Spiderpig
-
Posts
4,706 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
79
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Spiderpig
-
-
11 minutes ago, AllyMax said:
Midden equalise......
Every little helps as they say at ASDA, it over to us now to do the business tomorrow night.
-
1
-
-
31 minutes ago, Toxteth O'Grady said:
Harry Paton out for a "significant period of time". FFS
This season just gets better and better, finishing 10th will be like winning the league.
-
25 minutes ago, joewarkfanclub said:
Im not sure he is on this one.
Ive heard Lee Miller interviewed on this and he stated that it was more important for Lennon to be getting first team football at this stage of his career to allow him to develop. His attitude was that the money will come.
Of course we would have to wait and see how far that could be tested, but I dont think he will be off at the first offer.
It would be nice to see us improve his terms at the end of the season with a little bit longer on his contract to provide us with some protection. On the understanding that a significant fee would trigger a release clause.
No guarantee he would sign, but you have to show the kid how much we value him.
I would love for him to stay for a few more years, but being a selling club is our business model, so if we ever get an offer we can't refuse for him I fear the worst.
-
2 minutes ago, El Grew said:
I just hope him and his dad don’t get carried away only to have his career ruined like many others before him. If he keeps progressing he can set his sights much higher than Ibrox or Parkhead.
You know that won't happen though, the 1st big offer he gets offering him a major increase in cash etc from a top side if that ever happens he'll be Away.
-
1 minute ago, santheman said:
You could argue that we already add a premium as its a category A match which means the prices are higher than a normal category B.
https://www.motherwellfc.co.uk/tickets/fir-park-entry-prices/
Unfortunately it also applies to home tickets as well so it seems we cannot charge away fans more rhan home fans. Whether that's an SPFL rule or a gentleman's agreement between clubs I don't know.
It's SPFL rules, away fans need to be charged the same as Home fans for similar areas.
-
1
-
-
25 minutes ago, joewarkfanclub said:
Our chances of winning the game ended with his substitution.
Our chances ended when we sat back and tried to hang on for 45 mins from the start of the 2nd half.
-
Spittal for me, thought he was solid all game, scored a great goal, special mention for Vale. Oh and Gent had a nightmare today, brutal all day.
-
1
-
-
Just now, wellfan said:
I didn't say Butcher cost us the game. Read my post again.
That's what you implied by by SKs actions who had to replace Casey as he was fecked, but as I said the whole team is to blame.
-
7 minutes ago, wellfan said:
The man who brought Butcher on and unnecessarily rejigged the entire back three to accommodate him cost us the game. A lot more happened following that substitution, but many people on the forums acknowledge it was a turning point in the game.
Butcher is brutal but he never cost us the game, our whole team starting the 2nd half by sitting back and letting Celtic come on to us with the inevitable result cost us at least a point today.
Gent had a nightmare today everything Celtic threw at us came down his side, he constantly failed to stop the crosses coming in, and we got punished for it late on again.
Celtic were there for the taking today and we got ourselves in a great position and then tried to sit bag and hang on for 45 mins and got what that tactic deserved feck all, our game management is brutal.
-
1
-
-
26 minutes ago, gilmour said:
The club's recruitment of a new chief executive is ongoing with Weir scheduled to depart in five weeks. McMahon steps down at the end of the season and another director, Andrew Wilson, has now resigned.1
We keep getting told the club is stable nothing to see here etc, etc but the current board are all leaving, no sign of a new CEO, the optics don't look good.
-
I'm not a WS member so I've no say in the consultation but it seems blatantly obvious to me that if the WS members don't agree with reducing their shareholding then there will be no investment.
Potential investors don't want to be dealing with shareholders that continually need to poll their membership at every turn to ask their opinion. So for me unless the WS shareholding is below 50% then I can't see it happening in a form beneficial to the club long term.
-
Investment talks progressing Rapidly according to the BBC
Motherwell investment talks 'progressing rapidly' - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68369187
-
Just now, bobbybingo said:
Biereth and Spencer don't send out positive messages to potential targets? Loans are like any other signing, some work, some don't. What were this guy's personal reasons?
Hopefully not but it could be a family illness / bereavement or any number of personal issues that take priority over football and living away from home all of which are no concern of ours.
So whatever it is I hope it works out well for him.
-
40 minutes ago, thewelllfan said:
I Have no hope at all Id start
Oxborough
Mcginn Blaney Casey
Devine Miller Davor Gent
Spittal
Bair Obika (Purley because he can hold the ball up)
Obika in the team is like starting with 10 men, he offers nothing, Vale has a lot more pace than Obika so id keep him up front with Bair.
-
1 hour ago, Jay said:
This is a really good question & one that's sparked my return from a long hiatus on here (although anyone who also peruses P&B will notice I started posting there a couple of weeks ago after years away too).
As a member of the Well Society Board who has been elected & re-elected by Society members, I personally think there's an element of responsibility there in terms of safeguarding fan-ownership. It seems logical to assume that, if Society members have voted for you, they want you to try & grow the Society, champion the benefits of fan-ownership, and presumably subscribe to one of the key reasons used for fan-ownership in the first place - preventing the club from falling into the wrong hands.
In terms of growing the Society, I feel like there is now a majority of like-minded individuals on the Board following the recent elections (that, in all honesty, previously just didn't exist to the same extent) who recognise the need for drastic improvements across the Society, ensuring greater transparency, far better communications, and a raft of other aspects. That work is very much underway and I think it's certain that the Society will see growth in membership & income in the coming months & beyond as a direct result - the ceiling of that is, of course, very much up for debate. But, genuinely, it's the most positive I've felt about fan-ownership this side of the pandemic.
So, for me, the answers to the original question like this are really important - because if it is, in fact, the case that a majority of Well Society members would rather end fan-ownership, then that's something we would need to be guided by and, essentially, carry out - and it's something we will likely have to actually ask members sooner rather than later, to ensure that we're doing what they want us to do. For the avoidance of doubt, no investment happens in the football club without, firstly, the Well Society Board being involved in the discussions with interested parties and, secondly, a ballot of all Society members - with a majority needing to agree to the offer.
In terms of the actual question itself, I think it's worth highlighting the, potentially never-ending, caveats that mean it's not anywhere near as simple a question as "would you swap fan-ownership to compete with clubs who have ownership investment". The level of investment itself, who is providing that investment, their intentions for the club, and a whole host of other aspects are incredibly important there too. It's also worth remembering that fan-ownership isn't just some trinket that's been put in a cupboard in the Phil O'Donnell Stand somewhere, it's the result of years and years of time, effort, and money from an endless list of individuals, so I dare say there's a need to actually consider what scrapping all that work is worth to people.
Put it this way - I don't think in today's world it's ever going to be as simple as folk just wanting to "swap fan-ownership to compete with clubs who have ownership investment". What else would they sacrifice for that and where are the red lines? Would folk take a few extra quid to ensure that we're potentially finishing 6th or 7th each year, in exchange for a club that loses its entire community-based ethos? Would folk take five years of European adventures, in exchange for investment that is only part of a five year plan, with investors set to pack up & leave soon after leaving the club in the lurch? Would folk take dodgy money from unknown sources to make us the 3rd force in Scottish football until the investors got bored, in exchange for the eradication of our own youth academy? Would folk take all of those sacrifices - the loss of the club's identify, no long-term plan, no youth academy - for a club that could still end up in the Championship regardless of investment like Dundee Utd? All hypothetical scenarios but all very real possibilities.
As I mentioned before, protecting the club from falling into the "wrong hands" has long been a reason given for fan-ownership, and I think this is possibly a very real example of a scenario where people need to be very careful what they wish for.
Good post , and the merits of Fan ownership are great in principle, however when applied to a club of Motherwells size there is a fundamental problem ie our fan base , even if every single fan joined the WS would still be too small to make it a sustainable model.
So the club is going to need additional outside investment, which in turn raises the question of would a potential investor be interested in commiting money without gaining control of the club? For me I struggle to see how the club can attract investment with the WS in place, I hope that not the case but at the moment I don't think we are an attractive proposition.
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, MJC said:
There is a difference between what I think will happen and what I hope will happen. I always hope for a Motherwell win but given our dismal record in these fixtures then I can’t help but think that we will do nothing other than our usual and lose.
Selective reading and quoting at its finest. No one has said that “all they are interested in is beating the uglies” or that that’s anyone’s “sole ambition” to win games against either OF club.
But you just go on making things up to suit your ‘agenda’ eh? And of course no doubt you’ll be getting strong powerful ‘vibes’ that Rangers are the “big team some people support” and all that regurgitated nonsense.
I'm good at selective reading, i get lots of practice ignoring the dross you constantly spout but thanks for acknowledging it. 👍
-
2
-
-
35 minutes ago, FirParkCornerExile said:
I care. I find it utterly depressing that nearly every other club in the league has a better record against the OF than us. That's where we differ. I couldn't care less if Motherwell ever qualified for Europe ever again. Other than a junket and piss up they are an utter waste of time. If we don't utterly embarrass Scottish football (Flamaturi, MyPa47, Stjarnan and Sligo Rovers) we invariably play utter shite and are out before it even starts.
So all you are interested in is beating the uglies, and the statement you make about "nearly every other club in the league having a better record against them than us" is just bullshit. But if that's your sole ambition as a Motherwell fan to beat the ugly sisters then who am I to argue, best of luck coping with being disappointed most years.
-
1
-
-
40 minutes ago, santheman said:
My attitude is they're just another team in the same league as us.
It doesnt bother me any more having a poor record against either of the OF than it does any other team.
I really don't care how long it's been since we beat them, I only care about the next game.
Well said 👏
-
I can't understand the obsession some people have about beating either of the ugly sisters, especially the blue half, we've beaten both of them in games that matter over the years , the 91 semi final, 2015 playoff final, 2017/18 league Cup, yes a league win is nice but its not as simple as that.
The uncomfortable truth whether people like it or not is that they are both much better teams than us (Rangers playoff final team excepted) so we don't have a god given right to expect to beat them every time we play them.
All these stats about other teams having better records than ours etc are irrelevant it's nothing to do with mental attitude either, every Motherwell player goes into every game hoping to win, but in the real world you get beaten by better teams, who cares if its 20 odd years since our last league win against the blue uglies I'd rather see us winning against the other 9 teams, to earn a Euro spot, a decent cup run, stay in the premiership etc, people need to chill out a bit.
-
2
-
-
6 minutes ago, FirParkCornerExile said:
To answer a few, I'm not asking if it's feasible, I'm asking if the offer was there for substantial investment but a condition was fan ownership being given up how many of you would say yes.
I'm not a WS member, but if it was a question to all fans then I would say yes
-
52 minutes ago, yosemite sam said:
Unfortunately for us, the fan ownership (which I am part of) has slowly dragged us down. Why?
Our fan ownership would work if we could at least double the amount of members. The number we have at present makes it very difficult to make progress, because over the years costs go up, but our membership doesn't go up to compensate , so you eventually reach a point where what we put into the club isn't enough.
I sincerely hope I'm wrong. That's why if we could put some kind of package together for interested people to invest in conjunction with the Well Society, this would put us a more stable footing.
Potential investors want a return on their money, ie controlling interest in the club, ownership of the stadium / land etc and for me the WS is a major obstacle to that for investors. Given our very limited fan base it was never going to be a long term workable solution and would any investor want to put money into the club with no certainty of a return / profit and not having control of the club, for me I can't see it happening.
-
1
-
-
53 minutes ago, Big Stall said:
Despite them being massive favourites, and whatever MJC says, there is no reason we cant fight our way to at least a draw.
It will be tough, but they are at a low ebb. Confidence is shot & they will be hurting. Would like to see us take the game to them & get right in their faces from the off. They are not the fluid attacking unit they were last season. Sadly our defence and keeper are a shambles. Keep the ball in their half as much as we can. Dont sit back & invite them onto us
My thoughts as well but over the years we've been very charitable to struggling teams looking for a win so I have the fear for this one. I can see us scoring but as you say our defence is a shambles and that's our biggest concern.
-
1 minute ago, grizzlyg said:
Any man that wears a short sleeved shirt and gloves deserves to be shown the door
He deserves to be shown the door just because he's Obika, he's feckin brutal 👍
-
3 hours ago, bobbybingo said:
I thought so too, but last night showed how useless it is. The confirmation of an offside call, surely the most basic, human error free task it was designed to carry out, ends up looking like somebody used an Etch-a-sketch to make the decision, followed by another example of person or persons taking an eternity to see some things and miss others.
It seems the authorities are admitting they are not getting it right with VAR
Big increase in wrong VAR calls, finds review panel - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68306579
We get mentioned twice
LIvingston V Motherwell 28/02/2024
in Club Chat
Posted
On paper maybe, in reality no as we've scored 12 more goals than them so far