Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 03/12/2024 in Posts

  1. Personal view is he's the best manager we've had since McCall, which makes him the best in the last 10 years. Rate him above Barralough, McGhee, Robinson, Alexander and Hammell. Given we've reduced the spending, squad size and he's lost less than 1/3 of games, has a decent enough win record , has us 8th in the league. Plus seems to be a normal guy who cares, speaks well I'd put him close to McCall -who for the majority of time was excellent. He's made plenty of mistakes but appears to learn and move players on quickly. Add to that expect him to improve as he learns and grows. I'm really happy to have him.
    6 points
  2. I was at Hampden when Israel were adjudged to have scored a perfectly good goal after a cross was deflected off the arm of an Israeli player into the path of the goal scorer. At the time it was explained in great detail that in such circumstances a foul must not be given. The only time a foul should be given for such an accidental handling of the ball by an attacker is if it is the goal scorer that handles. The Law is perfectly clear and so I then had to accept that Ross County were correctly awarded that goal at Fir Park. SK confirmed on Saturday that is also the reason he was given for that goal standing. So what really pisses me off about Saturday is that two qualified officials (at least) ignored the Laws of the game in order to refuse the goal. Either that or they did not know the Laws. Which is worse? Add to that the silence from the Authorities regards a huge error made by their employees. Saturday was not a situation where there should have been any doubt or discussion as to whether a valid goal had been scored. Final part of my rant. Not from our game, but that exact situation was covered in Sky's Ref Watch today and again my understanding of the hand ball law was confirmed. McLean and Collum made an arse of it and at the very least that should be acknowledged by those in charge. But it won't be. I hope Motherwell go public on their discussions with Crawford Allan or whoever has the balls to address the issue.
    4 points
  3. Launch that fucking VAR. as I’ve said repeatedly they’re now moving to actively seeking ways to “disallow” goals. Its killing the game and I bet I’m not the only person that’s nearly had enough.
    4 points
  4. Aberdeen have totally lost their way since Fergie left, putting them in the same category as Prince Andrew and The Black Eyed Peas.
    4 points
  5. I don't think anyone would disagree that promoting from within was a cheaper option. But whether that option was taken was for good footballing reasons or through financial necessity we might never know. As for "it's not my job", that is just a cop out. This is a fan forum which opens up debate based on fan comment. You have plenty of views on a range of things so why not who we might have appointed instead of Kettlewell.
    3 points
  6. I'm actually at the stage of being so scunnered with VAR I'm seriously thinking about going back to watch games in the WOSL.
    3 points
  7. Why is Zdravkoski not playing? He does all the donkey work in the midfield and allows Spittal to play further forward. Spittal is ineffective the way we are playing.
    3 points
  8. Turns out a professional football manager knew more about coaching players than random punters on a message board.
    3 points
  9. A number of credible candidates for CEO were identified during the interview process. The whole thing has been put on hold until the investment issue has been resolved because at least one of the investors wants to appoint their own CEO. Any suggestion that the current board have been ignoring this is patently nonsense.
    2 points
  10. The pertinent issue is, you're full of bile and bullshit, and will slant anything the club does as negative and not meeting your standard.
    2 points
  11. We were actually discussing at half time that Collum had, by his standards, a pretty good game yesterday and got pretty much everything correct, up until the VAR intervention. He could have looked at that and justified the goal on the basis that from the camera angles given the point of contact with Bairs arm isnt clear therefore no clear and obvious error. Onfield decision stands. We then discussed that, this would be the point it all unravelled for Collum and the game would become all about him. And so it turned out. Numerous baffling decisions for fouls both ways, the time wasting, as you mention, failing to book Roos. The yellow card for SK, the yellow card for SOD, only adding 3 mins when there were at least that for subs, never mind injuries and time wasting. His attitude towards our players at the end when awaiting VAR confirmation on the pen was just the icing on the cake. Ive no idea why matches turn out that way for him, but its like a switch flicks and he goes into meltdown. I despair when I see he is refereeing any of our games as it rarely ends well for us.
    2 points
  12. Aberdeens game mgt was much better than ours. They had better energy, better passing and won the majority of 1st and 2nd balls. Like most teams that play us they dominated midfield , we needed more than just Miller as the defensive style midfield player. That said it was a poor Aberdeen team and with a bit more energy and oomf we could have won. Not great when our best attacking option off the bench is Gent. Brining on Nicholson rather than starting him made more sense. I suspect we're now in no mans land. The slim chance of top 6 is gone, there's still a slim chance of being caught at the bottom. Real shame - we simply blew it yesterday. It's much more fun when thinking about progressing up the league.
    2 points
  13. He'll be miles off it. Look how bad we were today with a week off. He's not played in 2 months. And you need to give kids a chance to learn and gain experience. Ferrie wasn't any worse than anyone else. Bair was straight through on goal today if he didn't have the first touch of a pregnant hippo.
    2 points
  14. There have been one or two but many more have commented that he's nowhere near ready. We saw a few cameos of him early in the season and quite a few thought that he wasn't ready. At that time he looked to be way out of his depth. He then went out on loan to a lower league club at Stenhousemuir but failed to make any impression and hardly got any game time. He then returned. Now I don't understand why Moses wasn't given any time today like 15 or 20 minutes. Although he hasn't played for some weeks, he's played more than Mark Ferrie. I'm all for giving young lads gametime but it has to be in the right situation. Today only served to prove that young Ferrie should be nowhere near the first team squad for his own good. He needs time in the gym and a loan spell at a lower league club where he can get playing time. I don't know about Dylan Wells. One of a number of odd decisions from SK today.
    2 points
  15. When I saw the starting line up today I did raise an eyebrow with the changes made and can only presume some players were unwell or carrying knocks. The back line seemed particularly negative with no Gent or Devine and the midfield too attacking with no Davor. It also left the bench looking like it was all eggs in one basket, with plenty to shore it up if we were ahead and not much to change it positively if we got behind. Thought we started slowly and let Aberdeen get the better of the early exchanges, but we seemed to grow into the game and it felt like another act of self harm when we gave up the opening goal. After that we had some good chances and should really have got level, even before VAR conspired against us. Second half, I couldnt really understand the substitutions. I can accept Gent being brought on to give us more width but he was largely ineffective and Im not sure what the purpose of bringing Halliday on was. I can only think SK thought we needed more control in midfield and maybe Davor wasnt fit. Otherwise its a mystery. We did play ok for the first part of the second half and created a few chances that were spurned but the rest of the substitutions were baffling. Taking Lennon Miller off was madness as we effectively gave up the midfield at that point and bringing 2 youngsters on when we were chasing the game was not fair on them. If Moses hasnt shown enough in training to get 15-20 mins in front of them at this point, Id question why we have given him a contract. Big Theo had a poor game and had run his race by then and should have been replaced before Vale for me. Need to see the Shinnie hand ball again, but it certainly looked a lot clearer than the Bair decision. All said and done though we didnt lost the game because of VAR. Bad finishing and poor in game management did that.
    2 points
  16. We play our most attractive and effective football when its an open game and we're counterattacking. Our defence is shaky at the best of times and needs serious attention, as does (to a lesser extent) our midfield. When teams score first against us and then sit in we struggle. We obviously got it wrong on so many fronts today, but it was still a close game and there's no need to panic as long as SK learns lessons. He watched Aberdeen on Wednesday and so knows how they play so its his reaction to that, that was remiss.
    2 points
  17. As said elsewhere, fielding a 17 year old, albeit a very talented one, behind 2 attacking central midfielders was a huge risk. Also I thought the McGinn at LWB, was a failed experiment that had been consigned to the dustbin of history. SK does half overthink things at times.
    2 points
  18. We were rotten today, but again we are talking about VAR, if they give the Bair handball they have to also give the one against Shinnie at the end, inconsistency in our official’s is what’s killing the game, I think they all need to be made accountable and explain their decisions
    2 points
  19. In total tangent.... watching Partick v Raith. James Brown for Raith went down feigning injury..... Thistle player raging and said to him. " Get Up .....Get on up........Get up...Get on up" Ah'll phone my taxi 😜😜😜
    2 points
  20. Thanks Jay. Good news that the annual funding agreement ran out when Les was repaid. Hopefully when we sell Theo for £10m, the Club will be in a position to repay their debt to the Society. Making that a priority would certainly boost the Society bank balance. Onwards and upwards. Appreciate your openness throughout this thread
    2 points
  21. In terms of the precise annual figure, it was roughly in that ballpark. It may have been close to £120,000, but essentially the majority of the funds raised on an annual basis went into the club as a loan. The loan to the club remains & hasn't been written off. Just also to clarify, the Society putting cash into the club on that annual basis ended when Les was paid off. It no longer happens. Instead, the majority of members pledges remain within the Society finances, which thankfully allows us to now be in a position to highlight that £750,000 we have. I imagine things would be a lot more negative regarding the Society's ability to be the majority shareholder going forward if there was the prospect of a £750,000 gap in 18 months, and we had a few quid. And on the point around whether the arrangement with Les was communicated to members or not, I can only play the massive cop-out card & say that was before my time, so I genuinely have no idea how members were informed about that, if at all (I say that as someone who was a member at the time but has obviously forgotten).
    2 points
  22. I just wrote a rather large reply to this & then lost it so hopefully I manage to remember everything again... This is absolutely the kind of thing that should be accessible & transparent though. I can only really speak for the time I've been involved in the Society, since early 2017, but when I joined the board, the club was still very early on in the "repay Les Hutchison's loans" journey. You may remember that, at the time, there was the Double Your Money campaign, where every penny raised by the Society would see Les cut his loan by the same amount. However, also part of the loan agreement, was that the Society would put - if memory serves - around £130,000 into the club on an annual basis (in the form of loans). This effectively meant that, as a result of the Les Hutchison loans to the club, the model of the Well Society changed from being that contingency fund to investing in the club on a yearly basis. Alongside that, there is also the reality that, albeit infrequently, there may be the odd situation where the majority shareholder is asked to invest a sum in the club for a genuinely important reason. The example I'd maybe use to flesh that out a little would be if there was an injury crisis in January & the playing budget was already maxed out, would an owner elsewhere be able to reduce the chances of relegation by increasing that budget slightly to cover a target? And if so, should the Society do likewise? As I say though, very much not a regular occurrence by any means. Beyond that, in more recent years, there has been a process in place to allow parts of the club to apply to the Society for a sum of funding. The funding is capped & an application has to be submitted that details what the funding is for, what the benefit is, and why the funding can't be sourced elsewhere. The Society Board has to agree as a majority to accept any of those applications, and a number have been rejected during my time. Those that have been accepted are usually publicised at the time, the defibrillator outside the ground & a couple of youth teams travelling to Ireland to take part (and win) a cup competition spring to mind. The sums spent on successful applications are small in relation to the kinds of big sums we're talking about and even then, the Society Board would point blank refuse any application if the club itself was in any sort of financial trouble or it just wasn't viable or deemed as worthwhile. And then there's the usual admin fees, other expenses, and the staff salary that the Society pays on an annual basis. I am not aware of any ongoing funding of or donations to the likes of the Community Trust, outwith any requests they've had regarding funding in the past that we've possibly agreed to. That for me is a - albeit second attempt - rough outline of the Society's financial approach as I understand it. There's no doubt that the model of the Society switched during those years following Les Hutchison but, in more recent years, there's been a conscious effort to switch back to the original model, hence the ability to build up £750,000. All that said, if you're looking for more specific figures, I would absolutely contact the Well Society by e-mail. None of this should be a secret.
    2 points
  23. They don't have the right to say what they want on here. This isn't a democratically run public park where everyone has a right to be. It's a website run and owned by certain individuals. He's not a mod. He's an admin. There's a big difference. I'm a mod, which means I give up a little of my free time to help out where I can in running the forum, but what an admin is responsible for requires a whole lot more involvement. The truth is, as harsh as it sounds, he can call out whoever he likes. He doesn't, though, unless there's a reason for it. This forum is pretty relaxed when it comes to rules and how people are treated, with a lot of leeway given. That approach comes from the top down. I know that you personally have had some issues with how this forum is run and the leeway I mentioned, which the moderating team didn't agree with you on. It's a football forum. For the most part, the mod team lets stuff slide because football is a passionate subject, and people get heated, particularly after games when the result hasn't gone our way. I think, by and large, we do quite a good job in that regard. Basically, we are a small team, but we've done okay the past few years, I think. But it's important to remember that being allowed to post here isn't a right. The admins in charge make the rules, and the mods help keep things flowing as best we can. People can choose to either stick around and follow the rules set by the admin team or not.
    1 point
  24. It's not difficult to imagine that Kettlewell (and Hammell) was a budget option as he was promoted from within. It's also not my job to scout potential managers or forecast staffing budgets; that's the job of a CEO. Oh, wait...
    1 point
  25. We might make it to more cup finals with McInnes. He's helped us into 2 already.
    1 point
  26. 1 point
  27. Whilst recognising the apparent positive attributes noted in the comments above, we’ve gone for the budget option in Kettlewell so we need to accept having a poor tactician and decision-maker at the helm for now. Will he learn and improve? I don't know.
    1 point
  28. completely agree - purpose like a few have mentioned is to correct an obvious error. Feels like there's a bunch of people desperate to prove their value in each and every game, who quite frankly we don't need. There's enough hangers on in footy as it is, having bunch of non players looking at freeze frames is a nonsense. Even with freeze frames I really can't see how Bair handled the ball. Goal should have been allowed. Re Shinnie - for me and in the spirit of the game, thats never a penalty either. I'd have been livid if we got a pen against us for that.
    1 point
  29. I’ve watched the highlights on tv and McCann gets it spot on - it’s high up on the sleeve against Bair and more towards the elbow for Shinnie. There is a panel that reviews the VAR decisions at the end of each round of games and I’m sure there will be an acknowledgment of the errors in this game; but that’s pointless (just like us yesterday). If we end up in the play-offs by a point, will the SFA or the SPFL save us? No chance. When VAR was brought in, it was for clear and obvious errors; the scrutiny required to see Bair’s handball (??) tells you that it was clear or obvious. Collum was standing facing the Shinnie one, with an uninterrupted view - that’s surely clear and obvious. As many others have said, VAR isn’t ruining the game; it’s the poor humans who are operating it. We had poor officials before VAR and all we have done, is out the same poor officials in front of a tv screen.
    1 point
  30. Well said Dave, brining on two very inexperienced Academy players when we were chasing the game was a nonsense, both of them hardly touched the ball and as you say neither of them are ready for 1st team football. If he was on the bench Ebiye must be fit enough for 20 or 30 mins, so I can't understand why he was not brought on to add something different up front. In all not a good day re tactics, team formation, or team selection for SK and we let a poor Aberdeen side off the hook.
    1 point
  31. So your original claim that the club have refused to look for a new full-time CEO is incorrect then.
    1 point
  32. Fair play to whoever selected Mugabi... Comedy gold 🤣
    1 point
  33. Can't understand why we brought on 2 kids when we're trying to save the game. One maybe, but 2? Especially when we have Moses sitting on the bench. I thought he would have been the obvious choice to see what he could do.
    1 point
  34. Other than everybody saw Shinnie’s and no one saw Bair’s but yet one is called and one is not. Would at least be good to have the officials explain the different outcome for the two instances
    1 point
  35. It’s been depressingly predictable so far. After beating Rangers at Ibrox the other week following that up with a dismal performance and a loss at home to a poor Aberdeen side was always on the cards.
    1 point
  36. Why would or should anyone spend money to watch football live in the stadium now with VAR.
    1 point
  37. What is anything at Motherwell without steelboy's unique 'everything and everyone at the club is a dick/pish/out of their depth'?
    1 point
  38. Aberdeen playing last night and us being fresh from a 2 week break i think will help our cause on Saturday, Its still a long shot however and i think its going to go down to the wire. Have a feeling Celtic/Rangers as well as Utd/Raither Rovers is going to go down to the wire too
    1 point
  39. It's definitely still on but for it to happen we need to win 3 or 4 of our next 4 games and we've only won 7 all season. So it unlikely, add to that that it would be so typically Motherwell to beat Rangers and lose to the worst Aberdeen team you will ever see. Aberdeen were utterly shocking tonight and if we have anything about us on Saturday we should be able to beat them. However all my Motherwell supporting life the one this we consistently can't do is deal with rising expectations in the stands. That said it would make for some real excitement in the stands for a change if we took it right down to the Hibs game. I still says the odds are against us.
    1 point
  40. Given their recent track record there's a chance I could be on Aberdeen's shortlist.
    1 point
  41. Thanks for the update Jay. And for highlighting that the potential funding gap in October is a worst case scenario, but something that has to be planned for. Makes perfect sense. But as for the other point, and acknowledging that the bucket collection is a relatively minor matter, can you clarify whether Society monies have been/are being utilsed to support worthy causes such as the Trust or have been/are being provided for projects that the Football Club wished carried out? And if so, to what extent and who authorises that expenditure? There is a sizeable gap between the Balance you quote above and the total received from Members to date. I keep coming back to the reason the Society was established in the first place (as a safety net) and to the fairly narrow purposes any funds ingathered were to be used. I appreciate that may be looked upon as history, but as fans and Members are being asked to dig deeper, then I believe they are entitled to know where their contributions are likely to end up. It is one thing providing security for our football Club (a Contingency Fund for emergency use only), but an entirely different thing supporting charitable causes or funding what might be looked upon by some as non essential projects. Have the lines between Club and Society Funds become blurred?
    1 point
  42. Just wanted to jump on to address this point - I understand why there's a perception that the club needs an injection of significant investment by October, but I think it's important just to add the context to that. If the club finishes 10th without any player sales or cup runs (so, essentially, worst case scenario without going down), there's a gap in the finances in 18 months time of around £750k. It's my understanding that this has essentially been the case for the last couple of years, it's only really being discussed now as a result of the investment video & resulting negotiations that everyone is aware of. The Well Society has around £750k in reserve so, at the moment, it could be argued that, if we were to finish 10th with no cup runs & no player sales, the Society would already be in a position to meet that shortfall in 18 months time. Of course, that doesn't eradicate the ongoing problem but I think it does at least add a little more context to the situation we're in. In addition, if we finish higher than 10th, that £750k is naturally reduced. And if things go very well in the next few games & we - as unlikely as it seems - make the top six and/or sell Lennon Miller (or Theo Bair!) suddenly the £750k isn't just reduced, it's potentially eradicated for a number of years. The idea of October as a deadline is a result, I believe, of the need for the club to demonstrate to the SPFL at that point that it can meet its obligations (ie. fixtures) for the following 18 months. It's obviously very difficult to ascertain what that will look like in practice, because by October some of the things I've suggested above could happen - or, of course, we could still be relegated - but I think at this stage there's a genuine hope that, between the potential of a strong end to the season, at least one very sellable asset, and the Society's cashflow, we could do that even without external investment before that point. That's something that might have to be achieved regardless because, as mentioned before, even if we all wanted rid of fan-ownership, there's still a real possibility that the external investment doesn't materialise for a variety of different reasons (including Society members just voting against it). So yeah, in short, hopefully that adds a little more flesh to the bones around the idea that the club needs an injection of significant investment by October. Simply put, there's a lot of moving parts and, given the model the club operates under & has done for many years (in terms of league position & selling assets), there's still a big question mark around what October even looks like in financial terms. The absolute worst case scenario is needing significant external investment by the date but there are outcomes, however, where that is not necessarily the case. How likely those outcomes are is entirely open to personal opinion I'd imagine. As for the bucket collection, I have to say I've not been involved in the plans for Well Society Day - other than offering my time on the day - so I can't really comment there.
    1 point
  43. Thank you for flagging both. We have received 150 updates received over the first 48 hours. Well Society members can update their details here.
    1 point
  44. Let’s look at it a different way. Who do you think makes the most mistakes in a game? Players or the ref? Who is trying to deliberately cheat? The players. It might be said in less harsh terms but basically players routinely try to cheat. So maybe they sort themselves out before running the refs into the ground. I used to referee a lot of high school games her and often used the phrase, “once you’ve made less mistakes than me then I might listen to you”. That usually kept them quiet for a while. Especially when their mates found it funny!! Of course a lot tougher dealing with the pros, plus, at least the HS kids were trying to play an honest game.
    1 point
  45. Sounds like Steven Gerrard.
    1 point
  46. Only if you love being dramatic and constantly want to find faults? Spencer and Biereth being recalled can be spun in a positive sense...they've come up here done well and their parent club wants them back to further their own wishes for the player. Absolutely nobody in the footballing world will reconsider sending us a player because a young guy fae Sheffield wanted back down the road for personal reasons
    1 point
  47. Yes, him being capped while playing for us obviouly persuaded his parent club that we were a complete clusterfuck amateur shambles with no CEO and a manager totally out of his depth.
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...