Inthebasement

My all time favourite Well player, and I'm 46. Not just a leader and good guy, Las was simply immense in his later Xavi years. The number 1 on field reason we had spells as a very good football team under mcgee and under mccall. Thanks a million and best of luck.

Couple of individual errors aside we look strong and confident and are bossing this

Some harsh comments, they long balled from the keeper, kicked and dived all night, the pitch was a ruler shaped swamp, we had 10 men through extra time, refereeing was breathtaking. We're through.

No it really is not, these issues change year by year, the naive position is to assume anything in 1962 must be the same now. Unfortunately you are just spouting nonsense to back up earlier nonsense. This from a quick look at wik:- Construction of a new main stand began in 1962.[4] The £92,000 cost of this work was financed by a small quote and the selling of two players, Pat Quinn and Ian St. John.[4][5] To minimise disruption to the old stand, the steel frame was built over and behind it.[4] Construction of the main stand stopped 20 yards short of the south end, however, because a local resident successfully objected to a completed stand.[4] The objection was made because it would have restricted light to the garden and reduced the value of the property.[4] By the time the property owner had decided to sell, Motherwell did not have the funds or will to complete a full length main stand.[4] The club instead bought the house and used it for their offices.[4]

See above - this is complete conjecture, all construction projects face a mass of legal, planning and ownership issues, as would anything on Ravenscraig. The position in 1962 has little bearing on the position in 2020.

Sorry, why won't the land ownership problem be solved? Do you have information on this? That was around 80 years ago.

The historic failure to complete the stand has no logical connection to the prospects of redeveloping. Or do you want to explain the connection? Maybe just felt like disagreeing and saying 'piffle' but don't gave two coherent thoughts to rub together?

IMO humble opinion the only clubs to emerge from a move to a new build stadia better off are those that needed increased capacity to increase revenues. For the fans it's almost always a sad loss of identity, memories and atmosphere. Ask home or away players about playing in front of the east stand, we have a special intensity on the pitch for big games. I personally adore Fir Park it's tremendous, and i'd rather see us relegated than move to a Tony Macaroni Arena which is all we could reasonably hope for. If we really needed a refurb a rebuild of the Phil O'Donnell would surely be preferable to a move.

His co-commentary has been painful. It's difficult not to say one remotely positive thing re Well in 90 mins live chat but he managed it comfortably.

Anyone know why Craigan hates us now?

Undoubtedly true, but the discussion is a response to Tait appearing in the press indicating he is the good guy and club are the bad guys. So if that was unreasonable, he is the bad guy in this event.

Tait's complaint simply makes no sense. Well can't 'take advantage' of a situation arising which makes us broke. It's not a matter of wanting or not wanting a player, it's a matter ofongoing assessment and prioritising. The reality is that a change in financial circumstances has forced us into reassessment (see also every football club on planet Earth right now), and that reassessment rightly included renegotiation in the terms of an unfinalised contract with a veteran/fringe player. There is a lot if sympathy and good will towards Tait as a popular player who contributed a lot to the club, but imo he is old enough and smart enough to absorb the realities of the the situation, and either sign up, or move on, without badmouthing the club all over the press. He can now get to Paisley, and I do not at all expect us to regret the decision for on the park reasons.

I would give him a 9 and legend status for safely overseeing our precarious 'on the park' transition to fan ownership. We have had the right man at the right time for sure. Caveat for me is that we have never been all that great under SR. The present team would be comfortably beaten by the second/third placing teams of recent history. In fact I suspect the present team may struggle against the Kipre / Moult 'long ball' team, though many would disagree. In any case, we could have collapsed in recent years, and instead we have consolidated and outperformed city sides yet again. Massive massive thanks and credit to Robinson and to Alan Burrows too imo.

You are an idiot.

Overlooking Humphries?

That was fantastic from us, a blast back to our best tyncastle performances under mcghee (1st season) and mccall, with the caveat that i have never seen hearts quite so shitte at home. Brilliant ballsy performances and goals from our young wingers, pressed and broke all game. Donnelly superb sitting deep. Crowd buzzing too, shift from the bois.

He's not going to get the plaudits but thought Donnelly was brilliant sitting deep, tough and positionally aware.

Don't have any direct intel but imagine Tanner was offered reduced terms and has decided to take his chances looking for a new start elsewhere. Fair dues on both sides. Personally think his reputation rose unduly while he was injured, he was looking ok when fit but nothing special. His Well highlights reel would be short and unspectacular.

Cheers for the stream, that was ace. Also one the worst stone-waller denials I can remember?

Couldn't play the ball through their strikers, a really terrible performance. Dreadful from both full backs especially.

A stream would be hugely appreciated...

There was last year, lots of fans missed the early stages and no one working there was in the least bothered ala Easter Road.

I understand that perspective David, and respect your view. But on the one hand you make it sound completely straightforward - the player must look out for himself only and the 'home / development club' relationship means nothing. Then at the same time you draw a neat moral distinction - loyalty is fine if you're a better player like Turnbull or Tierney, but its not for middling propects like Cadden. I think that shows that it really isn't straightforward at all, and we know that even more fashionable young talents like Turnbull can suffer a career ending injury at any time. Football is an emotional game, and a players relationship with their boyhood club often does mean something, at least to the extent that the fans might hope the player would avoid the kind of 'legal swindle' we have been victim to. Development fees already assume the club has not obtained value, it's no more than a minimal compensation for the years of investment and coaching and Motherwell reasonably deserved that, in my opinion. Not saying Cadden is a bad guy, I'm convinced he isn't, but it's disappointing nonetheless.

I can't pretend to know the detail of the various options and contractual negotiations, and neither do you. So it's an unanswerable question. But in broad terms, he could have instructed his agent that his move should not be structured in a way which avoids his boyhood club receiving a minimum development fee. If a player want to force a move which doesn't work well for the selling club, they can generally do that around the end of their contract. Some young players choose not to go down road out of respect or a sense of loyalty to the development club. There's an obvious example all over the papers - if Teirney was minded to force a move, Celic would most likely have accepted an earlier offer and he'd be an Arsenal player right now. Like it or not, Cadden has opted for a deal he would have known left Well screwed, to the degree we are now considering legal action. There is no point in pretending he was powerless, it's simply not true.

Personally don't blame the clubs involved in the Cadden swindle at all - it's legal and I don't doubt we'd have done something similar if the opportunity arose. I do however blame Cadden, at least to an extent. The player does has power in these circumstances, and can help ensure compensation for the club if so inclined, though it will sometimes be contrary to their own immediate interests. In short hand, he's taken the Hastie route rather than the Turnbull, and given the boys background and relationship with the club that's a little disappointing. At least it's not Hearts.