numpty

Don't think anyone's official statements specified whether it was online or otherwise, did they?

And to be honest, just keeping their mouths shut and getting on with it for a while probably isn't a bad idea, given their current standard of public communications.

Are we confident that he didn't fully back or suggest most of those mistakes in the first place, given that (officially) we're not managerless as a result of how the team is playing?

Accidentally clicked on the wrong mailbox when looking for my daily dose of SO comments this morning, and this was the first email I saw. Took me a minute to figure out what was going on...

Not if that's what it takes. I've seen plenty of Motherwell teams that were difficult to play against, and none of them were full of nasty players or big physical units.

If that's ever our actual plan, I'm out for good.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2025/jan/19/paul-lambert-interview-dortmund-motherwell-celtic-zidane

No doubt. In general, though, I still enjoy shitfest wins massively less (probably disproportionately so) than ones where we've played some easy on the eye stuff.

Trouble is, as soon as you put a time limit on it, everyone starts rushing to make sure a decision gets made within the time (or, if you're a conspiracy theorist, takes just a wee bit too long), both of which would likely result in mistakes too.

Also. "free speech" means hee-haw on a moderated forum on which everyone agreed to the rules and regulations when they signed up. (And generally, especially outside but even within the US, means nothing like what people think it means anyway.)

Mainly because folk bang on about it before and after it happens, but never mention it again when we just turn up and win anyway, which is probably statistically about as often as you'd expect Motherwell to beat anyone.

And to be honest, not many legendary full-backs attain that status for their goalscoring prowess.

It does. But long before social media was a thing, folk used to write to Points of View every year moaning about which TV presenters weren't wearing poppies and which were showing off by wearing the ones with the extra green bits.

On paper his pedigree before he joined us was perfectly decent, with Leeds United paying decent money for his services, and representing his country at every level from U-17 to full international (including one in which he clogged Steven Gerrard at Wembley). I don't remember anyone ever touting him as a goalscorer, though.

Depends who’s paying them I guess. If Premier Sports are paying their fee for these games and have asked them to be impartial (as alleged), then it wouldn’t be unreasonable for them to tone it down a bit. If they’re not, then it serves them right.

Currently 15th-longest serving in Scotland, but 3rd-longest in the top flight. Managerial reign

Not sure if he's on here, but if you can stomach X/Twitter these days, @SteelmenHistory (run by club historian Stuart Graham) might be a good place to ask, too. Think you can also email him on historian@motherwellfc.co.uk.

They are? Can't say I've disagreed with any of their decisions so far.

Agree the email is really good... could quibble about the order of information for me personally, but I'm not the main target as I won't usually be going to the game. Been a bit disappointed with the WhatsApp so far to be honest, was hoping it might at least be a replacement for the much-missed Twitter updates on game days.

The rumoured €1.5m bid for Theo Bair from Auxerre would be a good start.

True on the "clear and obvious". But it doesn't matter whether you measure it with computers or a bit of wet string, there will always be a line behind which you're offside, and it will always be possible to be a few millimetres the wrong side of it.

Certainly not how I remember it, he was a useless unlikable arsehole from day one.

What he chooses to discuss on the forums is up to him and his team... certainly seems a bit ill-advised to me, but he's made a lot more money doing what he does than I ever will, so you have to assume he either knows what he's doing, or thinks he does. Either way, it's his choice. So yes, the thought that more suitable investors might be put off from dealing with us in future because we now apparently have previous for leaking private conversations during negotiations does concern me more than that.

I'd be more concerned about the legality of sharing them, as there appears to be precedent in Scots law for reasonable expectation of privacy in WhatsApp group chats.

He might have made a better job of saving that.