Domino the Dug

No one in Southern Ireland, where Premier broadcasts from, gives a f**k about Falkirk or Hearts. Saturday, 5.30pm kickoff. Guaranteed.

Wylde or Ally Love, would be my personal choice. Why invite trouble with an inferior player, especially in a defensive area of the pitch? The inclusion of Wylde, as a skilled technician, on the left of midfield would surely assist in us being perhaps more able to dominate possession in aggressive spaces, forcing teams (starting with this mob tomorrow) to withdraw players away from pressurising our three man backline, instead of having them pick on an inferior choice of left-back. Just do away with the position until we get a proper one in.

Very much so. The only thing i'm unsure of is if Cuddihy is available or not to play Rwb, which for me, he would. Lang played 'left' of Rumsby from January onwards, and if as expected we are on top in possession, he and whichever of the other two are 'right' would invariably become part of build-up play. It's far from a long-term strategy, merely a solution to get us by tomorrow and see where we go. But the failings until now (that IS what they are, esp against teams around us) need rectified somehow.

Provided we get the go-ahead in the face of these terrifyingly moderate overnight weather conditions, and taking into account the nature of the pitch, our opponents, our new additions, and our utter failure in succesfully negotiating these games recently whatsoever when going with our 'usual' preparations, layout and playing style, i think a radical alteration is staring us, and hopefully Danny Lennon too, in the face. Having no left-back all season has killed us, the inconsistency of form and selection at right-back has unbalanced us further. We've recruited well, and any ideas of Howie or Rumsby dropping out, particularly tomorrow, to shoehorn Tom Lang into defence, (looking FIRMLY at you, Haufdaft!) should be seen and treated as nonsense. It's very simple. He should play alongside them. I dont normally go for 'tight pitch' this, or 'man the barricades' that, but in the face of our lack of genuine full-backs, the signing of a versatile wide player, and the lack of support Goodwillie receives when wingers spend 70 minutes covering, a back three is a must. Smith looked able at RWB against Stranraer, arguably his most industrious performance so far. I'd gamble him or Johnston in this role, with the other playing off to the right of DG. Grant and Wallace/Lamont simply need to man up and get stuck in regardless of how we line up anyway, back three or four. Wylde and Love can partner on the left simpatico with DS and CJ on the right, in a classic old 3-4-3 from the days of Maitland. Get intae thum.

We're not paying the players to fanny around with calculators, we have enough of those elsewhere throughout the club. I'm more concerned with our players physical condition. Would be nice if people refrained from indulging our support's version of a 65 year old Greta Thunberg. Again, we have enough of those already! Gritters out and about all over Central belt today, could be dicey tomorrow.

Are you happy shuffling along out of your regular seat, for your manky hearse-chasing club to sell its arse to Timothy?

And of the "lower taxes"? I've been slung mud by an illiterate, impulsive moron ex-Clyde striker campaigning for these fascists, for challenging this very ideology. Mason's a w**k.

Haggis filling in the pies for the East Fife game? Removal of the £5 Yob Tax upon the Arria Lounge entrance? Tease!

The most sensible poster on the subject, not least because he's already saw Lang try already to break into a Championship side, coming straight from NeoGers u20s. The simplified facts as they are, is what went on over the summer is finished. He's since had two injuries, one at a time when Dunfermline were already chronically short at centre-back. They've also had a shite season where experience is always trusted in selection, and Crawford fucking about between 2 or 3 CBs every other week, and they have bags of that throughout their squad which i'd imagine would result in a highly competitive cut-throat competition in reserve games for just a bench spot compared to what he's largely been used to, INCLUDING with us. Maybe we're not for him, under those conditions if he's training with full-timers, but the generally accepted move in that case is to go on loan a step down. Given our defence numbers i'd say its a priority position, if not Lang then certainly another. We've taken some seriously shite players on loan in this situation over the last few years, this absolutely wouldn't be another.

I thought you were incapable of human feeling! We live and learn.

Just the way of the world . Many feel they have the right or entitlement to say what they want, just makes for a very toxic environment. Rather a counter-productive view, surely. If it's "toxic" for some, a word used frequently involving recourse over virtually any event at our club, then it should be "toxic" for all? What is it that are you worried about people talking about, or finding out? Perhaps valid reasons exist for people discussing anything and everything they wish. If you speak/type from 'inside the tent', as it were, you should be glad people still care enough to wish to converse matters after all those years of terrible leadership and altruistic cronyism mis-steering the ship, with impunity. Unless it's considered here that more than two is assembly, on an open forum you neither monitor nor gain from. Unlike the all-but-dead club forum we pay for.

Agreed. I'd have quoted the previous post, but there's a virulent non-truth in it. The uptake of this facility is pathetic, frankly. Given the list of extremes the club's endured lately (and i mean the decade), it seems to serve as another chip for many to balance on the shoulder. Its almost as if the vast, vast majority just don't care. Whatever views one may have of the structure/personnel, its really very simple to get not even involved, but merely cast an eye over.

As if you lack the means of finding anything out!! Life's a game of why you know, who you know. Some are good at it. Others.....

What, for USING it? Regardless of who said what, and to whom, did anyone consider the fact that it wouldn't be free? What a place.

Oh, Harold. One deeply clouded matter which hasn't yet manifested a single outcome, inspiring rage.... And yet a factual, openly- declared gamble is merely a dogbite on the arse. What a place this is.

Oh dear. You truly are fucked, then!

Post of the season, Sir. One could add, to the House of Horrors list of dross DW illuminates, is our never-ending injury list. To be fair, almost everyone who has endured a long term absence is on the 'good' list, and have mostly proven a worth. Can't argue with SP's assertion that filling in the blanks *could* be a monetary issue in some cases, if not outright deliberate. I don't envisage that Howie or Rumsby, when added to the squad were high-end. Neither were either Lang or Coggill, so centre-backs clearly don't break the bank. We now have one fit option, where we had five last season. Cuddihy and Love also would enter this category of being adequate first-picks, on affordable wages. If this were the case throughout the squad, i don't think the selection issues would have manifested, leading to the current awful form. And it IS awful. Our only recent win was a terrible display. Mitchell for Currie, is a merited and worthy upgrade in every way, including financially. Even if he leaves, we have attained a standard with him which must be aspired to. Similiar with Grant, Rankin and Goodwillie, two of whom again i expect to be among the higher bracket. Johnston, Wallace and Smith, in particular, i'd expect to have been enticed by the carrot and not the stick, based on their showings so far. That's not an endorsement of any of them, when we need dig, they disappear. This is a character thing, not a financial one.

Well, now we know how THAT went, what's plan F? Others have been brave to make statements, so i'll join in. Several of that team today, frankly aren't good enough, or interested enough, to arrest the slide in form. And Lennon's reputation, whether anyone likes it or not, is staked on him a) realising this, and b) acting accordingly. Budget restraints this, availability that, don't interest me. We're already wasting a right chunk of what budget he has as it is, by those choices. It's not ALL been bad, but good bonhomie and fond memories won't keep us out the bottom two for much longer. That game today, even with us still plodding at no more than 70%, should have been buried even before the, ahem, penalty. If it were a technical issue, i'd understand but i think it's an attitude problem. Lennon wouldn't ask them to play this "certain way" he refers to (ref his first six games, with the shell of Chapmans side) if it wasn't in the locker, although Petkov seems to take this instruction literally, with every first touch. Only three more games of that, Howie permitting, thankfully. I like our 'style', i really do, but some of those today just did not fancy it. Change my mind, by all means.

As it should be, for all teams of our stature and a good few above, too. Even the likes of Thistle having one is a completely pointless exercise, even with their Pilsbury cash. The point is, its a team masquerading as a Clyde select when its just a boxticking venture for everyone concerned except the actual players who will be doing their best, in a field they'll sadly never succeed in. No offence intended to individuals, but It does look to be something which has no bearing or reputational press on the club, whether if good or bad results. Its not like if a player nets three hattricks or clean sheets he can simply join the first (ONLY!!) team, he's actually probably more likely to attract attention from better amateur or even Junior sides who would play him rather than sit on a bench while not being able to play for this Fdtn side. Producing a player for Clyde is far down the list of priorities, in any case. Just look at our bench until Tuesday. It's never been that busy on a Saturday!

No squad list, profiles, fixture information or match updates on the official club site. At all. Which absolutely is fair enough, if it costs the club nothing financially or in manpower. However if by some miracle a better result was achieved, i'd expect those same distance being put between the foundation team and the club. Aye, right! The youth side which ran up until around 2004 had their own section and information guides during that season's programme. I knew a few, personally. Whoever was paying them (the club, or others, or indeed if at all), they were bona fide, fully signed Clyde players. Mark Gilhaney quickly established himself in the team during winter/spring of 2003, John Baird, Billy Reid Jr and David Greenhill (among others) made (minimal) apps from the bench, and Paul Doyle became Simon Mensing's understudy during the 03/04 season. But of course, we should feel nothing but guilt over those days!

A shitstorm awaits, of that i've no doubt.

Where's it been announced? I did see on Rose's twitter tickets are available from Sunday, but not a lot else. Eta saw website.

I noticed the criticism too, but shouldn't it be directed *somewhere* if we are expecting miracles from the same club genie when he's literally getting his arse kicked, with no adequate replacement? To be fair, no more than two players in recent games have been asked to take on unfamiliar roles, and even they being Lyon who's played RB more than midfield, and Duffie temporarily at left back (i am told). Petkov knew he was brought here as a CB. Their general body language and mindset may be altered by the obvious weaknesses which are appearing as the squad wilts further by the week, but one or two could be doing with toughening up a bit in that instance.

There's nothing negative in fans voicing opinions. Indeed, many have said the same here about Saturday that they did in previous games we've won or drawn, and usually about the same players. Some even questioned the summer retention of two players mentioned quite a lot. Clearly the supporters are discussing these, hoping those able to sort the particular problems have a bash at doing so, in order that the situation can improve. That's highly positive i'd say. A lot more so than ignoring them, or wishing others not to discuss them.

Agreed John, i felt the criticism was unjust when we've largely done the same things, in most games, and fared better. At no stage did we look like we did in early August, or at home first half to Raith. I dont think it fair to lay the blame at Goodies feet either, he's no more entitled to a bad game than anyone, but i felt Johnston and Lamont took a fair whack of the responsibility for dragging us through the second half but it wasn't enough. They're often the first two to get slated, and i can see why but again it was the final ball, every time. Grant and McStay are strangely copping it far heavier than they were last season when allowing the likes of Berwick and Stirling to strut around, again both had undeniably poor games but Dumbarton didn't overly dominate us, just played 'us' better than we did. The injury list growing by the week is sending us out weaker with each match and in turn asking players to moderate their own game, thats not a final third issue as we had half a dozen set pieces that landed on a fucking treadmill, but it IS a reason why Dumbarton scored both goals as easily as they did. And should have scored more, Mitchell again was outstanding.