Domino the Dug
-
Posts
199 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Domino the Dug
-
-
6 minutes ago, lumos said:
Thanks for that, like I said I wasn’t there on the night so if I had “ sources “ I wouldn’t be asking. You certainly seem to be more informed than I am as regards the financial side of things. Didn’t Mr Innes bill the club,after stepping down from the Chair, for £60,000 of food that he organised for the players? Or is this wrong ?I'm not falling for your reticent Manuel the waiter routine (rather spookily, from Barcelona!), but i am led to believe this is wrong.
It was much, much more than that.
The figure you quote is apparently a 'settlement', in other words, an admission of liable for the debt.
At that figure, we're talking almost £2k per game.
On food.
I didn't recall seeing any players gobbling down plates of lobster or halfing a chateubriand, so perhaps the question ought to be, for what reason is it the board consider themselves paying such a fee that hasn't yet been disclosed?
One party is accused of highwaymanship, while the other pisses away money it doesn't have. Is it just to get rid of him?
0 -
23 minutes ago, lumos said:
That’s the golden question, was it the club or Norrie? Mr Innes is a shrewd businessman and it appears he’s done well for himself with the Arria Lounge, more than the club has. I wasn’t at the AGM but I believe this was discussed on the night. Anyone remember any details?If you (or your sources) listened to what was said, and/or relayed them correctly, Mr Innes seemed to be missing some crucial part of the profiteering allegations being made, when presenting figures. That being, making a profit!
Its either that, or people have their goodie/baddie roles greatly misunderstood.
Then again, the stage needs a villain, and after a two hour bum-skelping of the directory with zero explanation from the incumbent board, an unwarranted vicious attack was launched at one of the only tangible fundraisers left in the room.
For a club that greets about constantly being pratted, it seems money from various (if not most clear) sources is free to walk out the door and not pester the Ponzi scheme which appears to otherwise sustain it. £150k+ loss in two years? Handing out three year contracts?
They should be kissing feet!
0 -
19 minutes ago, haufdaft said:
Genuine questions that I hope aren't covered by the owner/member Omerta.
Does the Arria make a profit?
Was it a worthy investment?Depends upon who you consider the investment was made by, or if anyone's been saddled with it. Good luck finding any of this out, if you go the usual route!
2 -
3 hours ago, FREDDYFRY said:
You are correct, does my head in everybody back.
Leave Goodie up and they would be terrified to leave him with less than 2/3 back looking after him.This is one of several counter-productive issues that we've adopted, and like all the others the results simply are dreadful.
Bringing in Lang, to either replace or partner whichever CBs we've used until now won't make the blindest bit of difference until the midfield grow a set and impose themselves. Grant sits far too deep for someone with virtually zero creative distribution, never actually picking up a man and often wandering into the spaces the CBs need to push their opponents back into. Put another way, none of our CBs ever get in Mitchell's road. There's a reason.
No denying that goals have come from individual errors among that group, but the sheer volume we're losing from runs/speculatives from outside the area is frightening. Last year this was down to Clownshoe Currie, but this time its down to pure shitebaggery in the middle. No wonder teams take us as easy beats when they know all they need to do is tire out McStay or Lamont (if they even bother with them) and who invariably chuck it quickly. This was spotted early at Stranraer, and at Montrose. f**k all done about it. That's the managers fault.
0 -
24 minutes ago, Jack Burton said:
Ssh! You are not allowed to talk about it. Nothing from the AGM is to be discussed and there is still plenty of fans in the dark as to what happened.
Head over to the Falkirk and Raith threads and you'll see plenty of posts on their recent financial positions.Absolutely, and a very liberal use of them is administered too, fitting various agendas all at once.
I'm none too fussed whether we're X amount in the hole, or throwing cash around like there's no tomorrow. The results on the field will determine whether the strategy has succeeeded or not, and we have appointed a body of people to carry this out. Let them at it!
What i am concerned about is us sleepwalking into situations by avoiding them, while dishing out bright eyed and bushy tailed (and fully deserved) critiques and slatings for poor team displays like recently. Why is one acceptable (remember the great STOFO initiative throughout 2016-17) but the other, is not?
0 -
Dunfermline fan on the Raith match thread seemed to pull a few in, with his Goodwillie contract exclusives. Would people, specifically our own supporters, rather not discuss such matters, let alone agree or disagree over them? Given the AGM financial report and the importance placed on governance having seen off the resident Chairman surely its an important subject?
0 -
3 hours ago, Jack Burton said:
Injuries have all but cleared up now and we need to get back to the starting line up and formation that we used with success last season.
Some of Lennon's selections have been baffling to say the least. Howie at right back, Rankin centre mid, Lyon straight back into the team playing both Wylde and Love.
The majority of games we concede first and give ourselves a mountain to climb. Don't expect to getting anything away at Raith especially if we persist with another bizzare line up.
Any word on Lang's injury?Hamstring i heard, perhaps carrying a niggle like a lot of players generally do. Love knackered himself playing through his as long as he did, mind you.
Big fortnight coming up, rotation really ought to be a four letter word when we're struggling but that complete shambles of a lineup from Airdrie must not be repeated. If Lyon and Wylde were thrown in on Saturday with such a result, i should expect McStay, Smith, Love and Johnston to be at the very least in serious contention for Raith. They've been no less consistent than Lyon, and have each shown more than Wylde despite his supposed pedigree, on a game percentage basis. In whichever configuration is up to Lennon, i don't suppose the numbers or lines make much difference when in such dreadful form. They literally couldn't be worse. Livingstone and Cunningham, in their position, can't really have been expected to rally the side, but both with their backgrounds should fill a gap until May.
1 -
6 hours ago, Bully Wee Clyde FC said:
Playing from the back needs a footballing goalie, an assured receiver of the ball and space from the opponents. Last year we often had all three, not so sure this year.
I think that when we're allowed to play, we look good and this builds our confidence. I believe many teams have got the measure of us and they press high, are aggressive in mid field and double up on Goodie and we have no plan B. We don't help our situation by chopping and changing without logic. McStay good enough v Celtic but not for Airdrie? Lyons nowhere for a few weeks but in ahead of Smith?
DL's focus should be organising the defence, working out, bearing in mind the individuals at his disposal, if we go 3 at the back with wing backs or a back 4 without an obvious RB. If we stop losing goals; we stop losing games.
In all the commotion about left back/strike partner for DG, right back has been the elephant in the dressing room. Cuddihy playing there, and very well in L2 is a distant memory, and neither Lyon or Duffie are fit enough to play five games in a row. Two are midfielders, so why not use them there!
The main problem with the three, in Scotland in general and struggling teams in particular is a 'back three' really means back five. That would invite so much more bother to the door than we already have, if we don't cap the number of 'defensive minded' players we select. When i say defensive, i dont just mean position, i mean those who err by standing off, or are just plainly reactive players. Of all our defenders only Lang will follow his man along the deck. Likewise Ally Love offers a defensive edge on the left wing, as he did in the autumn especially at Falkirk. Square pegs in round holes are costing us, more than the failure of (most) operatives. These are Lennon matters, simple as that.
0 -
1 hour ago, SouthLanarkshireWhite said:
I'll offer a couple of reasons as I see it. Midfield - for me too slow in their build up and lose possession. Rankin back is very good news. Secondly, you need someone else taking on some of the goalscoring duties otherwise putting two men on DGW is too easy an option. Midfield have to run beyond him sometimes. Wee need a bit more pace about the team.
Opinions are fine, but the manager should know better than us.
The latest round of recruits (May-present) have each been intended to fill a skills gap on the field, even Wallace as a midfield all-rounder. Obviously that one went to the dogs, and of the other signings still here, only Johnston, tasked with providing width and creativity, polarises opinions (early on Wylde, as you were with Lang). Livingston looks a clear upgrade at LB, and good reports surround Cunningham. So its fair to say the manager knows a weak area when he sees one. I had issues with his recruitment last season (Hopkirk, Gorman, Kharim) but hasn't been so eager to bolster with more mediocrity just for numbers this time. Budgets and availability play their part, and what he's rectified then becomes a recruiting/scouting issue if they don't measure up. Even Alex Ferguson got the odd one wrong, so its far from a slating the manager. Had the players shown a hunger for pressing and harrying Forfar never mind Celtic, im sure he'd have incorporated it into our game. I felt he protected them a little too much from this on Sunday.
0 -
7 hours ago, C. Muir said:
The 4 Sevco games in 2012/13 were brutal too aswell as the 8-1 scudding at Ibrox. Although admittedly it wasn't even a mixed ability classroom for us in they games, just completely shite.
Yes. Which is why i had even less expectations then, than Sunday. The place was such a state, the name was up for grabs.
0 -
44 minutes ago, Bully Wee Clyde FC said:
I don't know if I buy that positivity completely. 1There's no guarantee that we'll retain the quality we have in the current squad. 2 whoever comes up from league 2 , most likely Cove will be well resourced. 3 The team(s) coming down, possibly Thistle will be well funded. 4 We maybe should have had an element of surprise this year which could explain our decent results against Falkirk AND our poor results against Stranraer, Montrose and Forfar. If we stay up, we might be easier to suss.
Hope I'm wrong.
On point 4: Do we accept relegation then, to avoid the stress of having to worry about it?
Peterhead have us completely sussed as it is; Stranraer this year have filled the gap Berwick left, that being the one where we concede tons of first half goals to crap teams. Forfar and Montrose, seem content with their own battles to be bothered by us much.
Positivity isnt about jumping up and down with glee wishing things into existence. Its about identifying areas with improvement potential, and for the most part, that's been disregarded as the season has gone on, for various reasons. The game yesterday being the most stupid of them all.
Left-back this, Goodie partner that, has papered over cracks elsewhere which are a problem now, never mind next season.
0 -
25 minutes ago, the_bully_wee said:
It's one thing wanting to showcase your own talents, but we couldn't even do that against a pretty shite Forfar side last week. In horrific conditions, and against the best team in the country, it's not really reasonable to expect that we can switch it on and do so. We played some tidy stuff along the ground in possession yesterday, but when every single opposition player is a good distance quicker and fitter than every single of ours, it tended to lead to blind alleys or forced errors. If we had committed too many men forward, then Celtic would have picked us off time and again. In any scenario, we would have needed a huge amount of luck to get a result yesterday; when was the last time either of the OF failed to beat a part-time, third tier side (while they were battling it out at the top of the top tier)? I think there can be a lot of heart taken by the squad from the manner in which we limited Celtic yesterday. A drubbing, even as a "free hit", wouldn't have done them any favours.
Johnston has his positive qualities but I think it's fair to say we were expecting much more from him - he was our marquee summer signing probably, and generated more excitement than Mitchell at the time. In yesterday's game, where we needed a great defensive work ethic to stay in the game (with the hope of getting lucky), he's precisely the kind of player you can't afford to carry and is basically a man down without the ball. Even in his five or ten minute cameo at the end we saw him shite out of a 50/50 and let his man past him without any sort of a challenge - I think it's very unlikely he would have been involved enough to offset how much of a liability he is defensively.
In the times we've played the OF since the last Celtic game - five games against Rangers, I believe - we have turned in some of the most embarrassing performances I've ever seen from a Clyde team, at times when Rangers were laughably shite. Duffy bottling it against them four times in the league, with us being the only side not to have a go at them when they were very gettable (unlike this Celtic team) and then the 8-1 fiasco while Ferguson had the same stubborn tactical doctrine as Sarri. We worked extremely hard yesterday, and when we did have the ball in decent areas we tried to play the right way - all we can do is hold our hands up and say that we are an absolute mile away from where Celtic are. If that same work ethic is applied to the league games, and the same commitment to playing football at the right times, then we will be just fine come the season's end. Hopefully, at that point, the takings from this match are somewhat intact in order to conduct some serious squad surgery and push for promotion next year.
Your closing words are a lot in sync with where i'm headed with what might appear 'criticism' of the match or result. I absolutely didn't expect a thing yesterday, in the best spirit possible. Celtic are probably playing their highest standard of football in the Sky sports era, potentially maybe nabbing a long European run and in light of NeoGers revival (enough about them now) and yes, it would have taken a major miracle to get even a draw, on balance of the match itself.
The last sentence is pivotal, and a sign of where the players (even the ones i'd now thank and replace) and management have led us, some a victim of their own success in a way. Of course yesterday i wasnt expecting that magical 'one performance' from any of those who've flattered to decieve, or been simply pish until now, but i'm not hiding my annoyance with some of them and their form, just because they got passed around by a top drawer side. Broomhill could have easily pulled the same draw and been even happier with the 'plucky part timers' gig than us, but i'd much rather we were 'plucky' away in the league and given ourselves a template not just for yesterday but for the rest of the season. It was easy to go into battle yesterday.
0 -
1 hour ago, the_bully_wee said:
We were on a hiding to nothing the entire game really, so I'm not sure what more folk were expecting. Celtic are rightly miles ahead of us in every department, particularly technically and physically. The entire game they had both full-backs basically playing as wingers and left Goodwillie up against Ajer and Jullien, who are both bigger, stronger (at least the latter is) and faster than him. We were happy to give them the wide areas, but generally defended the middle well. Still, they did have good chances that they passed up (Elyounoussi's from close range springs to mind) even if the two goals were somewhat preventable and disappointing to lose. We were maybe a touch unambitious in that first half, but the first goal coming when it did was a bit bruising at a time when we were looking fairly comfortable on the whole and feeling our way into it. From that point on, it was always going to be nigh on impossible to get a result and the second goal completely killed it.
We showed a bit more enterprise in the second half, but by that point the game had already gone and going gung-ho would have resulted in a complete scudding. By about the 75th minute most of the team were blowing out their arses, too. The starting line-up was the right one for me, as it kept us strong in the middle with plenty of grafters and defensive discipline. Adding a shitebag like Johnston in a game where you are defending 90% of the time would have been complete suicide; he struggles to influence games and do his defensive share in L1, never mind against the best team in the country. Ally Love is a very handy player for us, but I don't think I've ever seen his turn of pace alluded to earlier.
The main positive from yesterday for me was how well Tom Lang performed; Klimala is obviously just another total ringer at this point, but he defended really well the entire game. It's a good headache to have he, Howie and Rumsby vying for two positions - a shame that one will probably to be left out. It's very hard to judge Livingstone on that game alone, but it looks as though he won't be rinsed by anyone simply facing him up and running at him, so that's a plus.
So, it's not an occasion to showcase your own talents, just to build a wall and blooter it up the park and hope for the best?
Where's the self-respect, or intent on adding to the spectacle? Or do we simply judge a game beforehand, based on what league place we're both in, or what the papers say? Johnston wasn't signed to chase back and prove his commitnent by knackering himself defending (something those chosen ahead of him never do themselves), he was hired to create, and give us an outlet we didn't have. Yes he's been shite on a few occasions, but outside of a group of about four players this year (inc the goalie, and Lang after 4 games!) that's true of everyone. Look at our league statistics, for evidence. Its no coincidence we kept Celtic at a regular Premiership scoreline, the only league team we've bothered turning up against twice is Falkirk, large crowd, bigger club etc. Had as much effort gone into our games against the rest of the bottom six, as yesterday, i'd have gladly forgiven double that scoreline had we at least looked like trying to get into the game, somehow. We're painting ourselves as strugglers to seemingly avoid any sort of accountability for poor showings, and on a football level, when your keeper and CB are your best performers, thats exactly what that was.
A bit of duplicity here, we're praising Tom Lang's MotM display (correctly) while basically telling the rest of the team it didn't matter how they played. It may be a mixed ability classroom, but thats the first time i've seen us play the OF (8 or 9 in total) and not enjoyed anything of how we played. A lot of eggs going in the 'hope' basket for the remainder of the season, while we continue making the same stupid bloody mistakes.
0 -
4 hours ago, FREDDYFRY said:
Certainly a little better in terms of squad numbers; time will tell if the additions are any better than what we have already; hard to tell yesterday obviously. Rankin back is a massive bonus.
That said; and I realise it was against a team light years ahead on Sunday, but still some of the same issues. Cheap goals and giving away possession when in good situations, under hit passes the main frustration. Again hard to criticise but Goodwillie again completely isolated.
I know I’m being a bit harsh regarding yesterday but not basing this only on the Cup tie. Lennon has to sort out the recurring problems.
Finally, again just a bugbear of mine.. have we ever retained possession from our own throw in for the last 2 seasons?
Thou shalt not analyse such contests. Only about the money, yada yada, other classless, nihilistic observations, etc.
Excellent points. 3-0 was accurate, both on scale of effort and the obvious gulf. That's not the problem. Poor decision-making with the ball continues to hamper us far more than what opponents are managing- including Celtic in spells- when we don't have it. Far be it for me to suggest we look for things we're good at, in amongst all the defeatist garbage about how terrible we are and shouldn't bother to compete.
Lamont over Johnston, when you're looking at less than a handful of times you'll get the time or space to feed in Goodwillie, which Johnston can do, and with the ball almost 90% of the game in midfield and on the deck, was a bad choice. Not utilising Love's pace and dig, potentially moving us up the park quicker to support DG and perhaps making a game of it early on (our only real chance), a move which could have moved Rankin central and keeping (what) possession we had better.
These aggressive, progressive changes might have got us a bigger scudding, on the other hand, might not have. For me there just seemed a lot lacking, from atmosphere to tempo and strategy. Very little to get excited about, in truth.
0 -
22 minutes ago, Scotchpie said:38 minutes ago, Domino the Dug said:I'll offer a reason why Clark didn't send him off. Because he shat it from giving the correct triple-whammy in an age where every decision against Celtic was disputed as a Royal Blacks' conspiracy.
I don't understand why people consider the missed pen and Malone's V-1 strike seperately. We can't claim both- the pen led directly to the goal!
The second half goal, O'Donnell through one-on-one, was given off very early, and it absolutely was.Did the ball not deflect off a Celtic player making it dubious at least?
The intention was there, from memory. I distinctly recall SO'D slowing down well before 'shooting'.
EtA- some memory. Bryson, not O'Donnell. Oops. Williams offside, deflected back to CB.
0 -
2 hours ago, David W said:
The two "goals" were wrongly ruled out, but Bryson's one that stood was actually slightly offside as well. Kenny Clark admitted later on that he had no idea why he hadn't sent Du Wei off as it was blatant.
We also had a goal ruled out in the second half for a tight decision.
What I can remember about that day is feeling remarkably comfortable throughout Even after they pulled a goal back we killed the game well. Hardly any stoppage time either.
I'll offer a reason why Clark didn't send him off. Because he shat it from giving the correct triple-whammy in an age where every decision against Celtic was disputed as a Royal Blacks' conspiracy.
I don't understand why people consider the missed pen and Malone's V-1 strike seperately. We can't claim both- the pen led directly to the goal!
The second half goal, O'Donnell through one-on-one, was given off very early, and it absolutely was.
EtA Bryson, not O'Donnell. So many ruled out, its easy to forget.
1 -
14 hours ago, HughieMc said:
FFS- you’ve been banging on about a back 3 since forever- fickle or what?
lol
Absolutely fickle, you bet.
I'd rather an out-of place left back, tucking in as part of a four, than a completely missing-in-action midfield having to supply two wingers AND two strikers. Top-heavy, and it's not just Saturday, no natural general has emerged, to the point i'd call it the next-priority position ahead of left-back itself. The selection availability hasn't been kind lately, but neither McStay or Lamont have cemented anything yet when playing every week. And it's not Rankin's game either.
0 -
7 minutes ago, Domino the Dug said:
TBG, tbf....or is it Tbf, TBG...
Yes, we are. But we're armed with better depth in Lang at Cb, and higher creativity in Wylde over (the most welcome) graft of Love/Smith which can now be even used effectively playing off Goodie, with Syvertsen perhaps adding to that soon too, should we not secure another central midfielder before the month's end. And the Davids at each end, now happy and settled, are worth a goal each per game. No one else in the division has upgraded or settled their team, in that manner.
I think we can nick 4th.
Further to this, having seen it in action on Saturday, and been its biggest champion based on squad composition, the back three idea can get itself in the bin. We lack the central midfield general needed to protect a three, which isnt as crucial when playing either a tight or pendulating four. Thank christ we learnt it on Saturday.
-1 -
40 minutes ago, TheBigGuy said:
While the hysteria of the weekend is still very much at the forefront of my mind. We are (league-wise) still in a somewhat precarious posistion. Big two games coming up which are winnable. Really hope we can take 6 points pre Airdrie, Raith and Falkirk to end February.
TBG, tbf....or is it Tbf, TBG...
Yes, we are. But we're armed with better depth in Lang at Cb, and higher creativity in Wylde over (the most welcome) graft of Love/Smith which can now be even used effectively playing off Goodie, with Syvertsen perhaps adding to that soon too, should we not secure another central midfielder before the month's end. And the Davids at each end, now happy and settled, are worth a goal each per game. No one else in the division has upgraded or settled their team, in that manner.
I think we can nick 4th.
-1 -
12 hours ago, ATLIS said:
Worth saying that a good number of our fans pissed off to Broxburn v St Mirren, a couple of teachers from the local schools play for Broxburn and they turned out in support.
You can't be serious!! I never had 'virtuous' among the traits of Accies supporters, but you're saying that two local teachers, at schools with likely 95% Old Firm fans, swept half a dozen kids and parents away from NDP alongwith the rest of the school, reducing the crowd so heavily???
For all Hamilton's efforts in the community, freebies etc, we pulled more for the L2 final (admittedly with freebies of our own) than you had for a relegation/playoff decider played at the exact same time!
If there's a wedding on the 9th of February, you're fucked!
2 -
10 hours ago, LiviClyde said:
No undertone intended and I don't have a clue who you are so I have no interest in "catching you out".
The fact checking was purely in respect of your statement that no Clyde fan would need to move their seats.
The fact is that I and others around me did not have access to our usual seats under the previous arrangements, so if we apply the same this time then we will have to move our seats.
Pop away at Thistle to your hearts content.
I unreservedly apologise, i went a bit off the pier.
After probably the best newsweek the club's had in years, i'm just overly cautious that these things never last, and Clyde fans having fun seems to annoy other Clyde fans more than anything else! I got this wrong.
1 -
5 minutes ago, TamClyde said:
Just over 2000 I believe. Correct me if I'm wrong
Playoff crowd was 2721. In the main stand.
Facts, remember!
4 -
13 minutes ago, LiviClyde said:
If we give them half the main stand, then I'll be moved from my seat, as I was both previous Celtic games, so you might want to check your facts.
Is there a need for the undertone? Or has this been brewing a while and you've at last 'caught me out'? This doesn't end well for lackeys, i'm still here. Many others are not.
Half the stand, factually? Facts? They had a third. Me, my dad and our guest were plonked behind the Celtic dugout, to the left of the tunnel by that time, because we were abroad during the sale and simply couldn't request our normal seats. So no, they didn't have 'half'. Three unused Clyde squad players sat beside us. My dad is also in 90% of the on field photos because a steward invited him to join the three players with five minutes to go, thinking he was Robert Harris's father instead, and Strachan moved out his way to let them past. Touch of class, imo.
And i'll have any pop at Thistle that i wish to.
0 -
8 minutes ago, shawfield shed boy said:
Thanks Dug
Wasnt aware premier covered their fixtures in cup
Just hope they pay something like Sky. Get the feeling alba would pay more
I'm unsure of that, but Premier have covered four Celtic games in two years with Saturday teatime kickoffs, and given that Rangers v Stranraer was broadcast on it on Friday, its clear what their interest is!
The old standard 80k telly fee is surely built into the broadcasting contract? A massive part of any package, surely. Perhaps increased with inflation, we've no been on Sky/alternative in a Cup since Dundee Utd in 2008. Think we're looking at £130,000 clear profit here, and that's IF we lose.
Also, as an aside, no Clyde supporter is going to be moved from their seat, unlike the hearse-chasing filth across the city. Happy days.
2
Clyde FC; Season 2022-23
in Scottish League 2 General Chatter
Posted
Rather contradictory, this. In principle and in its sales pitch, yes it professes to incorporate transparency. Many will have varying views on this USP as a meaningful factor, while remaining as owners/members/shareholders/cashcows. Their/our choice. Yet given such an option, you opt not to endorse it other than as a nosey-parker, and choose to foster a viewpoint on matters with third-hand information and no regard to how 'on the pitch events' have been steered until now. Your interest moved away from the pitch awfully quickly, did it not?