Goggles & Flippers

Just looking at Yabba's pinned list, there's only one player who has left the club and could be argued has gone to a bigger/higher level (albeit he's being loaned out at present). Also Yabba, I'm sure the 4 players released last year without clubs have got gigs now as been highlighted on this thread. ZFA - Leyton Orient Cummins - Bangor Lawson - Formartine Ramsden - Gateshead

You need to re-read the constitution then weeyin and see how "easy" it is to do. That is if the constitution hasn't been re-written since I last looked. There was a concern highlighted by Steelboy that it had been done. The issue is a number of people have put themselves forward to help or offer solutions and have been ignored, pandered to or paid lip service. I don't think there is a shortage of people willing, but the desire to get involve diminishes daily.

Does he though, he's asked legitimate questions which have been both ignored and promises to discuss have been broken. Bear in mind these postholders on the WS Board are there to represent the interests of the general WS membership. They've contributed at least £300 each the same as us, somehow the link between them and us has widened. If a fellow member asks for clarification, then voices his disappointment on here, he's got an "axe to grind" .... oh come on. The only reason we know half the stuff we do is because a number of members have kicked off, raised concerns and forced the WS, faced with increasing poor publicity, to reveal details. It's not because they either wanted to or felt they had to. If it wasn't for th eaxe grinders of this world then ask yourself how much do you honestly think we'd know. I don't think they are trying to stifle and subdue discussion, however I do think they've "stifled" information dissemination and not adequately furnished the WS membership with a full and frank outline of agreements they've entered into. Remember this is a deal that is key to their future strategy, done without ANY consultation. As for "subduing" I think they'd prefer it if they could continue to scheme without having to placate and deal with any concerned fans. And yes I use the word "scheme" as no other feels right. Say what you like about Barnstaple, at least he got 5% of the club for a fund transfer. We've now been signed up where our £500k slush fund is secured against Les' loan. I would say any board member who is constantly being embarrassed by association and the failings, who is going to say OK, I'll manage this going forward and be responsible for communications being released as promised. I also echo "not a penny more"

I don't think any of those who have put themselves forward could be considered anything other than Motherwell fans. However there has to be a distinction between nice people and those able and capable of delivering the duties of their post. Unfortunately time after time we've seen promises broken and it just reeks of amateurism. How many instances does it take before someone takes control of this. Everything they do seems to be a bit of a cockup.

Opposed to giving an endorsement to someone who's son organised a vehicle getting from A to B? Ideal, glad to see there are other strings to someone's bow before they get your vote.

I think we've been blackballed Denny

Ying and Yang, I'm just tried of the constant reactive press releases opposed to proactive ones. This statement from Les is borne out of a growing rumble of dissatisfaction from the support in how we are informed. Of course any info is welcome but the nature of how we find out is getting really tiresome. The WS board's remit is to represent the general fan base however repeatedly inept at engaging and keeping their fellow members (let me emphasise "fellow" - they aren't above any of us who have contributed in a one member one vote constitution, they merely secured the vote of 20 or so other guys who sit in the POD stand and attend meetings, sadly that fact seems to have been lost). I got this email on the 20th of October (that's 13 days ago, which will become relevant) Still nothing, despite what you imagine is a October 27th deadline, a poor track record, plenty of criticism, they issue this and still can't deliver. When will anyone take responsibility for this repeated failing and fall on their sword?

Sounded like a turgid affair from the radio and twitter. Great to see Louis step up and slot one away, he must be on to get 10 by Christmas. Next week we've got an opportunity to jump from 10th to 7th and leapfrog 3 teams if results go our way.

You mean like when Big Handsome fouled Langfield and Craig Reid tapped the ball in?

McGhee's reaction up on youtube. Highlights no doubt to follow shortly as the media team must have just got back to FP.

Everything I've read seems to suggest it was the best performance in ten games only eclipsed by the playoff final or ICT. Nice to see there's some fight and players seemingly finding the ability we all knew they had. Heartened that McGhee seems to be pulling the right strings. After shockingly few enjoyable games and lack of a competitive edge for so long today has left me feeling optimistic. Hopefully in the week ahead he will find where the killer instinct and having a go from 20 yards has been hiding.

How's Johnson playing?

I'd say pretty good under McGhee now he's got his feet under the table .... well I'ld like to think so.

Cue the Well Society apologists

I wasn't able to attend, however if I was it wouldn't because I had issue with the WS even though I'm finding myself a growing critic day by day. It was conveyed in advance that Andy had pretty much run things with minimal WS input or help so not attending on that basis would be naive and churlish. Anyone with a little bit of background could see that the WS involvement was limited to a tag line on the poster. If anything the podcast team should be commended for not dropping the WS tie-in when it appears they had every right to. Dissatisfaction with the WS should manifest itself in other means, may I suggest not blindly paying direct debits to a group that seems to have forgotten they represent us and have a duty to inform and consult on major directions the organisation takes. I didn't sign up on a "need to know" basis.

Ally Maxwell 1991 Cup Final, holding his ribs for 40? minutes from memory. Stuck in my mind as it was the same day as the FA Cup Final where Gazza was playing his last game before heading to Lazio. He committed two of the most flagrant and vicious tackles I've ever seen, got injured but all the news focused on was how unlucky he was and no mention of Ally other than in passing. He played on stoically and was a credit to his sport.

In all seriousness, wasn't his statement factual rather than racist? Would you have been as inclined to report him if "Irish arsehole" or "Welsh fanny" were used for a different player? However he was in the Cooper so there's plenty of other places he could go to swear as freely and not influence kids.

Marv seems to had enough of square sausage and the Megabar, maybe a quick word in his ear that playing badly won't get him a new deal anywhere else other than at a pub team may get him focused again. I suspect Kennedy will be in the SPFL team of the season come May. Skippy will find the form of last season at least. Thomas will benefit from starting with Marv coming on to replace him. Could be argued that Moult and Ainsworth are two of the only ones to get pass marks so far this season, so could we see them playing like well tuned fiddles in a months time. One thing is certain, he alluded to double training all next week may get a few petted lips though.

Alan Muir for ensuring I'm not listening to post match interview where endeavour and workload are lauded .... oh wait

Sorry upon rereading it maybe appears my post suggested McGhee spoke to skippy as to the feeling at Motherwell recently. McGhee actually suggested Skippy contacted him (I'm suspecting last Jan/Feb), hence my question where the association flourished. He also seems to want to put across the narrative that we contacted him rather than he applied, despite him outlining in that article that he was actively seeking a day to day club management role. Maybe his ego needs that or perhaps it was actually the case. Does anyone think if it was between us or Dundee Utd, he'd be draped in a C&A scarf.

Section 30b of the society rules state that 10% of the adult membership are required to do so. I was informed that a change in the rules (again passed by the board without consultation) means that as soon as you have paid your first monthly instalment on the way to the £300 steel membership then you have a vote, so the number required increases.

OK, so just listened to the pre-match press conference. Apparently he spoke to Skippy in advance of his signing on the phone to give advice as to helping him to move (6 minutes in approx). Not that it's a big deal but I don't see any reason or connection there? However one other thing I did like, he didn't apologise for Celtic and limit our chances as McCall so often did against the OF, he was relatively tenacious about wanting to contain them but go for the win too.

I'll start off y saying I'm not fussed either way he has returned, certainly without seeing who the other 79 CV's belonged to. However I have read a lot of "the way he conducted himself" concerning the circumstances surrounding O'Donnell's collapse. Does anyone think that whoever we had standing on our touchline wouldn't have dealt with things with a degree of reverence and respect that would have got universal acclaim? Would have been a bit of a callous, self absorbed, arsehole with no social intelligence that would have.

Kinda the reason why I started this thread. I accept an executive of any group has to make decisions and I never assumed that every item would be put to a vote, but major things such as this should have been brought to everyone in advance to scrutinise and debate. Stuff like race nights and other stuff I'm happy to have decided for me. There's just an increasing chasm of accountability and transparency as time progresses. In the fall out of Baraclough leaving we find out the club chairman finds out after the deed is done, even if he wasn't consulted as a courtesy he should get a heads up opposed to reading it in the newspaper, however no different how 1,000 members tend to find the details of the entity we've invested in. Left me wondering if the position is purely symbolic?

With respect to the loan repayments, that has been covered in the press and in blogs so far. Any shortfall in the club being unable to meet the terms as outlined in the spreadsheet above, the Well Society has to make up the shortfall. What they also don't convey is for example Louis Moult is sold this January for £1m then essentially the deal would effectively be a fait accompli. But the Well Society don't really want fans to consider this as it may dry up recruitment and Les has stipulated a membership of 2,000 (adults, not total, from memory) to ensure there's a big enough base to draw funds from if required as I assume all members would be in some way liable/responsible as owners. I'm only conveying what I've heard and accept it may be conjecture or a half truth that is close to the truth. It may be as simple as a caveat that any future sell on revenue for a player, our owner gets his initial transfer fee investment back first then the club.