CLYDE FC season 16/17 Thread

[Pride Of The Clyde]

Edinburgh and Cowdenbeath games are massive, it's 2 games for MacDonald and McGovern to turn things around or they have to step aside. It was certainlyy a gamble with the appointments , one that has not paid off so far. 

I will reserve judgement until after those 2 games, lose 1 or both of them we are screwed and I don't see where we are going to win another game this season after that.

Very worrying times.

[cfcuk]

Edinburgh and Cowdenbeath games are massive, it's 2 games for MacDonald and McGovern to turn things around or they have to step aside. It was certainlyy a gamble with the appointments , one that has not paid off so far. 
I will reserve judgement until after those 2 games, lose 1 or both of them we are screwed and I don't see where we are going to win another game this season after that.
Very worrying times.

The board won't do anything even if you lose these two games you better just hope that by some miracle these players grow a backbone for the play off games

[haufdaft]

Good post

The majority of these players don't care about the club our most experienced players are more interested in their old firm teams

Best we can hope for now is to win the play off

I agree with you about the players but the best we can hope for is to be well clear of the playoffs.

The next few games will be vital

[Replays]

Not that it makes a difference but Locke wasn't in charge today for Cowdenbeath - he takes over in their next game.

We're looking humped anyway.

[Sao Paulo]

1 hour ago, David W said:

They've had three games, two against the top two. They've had two training sessions. What on Earth difference do you expect there to have been?

I'd have asked SLClyde the same rhetorical question if I didn't think all of the following:

1. JP & Peaso have picked three teams which I wouldn't have.
2. JP & Peaso haven't used the bench (substitutes) as I would have in their three games.
3. JP & Peaso have had the pool of players, across their three games, to make a difference, but they haven't.
4. JP & Peaso are committing precisely the same errors that Ferguson and Malcolm did re team selection.
5. JP & Peaso look set to continue to make those same errors.
6. The players look downtrodden and there's a manifest lack of whole-team dig.
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. 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?

Edited March 11, 2017 by Sao Paulo

[1320Lichtie]

Forfar were there for the taking as were Arbroath by the sound of things.

The next four games are huge. Three at home against Edinburgh, Cowdenbeath and Stirling then away to Cowdenbeath.

Said this in the match thread... that could possibly be the worst we've played all season. We were all over the place and none of our big players put in a performance, Linn, Scott, Doris, McCord all very poor compared to their usual standards.

However we had plenty of very good chances, purely down to the incompetence of your defence. In particular the 2 centre halves. If you don't find some sort of solution back there you're fucked, simple. If you sort that out I think you'll be perfectly fine. Some decent players going forward that can cause teams problems.

Literally all over the shop at the back. I stood in line with your defence for most of the game and nobody taking control of it at all. No organisation.

[Snakebite]

What are Clyde waiting on for a new manager? Another defeat and the writing was on the wall weeks before Ferguson eventually chucked it. The club is a total shambles. The fan ownership is an absolute con.

[cfcuk]

This is you just realising it? It has been since the start. The entry page on the site is a fucking lie, namedropping German clubs like they use the same system. Its just a ruse to turn failure back on the fans/owners for not volunteering or stumping up the cash to fund the team 'they' want. It'll never change, because vested interests and personal agendas are more important than the benefit of the club. I'm sorry to say that we will be absolutely no loss whatsoever to the game when we do eventually fold. Not if, when. 

Sad but true [emoji54]

[David W]

1 hour ago, Sao Paulo said:

I'd have asked SLClyde the same rhetorical question if I didn't think all of the following:

1. JP & Peaso have picked three teams which I wouldn't have.
2. JP & Peaso haven't used the bench (substitutes) as I would have in their three games.
3. JP & Peaso have had the pool of players, across their three games, to make a difference, but they haven't.
4. JP & Peaso are committing precisely the same errors that Ferguson and Malcolm did re team selection.
5. JP & Peaso look set to continue to make those same errors.
6. The players look downtrodden and there's a manifest lack of whole-team dig.
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. 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?

You, at least, have provided a response of some effort. I'll give you that. To the others, there has been no shortage of effort, commitment or aggression in the last three games. Or, indeed, in many of the Ferguson matches. That's always the first criticism churned out of any team who are losing. If there had actually been a lack of effort, we'd have lost heavily against three motivated sides. As an argument; it's fanciful nonsense. The two ways to improve a team are with coaching (over a long term), and with new players.

To answer your points:

1) Totally irrelevant, and I'm surprised that you are raising such a point. There hasn't been a team selection in the history of football that three or four fans have agreed on, never mind a fan and the manager (who is always privy to more information about form, fitness etc). At every level of the game. Indeed, in playing Flynn, dropping Higgins, fielding McMillan/McNeil/Johnston in their normal positions, they made the exact changes that most were crying out for.

2) Totally irrelevant. Same point as above. However, to humour you, they had to take off two injured/struggling players today and replaced them with the most obvious replacements. They had to take off three injured players against Forfar and again replaced them with the obvious replacements. Against Berwick, they brought on the couple of players who were fit to bring on. Could've perhaps done things differently but not really much in the way of options.

3) A fair point. The onslaught of individual errors won't be stopped by a new coach though. And those individual errors are the consistent problem. No matter who is in charge, you can't excuse McLaughlin (who has poor games but rarely makes out and out errors) costing us two goals in one game (and nearly a third). A different manager would still have Gibson. 

4) The previous errors you highlighted are normally; Johnston at right back (not happened), McNiff at left back (he is a left back, he is our only fit left back). Anything else? As I said earlier, they've made precisely the changes that everyone was crying out for!

5) Still not sure what those errors are.

6) Certainly not last Saturday, or today. Nor really in midweek, where they were downtrodden enough to come back from 2-0 down, and dominate the second half. 

7) Different team, entirely different circumstances. I have no idea how bad Fox was, or how good Locke is. It's a different group of players. Team's can fluke a win. Again, a totally irrelevant point to the Clyde situation. Look at the noticeable difference from Malcolm to McGovern/MacDonald.

8) Again, a totally different match. It's not like you to compare apples with pears but that's what you're doing in an uncharacteristically messy post. It sounds like Forfar could easily have given Edinburgh a tanking today. They caught them with a late goal. 

9) They've changed out style and there has been a far greater emphasis on width (rightly or wrongly; I like the diamond myself). They're playing players in their correct positions. They've retained a positive outlook.  They've tried to cut out some of the individual errors by dropping Smith. Apart from maybe also binning Perry, that's all I'd expect from 2 training sessions and three matches from which we only actually took 1 point when we were playing well earlier in the season. Look how long (and also with a number of expensive transfers) it's taken Allardyce, probably the best "firefighter" of a manager to tighten Crystal Palace up, and that's with full-time football. His early time at the club was horrific. There are far more examples of managers having no impact whatsoever; the problem is, no-one remembers them amongst the few exceptions who manage to win their first few games.

I am hugely worried about where we're going to end up. I'm not saying that I think they should have been put in charge. I've said previously that a Danny Lennon type would be perfect. However, I, like every other person on this board, have no idea of McGovern/MacDonald's qualifications or abilities. The fact they are players... so what? They could well be doing things totally different on the training pitch, in their preparation for games. They could well be the best people for the job. I am fully aware of the fact though that three games and two training sessions is absolutely no time to judge anyone in a managerial job, especially with someone else's squad, and that expecting massive changes immediately is crazy. 

[cfcuk]

You, at least, have provided a response of some effort. I'll give you that. To the others, there has been no shortage of effort, commitment or aggression in the last three games. Or, indeed, in many of the Ferguson matches. That's always the first criticism churned out of any team who are losing. If there had actually been a lack of effort, we'd have lost heavily against three motivated sides. As an argument; it's fanciful nonsense. The two ways to improve a team are with coaching (over a long term), and with new players.
To answer your points:
1) Totally irrelevant, and I'm surprised that you are raising such a point. There hasn't been a team selection in the history of football that three or four fans have agreed on, never mind a fan and the manager (who is always privy to more information about form, fitness etc). At every level of the game. Indeed, in playing Flynn, dropping Higgins, fielding McMillan/McNeil/Johnston in their normal positions, they made the exact changes that most were crying out for.
2) Totally irrelevant. Same point as above. However, to humour you, they had to take off two injured/struggling players today and replaced them with the most obvious replacements. They had to take off three injured players against Forfar and again replaced them with the obvious replacements. Against Berwick, they brought on the couple of players who were fit to bring on. Could've perhaps done things differently but not really much in the way of options.
3) A fair point. The onslaught of individual errors won't be stopped by a new coach though. And those individual errors are the consistent problem. No matter who is in charge, you can't excuse McLaughlin (who has poor games but rarely makes out and out errors) costing us two goals in one game (and nearly a third). A different manager would still have Gibson. 
4) The previous errors you highlighted are normally; Johnston at right back (not happened), McNiff at left back (he is a left back, he is our only fit left back). Anything else? As I said earlier, they've made precisely the changes that everyone was crying out for!
5) Still not sure what those errors are.
6) Certainly not last Saturday, or today. Nor really in midweek, where they were downtrodden enough to come back from 2-0 down, and dominate the second half. 
7) Different team, entirely different circumstances. I have no idea how bad Fox was, or how good Locke is. It's a different group of players. Team's can fluke a win. Again, a totally irrelevant point to the Clyde situation. Look at the noticeable difference from Malcolm to McGovern/MacDonald.
Again, a totally different match. It's not like you to compare apples with pears but that's what you're doing in an uncharacteristically messy post. It sounds like Forfar could easily have given Edinburgh a tanking today. They caught them with a late goal. 
9) They've changed out style and there has been a far greater emphasis on width (rightly or wrongly; I like the diamond myself). They're playing players in their correct positions. They've retained a positive outlook.  They've tried to cut out some of the individual errors by dropping Smith. Apart from maybe also binning Perry, that's all I'd expect from 2 training sessions and three matches from which we only actually took 1 point when we were playing well earlier in the season. Look how long (and also with a number of expensive transfers) it's taken Allardyce, probably the best "firefighter" of a manager to tighten Crystal Palace up, and that's with full-time football. His early time at the club was horrific. There are far more examples of managers having no impact whatsoever; the problem is, no-one remembers them amongst the few exceptions who manage to win their first few games.
I am hugely worried about where we're going to end up. I'm not saying that I think they should have been put in charge. I've said previously that a Danny Lennon type would be perfect. However, I, like every other person on this board, have no idea of McGovern/MacDonald's qualifications or abilities. The fact they are players... so what? They could well be doing things totally different on the training pitch, in their preparation for games. They could well be the best people for the job. I am fully aware of the fact though that three games and two training sessions is absolutely no time to judge anyone in a managerial job, especially with someone else's squad, and that expecting massive changes immediately is crazy. 

So still not answered why Cowdenbeath could win today ?

The club are facing going out the league and you say we should wait weeks to see if mcgovern and McDonald are any good as managers , what a great strategy that is

[cfcuk]

You, at least, have provided a response of some effort. I'll give you that. To the others, there has been no shortage of effort, commitment or aggression in the last three games. Or, indeed, in many of the Ferguson matches. That's always the first criticism churned out of any team who are losing. If there had actually been a lack of effort, we'd have lost heavily against three motivated sides. As an argument; it's fanciful nonsense. The two ways to improve a team are with coaching (over a long term), and with new players.
To answer your points:
1) Totally irrelevant, and I'm surprised that you are raising such a point. There hasn't been a team selection in the history of football that three or four fans have agreed on, never mind a fan and the manager (who is always privy to more information about form, fitness etc). At every level of the game. Indeed, in playing Flynn, dropping Higgins, fielding McMillan/McNeil/Johnston in their normal positions, they made the exact changes that most were crying out for.
2) Totally irrelevant. Same point as above. However, to humour you, they had to take off two injured/struggling players today and replaced them with the most obvious replacements. They had to take off three injured players against Forfar and again replaced them with the obvious replacements. Against Berwick, they brought on the couple of players who were fit to bring on. Could've perhaps done things differently but not really much in the way of options.
3) A fair point. The onslaught of individual errors won't be stopped by a new coach though. And those individual errors are the consistent problem. No matter who is in charge, you can't excuse McLaughlin (who has poor games but rarely makes out and out errors) costing us two goals in one game (and nearly a third). A different manager would still have Gibson. 
4) The previous errors you highlighted are normally; Johnston at right back (not happened), McNiff at left back (he is a left back, he is our only fit left back). Anything else? As I said earlier, they've made precisely the changes that everyone was crying out for!
5) Still not sure what those errors are.
6) Certainly not last Saturday, or today. Nor really in midweek, where they were downtrodden enough to come back from 2-0 down, and dominate the second half. 
7) Different team, entirely different circumstances. I have no idea how bad Fox was, or how good Locke is. It's a different group of players. Team's can fluke a win. Again, a totally irrelevant point to the Clyde situation. Look at the noticeable difference from Malcolm to McGovern/MacDonald.
Again, a totally different match. It's not like you to compare apples with pears but that's what you're doing in an uncharacteristically messy post. It sounds like Forfar could easily have given Edinburgh a tanking today. They caught them with a late goal. 
9) They've changed out style and there has been a far greater emphasis on width (rightly or wrongly; I like the diamond myself). They're playing players in their correct positions. They've retained a positive outlook.  They've tried to cut out some of the individual errors by dropping Smith. Apart from maybe also binning Perry, that's all I'd expect from 2 training sessions and three matches from which we only actually took 1 point when we were playing well earlier in the season. Look how long (and also with a number of expensive transfers) it's taken Allardyce, probably the best "firefighter" of a manager to tighten Crystal Palace up, and that's with full-time football. His early time at the club was horrific. There are far more examples of managers having no impact whatsoever; the problem is, no-one remembers them amongst the few exceptions who manage to win their first few games.
I am hugely worried about where we're going to end up. I'm not saying that I think they should have been put in charge. I've said previously that a Danny Lennon type would be perfect. However, I, like every other person on this board, have no idea of McGovern/MacDonald's qualifications or abilities. The fact they are players... so what? They could well be doing things totally different on the training pitch, in their preparation for games. They could well be the best people for the job. I am fully aware of the fact though that three games and two training sessions is absolutely no time to judge anyone in a managerial job, especially with someone else's squad, and that expecting massive changes immediately is crazy. 

Think you need to go and read your posts from Berwick game [emoji23]

[David W]

9 minutes ago, cfcuk said:

 

 

So still not answered why Cowdenbeath could win today ?

The club are facing going out the league and you say we should wait weeks to see if mcgovern and McDonald are any good as managers , what a great strategy that is

 

 

1) I did.

2) Read my post. I said that no matter the manager, expecting them to change things dramatically in 10 days is delusional lunacy. Dealing in hypotheticals of course, but if we'd appointed an experienced guy pre-Forfar and proceeded to take one point from the next three, would you want them replaced? We supporters may have to wait to see if they're good managers; others who have more of an insight may already know.

3) Read my Berwick post again. I questioned individual errors, and the fact that we'd blown a terrific chance, again, to get a win. That the fact we hadn't won since November was embarrassing and that I was fed-up watching us lose every week. I didn't question effort or attitude. I didn't say a different manager would suddenly be doing a better job. Again, you have spectacularly missed the point.

[Bully Wee Villa]

Today couldn't have gone worse.

f**k Berwick off to the Northern League and get Forfar merged with the other pointless Angus twats. c***s.

[haufdaft]

So still not answered why Cowdenbeath could win today ?

The club are facing going out the league and you say we should wait weeks to see if mcgovern and McDonald are any good as managers , what a great strategy that is

Who is to say that Locke's selection as manager will turn out to be a great strategy? One game doesn't make him a success or mean that they'll escape the playoff. His previous record indicates that he's a poor manager.
Remember we had a random 5-0 victory against Arbroath in the cup. That didn't mean Ferguson's strategy was correct.

Results wise, the issue that is killing us is individual errors by players. There's not much a manager can do about that. The only way you can fix it is by jettisoning them for better players. Unfortunately, they are all as bad as each other in the squad

[cfcuk]

1) I did.
2) Read my post. I said that no matter the manager, expecting them to change things dramatically in 10 days is delusional lunacy. Dealing in hypotheticals of course, but if we'd appointed an experienced guy pre-Forfar and proceeded to take one point from the next three, would you want them replaced? We supporters may have to wait to see if they're good managers; others who have more of an insight may already know.
3) Read my Berwick post again. I questioned individual errors, and the fact that we'd blown a terrific chance, again, to get a win. That the fact we hadn't won since November was embarrassing and that I was fed-up watching us lose every week. I didn't question effort or attitude. I didn't say a different manager would suddenly be doing a better job. Again, you have spectacularly missed the point.

We are facing going out the league and you think it's the best strategy to have two guys who have no managerial experience in charge ?

This idea that we have to be grateful that the team are giving effort[emoji23]

So your buisness is in danger of going down the tubes let's put a couple of inexperienced guys in charge, by the way who picks the team ? Do they get 5 picks each?

I'm not blaming either of the guys in charge the responsibility for that is goes right to the top

[Velazquez Blue]

Who is to say that Locke's selection as manager will turn out to be a great strategy? One game doesn't make him a success or mean that they'll escape the playoff. His previous record indicates that he's a poor manager.
Remember we had a random 5-0 victory against Arbroath in the cup. That didn't mean Ferguson's strategy was correct.

Results wise, the issue that is killing us is individual errors by players. There's not much a manager can do about that. The only way you can fix it is by jettisoning them for better players. Unfortunately, they are all as bad as each other in the squad

Locke wasn't in charge today. New coaching team starts Monday.

[cfcuk]

Who is to say that Locke's selection as manager will turn out to be a great strategy? One game doesn't make him a success or mean that they'll escape the playoff. His previous record indicates that he's a poor manager.
Remember we had a random 5-0 victory against Arbroath in the cup. That didn't mean Ferguson's strategy was correct.

Results wise, the issue that is killing us is individual errors by players. There's not much a manager can do about that. The only way you can fix it is by jettisoning them for better players. Unfortunately, they are all as bad as each other in the squad

Well in the next couple of weeks you are about to find out if locke is going to be a success

Glad to see you bought into its individuals errors that have us to 5 points from the bottom , that conveniently excuses everyone else from responsibility for the mess we are in

Let me guess Smith, Johnston , McNiff

[big al]

Don't be fooled by our win today, Berwick were dreadful. We are still favourites for 10th.

[haufdaft]

Locke wasn't in charge today. New coaching team starts Monday.

Cheers for the correction. Hopefully he drags Cowdenbeath downwards again.

[haufdaft]

Glad to see you bought into its individuals errors that have us to 5 points from the bottom

It's as plain as the nose on your face.

We all see individual errors costing us points practically every match.

How many points have individual errors cost this season?

The club hierarchy, as I've stated before, can be blamed for many things but not for our goalkeeper fumbling shots, defenders ball watching,failing to clear the ball or missing a tackle, midfielders not tracking their man or strikers putting the ball over the bar from 6 yards out.