Mantis Toboggan Posted May 17, 2020 Share Posted May 17, 2020 2 hours ago, Bully Wee Villa said: I'd hope that Hearts and Thistle would remember that Clyde's statement was sympathetic to their cause and not try to shaft us as thanks. I can live with 14-10-10-10 but no change which leaves Clyde (or Peterhead) worse off through no fault of our own should even be on the table. 14-10-10-10 seems the fairest way to me if something has to be done. Not sure who really loses out in that scenario? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Burton Posted May 17, 2020 Share Posted May 17, 2020 How are Clyde different?We are not any different but we aren't releasing statements decrying teams for voting in self-interest and saying we are looking at the greater good.14-10-10-10 is about the fairest outcome. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haufdaft Posted May 17, 2020 Share Posted May 17, 2020 14-10-10-10 seems the fairest way to me if something has to be done. Not sure who really loses out in that scenario?That's the thing, nothing needs to be done.There was zero urgency about reconstruction until Hearts were the "victim"The leagues are fine the way they are. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bully Wee Villa Posted May 17, 2020 Share Posted May 17, 2020 (edited) If we were in Hearts or Thistle's position and found ourselves relegated with every chance of escaping, we would be seething. As would every other team. As would any team in our our position or Peterhead's that found themselves unfairly punted to the bottom tier having not even been close to a relegation playoff place. 14-10-10-10 seems abundantly fair. It might cost a tiny fraction per club as the TV money would be split an extra two ways. But just about every industry is going to take a hit from Covid in one way or another. Seems to me a lot fairer to share a negligible amount of extra expense between all the member clubs than arbitrarily punishing a tiny number of teams. Edited May 17, 2020 by Bully Wee Villa 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clyde_r_us Posted May 17, 2020 Share Posted May 17, 2020 8 hours ago, Bully Wee Villa said: I'd hope that Hearts and Thistle would remember that Clyde's statement was sympathetic to their cause and not try to shaft us as thanks. I can live with 14-10-10-10 but no change which leaves Clyde (or Peterhead) worse off through no fault of our own should even be on the table. Or give some compensation at least 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthLanarkshireWhite Posted May 17, 2020 Share Posted May 17, 2020 47 minutes ago, clyde_r_us said: Or give some compensation at least Once you even open up the option of compensation you are saying it is an OK suggestion it's just the price we are talking about. Never open that door. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kizer Sauze Posted May 18, 2020 Share Posted May 18, 2020 (edited) Sorry and apologies, if this has been posted before but would a 14 - 16 -14 (with possible splits) not be fair to most clubs barr Stranraer and Forfar? Edited May 18, 2020 by Kizer Sauze 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Burton Posted May 18, 2020 Share Posted May 18, 2020 Sorry and apologies, if this has been posted before but would a 14 - 16 -14 (with possible splits) not be fair to most clubs barr Stranraer and Forfar? Stranraer, Forfar and Cove all lose out. Would need a 11-1 majority from the top flight too.Despite Budge's statement, I fully expect her to suggest 14-14-14. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pride Of The Clyde Posted May 18, 2020 Share Posted May 18, 2020 How many more times are we going to accommodate that wummin, she has put reconstruction on the table already and there was no appetite for it and was voted down. I felt for Hearts with the position they had been put in, that is now gone after the way she has went about her business not caring or considering about how her ideas will effect other teams as long as her team is ok. Her idea that no team should be financially worse off when infact her whole plan will cause this to other clubs. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxruby Posted May 18, 2020 Share Posted May 18, 2020 What an interesting few weeks. It would appear that it’s time for the dust to settle and planning for the new season can begin. Clyde should be in a very good position with regard to a playing budget for the forthcoming challenge. The board, I understand,have been prudent and retained funds from last season to keep our momentum upwards assured. Well, that’s the way it looks. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clydeontheup Posted May 18, 2020 Share Posted May 18, 2020 19 minutes ago, maxruby said: What an interesting few weeks. It would appear that it’s time for the dust to settle and planning for the new season can begin. Clyde should be in a very good position with regard to a playing budget for the forthcoming challenge. The board, I understand,have been prudent and retained funds from last season to keep our momentum upwards assured. Well, that’s the way it looks. Does it aye? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxruby Posted May 18, 2020 Share Posted May 18, 2020 Does it aye?Thank you for your considered response. Always a delight to interact with fellow supporters. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haufdaft Posted May 18, 2020 Share Posted May 18, 2020 Thank you for your considered response. Always a delight to interact with fellow supporters.It made more sense than your previous post. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bully Wee Clyde FC Posted May 18, 2020 Share Posted May 18, 2020 (edited) 7 hours ago, Jack Burton said: Stranraer, Forfar and Cove all lose out. Would need a 11-1 majority from the top flight too. Despite Budge's statement, I fully expect her to suggest 14-14-14. Not sure the ugly twins want reconstruction. Not much in it for them. St Mirren, Accies and Livvy may want more teams that might end up below them so could vote for. I say this with no intended disrespect to diddy teams. The others I don't see being fans of reconstruction as their slice of the pie would be smaller and give them the prospect of travelling to Inverness on a wet Wednesday. Edited May 18, 2020 by Bully Wee Clyde FC 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxruby Posted May 19, 2020 Share Posted May 19, 2020 It made more sense than your previous post.What exactly is the “it” to which you refer? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotchpie Posted May 19, 2020 Share Posted May 19, 2020 Thank you for your considered response. Always a delight to interact with fellow supporters.With a donations page and player budget cut % [emoji849] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bully Wee Villa Posted May 19, 2020 Share Posted May 19, 2020 20 hours ago, Jack Burton said: Stranraer, Forfar and Cove all lose out. Would need a 11-1 majority from the top flight too. Despite Budge's statement, I fully expect her to suggest 14-14-14. How about 14-18-12, with Cove replacing Stranraer, or 14-20-10 with Stranraer surviving and Edinburgh joining Cove in promotion? Not suggesting this is a great idea, though I wouldn't mind it. Just wondering if any change other than 14-14-14 might be suggested. Surely the more clubs she gets onside, the better chance she has of getting her reform voted through? Alienating us, Peterhead and others seems counterproductive. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted May 19, 2020 Share Posted May 19, 2020 52 minutes ago, Bully Wee Villa said: How about 14-18-12, with Cove replacing Stranraer, or 14-20-10 with Stranraer surviving and Edinburgh joining Cove in promotion? Not suggesting this is a great idea, though I wouldn't mind it. Just wondering if any change other than 14-14-14 might be suggested. Surely the more clubs she gets onside, the better chance she has of getting her reform voted through? Alienating us, Peterhead and others seems counterproductive. That's desperation on a Falkirk scale. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thom & Gerry Posted May 19, 2020 Share Posted May 19, 2020 She will get 14,10,10,10 if she compensates clubs for the extra teams but if not no combination will be voted in. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted May 19, 2020 Share Posted May 19, 2020 56 minutes ago, Thom & Gerry said: She will get 14,10,10,10 if she compensates clubs for the extra teams but if not no combination will be voted in. "If she compenstes"? Are you serious? How would that work? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.