sanction, and so for using our case to form an article, i fervently hope he falls down his stairs tonight.

 

However, there are STARTLING similarities between Petrie, McRae, and the others clogging up the hallways, and our very own points-deductable situation. Or rather, some of the direct-occupants of roles at the club. 

 

Let's face facts here. The fiasco has, by and large been forgotten. If we do indeed finish within a win of Peterhead, there will be no time for rage to re-emerge, with the first leg on the Tuesday after. Success will be met with great joy, then trepidation about our chances in L1. Failure, then i'd say it's likely most will concede that winning the league was never really an option- even if the facts stare them in the face, confirming otherwise.

 

Perhaps it's been the ever-mourned "last ten years" which has forced the apparent trade-off between support for the team (which has never wavered and never will), and extreme tolerance of a failure from upstairs not just to simply register (or recall in the correct timeframe) a player but of fully matching development on the field, and in the dugout, with the much-needed commercial activity needed to assist in supporting them both going forward. I see no link between endorsing one but accepting the other, whatsoever.

 

The reformed Glasgow Branch sponsored two games this year (and several players, although its early yet in guessing what value those will have for the members), yet half the advertised package was either missing or flagrantly ignored. The best effort on one of those days, saw a stringent name-check carried out designed solely on removing the representatives from their opulent surroundings! The lounge, barely promoted or advertised correctly, from right back in August- club owners were blatantly discouraged from bothering David Mackay by attempting entry, unless going cap-in-hand for a sign-in. This very situation had been discussed in the weeks leading up to it among various parties, partly due to the clear misinformation regarding the now defunct Bar 58, we hardly knew ye, which was never reopening- but mainly due to the 'exclusive' entry to the Arria which was falsely announced prior to the Edinburgh City group match. 

 

In my view, these actions are quite consistent with the complete balls-up that potentially could cost us our season. Thinly-veiled arrogance and in-the-know 'superiority' are a toxic mix at best, but when being enabled by the silent and compliant trust of the majority, the whole debacles surrounding Fitzpatrick, the points, and indeed Scotland over the last week, become far easier to identify as consistent with the attitudes held towards the plebs who are paying for it all, every fucking week. 

 

SLW, i barely see a difference between us, Clyde FC, our collective supporters reaction to a devastating situation, and the oblivious, entitled claptrap the SFA president came out with, believing no one would notice. It's a fairly common aspiration, that last one. 

[Cutty Sark]

1 hour ago, Officer Barbrady said:

Sorry SLW- its a fine article, but the mention of OUR name in amongst two disgustingly toxic groups- one, being the giant big incestuous family called by some as the "Old Firm" (clue is in the title- a pantomime rivalry), and the other, the patrons of the largest trough in the country, only now being found out for their density and inability to relate- the mention of us, is a cheap and extremely disrespectul tactic by yet another shitehawk reporter who'll soon be firmly involved with the second group listed above when promised the 'exclusives', leading to a similar role in amongst the first if he keeps his nose clean. The journo could not give one f**k about us, doesn't even name the player or the significance of the sanction, and so for using our case to form an article, i fervently hope he falls down his stairs tonight.

 

However, there are STARTLING similarities between Petrie, McRae, and the others clogging up the hallways, and our very own points-deductable situation. Or rather, some of the direct-occupants of roles at the club. 

 

Let's face facts here. The fiasco has, by and large been forgotten. If we do indeed finish within a win of Peterhead, there will be no time for rage to re-emerge, with the first leg on the Tuesday after. Success will be met with great joy, then trepidation about our chances in L1. Failure, then i'd say it's likely most will concede that winning the league was never really an option- even if the facts stare them in the face, confirming otherwise.

 

Perhaps it's been the ever-mourned "last ten years" which has forced the apparent trade-off between support for the team (which has never wavered and never will), and extreme tolerance of a failure from upstairs not just to simply register (or recall in the correct timeframe) a player but of fully matching development on the field, and in the dugout, with the much-needed commercial activity needed to assist in supporting them both going forward. I see no link between endorsing one but accepting the other, whatsoever.

 

The reformed Glasgow Branch sponsored two games this year (and several players, although its early yet in guessing what value those will have for the members), yet half the advertised package was either missing or flagrantly ignored. The best effort on one of those days, saw a stringent name-check carried out designed solely on removing the representatives from their opulent surroundings! The lounge, barely promoted or advertised correctly, from right back in August- club owners were blatantly discouraged from bothering David Mackay by attempting entry, unless going cap-in-hand for a sign-in. This very situation had been discussed in the weeks leading up to it among various parties, partly due to the clear misinformation regarding the now defunct Bar 58, we hardly knew ye, which was never reopening- but mainly due to the 'exclusive' entry to the Arria which was falsely announced prior to the Edinburgh City group match. 

 

In my view, these actions are quite consistent with the complete balls-up that potentially could cost us our season. Thinly-veiled arrogance and in-the-know 'superiority' are a toxic mix at best, but when being enabled by the silent and compliant trust of the majority, the whole debacles surrounding Fitzpatrick, the points, and indeed Scotland over the last week, become far easier to identify as consistent with the attitudes held towards the plebs who are paying for it all, every fucking week. 

 

SLW, i barely see a difference between us, Clyde FC, our collective supporters reaction to a devastating situation, and the oblivious, entitled claptrap the SFA president came out with, believing no one would notice. It's a fairly common aspiration, that last one. 

I'd imagine the journalist has included Clyde to show the clear ineptitude shown by one of the governing bodies in relation to the old firm and the "easy target" smaller teams, which we fall under as a well established league 2 team.

If anything it shows that others also think the punishment is harsh, definitely doesn't read as disrespectful...to me anyway.

You bring up an interesting point regarding behind the scenes at Clyde. A lot of criticism. How do you think behind the scenes could be improved as there seems to be a lack of bodies doing the work where the mistakes have happened. Could there be human error due to workload or is it the process...or something else? Genuinely interested in your thoughts regarding this given your in depth critique.

[Officer Barbrady]

5 minutes ago, Cutty Sark said:

I'd imagine the journalist has included Clyde to show the clear ineptitude shown by one of the governing bodies in relation to the old firm and the "easy target" smaller teams, which we fall under as a well established league 2 team.

If anything it shows that others also think the punishment is harsh, definitely doesn't read as disrespectful...to me anyway.

You bring up an interesting point regarding behind the scenes at Clyde. A lot of criticism. How do you think behind the scenes could be improved as there seems to be a lack of bodies doing the work where the mistakes have happened. Could there be human error due to workload or is it the process...or something else? Genuinely interested in your thoughts regarding this given your in depth critique.

The governing bodies have been inept for years, including in dealing with the "Old Firm". I'll cite the vastly different scenarios in the mid 90s surrounding Jorge Cadete's registration delay and Duncan Ferguson's imprisonment for headbutting John McStay, as examples where under sound administration, both Celtic and Rangers were punished to the highest degree known at the time. Clyde, on the other hand have transgressed the regulations, and admitted it. 

 

Dropping our name into a discussion surrounding the SFA's car crash running, and subsequent appointments, when it was the SPFL who sanctioned the club is very disrespectful, not to mention plain wrong. The writer shows no interest other than mistakenly blaming the SFA ahead of the appeal, something which could seriously hamper the case if the allegation against the SFA is that they pick on smaller clubs is considered a widely held view.

 

He's probably one of our misguided supporters who've been singing about the wrong organisation all month, come to think of it. However, i'd consider him sincere only if he were serious about publicising our plight in order to actually help rescind the sanction, rather than score petty points. I'm not, and never will be,  interested in us being painted as victims or being in need of a virtue-signalling hack to aid us when we've fucked up. The sort of 'publicity' that gives comfort should the SFA uphold the sanction, shouldn't be welcomed. Facts only will be heard. 

 

I think i stated (certainly i implied) one or two aspects which could improve matters in my OP, but i fear it too late to attempt any indoctrination of a change in either policy or philosophy of those involved. Frankly, i only touched the surface with what i posted because it is relevant in this situation, in my opinion. PnB may be a vehicle for discussing what's happened, why things may occur, and their outcomes, but the designated platform for communicating and attempting to find internal solutions has become a barren and unwelcome place for either of those. I won't breathe life into them here any further.

[Only one David Marsh]

The appeal against curries red card is being heard today hopefully we win it 

[Bulstrode]

Duncan Ferguson was imprisoned for breaching his probation as his head-butt on McStay was considered to be assault.

[Only one David Marsh]

f**k Tommy Muir  red card has been rescinded 

[BullyWeeStonehouse]

All the Annan fans clearly talking shite as per. LOL.

[SLClyde]

Poses the question is tommy Muir going to be cited for simulation, winning his team a penalty in the process? 

Get it so far up him. 

[the_bully_wee]

Will accept Currie being re-banned if it means we can only win one of the appeals IMO.

[Clydeontheup]

On 26/03/2019 at 19:39, Officer Barbrady said:

Sorry SLW- its a fine article, but the mention of OUR name in amongst two disgustingly toxic groups- one, being the giant big incestuous family called by some as the "Old Firm" (clue is in the title- a pantomime rivalry), and the other, the patrons of the largest trough in the country, only now being found out for their density and inability to relate- the mention of us, is a cheap and extremely disrespectul tactic by yet another shitehawk reporter who'll soon be firmly involved with the second group listed above when promised the 'exclusives', leading to a similar role in amongst the first if he keeps his nose clean. The journo could not give one f**k about us, doesn't even name the player or the significance of the sanction, and so for using our case to form an article, i fervently hope he falls down his stairs tonight.

 

However, there are STARTLING similarities between Petrie, McRae, and the others clogging up the hallways, and our very own points-deductable situation. Or rather, some of the direct-occupants of roles at the club. 

 

Let's face facts here. The fiasco has, by and large been forgotten. If we do indeed finish within a win of Peterhead, there will be no time for rage to re-emerge, with the first leg on the Tuesday after. Success will be met with great joy, then trepidation about our chances in L1. Failure, then i'd say it's likely most will concede that winning the league was never really an option- even if the facts stare them in the face, confirming otherwise.

 

Perhaps it's been the ever-mourned "last ten years" which has forced the apparent trade-off between support for the team (which has never wavered and never will), and extreme tolerance of a failure from upstairs not just to simply register (or recall in the correct timeframe) a player but of fully matching development on the field, and in the dugout, with the much-needed commercial activity needed to assist in supporting them both going forward. I see no link between endorsing one but accepting the other, whatsoever.

 

The reformed Glasgow Branch sponsored two games this year (and several players, although its early yet in guessing what value those will have for the members), yet half the advertised package was either missing or flagrantly ignored. The best effort on one of those days, saw a stringent name-check carried out designed solely on removing the representatives from their opulent surroundings! The lounge, barely promoted or advertised correctly, from right back in August- club owners were blatantly discouraged from bothering David Mackay by attempting entry, unless going cap-in-hand for a sign-in. This very situation had been discussed in the weeks leading up to it among various parties, partly due to the clear misinformation regarding the now defunct Bar 58, we hardly knew ye, which was never reopening- but mainly due to the 'exclusive' entry to the Arria which was falsely announced prior to the Edinburgh City group match. 

 

In my view, these actions are quite consistent with the complete balls-up that potentially could cost us our season. Thinly-veiled arrogance and in-the-know 'superiority' are a toxic mix at best, but when being enabled by the silent and compliant trust of the majority, the whole debacles surrounding Fitzpatrick, the points, and indeed Scotland over the last week, become far easier to identify as consistent with the attitudes held towards the plebs who are paying for it all, every fucking week. 

 

SLW, i barely see a difference between us, Clyde FC, our collective supporters reaction to a devastating situation, and the oblivious, entitled claptrap the SFA president came out with, believing no one would notice. It's a fairly common aspiration, that last one. 

Agree with much of this yet question it more.

First of all Tom English has no love for Clyde or any other clubs at our un-newsworthy level. He was very outspoken retrospectively about Goodwillie, and in my opinion quoted us for cheap effect.

My limited knowledge of board members show no arrogance apart from our most recent former chairman- and that’s no bad thing . Furthermore- perhaps because I’m of a certain vintage - I didnt think  the Glasgow Branch we’re anywhere near as big as the Castlemilk Branch, and without having a pop were no more than the colourful bunch of Santa’s at Cliftonhill.

Regardless of a supporters branch size, backing like you mention is fantastic, but surely it’s for love of club and not as you say to get value. Just not sure how that correlates to a points deduction. 

If you are suggesting it’s a result of the same people being responsible then to me that’s a sad indication of what little or more specifically over worked skill sets we have.

if there’s a long list of directors lining up to offer their skills, all they need to do is declare at an agm.  

 

[Officer Barbrady]

19 minutes ago, Clydeontheup said:

Agree with much of this yet question it more.

First of all Tom English has no love for Clyde or any other clubs at our un-newsworthy level. He was very outspoken retrospectively about Goodwillie, and in my opinion quoted us for cheap effect.

My limited knowledge of board members show no arrogance apart from our most recent former chairman- and that’s no bad thing . Furthermore- perhaps because I’m of a certain vintage - I didnt think  the Glasgow Branch we’re anywhere near as big as the Castlemilk Branch, and without having a pop were no more than the colourful bunch of Santa’s at Cliftonhill.

Regardless of a supporters branch size, backing like you mention is fantastic, but surely it’s for love of club and not as you say to get value. Just not sure how that correlates to a points deduction. 

If you are suggesting it’s a result of the same people being responsible then to me that’s a sad indication of what little or more specifically over worked skill sets we have.

if there’s a long list of directors lining up to offer their skills, all they need to do is declare at an agm.  

 

Your remarks regarding English are bang on. Cheap effect is putting it mildly- he's been around long enough to have established himself as either the new Traynor/Keevins, or as a keen questioner. And he certianly wasn't giving this much of a shit about a poor Scotland side before, either, despite us being shite for the duration of the century thus far. 

 

Now for the argument.

 

If you use terms like "limited knowledge of board members", this  indicates that maybe it's not a subject you should be readily dismissing, as you appear to be. It's not an easy thing to have to feel forced into writing, but in doing so, i don't believe anything i or anyone else says can do any more damage than some of those with 'good intentions' have managed. This isn't the place for specifics, but the information i have is readily available to all interested parties on various platforms. Perhaps if enough people cared to find this, and act accordingly, the instances i have provided would be avoided. This isn't a time-exhaustive or limited-skill issue, it's a personality one. 

 

The comments regarding the Glasgow Branch activity are very disappointing. Summing up 18 months close work with the club (in the main, the "arrogant" Norrie Innes- another shocker, mate) with a Santa suit gimmick is evidence enough of the ignorance you're displaying, in matters you have no clue or genuine interest in, otherwise you would be more enlightened. As far as most of the 'factions' at the club, opposing or otherwise, are concerned, the GB are relatively pulling their weight. There are Exec/Arria club members, matchday volunteers and everyone in between among the subscribers, and its very possibly the second-largest affiliated club administration after the CIC, depending on the numbers of season tickets. With respect to the Castlemilk, the only times it has forged serious links with the club is when there's been something in it for them, and it's been a long time since that was the case. Judging by my book number, purchased in September, the GB has more members than Clyde have ST holders. Not insignificant, wouldn't you say? Someone's already found that out, the hard way. 

 

Disregarding a branch size,of whichever magnitude, in favour of applauding all collective efforts,is again clutching at the low-hanging fruit from the tree. Just assuming something will always be there isn't exactly great practice. There IS value in the purchases made, beyond a one-off flash in the pan. The club being reimbursed with both the profits, and additionally sourced income, isn't the sort of revenue stream they seem to believe is a requirement of the business, and with that outlook displayed publicly and regularly, its easy to see why the background was set for such a disastrous schoolboy error. 

 

Anyone declaring themselves fit and able to schmooze their way onto the board at an AGM would require the skin of a rhino, for a start, as that would imply the present incumbents were somewhat lacking. At any given point this decade, any hint of this has been met with derision and very quickly descends into smear campaigns and vendettas. I don't expect you, or many others to be aware of this, as the more deferential and trusting among us tend to steer clear, and in many cases actively believe the bullshit they are told by any given fifth-columnist who's available at the time. It's certainly an effective way of putting any insurgencies to bed, i'll concede that. 

 

At least it appears you're not quite in that circle just yet, although you're certainly leaning to the correct side.