Goggles & Flippers

Rather than the 45 mins which too many seem to cite, wouldn't it be on the 12 months he was with the club where those with the power to appoint would have seen him on a daily basis, how he interacted, seeing that me maybe had something about him, his demeanour and what his colleagues thought of him. Certainly a significantly more well rounded probationary period say over a few randoms producing their CV's and having an hour chat? But lets keep on with that 45 minute pish, it makes good forum fodder.

I concur, hence why I never mentioned manager in the list of major WS decisions. The hiring/firing manager is reserved primarily with the main club board and not the WS. McMahon, Flow, Feely, Leanne and Dickie. with oversight from the what is essentially the WS board plus others. I also agree that a weekly poll is a nonsense, but 1 in 5 years is at the far end of the spectrum when we've had so many changes.

Thanks Jay, Much appreciated. I think I can speak for most standard members when I say answers to questions such as these should be made available in advance of a new member approaching with a list and a cattle prod. That for me is the essence of a society over a commercial board or a single majority shareholder. 2nd with respect to the announcement on McGhee it appears that (and maybe I'm inferring) that it was adhoc conversations made here and there rather than a gathering all elected and co-opted members at the same time. Fair enough of that is the case, but not really a place where undecided's can listen to a pro or against argument before making, reinforcing or changing their vote. Finally the one vote in 5 years. I'm sorry but not happy with that bullshit answer. I would agree if I had seen a demonstration of an "efficient" or a "functional and swift decision-making process." however we have not. How can you when it's essentially a volunteer group meeting once a month. I don't equate the renaming of Fir Park to the significant (almost wholehearted) changes to the governance, constitution, structure and model of the WS, an entity that presides over £750,000 of funds raised by the support. I also don't agree that the elected board will represent the groundswell of the full adult membership (1,600 odd) as conveyed in the answer if for example they are all 60+ year old men with season tickets in the POD. They would tend to prioritise issues affecting their peer group. Glad to say there is more of a mix now with Jay, female representation, from multiple stands, etc. The is one simple way to get consensus for major decisions going forward that is truly representative. Do a membership online poll, that sweeps up the majority and someone spends a couple of days making phone calls to those who don't use or are interested in the internet. One WS board member sits on the fence and impartially lists all the pro's and con's, one makes a case for and another against the motion (unless a majority in favour) and that's what the membership use to help sway their vote. No agendas, full transparency, fair and the WS have a mandate.

Thing is though, someone who's agent is running to the press for comment isn't going to be the ideal appointment, that sort of thing tells you both the agent and the candidate think they are above the job and its merely a ploy to get them exposure and keep their name fresh in the minds of those who they really want to target. What is key we stay up in the SPFL next season, we're guaranteed extra cash due to the Celtic CL kickback, an enhanced TV deal and I suspect because of the debacle in fixtures, 4 of the 6 pre-split games against the OF will be at home. All of that is worth an additional 700k I reckon over our existing turnover. Relegation means the appetite for putting into the WS to have it matched by Les will diminish and as a few have pointed out, it's St Mirren, Dunfermline time. I for one will be gutted to see a top league with Ross County and Accies in it at our expense. I think the appointment will either be Robinson (whom I would also wouldn't have any immediate aversions to) or someone who has hardly been mentioned if at all. One thing that has happened since Flow was appointed, the drip feed of information out of the Chapman has stopped, unless you are Onthefringes and you come on here to reveal a riddle, wrapped in a puzzle, surrounded by an enigma unlocked by a Fibonacci based codex.

Can we introduce a degree of etiquette that if you post a link you also copy and paste the contents as a quote? Thoughts?

I would have said that too right up until an average Ross County side went in a 13 game winning streak when we ended up in the playoff. Anything is possible with momentum.

Anything other than the last result please. Looking at the run in, we play sterner opposition over the next three but potentially tougher games at the foot of the table. notwithstanding we are only 5 points at present from being top six and safe but it needs consistency we've not exhibited thus far unless you count shipping goals consistent. The financial benefit with two home games against the unwashed and currants would be extremely helpful and maybe worth incentivising the players with a little bonus. (not that I think they are worth it due to some of the dire performances). I'm not holding out much hope of anything from Ibrox and Pittrodrie away but St Johnstone at home may get us something if we find form and keep focused. They are only 10 points better off than us over 27 games. ICT and Accies will be ugly, cup tie type games.

And I asked if in this particular instance, were all 7 consulted in advance of the club announcement. I'd be unhappy if I was a board member and a press release was issued citing my endorsement if I hadn't been consulted regardless of my view.

In red to emphasise: Jay has promised to be open and transparent and I'd just like to know if a consensus of the WS board was garnered before the announcement and the club citing the WS as essentially using it another straw on the camels back in the press release. I'd like to emphasise the word "board" as some (for reasons unbeknown to me especially when I read my post back) think I was suggesting a full membership referendum on McGhee's future. The board are there to reflect the reflect the views of the membership and make decisions on our behalf and I'm happy for that to happen. However we can't deny that many decisions have been made by that body without adequate consultation of their membership thus far. I'd like to think so too, and I was asking if that was the case. If that is the case then that is 2 of 7 members and doesn't constitute a majority IF the other 5 were not in agreement. I'm suggesting if the club make an announcement that the WS board were consulted, I'd like to feel confident that they were as a whole and not just the two members who sit on the main club board. I'd like to think that at last 4 from 7 were of the opinion that McGhee should go and that was vocalised. I really can't understand this post as you even quoted mine (also above here) where I quite clearly state board. There was no mention of a referendum of membership, merely asking if the 7 members of the WS board were in consensus or a majority in advance of the announcement by the club. As for your second point I fully agree. However if the club wish to release a statement citing the WS then I'd like to know all of the WS board were consulted not just the two that sit on the club board.

Maybe you can answer this question for me, always intrigued me. You know if you're doing a night in the rank outside the Palace? Is it better/more profitable to have like one big fare to Glasgow or lots of little local ones like to Silvertonhill and the bottom end of Motherwell?

Well how can that representative convey the views of the majority of their board without consulting them? It then becomes that person(s) personal opinion. If you are correct about the speed of things then fair enough, but don't validate a statement to the press by adding in the WS being another dissenting voice to give credibility to the decision.

If you're going to use that going forward ... I want a royalty

Based on the club statement that the WS were consulted, I would be interested to know how many of the board were asked for their input prior to the club announcement. Unless its window dressing of course.

Everything about your posts, description and picture screams "massive cunt" to me. Feel free to set the record straight however.

Milo, I remember your posts on here 2 years ago during the run in were equally pessimistic and we got into a debate, that's why it sticks in the mind. It was every game we were going to get cuffed. All it says to me is we lose you get to spout the "I told you so" and if we win its "I'm glad to have been proved wrong, but we were lucky". Seems you are covered either way. Gaz makes a valid point he finds echoed with me, if following Motherwell only increases your doom, gloom and blood pressure, why bother? You rarely have anything good to say and while this team is far from 2013 or 2007 its not leading many others to reach for their Wilkinson Swords to do damage to their wrists. I've shared my apathy with the game in Scotland and were we go from here to the extent its affecting my attendance at FP, however I do find your posts bloody irritating. Supporting Motherwell can be down to a multitude of reasons, from having a visit at your school from Terry Butcher or Faddy as a child, proximity to Fir Park, liking the colours, fancying a player (Las), your favourite uncle being a die hard, to definitely not wanting to have anything to do with those religious focused bile merchants from town. So what's yours? It almost reminds me of the albino monk from the Da Vinci code whipping himself and wrapping his leg in barbed wire. We can all be critical of this and that. However, after reading these boards for some time now, the only thing we all agree on is 3 points on a Saturday. The merits of who we recruit or release, how the manager sets us up tactically, how the funds are raised off the pitch and how the club is governed will result in a unique response from every one of us. I thought Leeann left Motherwell in a better place she found it, I felt the league messed up our fixtures through incompetence, I support summer football, I appreciate TV makes up the lions share of our finances so unfortunately as paymaster they get to call the tune, I don't see how McManus ever got a Scotland cap, I would prefer it if the SFA followed the example of Iceland than this super academy pish, I'm glad Robinson is back, Instant replays on the sidelines for major decisions, I wish we move to a new stadium at Ravenscraig and don't support a 16 team top league as yet. You find me one other Motherwell fan that agrees with all of that in addition to 3 points on a Saturday and I'll doff my cap.

"Jay likes this", he's now a signed up member .... WS blazer getting altered at the tailors mate? Make sure its got big pockets so you can swipe a few and feed your mates in the electric after the game

Steelboy, you seeing this? The King is dead .... long live the King

I must admit I've always been in the give people time camp, mainly because I see that it bore fruit at Manchester United when it took incredible faith from a chairman and board that Fergie would turn good. It's easy to call for a P45 when you have no idea of the financial implications to the club to server a contract. For that reason I took a lot of the Baraclough and McCall out chat with a pinch of salt and put it down to knee jerk critics on here. With hindsight to hold up my hands and say I was wrong, they went at least when they should have and to those I was critical of myself, I'm sorry you did call it right earlier than I did. In the run in to the summer last season, despite dismal performances I justified it with words to the effect of "it'll all turn good in the summer, he'll get them among the fittest in the league like he did in his first spell and get guys he wants rather than another mans team". Unfortunately for whatever reasons that didn't happen at all. I appreciate that Marvin behaved like a dick and he lost what I imagine was a key part of his plans when McHugh got his head knock. However I am increasingly fed up with his attitude in the media, talking of improvement and "turning corners in the following week" or "our season starts tomorrow" b/s. The post match interviews, the attitude, his demeanour, the substitutions or lack of, the downright petulance, the continual approach of setting up to limit damage opposed to inflicting it now means I'm done. The king is dead, let's find a new king

You would expect to see a big drive to maximise this .... expect being the defining word here. Comes as no surprise when I go onto the WS website the tier benefits info has been taken down yet again with a deadline of Jan 2017 for a reworking and that update which is still blank. How can you hope to attract people when a defining part of contributing for many is unclear, not populated and you've missed your own deadline even with a full time employee to manage things. Since the launch of the WS, the benefits have been altered three times, only once bringing it to the membership in advance of change.

Just surprised Well fans read the Daily Record unless it was wrapping a poke of chips

In a bad situation I agree that the club (Flow) has came out of this well. A realisation that throwing the toys out the pram was going to achieve nothing but add to the bar tab at Mar Hall, the club has essentially put the emphasis on the SFA to address out the anomalies in refereeing in a mature and conciliatory way. No doubt subconsciously reinforcing in any referees officiating us between now and the end of the season that we are all over this so they best get it right. Just out of interest, how many of those citing that the OF are treated differently by referees and rolling their eyes/accepting it as part and parcel of the game in Scotland, voted that Sevco and the Unwashed should not be treated any differently in the fixture list planning in the poll I started?

I'd echo Andy that Melvin's post posed some decent talking points. What stood out from yours Andy was this right at the end, can't tell you how that statement (albeit true) was a little sad to read. I think there's a healthy number of our fans who now can look at the demise of St. Mirren recently and the likes of Dunfermline 15 years ago and think ourselves lucky we aren't where they are. It's not a million miles from that tipping point and where we bob along in Scottish football. Maybe it's endemic of the basket case that football now is, that we now find our primary reason for being is to start a campaign thinking that our league games should be blooding and fitness preparation for an assault on two cups, of course ideally, ticking along in 8th or above in the league would be a bonus and doesn't cause too much of a distraction. All this project brave, super academies, let's target grass roots, performance directors stuff .... just feels like that one scene in every war film ever watched where the medic won't give up giving CPR until he's dragged off. I must admit my interest is waning, my attendance at FP is on the slide, I don't look to join up with friends for a Scotland match on the TV or pub.

AreJimmy Calderwood, Tony Fitzpatrick or Jimmy Nicholl available? ....

I think there's definitely a breakdown in relationship where he is being overlooked on purpose. I suppose everyone can cite an incident in their own lives either with a school teacher, boss, friend or parent who have pulled a wideo on someone because they hoped the replacement could do just as good a job. Ainsworth is a prime example here. To think that McGhee is doing anything other than trying to justify his position can't see the wood for the trees. McGhee will justify that he doesn't track back and offers little when we defend (which seems to be our modus operandi at present). This time last year I didn't want to see him in the team any longer as I felt he tapped out, however the only player I felt offered guile and spirit if not ability was Josh Law. I was happy to exclaim on here I never wanted to see him in the C&A again. But I felt his attitude changed towards the run in and he looked genuinely upset when McGhee poured scorn on him rather than a number of his colleagues who equally performed chronically in a defeat. It's evident that he's the dog that can be kicked in that dressing room by McGhee.

May as well get them to help fund O'Halloran's wages .... for a second time.