The SOD criticism is baffling generally but when Well fans are happy to stick the boot in, I really am left scratching my head as to the negativity. As Steve Clark himself asked ' Tell us what he did wrong?'
I don't know what magic mind bending dust the media has been spraying this last month but I had the most surreal experience of a Celtic fan arguing that Patterson should be replacing O'Donnell before admitting that he had never actually seen Patterson play!!!!
At the very worst (and I don't share this view) O Donnell's performances could be described as mediocre but then how many Scotland players performed better?
Take Stuart Armstrong as an example. SA's tactic seemed to be to run with his head down into trouble before promptly losing possession of the ball. He did it several times. I did no hear or read the witch hunt against him.
Did anybody really believe that Lyndon Dykes was going to score a goal in these championships? We could have played ten games and I would not be convinced our strikers would have scored.
In other words many of the players performances were at the same level or below that of SOD. So why was O'Donnell singled out particularly from Scotland fans and more interestingly Well fans.?
To top it all, had he scored at Wembley (as he nearly did) his value as a player and reputation would have rocketed. I doubt he would have stayed a Motherwell player had that shot gone in. That is how superficially we assess players worth and value. It is all shallow analysis.
As a Well fan, I was proud to watch him play and thought he did the club proud.