Clyde Season 23/24

[haufdaft]

1 hour ago, John MacLean said:

Being praised by Jimmy Choo is by far the most objectionable thing a sad w**k pretending to be a Clyde fan has ever said to me. And I'm a Thistle fan! 

Corrected it for you

[JIMMY CHOO]

45 minutes ago, haufdaft said:

Corrected it for you

I will take that as a compliment Coming from a Pr—-k dressed up as a dog . No wonder we have problems.

[Clyde85]

Good to see the Xmas spirit lads

[NavyBlueArmy1876]

I take it Clyde going back to Shawfield wouldn't be an option? 

It's in a bit of a sorry state at the moment but could certainly be salvaged 

[BullyWeeStonehouse]

1 hour ago, NavyBlueArmy1876 said:

I take it Clyde going back to Shawfield wouldn't be an option? 

It's in a bit of a sorry state at the moment but could certainly be salvaged 

No.

[bullyweehutch]

2 hours ago, Clyde85 said:

Good to see the Xmas spirit lads

Tis the season to call your fellow fan a p***k

[Replays]

£90 for the Aberdeen game hospitality. My dad and I were strongly considering it, but £90 a skull is probably a bit steep for us.

[Clyde01]

19 hours ago, the_bully_wee said:

Not sure what the point of the above post is, really. Having withered as a club over the past 20 years, with our only periods of relative success coming as a result of ruinous overspending/borrowing (and some periods of abject failure while going headlong into the red too!), surely it should be clear by now that any kind of material improvement to the club's current and future fortunes is nigh on impossible to enact while we remain tenants at the behest of, and generating profit for, other clubs/entities. Regardless of the costs associated with running your own stadium (a large chunk of which would be covered by grants, incidentally), stadium ownership and its associated benefits represent the primary reason why clubs of a similar core support and without sizeable external financial backing are consistently able to outspend and outperform us. We are sorely hampered in terms of attracting sponsorship and hospitality opportunities because we are an itinerant club, functioning away from its historical home and not part of a community; a look around the advertising hoardings of just about every club we come to face will show dozens of their local businesses. You'd be surprised at how quickly you can start fleshing out your hospitality and sponsorship opportunities when you are a visible force for good in your local community and producing a decent on-park product alongside that.

We played in Cumbernauld for almost 30 years and didn’t make much concerted effort to integrate into the community there so wherever we end up next could you blame them for being sceptical if we are in it for the long haul? There just isn’t a community out there waiting to embrace a mediocre SPFL club. We will need to work extremely hard over a sustained period to try and appeal to the community we land in next and over the years I have seen very little to make me believe we can achieve this.

[Jacksgranda]

7 hours ago, FREDDYFRY said:

The fact that we couldn’t take our place in Fairs cup back in late 60’s due to 2 Glasgow clubs also having qualified for Europe means that SFA etc considered us a Glasgow club too!

Were you not a member of the Glasgow FA?

[ScottR96]

4 minutes ago, Jacksgranda said:

Were you not a member of the Glasgow FA?

Yes, and still are. 

[the_bully_wee]

37 minutes ago, Clyde01 said:

We played in Cumbernauld for almost 30 years and didn’t make much concerted effort to integrate into the community there so wherever we end up next could you blame them for being sceptical if we are in it for the long haul? There just isn’t a community out there waiting to embrace a mediocre SPFL club. We will need to work extremely hard over a sustained period to try and appeal to the community we land in next and over the years I have seen very little to make me believe we can achieve this.

All very true, my post was just in response to a suggestion that clubs aren't better off as a result of owning and operating their own stadiums. I'd like to think that a lot lessons would be learned from all of the many failures in Cumbernauld if we were to secure ourselves a permanent home in Glasgow.

[420]

Mixed emotions at the news that Crownpoint is off but the overriding one is that of relief. Much as I would like nothing more than a move back to the East End of Glasgow,  the thought of having to mingle on the Gallowgate with fans of one half of the Old Firm (and both when the pair clash at Celtic Park) on Saturdays we're both at home isn't a pleasant one. There's hardly a pub within a mile radius that isn't a dyed-in-the-wool Celtic or Rangers pub, we'd be surrounded by unfriendly natives and parking would have been an issue especially for the bigger cup ties and besides - what do we know about running a sporting facility? We've had no experience of running our own stadium since the Shawfield days and no experience of owning a stadium of our own since we sold it to the greyhounds. 

If somehow we're able to get our hands on the hockey stadium (and I've not seen or heard anything to suggest GCC would welcome a bid for a Community Asset Transfer) then we'd be doing exceptionally well to rebuild and run that as a football stadium without biting off way more than we could have chewed with Crownpoint. 

[Mediocre Pundit]

I hope you get sorted, but as an ex-hockey player who played at GG for a number of seasons it would be the piss cherry on the shite pie of Glasgow Life’s management of the national fucking hockey stadium if they transfer it to a football team. It’s a great facility, shambolically managed because they clearly give no fucks about the third biggest participation sport in the country - a facility that was fully booked every weekend up until Covid. 

[Clyde_1977]

As above I also have mixed emotions about crownpoint.  I think we could have made a good go of it and old firm bias aside, I liked the location.  So initially very disappointed.

Other than the sheer amount of time lost my main worry was the whole Clyde charity / Clyde FC arrangement. 

I know they are basically one in the same but given our previous I would prefer something that's Clyde FC' s outright, that can be used as a base to develop and grow the charity.

Probably a big ask these days.

At least a decision has been made so we can only wish finnart well and put on a strap on a smile for our friends at GCC.

Focus is now on the January transfer window and putting together a team capable of winning some games of football.

[David W]

I know there was a wee email from the Foundation, but does anyone else find it bizarre that there has been nothing from the club?

This is not an inconsequential occurrence and presents a huge chance for a rightly underfire chairman to show some leadership.

[Replays]

4 minutes ago, David W said:

I know there was a wee email from the Foundation, but does anyone else find it bizarre that there has been nothing from the club?

This is not an inconsequential occurrence and presents a huge chance for a rightly underfire chairman to show some leadership.

It’ll probably get a sentence in amongst the usual drivel of a Chairman’s New Year message.

[BrigtonClyde]

1 hour ago, Clyde_1977 said:

Other than the sheer amount of time lost my main worry was the whole Clyde charity / Clyde FC arrangement. 

I know they are basically one in the same

 

I can understand the reason people think this, but it's a misconception.  They're a million miles from being basically one in the same.  They're two completely separate legal entities with completely different operations and purposes.  The CCF is a charity who under their charter have to operate in a way that is for the wider public benefit, they couldn't be seen to be operating primarily for the benefit of a private company like Clyde FC CIC.  If they changed their name today to something like "The Football For All Community Foundation" it would be just as accurate in terms of their actual day to day purpose and operation.

Of course I know who set it up, but in that sense there's a closer comparison to Clyde FC / The Greyhound Racing Company, although the latter obviously had a completely different purpose and operation to the CCF, but the relationship between the two is closer.

This is why on the club's own website they accurately explained that if the CCF did take over a facility, Clyde FC CIC would in effect be their tennants.  The CCF operate almost like for like as Glasgow Life themselves do, and is exactly the reason it was the CCF who put in the proposal as they hoped it would be viewed as seemless transfer.  The issue was the specific use of the existing football facility, and under the proposals whether the public would have the same kind of access as they do now.  Finnart's proposal is an enhanced version of what's there now.  Ownership by a private organization throws up more questions.

That said, given councils are struggling with maintenance resources, had CCF put in a bid that did not include an accomodation for Clyde FC CIC, chances are they would have been successful, because unlike Finnart's proposal, that would have removed all of the running costs from GCC.

[BrigtonClyde]

3 hours ago, Mediocre Pundit said:

I hope you get sorted, but as an ex-hockey player who played at GG for a number of seasons it would be the piss cherry on the shite pie of Glasgow Life’s management of the national fucking hockey stadium if they transfer it to a football team. It’s a great facility, shambolically managed because they clearly give no fucks about the third biggest participation sport in the country - a facility that was fully booked every weekend up until Covid. 

Wasn't aware the usage was as high as that, but fair enough.  The issue here for GCC and all other councils as has been well publicised in the media is they're basically rooked.  They're struggling to meet the running costs of the vast majority of their sports facilities.  COVID in some cases was a handy situation for them to permanently close down a few they had in mind anyway.   Last year GCC was given a grant of £1m but said it barely scatched the surface, so had to ring fence what they viewed as the few priorties (would assume Toryglen is one of them), with just about everything else up for grabs.

Bit surprised the hockey centre would be potentially up for grabs given the development there and from what you're saying the level of usage, but that's the reality.  Out of interest, you say it was fully booked up until COVID.  Is that not the case now, and if not is there a reason for that, or is it GCC who just decided not to re-open it ?

[BrigtonClyde]

22 hours ago, NavyBlueArmy1876 said:

I take it Clyde going back to Shawfield wouldn't be an option? 

It's in a bit of a sorry state at the moment but could certainly be salvaged 

It's not true to say it's absolutely impossible, but due to multiple "events", less likely unfortunately.  The current owners recently changed the name of the parent company for presentation purposes to bring it in line with the other regeneration projects happening there - although their sole interest is making money as opposed to the spirit of helping the area.  They have published their plans for the site, but there's already been a substantial number of objections to it and still requires planning permission from SLC who already told them they'd need to fund and proceed with decontamination of the site before any building could take place.

Could be they've decided to bite the bullet and accept that liability as part of their plan given they weren't made any other realistic or recent offers to buy them out.   What they plan is the last thing the area needs, an area where over the past few decades more and more public pitches were sold off and are now built on.  It could still be possible to propose a community use stadium as a joint project with SLC and others - that would involve picking the phone up finally to them to at least discuss feasibility - but unfortunately it's likely too much time has been wasted and the horse has bolted. 

In terms of land available for a good sized development and feasible communities to buy into, it remains the best option by miles, so it'll likely end up being a waste of an opportunity for the football club and community. 

[Mediocre Pundit]

32 minutes ago, BrigtonClyde said:

 

Bit surprised the hockey centre would be potentially up for grabs given the development there and from what you're saying the level of usage, but that's the reality.  Out of interest, you say it was fully booked up until COVID.  Is that not the case now, and if not is there a reason for that, or is it GCC who just decided not to re-open it ?

I stopped playing about a year before Covid (kids) but at that time on a Saturday pitch 1 was booked 9-5 (schools then league matches) and pitch 2 from about 12-5 (league). Sunday was less busy but still both pitches in use 1-4, with pitch 1 used a bit outside that. It was booked 6-9 every evening for club training. Scottish schools played on it, and all Scotland games. Four clubs played their home matches there - men and women, two for full club and two for 1st XI as pitch was National League Div 1 compliant. St Aloysius used it too - during week and Saturday morning for school matches. 
 

Not sure it could have been used much more, and that was in spite of facility being badly run - mainly the refusal to do anything decent with the bar area which otherwise would have been full after matches for match teas, pints while watching other matches etc. Which was the model they originally wanted to create (works at most European clubs)

 

Since Covid they’ve not reopened it so you need to change at the five a side pitches - including the girls / kids. I imagine that put some people off. The cynic in me thinks they may have deliberately tried to reduce usage over time to make the final closure decision easier.