Kmcalpin

Yes, the situation has changed. The Magyars must win to overtake us.

Thanks agent Logan!

Logan Dunnachie scores for Clyde.

Yes, these changes have to be made as soon as practicably possible to allow us to move forward and re-create unity. They should be done in a civilised professional manner.

I wish neither party any harm. Rather than focus on retribution, revenge, vendettas, punishement and reprisals its now time for all of us to get behind the Society and club to work for positive change and to support the former's strategy. Personnel changes should be actioned in a timely but business like and objective way. We've no time for negative distractions now.

Some great banter tonight. I suspect we're signing AVS as a speculate to accumulate project. All we need now is another No 10 "Spittal replacement" and we're good to go.

Fair enough Tam.

Yes, you're right of course. A draw after 90 minutes next Sunday might have been enough for us, if we'd have won on penalties. Assuming Partick win this midweek, then they can afford to draw whereas we now have to win to finish top. We have to finish a point above them and that can only be achieved by beating them outright.

I've just watched the highlights from yesterday's game. Some good attacking moves, although much of it was unproductive. Stuparevic's goal was a real thing of beauty. Hopefully a lot more of that to come. As for Clyde's goal - it was one we conceded many times last year. A real team effort. A mistake in giving the ball the ball away; attackers given loads of space; the midfield retreating into our own box; and 2 totally unmarked attackers lining up to have a crack at goal about 15 yards out. Where was our midfield?? A lot of comment was made last year about the state of our central defence and we'll leave that aside for now, but it seems our defensive midfield weakness has not been addressed by new arrivals. Early days but I hope we get our house in order for next Sunday and the Ross County opener. I suspect SK will make a few changes from yesterday that will keep Partick on their toes.

One definition of an internet troll is "a person who intentionally antagonizes others online by posting inflammatory, irrelevant, or offensive comments or other disruptive content". Now thats a pretty wide definition. In my book, it clearly includes someone who makes personal remarks, bullies other posters, singles other posters out for "special mention or treatment" (excluding engaging in constructive debate) or is abusive. Thats the easy bit, or maybe its not so easy. Its not so easy to decide if someone is troll if they post ridiculous comments - it might be that they just hold ridiculous views. It happens. The problem then becomes who decides the definition of a ridiculous view and why a poster has posted them? What we have to avoid at all costs, is to label someone a troll if they hold diametrically opposite views to us. Our support contains extremes of optimism and pessimism and a whole range in between. Personally I like to read views which are diametrically opposite to my own as it helps me test and challenge my own perspectives and understand where others are coming from. I'd say that the mods and admin on here do a pretty good job. The problem is that we don't know what we don't know - the unseen work that they do quietly in the background.

I get that but these lower league teams have had different priorities to us. They're out to beat a big boy ie us, whereas we try to balance results against getting players matchfit. In my view we haven't got it quite right this year. Results wise though we're first in our group ....so far. Not the first time we've got the balance wrong. Injuries have also played a part.

After our result at Montrose, a win will be the only acceptable result for us. Even if we'd picked up all 3 points in Angus that might not have been enough, given Thistle's better goal scoring record. They'll be delighted to lose on penalties next week given their superior goal difference. We have to win simples. However, the players are getting match fitter and we've yet to field our strongest 11 from those we have available.

I suspect Clyde will play a similar game to Ediburgh City and Montrose. They'll also have the benefit of having see us struggle against those 2 sides. I wonder if any of our injured players will be fit enough to make an appearance? We certainly need more presence up front, a more offensive/creative midfield and more pace from the wing backs. So, more of the same won't do. Will Kaleta be fit? Will we play play 2 up front? Will Stuparevic start? Whatever, we need to shake it up a bit.

Agreed Weeyin but this comes second.

Well said sir. He's been dropped in at the deep end.

More suited to a golf course or Bay City Rollers convention. Its orrible.

I share the same concerns many posters have expressed about our start to this season, but the chances are that Edinburgh City didn't put 11 men behind the ball and park the bus from kick off last night.

Good posts Denny & StAndrew7. Thats my thoughts exactly. I think SK made a miscalculation. A lot of us saw Montrose equalising long before they did but obviously SK didn't. Some odd substitutions that turned the game, but not in a positive way. Would have liked to have seen Stupavaric appear long before he did.

Not a lot to say about last night's game at a macro level that hasn't already been said, but here are some additional thoughts. I thought we had the capability to move up a gear or two but didn't do so until Montrose equalised and twisted our arm into doing so. Oxborough was my MOTM. Very confident in the air; pulled off one incredible save and saved a penalty in the shoot out. Gordon impressed, with his leadership at the back as did Lennon Miller in midfield. Robinson looked fine but not really fair to judge him given his lack of service. We struggled at wing back through lack of pace and that affected our attacking threat. Again a wee bit disappointed in Ewan Wilson. I was really looking forward to him developing. Didn't do much wrong last night but was never really an attacking threat, apart from one occasion. Paton was all over the place and not his usual self. Halliday still fails to impress. I know he's a young lad but I still don't get what SK sees in Mark Ferrie. He came on as a sub a few times last term and looked out of his depth and last night was hardly seen when he came on latish, but before Stuparevic - maybe just me. As on last Saturday the referee stopped the game after 90 minutes exactly. No additional time despite umpteen subs being made. Is this some kind of official instruction?

Yes, we definitely need an imposing main striker, creative No 10 and a pacy wing back. All of these deficiencies were known months ago. As Steelboy ( I think) said, we have a lot of midfielders most of them mediocre and most playing the same role. If anyone wasn't aware of that fact then they most certainly will be now.

Agreed. Decisions off the pitch cost us. I think SK got the balance between pre season gametime/experiments and serious cup competitveness a bit wrong. We've now displayed similar failings against Livingston, Edinburgh City and now Montrose. There seemed to be a lack of urgency tonight and the game had a pre season friendly, stroll in the park, feel about it. Just read Spiderpig's response and I agree with that. The way things are shaping up, we will have to beat Partick to finish top of the group, and I'm far from confident we will do that.

We've done not too badly at unearthing successful strikers in recent years. Chris Porter, Scott MacDonald, John Sutton, Michael Higdon, Louis Moult, KVV, and now Theo Bair. No reason why that can't continue.

I suspect its already being considered.

I doubt if that would work in Fir Park. Would fans be forced to relocate from the POD Stand to other stands? That might cause the odd problem or three and upset a fair few. It depends on the scale of course. Some people like myself prefer a decent view from higher up. The club might also lose a portion of season ticket income if prices were reduced for the new stand.

As far as I know there are 2 food kiosks; one at the north end and one at the south end. As far as the southern one goes, its small and located on a landing, immediately adjacent to the toilets. Before kick off and at half time, the queue stretches around the landing and mingles with those coming and going to the toliets, and those coming and going to hospitality. I don't think anything can be done about that. The structure needs a million or two spent on to bring it up to an acceptable standard and that includes an extension built onto it at prohibitive cost. All in it would be cheaper in the long run to move to a new stadium. At some point in the not too distant future, it may well fail a safety certificate. Thats how bad it is. As with the entire ground, maintenance costs are high and mounting. A move to a new 10,000 capacity stadium is inevitable and I'd rather it was at a time of our choosing than at one being forced upon us. Thats why we need external investment (just not the Wild Sheep version). I don't doubt that the stadium issue was / is a factor in Jim McMahon and the EB's thinking in supporting the Barmack proposal. However, that proposal is not nearly sufficient and not right for us. The sooner we start planning for a new home the better. Easier said than done of course. Still, rumours abound.