Stephen Robinson was asked to get us a run in the cups. He's reached two finals. (You can talk all you want about how losing 2 finals isn't an achievement, but he wasn't asked to WIN cups, he was asked to get a run in cups, and he achieved that, therefore in the tick-box exercise that is a company performance review, it's an achievement).
He was asked to bring in money through player sales. Club has brought in more money under him than any other manager (I think).
He was asked to keep us clear of a relegation battle. We are comfortably clear of a relegation battle.
He was asked to do it all within a very restricted budget. He has done that.
He was asked to promote youth into the first team. He has done that.
In the form table over the last 5 games, we're 6th.
In the form table over the last 10 games, we're 6th.
In the form table over the last 15 games, we're....yup, you guessed it... 6th.
Now, you can debate opinion on how much you enjoy the games, how you feel we're doing, who you think should play, how you think we should set up.... until the cows come home, I have mine, everyone else has theirs, and they are probably all variations of a theme. However, the club look at the things on the list, a return on their remit. It's objective and it's fact based.
Putting aside what you "think" or "feel" for a moment. Could we as a club get a manager that would exceed what's on that list above? Are the club going to want to get rid of someone that's exceeded everything in the remit that they put in front of him? What has he not delivered on that would make the club consider his position?
Sorry if you're not happy, but it doesn't matter what you or I think. It's not about opinions. Stephen Robinson is currently in the middle of being an extremely successful Motherwell manager relative to what the club have asked of him, and that's what his employment status is based on. The idea that they would even be considering punting him is a massive LOL.