Jump to content

Clyde FC; Season 2022-23


Recommended Posts



At least that's a principled stand to take and while I might disagree with the reasoning I have respect for you standing by your decision. 



You disagree with a person not wanting to fund a rapist's wages? Interesting.



Do we just punish someone who has never been found guilty for the rest of his life? 



He was found guilty you complete weapon.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, BullyWee Craig said:

Metoo started in 2017 around the time we signed Goodie, it's not that much a difference to how it's viewed now. 

Take Val Mcdermit out this equation and I think he would be playing at Raith. 

Do we just punish someone who has never been found guilty for the rest of his life? 

In defence of the board I wouldn't describe taking this decision as spineless, the easy option was to take the money and run. They were pushed into listening to fans and sponsors but they made the tough decision in the end. 

Us not re-signing him is not him being punished for life for a crime he didn't commit.  What a hill to die on.  Honestly i've never known a fanbase to be so hostile to ex-players (other than this one).  He hands in a transfer request when we are in a relegation battle and all you lot are treating him like a hero and willing to have the club be the shame of the nation to get what?  One and a half seasons of league 1 football that we would likely have anyway?

Edited by Cannibal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, 19QOS19 said:


 

 

 


You disagree with a person not wanting to fund a rapist's wages? Interesting.




He was found guilty you complete weapon.

 

 

To be called a rapist you have to be found guilty by a jury of your peers in a criminal court, he wasn't. 

You can't be found guilty in a civil court you weapon. Maybe before having an opinion on something, try and understand the law. 

In civil court it basically comes down to 1 judge saying "meh probably happened", that's it. Not beyond believable doubt, not guilty, not a jury. 

So on nothing more than "meh probably" people are willing to ruin someone's life, he's also not the only person this has happened to. 

Another man who found "not proven" in a criminal court, only to have a civil court say he was liable. Well that's a great justice system, liable for something which is not proven. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Cannibal said:

Us not re-signing him is not him being punished for life for a crime he didn't commit.  What a hill to die on.  Honestly i've never known a fanbase to be so hostile to ex-players.  He hands in a transfer request when we are in a relegation battle and all you lot are treating him like a hero and willing to have the club be the shame of the nation to get what?  One and a half seasons of league 1 football that we would likely have anyway?

I don't think you can blame any clyde player for wanting full time football and a better wage. Would refuse to take Mitchell back if he became available? 

The punishment is he isn't making nearly the same amount he would have been or playing at the level his ability deserves.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be called a rapist you have to be found guilty by a jury of your peers in a criminal court, he wasn't. 
You can't be found guilty in a civil court you weapon. Maybe before having an opinion on something, try and understand the law. 
In civil court it basically comes down to 1 judge saying "meh probably happened", that's it. Not beyond believable doubt, not guilty, not a jury. 
So on nothing more than "meh probably" people are willing to ruin someone's life, he's also not the only person this has happened to. 
Another man who found "not proven" in a criminal court, only to have a civil court say he was liable. Well that's a great justice system, liable for something which is not proven. 
 

In a thread full of complete morons, you're doing your best to be top dog.

"Can't be found guilty in a civil court" - that's a belter.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Jack Burton said:
35 minutes ago, BullyWee Craig said:
I don't think we're much of a club if a council is deciding who we should or shouldn't buy.
 

We've just let a sponsor decide who we buy.

Owners voted on the forum and it was in favour of a return. The glasgow branch with 250 members were behind the sponsors push for a return. Danny lennon wanted his return. The players wanted his return. This was far more than just a sponsor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BullyWee Craig said:

I don't think you can blame any clyde player for wanting full time football and a better wage. Would refuse to take Mitchell back if he became available? 

The punishment is he isn't making nearly the same amount he would have been or playing at the level his ability deserves.

 

Well a) he should be getting his money from Raith as they were stupid enough to sign him and b) if he's not playing or being paid at the level he should be it is his own fault.

Unreal some of the logic being used here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Owners voted on the forum and it was in favour of a return. The glasgow branch with 250 members were behind the sponsors push for a return. Danny lennon wanted his return. The players wanted his return. This was far more than just a sponsor.
The owners vote was a small majority of 100 votes.

How do you become a Glasgow Branch member and were they all consulated or are you just basing that on how many followers their Facebook page has?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, BullyWee Craig said:

 

In civil court it basically comes down to 1 judge saying "meh probably happened", that's it. Not beyond believable doubt, not guilty, not a jury. 

Honestly just stop talking. You're a fucking idiot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, 19QOS19 said:


In a thread full of complete morons, you're doing your best to be top dog.

"Can't be found guilty in a civil court" - that's a belter.

You're getting angry at a fact? It's not my fault you don't understand the law. 

It's also not a minor detail, it's the basis for him being called a rapist and this whole circus. Yet they removed all protections given to those accused, which are in place to ensure people get a fair trial. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, GooseLips said:


Weird coincidence that every Clyde fan defending their hero has managed to miss this post. 

I didn't miss it but it contradicts the taxi drivers account. 

"She's couldn't give consent" 

Yet she told the taxi driver she was fine to go in the house and wanted to go into the house. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Jack Burton said:

The owners vote was a small majority of 100 votes.

How do you become a Glasgow Branch member and were they all consulated or are you just basing that on how many followers their Facebook page has?

What's funny is I suggested an official vote on the owners forum and twitter, interestingly it was only those who didn't want Goodie back that said it shouldn't be fans decision. Well they aren't saying that now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are there really this many stupid c***s in the Clyde support or is this a troll with multiple accounts?

No way such a small fanbase can have so many ignorant people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, BullyWee Craig said:

I didn't miss it but it contradicts the taxi drivers account. 

"She's couldn't give consent" 

Yet she told the taxi driver she was fine to go in the house and wanted to go into the house. 

 

and you’d have the same opinion if it was one of your family he’d beasted into?

of course you would because they’d have deserved it

you are one sick human

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Buddie Holly said:

and you’d have the same opinion if it was one of your family he’d beasted into?

of course you would because they’d have deserved it

you are one sick human

 

Would you be happy with one of your family members having their entire life ruined based on nothing but probability? Wouldn't you want a jury of their peers to decide? Well that's what goodie wanted and didn't get. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s reassuring to see posters like@Cannibal and@SouthLanarkshireWhite posting sense and echoing a lot of my thinking on the situation.

The short term thinking behind this move, the lack of reading the room after the raith reaction and the fact we seem to have bowed to the pressure of one wealthy sponsor and a minority of vocal fans all very worrying factors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, BullyWee Craig said:

Facts seem to upset you 

It's facts is it? Can you quote me the bit where the judge said "meh you probably raped her, David"? 

Or are you taking absolute shite in a bid to belittle a legal process because you just love defending rapists? 

I'm going to go with the latter. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...