David

Not really. I've never liked the term, I've always preferred the title "fan-backed" rather than "owned." Most of us aren't qualified to run a business of the magnitude of a football club, and when the barrier to entry for the society is so low that is even more of an issue. We're basically provided with the opportunity to help secure the future of the club, play a very small part in the direction it goes in, and can sleep easy at night knowing that it won't fall into the hands of some con artist with bad intentions.

Although not the silver bullet that would solve all issues, we have Robbie Mahon out on loan at Edinburgh City, where he has put in some man-of-the-match performances, notched two assists and scored three goals. I'd maybe look to pull him back in January and see what he can do. The problem is that Kettlewell has made it clear he doesn't really use wingers in his preferred setup. Can he adapt? That's the question I guess.

I can't help but think that Mika would benefit more from a system that employs wingers.

On top of that, he's playing for a new contract, either with us or elsewhere. His deal is up in the summer, and in his current form, I'm not sure if he'll have a whole host of clubs vying for his signature.

That won't matter, because you'll undoubtedly be on the next manager's case before too long, same as you were with past managers.

I don't think he needs to be protected. He's a 27-year-old professional goalkeeper who has represented his country and played over 230 senior games, almost 100 of them for Motherwell. It's on him to work his way out of this. The manager backs him. His teammates back him. Also, he's not playing to his usual level, but he's not been terrible. He's in the same boat as the rest of the team, he's not playing very well. He's being exposed by a terrible defence, and a non-existent midfield on occasion. He's made some right howlers this season, but he's also saved us on numerous occasions.

Will taking the captaincy off him help him though? And more to the point, is the upside of doing that far higher than any potential downside? Let's have a look. Take the captaincy off Kelly - Basically, kick the guy when he's down. He's lost form just now and needs to rebuild some focus and confidence. Is stripping him of the captaincy going to assist in that? I don't think so. Also, regardless of how we feel about him, he's seemingly well-liked and very respected in the dressing room. He goes out of his way to welcome new signings and basically does everything you'd want a captain to do. Will walking into the dressing room and taking the armband from him affect the rest of the squad? Could that kind of move be the very thing that quickly changes a squad that's working for each other and the manager to an unhappy squad? Is it worth the risk for Kettlewell? I'm not sure it is. Leave the captaincy on Kelly - I get what you're saying about the likes of Butcher, but we're not seeing the whole picture. While we may look at Butcher and think "he's a defender/midfielder, he looks like a captain, and he shouts a lot. That'll do for me!" it's also worth remembering that we don't even know if he'd want to be the captain. Again, if stripping Kelly leads to a disgruntled squad, would you want to be the guy who takes over when your teammates are pissed off that their captain has basically had his baws cut off in front of everyone? I know it's a cliche, but regardless of O'Donnell, Butcher, Casey, or whoever else people think should be captain actually having the armband, I expect them to all be captains. They don't need an armband to encourage and drive their teammates on. They can do that regardless. Once they cross the line onto the park they can all influence the game as captains in their own right. It all depends. If we had a Mark Gillespie on the bench then there's definitely a discussion to be had. If we'd seen Oxborough brought in for cup games, and even the odd league game and he'd looked very good, again, a discussion to be had. But he hasn't. He's looked relatively poor when I've seen him, and the manager and coaching team see him every day and have never really looked like picking him. I'm not in favour of dropping our first-choice goalkeeper and captain just to be seen to be doing something. Especially when Kelly is still winning points for us. Aye, he's making the odd error here and there, which is to be expected when the defence in front of him is as leaky as a council tap, but he's also saving penalties at Celtic Park, and stopping one on one shots that end in us snatching a point rather than nothing. He's definitely not in top form, but even in middling form, Kelly is still a good keeper.

Yes, but wasn't that due to his attitude? If Kelly had been petulant, or had been showing a stinking attitude then I'm sure many of us would think differently. But he hasn't. He's just suffering a dip in form. If Ronaldo had just suffered a dip in form he wouldn't have been dropped.

Well, the fact that he's hardly kicked a ball in 18 months would suggest exactly that. Chalk another great find up for the recruitment team!

Horrific? Seriously? 😂 Aye, his form hasn't been great, but he's not been "horrific." I think some folk are getting carried away now. If you think what I and others have been saying about not dropping someone like Kelly is all about "not hurting someone's feelings" then you're not reading it right. Simple as that.

And if he starts and does what he usually does when he starts for us? What then? Drop him for Obika next game? Then if Obika doesn't put in a good enough performance we drop him and put Bair back in, and onwards into infinity.

We need to settle on a striking partnership and give them a run. Whoever it is. Chopping and changing every week won't work.

Yesterday. A six. At most.

Have we forgotten that Bair isn't a striker though? Or are we back on the "Bair train" because he provided a cross for a goal? Like I said, if we go down the route of constantly chopping and changing the lineup we're going to get nothing. I don't really know of any teams that see success constantly changing their players around based on how they do in a single game. For me, it's Obika and Mika up top as our first choice. It's not ideal, but I think that's the best we have. Wilkinson can try to fight his way back into that equation, and Bair is there as a sub we can throw on when we need a big, athletic guy who can cause issues late in games.

He doesn't make that second save and we get nothing from the game. Also, he doesn't save that penalty against Celtic at Celtic Park and we could have gotten hee haw from that game as well. The point I'm making is, aye, he makes mistakes. If he didn't he wouldn't be at Motherwell. But, if we're going to batter the guy for his errors, then it's only fair that we mention how good he also is at times.

And if we're going to give him absolute pelters when he makes a mistake it's only fair we give him credit when he pulls off a good save.

The only problem I have with that is that we're constantly chopping and changing our forward pairings. One week we all want Obika back fit so he can play up front with Mika, then after one or two games we don't get what we want from that partnership so now we want Bair instead of Obika, then if that fails we'll want something else. Striking partnerships need time to gel. I think if we're going with Obika and Mika then we need to give them a run of games.

We're due a goal from Bair I think. I had him down as scoring a whopping four for us this season, so he should be good for one around now.

Well, just like you and every other Motherwell fan, I've not seen much of Oxborough. But, the manager and the coaching team has. They see him every single day. And over the 18 months that he's been at the club he's rarely kicked a ball, which tells me all I need to know. I think when his contract ends he'll quietly disappear into obscurity. Would I drop Kelly? The answer is no. Because the one thing the manager has going for him right now is that the team is still together and fighting for him. Dropping Kelly, the captain, and clearly someone who is well-liked and influential in the dressing room for a keeper who has hardly played a game for us could affect that dressing room dynamic. Fans don't really think about that aspect of the choices a manager has to make. They just think "player A has been rubbish of late, punt him out the team, and get someone new in." It's never that simple, sadly. The decisions made will affect the moral and general vibe of the team and could turn players against the manager, and dropping your captain is always going to be a huge move. Dropping Kelly right now wouldn't be for "a wee spell." Doing that would basically signal the end of his Motherwell career. He wouldn't be coming back from that in all likelihood. You'd be stripping him of the captaincy, dropping him, and opening a can of worms in the wider squad that I think could cause more issues. It's a tough situation, because Kelly is definitely going through a rough spell. The manager has one of two choices to make. Drop Kelly, strip him of the captaincy, bring in a keeper that neither he nor the manager before him has considered anywhere near good enough to this point, and risk the dynamic of the dressing room being turned on its head, possibly against the manager. Or stick with Kelly, and gamble that his form will return. By doing so the manager would win the support of the players and the captain by showing that he is the type of gaffer who sticks by his players when they're going through a tough spell. That action would ensure that the squad keep fighting for him I think. So, for me, it's option number 2. And I know many fans won't agree, which is fine.

Or, like most humans, they react with a "Is that right? Well, f*ck you!" attitude. Which isn't ideal. What is for sure is that absolutely no one ever got dogs abuse from someone and thought "Man, I really want to win for this guy!"

Sounds like an ideal move. I'm sure any player brought back when they didn't want to come back would be a brilliant addition to a squad fighting relegation.

What makes you think he wants to come back?

Yeah, but there are not many businesses or organisations that take into account the views of their paying customers when it comes to the managerial appointments they make. Me buying Tetley tea bags on the reg for example wouldn't have them listening to my views on who their Head of International Sales should be. I fully believe that clubs should understand and have sympathy for fans who spend money travelling to watch the team, and who are not happy with how results and performances have gone. However, actively listening to fan's opinions when it comes to making managerial changes is asking for trouble. Because, most fans, including me, don't really have the first clue as to what it takes to manage a football team.

Of course the fans have a right to complain. And the board and the people who are actually paid money to work in the game have the right to ignore the unqualified opinions of said fans. There's a reason why we're posting on a forum and paying money to get into games, while managers and players are being paid to actually take part.

Oxborough is clearly the number 2. A backup, only needed if Kelly gets injured or is suspended, neither of which has happened in quite some time. Him not playing doesn't mean he's not good enough, it means that the manager (and the managers we had before Kettlewell) prefer Kelly. I guess they could all be wrong though, along with our international manager who selects him routinely.