BullyWee Craig Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 41 minutes ago, Jack Burton said: So your post about the Glasgow Branch backed by 250 members is basically bollocks? What's likely happened in reality is a dozen or so fans and the sponsor have pressurised the board into signing him. Couldn't be more wrong. Over 50 people alone on the owners forum voted for his return. Zero people in the Glasgow branch group on FB have said they are against it. Everyone I've spoke to are in favour. The minority is Pie & Bovril, not the fans at games still singing his name, not the owners forums and not GB. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roland Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 3 hours ago, BullyWee Craig said: Massive well done to the board for listening to the majority of fans and sponsors who backed this move to bring Goodie home. The easiest decision would have been to turn our backs on him but that's not the Clyde way. This man has saved our club and those who celebrated his goals but now cower in fear over headlines should hang their heads in shame. We got our legend back Great signing for Clyde. Wish ICT had signed him instead, would have got us promoted!! Don't believe anyone should be permanently cancelled, especially when not guilty in a criminal court. Hats off to Clyde, am sure they will reap the benefits. -2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Burton Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 Couldn't be more wrong. Over 50 people alone on the owners forum voted for his return. Zero people in the Glasgow branch group on FB have said they are against it. Everyone I've spoke to are in favour. The minority is Pie & Bovril, not the fans at games still singing his name, not the owners forums and not GB. 50 out of 400 owners is nowhere near a majority.I'm on the Glasgow Branch Facebook page and there will be plenty others on it against it too.Everyone I've spoken to is against it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLClyde Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 54 out of 96 votes on the owners forum, 36 against and 6 undecided on that vote. 96 out of 404 owners that voted anyway. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BullyWee Craig Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 4 minutes ago, Jack Burton said: 50 out of 400 owners is nowhere near a majority. I'm on the Glasgow Branch Facebook page and there will be plenty others on it against it too. Everyone I've spoken to is against it. Then you should have called for an owners vote, but you didn't and now we're suppose to assume how many were or against it? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 Functioning adults. Actual functioning adults 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottsdad Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 Various news outlets label him as a rapist, including the BBC. Why? Because he cannot sue these organisations for defamation. They are perfectly within their right to label him as such because of this judgement. If he didn't like it, he could have appealed the judgement. Much as the zoomers infesting this place might dislike it, he can be called a rapist. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BullyWee Craig Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 48 minutes ago, oneteaminglasgow said: Just as a wee side note, no it isn’t. The basis for him being called a rapist is the rape which he That's an even worse take, so it's not even the civil case you base it on, just the accusation then? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bully Wee Clyde FC Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 5 minutes ago, BullyWee Craig said: Couldn't be more wrong. Over 50 people alone on the owners forum voted for his return. Zero people in the Glasgow branch group on FB have said they are against it. Everyone I've spoke to are in favour. The minority is Pie & Bovril, not the fans at games still singing his name, not the owners forums and not GB. 56 out of 404 is not a majority. All 50 members of a sub group is only that, as sub group. Some of the p***ks on the OS are living in the past and have little regard for Clyde in the future. Did The GB, fans living outside Scotland and smart arses saying it will blow over by the weekend predict that our landlord would go public with their views and potentially reviewing our rental agreement? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Burton Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 Then you should have called for an owners vote, but you didn't and now we're suppose to assume how many were or against it? The board had already turned down Raith Rovers offer to sign him back on loan so why would a vote be required?The fans don't normally get a vote every time we sign a player so why should we on this occasion? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BullyWee Craig Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 Just now, Jack Burton said: The board had already turned down Raith Rovers offer to sign him back on loan so why would a vote be required? The fans don't normally get a vote every time we sign a player so why should we on this occasion? OK then let's respect the boards decision and move on. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BullyWee Craig Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 Overall we've somehow ended up having a decent season (touch wood we don't collapse). We have a lot to be happy about at the moment. Do we want to get behind the team, Danny etc and who knows with a couple of good results, maybe push for a play off or do we want to sit around arguing about one signing? I'll be there backing every player in a Clyde shirt on Saturday and every game home and away. Let's focus on what we agree with at the club and not what we disagree on, FTJ. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bully Wee Clyde FC Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 4 minutes ago, BullyWee Craig said: OK then let's respect the boards decision and move on. Which decision, the first one or the second one, you know when their arses collapsed? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BullyWeeStonehouse Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 3 hours ago, BullyWee Craig said: So you didn't celebrate Clyde's promotion which was massively helped by goodie? For the record I read the comments under negative posts such as Sturgeons. Yes there are two camps on this issue but to allow the media and politcians to dictate our transfer policy over the fans, owners and sponsors would have been cowardly. Sponsors shouldn’t dictate our transfer policy, either. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squeezebox-son Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 12 minutes ago, BullyWee Craig said: Overall we've somehow ended up having a decent season (touch wood we don't collapse). We have a lot to be happy about at the moment. Do we want to get behind the team, Danny etc and who knows with a couple of good results, maybe push for a play off or do we want to sit around arguing about one signing? I'll be there backing every player in a Clyde shirt on Saturday and every game home and away. Let's focus on what we agree with at the club and not what we disagree on, FTJ. Let's stop arguing because there are far greater numbers of people who are talking sense and just a few roasters like you spouting shite every other post? I hope there is a real stance against this from the decent Clyde fans and that this goes further than to just be brushed under the carpet. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BullyWee Craig Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 4 minutes ago, squeezebox-son said: Let's stop arguing because there are far greater numbers of people who are talking sense and just a few roasters like you spouting shite every other post? I hope there is a real stance against this from the decent Clyde fans and that this goes further than to just be brushed under the carpet. Or because pie and bovril forum is a toxic echo chamber. -2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Carrigan Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 Just now, BullyWee Craig said: Or because pie and bovril forum is a toxic echo chamber. You have quite an odd view on what constitutes 'toxic', and also don't really understand what an echo chamber is - but that's expected from you at this point. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BullyWeeStonehouse Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 24 minutes ago, Jack Burton said: The board had already turned down Raith Rovers offer to sign him back on loan so why would a vote be required? The fans don't normally get a vote every time we sign a player so why should we on this occasion? I think I had this debate on Twitter with him a few days ago. You’d be as well flinging shite at the moon because you’ll never get any justification for that question. Forget it’s about DGW, why should fans vote on who their club signs?! Imagine we decided and the management team didn’t like them or they didn’t fit into their tactical setup. A truly moronic suggestion. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clown Job Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 3 hours ago, BullyWee Craig said: So you didn't celebrate Clyde's promotion which was massively helped by goodie? For the record I read the comments under negative posts such as Sturgeons. Yes there are two camps on this issue but to allow the media and politcians to dictate our transfer policy over the fans, owners and sponsors would have been cowardly. Should only be one camp when it comes to signing a rapist Signing him doesn’t make you brave. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BullyWee Craig Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 1 minute ago, BullyWeeStonehouse said: I think I had this debate on Twitter with him a few days ago. You’d be as well flinging shite at the moon because you’ll never get any justification for that question. Forget it’s about DGW, why should fans vote on who their club signs?! Imagine we decided and the management team didn’t like them or they didn’t fit into their tactical setup. A truly moronic suggestion. So why are you complaining about the signing? The board made a decision based on what was best for the club and I think we can all move on now. You can't tell people to back to board on one hand and then complain about their decision the next. 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.