Sao Paulo

Mind 'n' have on the Christian Dior x

Fisticuffs on Saturday m8 x

It's a nice hand you've played: make it seem as if I made a point about how many points we took toward the end of 07/08 rather than about the belief which saw us survive; set me up as someone defending the settled record of the worst manager in the history of the club; present the stats in a way to suit your case. You're a huxter. I wonder who you think you're arguing with. Do you really think I - and the majority of people reading-on - won't see through such a selectively cut response!? I'd fucking love it if we lost four of our last ten this season. Love it. That could be one of our best runs of form this season...! Listen to yourself, man. I won't cut the stats like you. I'll just invite anyone reading to do the following: go and look at those last ten games if you like. Look at the we teams played, where we played (Home/Away), how good they were (position in the table) and what they had to play for respectively (relegation, promotion, saving-face). Anyone who wouldn't take a run-in of equivalent quality this year is a mug. I think it's time some among our support were made to pay a special tax on their season books. A tax on being insufferably left-wing.

On a lighter note. Dick Campbell has a gem of a line in his post-match interview (00:20 - 00:23). You hear that? Packed wae experience. Ahts mah boay.

It's a sorry thing, isn't? The apologetics; the sophistry. I just watched McGovern's post-match interview. I hope what he says about not looking over our shoulder is just a bit of face. If those lads are being asked to behave as though there isn't a trapdoor under their feet, they're not going to gnash, claw and tear like they need to. The only thing John Brown ever done that anyone will look back on positively is keep us - temporarily - in the first division. The team that finished that season was playing out of its skin; better than it could've if it was playing on the premise: this is just another game. That same fog of fear really needs to settle in the minds of the squad now. If you're not playing for a play-off, and we're not, you're playing to survive. But look... We've three home games in a row. We could leapfrog Stirling in that run if the penny drops. But if we're not going to beat Edinburgh on Saturday, that should be frontier of our tolerance. We gave Barry the transfer window. Looking back, that was a mistake. He brought in players who were absolutely peripheral as patches on our problems. In that time, a better gaffer would've made our back-line watertight and we wouldn't be having this conversation; maybe he brings in a forward too, back then, and we're looking at the play-offs again. Bring in another one, ideally. But I don't know what the market's like. What happened to Kevin Roo-stay-weetz? You'd probably have to settle for Perry on the basis that he does win virtually all of his headers and give us a bit of security at corners (compared to the in-squad alternatives, anyway). Someone wrote that Perry really ought to be good enough at this level. I remember some posters tore strips off others when Perry signed. That was because some supporters had - seemingly - written him off before he'd kicked a ball. I had a swatch at his CV back then. I remember thinking: if you're his age and you've barely had a full season worth of starts behind you... There's enough there to worry a gaffer, I'd have thought. He'd a good début - with one fatal error - and a good shift over at Edinburgh. But if you look hard at his contribution elsewhere, you'll see that he's leaky. Whatever we settle with now, we need better in the future.

I picked you up because all anyone has really said is this: 'JP and Peaso haven't had long but neither do we'. I wouldn't be me defending JP & Peaso when the club itself is lurching the way it is. You've replied: JP & Peaso have changed things... Nobody will ever agree on absolutely everything... They've made the changes people have cried out for... They know best because they've been close to the team... They've had a lot of bad luck... Individuals are to blame... There's actually been no lack of effort/aggression etc... I'll say just this. If they'd changed things in any helpful respect we'd have seen the last of Smith and Perry. We'd have seen McNiff at centre-half consistently. We'd have seen McNeil left/right back consistently. We'd also have seen McMillan at right/left back consistently. Not centre half, by Christ. Fundamentally, we wouldn't still be wondering what back line will appear week on week if they'd changed anything. Phil Johnston wouldn't be in the team at all. And we wouldn't all - including you - still be willing them to do things differently. As for the 'no lack of...'. I was at Berwick. I was there today. Don't give us it. Effort's one thing. Aggression and dig, those are different. There's one or two in there that are playing for their jobs, flinging themselves about. But I invite anyone to look at the Berwick highlights package. You will be shouting at the screen for our lads to dive in, to go to ground, to give them a dunt. Flynn, McNiff, Johnston. Go and look. Downtrodden I think was the first word I used in the initial post: it's an attitude. Some of them just do not see light at the end of the tunnel and they're in desperate need of persuasion. 14 without a win will do that even to decent players. You're wrong when you say only long-term coaching and new players - I'd like to see some - can change things. Manifestly wrong. We need someone in there who those lads can buy into quickly and send them out with the fear of coming back into the dressing room empty handed. Someone who'll do enough with the carrot to get us that one win that'll catalyse another one. I take the general point, mind you. What I say cannot be done in a bubble; bad players and bad selections are so irrespective of incentives. All the patter about them knowing best, bad luck, individual errors, how things could've gone differently in such and such a match... Sounds like the first bar of the Lowland League Blues to me.

I'd have asked SLClyde the same rhetorical question if I didn't think all of the following: JP & Peaso have picked three teams which I wouldn't have. JP & Peaso haven't used the bench (substitutes) as I would have in their three games. JP & Peaso have had the pool of players, across their three games, to make a difference, but they haven't. JP & Peaso are committing precisely the same errors that Ferguson and Malcolm did re team selection. JP & Peaso look set to continue to make those same errors. The players look downtrodden and there's a manifest lack of whole-team dig. Hadn't Cowdenbeath won today, their supporters could have asked of any [whoever the manager was] critics: 'What difference was he supposed to make in 24 hours!?'. However, he did make a difference in that time and against the odds, too. Edinburgh beat Forfar away today (one of the 'top two'). We couldn't beat them at home at a time when we had all the incentive and occasion to do so. Had JP & Peaso done anything profoundly worthwhile in their three games, I'd have their back. As it is, they haven't, and they don't threaten to. We need someone to come and do that immediately. The howling wilderness of a planet from which you've passed only the most doggedly dogmatic and ideologically-rationalised commentary this season is long overdue a fatal meteor impact. To read you ask SLClyde such a question, you'd think we were safely mid-table or better. Worse still, you yourself would've done things different from JP & Peaso. But here you are implying that we keep them at our peril! Who do you think you're kidding Mr Juncker?

Pleased with JP and Peaso. Two intelligent players; the kind that occasionally do make good gaffers. Gets Malcolm out the way, raising the prospect of our form turning. Looks like we're holding out until the close season for an appointment, according to the Cumbernauld News. Martin Lauchlan's described us a "big club" recently, having been linked with the job. Sick stuff.

A lot of sophistry from remainers on this thread. Get over it lads; we voted leave.

Something to watch out for: recruiting an inexperienced candidate with an excellent record as a coach or scout. The best we've had from such people recently is stagnation (Joe Miller). The worst is annihilation (John Brown). Witness also the current example of Ian Cathro at Hearts. And anyone minded to institute a philosophy or ideology can bolt. Football managers and philosophy... Plato wept. Recruiting someone who isn't both experienced and successful would be regrettable. Nobody outstanding comes to mind, sadly. Allan Moore's record pre-Abroath was excellent; final season at Morton aside. That little stint with Arbroath's a worry. Some absolute cloggers in that team.

Delete "potentially". Otherwise agree completely.

It's a hard shift, being right from the off, every time... New gaffer please.

The John Sweeney Appreciation Society have tonight moved to block the exit of Ferguson. In a press statement, a spokesmen for the society is alleged to have said: "Oooooh" and added "Sao Paulo cannot be vindicated once again - we'll see Clyde go to the wall before we let it happen".

To be fair, I don't think anyone said precisely that. If anyone had, they'd have been sticking their neck out big time. But you have to say... There has been a reticence about some. That is, to criticise the manager ahead of players. To my mind, that's almost always the order in which criticism should come from supporters. The buck stops with the gaffer. We'll all pick out poor performers and say how things should've been, of course. That's just football supporters, isn't it? But stuff like "We're spoiled with Barry"; comments about the "recovery pace" of Johnston, and insistence on the 'non-fault' of McNiff and so on... When this sort of patter comes from posters who're ordinarily on the money and unafraid to bash a manager... You do wonder. Have we become retro-acculturated? Do we no longer know who's a good player, who's a good manager and so on. It crosses my mind. I'll put it no stronger...!

A few things we shouldn't accept from and/or be wary of in any future manager: Patter like 'I wish we got that backing every week'; 'it's up to them now [the players]'; or quizzical glances at supporters for yelling criticism. The manager doesn't own the club. He is in its service, isn't owed a favour by the world and the buck stops with him. Fundamental changes in approach over the course of a short period, especially when an earlier approach was set out with great confidence given real investment. Witness Ferguson's comments about having a mandate to sign players at six feet and above last season and his explicit disavowal of that philosophy at the beginning of this season*. Signing 'promising' attackers from East Stirling. Especially giants, who've played 30+ games for East Stirling and managed only a single goal. Signing former players who've 'improved' outside senior football, then doing nothing with them. Especially when their primary vulnerability is/was not being tall enough; we don't take them back unless they've been on a rack. Putting a different defence/midfield/forward line out every week. Running with a disproportionately large pool of midfielders/defenders/forwards. Punitive squad rotations: consistent performer makes uncharacteristic mistake and is banished or moved into a different spot. *One of the reasons why it was obvious to me - and many not on this board - that we'd struggle for the play-offs this season is because we decided to start virtually afresh. Give me "we miss Easton" "we miss Lowden" all you like. A club like this doesn't see the ledger cleansed of the progress it has made, decide its going to dazzle the division, and then actually go on and do that. We are an injury to Peter MacDonald away from losing our senior status. Make no mistake about it.

↑ Dangerous and outlandish opinion ↑

Decent centre-half in his day, him. A Peaso-era player with St Johnstone; perhaps he called in the favour. Assuming he's fit and serious about a last hurrah, I'd take him. No bother. We're itching for that sort of dependability in the middle of the defence.

Jordan McMillan!? That's a signing, that. If he's fit... We're no' really needin' another right sided player though, good as he is.

He was far from the worst of what most Clyde supporters will remember as a particularly bad bunch. A midfielder who could do a bit with the ball. He was on the scrawny side, as memory serves, though not small height wise. Sub six foot but not by a lot. Good from a dead ball. Wouldn't get a game ahead of our Linton, McLaughlin or Flynn. And if that's true of them it's even more so of McGovern and Easton who're injured at the moment. Having said that... If he's had umpteen seasons of good football in the states he might be worth something to East Fife. If you're putting him in centre of midfield with a grafter or two, he'll probably do alright. We had him in there with really lethargic players, unfortunately. Here's some footage of him scoring a free-kick for us. My god that team was stinking. But hey! Certain individuals had plenty apologists among our support...

Finnie's a right-back. And Walsh's a left-mid. Little can put a shift in virtually anywhere, so there's a good chance he'll play in a single position which we don't need cover for and be used absolutely nowhere else, a la Michael Oliver the centre-half. Little and Peaso could do a right good job up front, I'm sure. The other two lads are half-decent players, as I remember in one case and am led to believe in the other. A proper left back and an experienced centre-half wouldn't go a miss, mind...

Let's have it right: we'd be like Ewoks glimpsing C3PO if Uncle Walter got the Clyde job. Alas, Uncle Fester seems more likely. Mind, we'd get the sash either way...

One Graham Roberts.

The Vice Chairman's message on the OS this morning is worth a read. It's largely matter-of-fact in style; not suffering from any gratuitous defensiveness.

I think we're arguing at cross-purposes, Lichtie78. I don't claim that full-time fitness is an absolute advantage. If I handed in my notice and trained full-time, I'm positive I'd still be absolutely underwhelming division two. Reason being because I'd be up against experienced and otherwise more skilful players. And yes: that could be skill as manifest technically or, as with Skelly, because of his physical shortcomings. The difference here is this: Arbroath and Clyde will be playing SPL colt sides. Their colts will have a certain level of quality. That quality, plus the full-time fitness will, particularly around winter time when the calendar gets backed-up, and toward the end of the season, manifest itself as an advantage. Even in the second-half of most games, in fact. Aye: Bobby Linn, Steven Doris, Peter MacDonald, Gavin Swankie et al will have bags more quality than many of the 17-20 year olds at Rangers, Celtic etc. I wouldn't dispute that.