dennyc

I think Celtic and Rangers tend to fill their first team with relatively unknown foreigners and then hope to sell them on for fees we can only dream about. Bassey, Ajer, Edouard, Van Dijk as prime examples that brought in astronomical fees. I expect Celtic to cash in on their Japanese imports before too long. That strategy limits the opportunity for youth prospects to progress to the first team. Add to that the fact they, like us, lose youngsters to England before they reach first team level. For Celtic, Doak to Liverpool for £600k a few seasons ago. This season, Sule to West Brom, Morrison and Hepburn to Bayern Munich. Fees not released. Billy Gilmour from Rangers. I guess Forrest and McGregor are two that made it at Celtic and the Rangers squad currently includes Devine, King, Lowrie who have featured this season. Allan MacGregor was a Rangers youth player. The McCrorie brothers? None of them sold for huge money though. I suppose Celtic and Rangers have the best of both worlds. Owing to finances they can pilfer Scotland for youth as well as established first team players. They can also afford fairly sizeable transfer fees to bring in top level players from overseas. Both tactics have earned them big bucks in recent years. And, unlike us, they can cope financially with the odd transfer disaster. Boerrigter and Scheidt was £7.5m wasted by Celtic. It will be interesting to see if Bailey Rice and Murray Miller become first team regulars at Ibrox. Both have done well so far but that is no guarantee they will be at Rangers long term. Credit to Lennon Miller for sticking with us and hopefully earning us a fortune. It's the football world we live in. frustrating though.

I would like to see the Youth, B and first team Management work as a team to establish similar styles of play and approach across the board. Would help players to progress without having to adapt too much to a different set up. Not sure that would work if Hammell and Kerr were involved. Especially if earlier comments that Hammell did not utilse Kettle within the first team coaching set up are accurate. Kettlewell was asked about a first team assistant and he said work was in hand to identify the correct person. That person would need to think along the same lines as him, but also be strong enough to express ideas for improvement. When that person arrives I would expect Clarkson to revert to his former role. I suspect Kettlewell may also have someone in mind to assist at lower levels. Certainly sounds like Kettlewell and the Board have a vision of the structure they want. Let's hope it works out.

In fairness the financial rewards that come our way from youngsters that are poached are substantial. £300k/£400k is pretty common as an up front payment. I can recall at least four that brought in that amount in the past three years. And that's not including Scott, Turnbull or Hastie who were all a bit older. Plus you can negotiate future payments based on a variety of events such as first team appearances, international call ups and future transfers. Most clubs try to negotiate terms rather than rely on the set Dev Fee. in my opinion Motherwell are pretty astute in their dealings. So, even with the disappointment of youngsters not staying with us long enough to reach the first team, youth development is worth the investment as it generates substantial income. Also to fully benefit from solidarity payments from UEFA related to the performance of other Scottish Clubs in Europe, a Club must have a qualifying youth programme in place. it is a bit annoying that the more successful the youth programme is, the more likely it is that players will be drawn from us. If it helps to make it more palatable, even Rangers and Celtic lose excellent prospects to England. Rory Wilson to Villa for £400k being a recent example

Exactly this And as the article says, Motherwell have offered Beattie a pro contract when he turns 17. So they are protected as far as development fees are concerned. Might be better to negotiate terms with his new club rather than rely on development fees though as that can include profitable add ons. As happened with Rice who made is Rangers first team debut last weekend. Not a lot any Scottish Club (including Rangers and Celtic) can do if an English team convinces a youngster to join their scholarship programme at age 16 with the promise of a full time contract at 17. So other than ensuring their entitlement to Development Fees I'm not sure that Motherwell could have done anything more or that they have "dropped the ball" as was suggested. In reality the chances of a Turnbull like pay out are becoming less and less likely as the bigger clubs increase their raids on Youth Academies. And that really hurts clubs like us who rely on youth development income. I would not imagine there are many like Miller who is able to resist such approaches. Credit to him for that.

In his time in charge of our first team, what have you seen that suggests he is not the man for the job? Is his performance to date..although limited timewise... not relevant and to be ignored?

Well said and just about spot on. Why can't we aim for a Manager who accepts that both approaches are an option? Depending on a number of factors......opponents's style, injuries, league position etc. A Manager who is open to either approach is surely an asset. To a degree that lack of flexibility was a major factor in recent Managers being shown the door. We were far too predictable and made it easier for our opponents. Kettlewell's comments suggest he is open to either approach. So for me, and taking into account the evidence we have witnessed so far, I think he deserves his chance. Less of a risk than either of the other two for sure. It will soon become clear if he is a long term solution. We are not privy to Kettlewell's discussions with the Board, but it will be interesting to eventually discover what his vision of the way ahead is. Given his background I believe it will include youth development which has to be a priority for a Club like Motherwell. I'm not convinced either of the other two would look far beyond the first team. We need a Management team and Board working together across every aspect of the club. perhaps that what the ongoing discussions are about.

I think because it is the final of the League Cup, and overseen by the same body as the League, then suspensions cover both tournaments. The FA Cup is different with suspensions confined to that Cup. My understanding anyway. Our ex youth player, Bailey Rice, got his first team debut for Rangers today. Think he might be their youngest ever Premiership starter. A day after he captained Scotland U17s v Switzerland. And just to show we are not the only Club to lose kids ( with our without Agents involvement) to bigger, richer Clubs …a youngster called Rory Wilson scored a hat trick for Scotland in that game. He left Rangers for Villa in July. Fee £400k.

Paul Lambert. Soon if terms agreed.

Heard today Hibs are in discussion with Mikey Devlin, ex Aberdeen and Accies. Given he is from Motherwell I wonder if that is who were talking to and Hibs interest has stalled things. Been out for a while so that fits our Rehab profile. Just pure speculation but takes my mind off last night's pathetic showing.

Again a commendable effort to absolve Alexander from much of what went wrong regards Sligo combined with a brushing over of the previous six months performances on the pitch. And not only the results. Could it just be that that Board had their season end review meeting and decided to stick with Alexander in the hope of improvement and in recognition of our final league position. Loyalty if you like. As you suggest, that was a reasonable course of action, although unpopular with some....including me. Then, following Sligo, the earlier doubts were not only confirmed but added to. A mistake had been made and it was a bigger risk to leave him in charge rather than effect a change of Manager. So panic driven by the fans? No. As you say, we will likely never know the exact story. But no matter whether he was pushed or jumped of his own accord, his time was up even if the timing was far from ideal. The appointment of Hammell is a separate issue and only time will tell if a more experienced appointment should have been made. I can see why many think that would have a safer option. But, in my personal opinion, to continue with Alexander on the road we were heading would have been a much greater risk. I firmly believe had Alexander remained after Sligo, he would have been gone by now. On a more general note, and in defence of Robinson, Alexander and Hammell, the position we have found ourselves in should be no real surprise. Season upon season we have downgraded the quality of squad due to lack of finances. That is not the Manager's fault. Just look back over the years and make a comparison. You can only work with the tools you are given. Eventually that downgrade bites you in the backside and we end up in the situation we currently find ourselves in. So to a degree all of our recent Managers have been a victim of circumstances outwith their control. Whether the Board could have managed things better is open for debate. As a fan owned club, with no access to Bank Loans, no cash rich Benefactor to fund rescue acts and with a Membership contributing only (no offence intended) around £30/£40k? per month how on earth can we bring in quality players to improve our lot? Perhaps those screaming for up to 5 more additions this window have a solution? Transfer income has helped in the past, but with the reduction in saleable assets (either from transfers in or youth development) that becomes less and less of an option. Looking to income via youth development, CoVid was a disaster added to which most young talent we unearth is seduced by the Old Firm or cash rich English clubs. Bailey Rice as a recent example but there are many more. So the possibility of cashing in on the likes of a new Turnbull, Scott or even Hastie are much reduced. Just imagine.....£350k for Turnbull as opposed to £3m. Reduced income that tides us over rather than enough money to fund investment. Someone earlier talked about the Club finding its true level given all the circumstances and that sadly that might not be in the Premiership for a few seasons. That is a depressing thought but I wonder if that would not already be the case were quite a few Clubs not in a similar position. Just that they are not yet as depleted as Motherwell are. Examples - St Johnstone appear to be on a similar downward spiral, only a matter of two years after cup successes. Top players all sold on and a squad nowhere near the quality they used to have. Much the same could be said of Kilmarnock and Ross County, although benefactors have come to their rescue. I heard recently that will not be the case at County for much longer. Not all the McGregor family are as committed as the father. It can only be a matter of time before Livi and St Mirren go into similar decline. The Board Statement at the AGM regarding the need for investment was no surprise. Once the euphoria of being a fan owned club has started to wear off it sounds like reality has kicked in. But if we do stay up (hopefully) with or without Hammell, then what happens after that? Whilst remaining in the Premiership, how do we construct a team any better than we now have? I for one fear more of the same, year on year.

"He lost his job because the club panicked after we lost in Europe" ??? Should that not read "He left his job after we lost in Europe which was the final straw for the Board Members who had supported him despite a terrible record over the previous six months. During which time he showed no ability to turn things around or put a decent product on the pitch" or perhaps "Having witnessed new signing Josh Morris attempting to play football, enough was enough" To state that the Sligo shambles was the only reason for Alexander's departure is just not true. Agreed it was the final straw, but there was already enough evidence to question his position. He was fortunate to still be there. Also, that previous six months record allied to the Sligo performances do little to suggest we would be in a better place now had he stayed. His time was up.

Not sure what the financial situation is at York notwithstanding the similar level of crowds as ourselves. Question that occurs to me is.... What level of wages are York paying those two players in the hope of promotion? I would guess the players are on a decent wages at their parent clubs and York will likely be taking on a fair % of that total. Sadly, perhaps that is something we are not in a position to match. Not that long ago Salford, then National League or lower were able to outbid SPL sides like Aberdeen. Similarly Wrexham the past few seasons. Not saying York have a rich benefactor but finances might be the issue that limits us.

Lamie only had the three Hibs players to mark. No support whatsoever from Penney or Spittal. Not sure where Sol was.At least Lamie tried to make a challenge for the ball.

Not heard anybody saying Hammell has not made mistakes. And not heard anybody saying it’s all Alexander’s fault either. What I am hearing is the usual Alexander supporters attacking Hammell at every turn in what looks like an effort to prove their irrational, continued support of Alexander was justified. Just read the comments during todays game. Of course Hammell will be judged on his record. That’s fair enough. Some fans just think he needs leeway, time and patience to address the shitfest he inherited. And he will make mistakes. As most people readily stated when he was appointed. And the same would apply to whoever had been appointed, ex player or not. We are not even three days into his first window and folk are slating him for not bringing in the six players we apparently need on the 1st of January. In any event, how many he can recruit is down to other factors outwith his control…...like available cash, Board support, suitable players being fit and available and those players wanting to join up. His comments regarding numbers coming in sounded to me like he was being realistic given these factors rather than his preference. I prefer to support him a bit longer rather than turn on him first chance I get.

The question I have is why above average players like Watt and O'Hara ...to a lesser degree Donnelly.....wanted to leave in the first place. In my opinion that was down to Alexander and the way they they were unfairly treated/ignored. For a time Slattery was in the same boat. I don't believe for a second it was about the cash which is the reason often put forward on here. Bottom line is that Alexander did not want them. It was a choice, however, that he was entitled to make. But that is the same Alexander who believed Shields and Efford were the answer to Watt leaving and that his old pal Morris was an upgrade on O'Hara for this season. Watt and O'Hara would walk into the current team. So what does that say about Alexander's judgement. Hammell may or may not be the man to move us forward and early indications are not that positive. But it is not down to Hammell that decent players and most peoples' first choices like Kelly, Lamie, McGinn, KVV regularly forget the basics, have brain farts and cost us matches. It is not down to Hammell that he has few other options player wise. He can only pish with the cock he has. But anyone who believes we would be in a better position if Alexander had stayed is deluded. How quickly they forget what we were subjected to from January onwards and the way his reign ended. The way this thread is going all that is missing is the Yorky and David "Bring Back Graham" petition. Get over it lads, He's gone. So much for the..".Hammell needs time to rebuild, give him two or three transfer windows, time to all pull together" chat. Fickle hardly covers it.

Up until the League Cup final where he got injured, Turnbull was the only outfield player to feature in every match under Postecoglu, So not so sure he does not rate Turnbull. More like others such as O'Riley and Hatate grabbed their chance and the Manager has stuck by them, and rightly so given their performances. It's not as if Postegoglu has needed to bring Turnbull back because of poor results.

I'm pretty sure the change in the Law was to remove the situation where a player was red carded AND a penalty given IF a genuine attempt was made by the defender/goalie to win the ball. In that situation a yellow card is sufficient and should be issued. So 100% agree, Gordon should have received a yellow card as soon as the penalty was awarded. Clancy took it upon himself to ensure Gordon stayed in the game. But will the invisible/silent Head of Referees ask questions or even make comment? No chance. No doubt Motherwell will seek clarification and be brushed off again.

Agree 100%. Saturday was a classic example. From one angle the Watt red card looks harsh. But when you view it from that other angle, it is a correct decision. I can only think that is the clip Beaton reviewed and so he changed his decision. And that is a pat on the back to VAR. Even if Beaton is not allowed to comment afterwards, surely it would be simple enough to issue the supporting clip the following day, if not before. Might answer a few, valid, questions. And minimise costly appeals. Dermott Gallagher on Sky Ref Watch said he had seen such a clip and so the decision to issue a red card was spot on. Sadly Sky did not have it to show. Perhaps DG is an avid Steelmen Online reader. If that clip was available to Sportscene I wonder what Stewart, Faddy, Miller etc would have said then? Maybe would have helped them to arrive at a different opinion, supportive of the referee and VAR. But, let's be honest. Everything is a secret.

I think perhaps you should say "That's how VAR is abused". See it every week now. Referees abdicate decisions believing VAR will bale them out if they miss something. So they play safe and it isn't working. Same with Assistants and offside. Then again if Collum referees as he used to, VAR interventions will result in matches taking over two hours to complete.

Pretty sure McHugh got sent off on at least two occasions when there was no contact. That might have been the Craig Thomson/Willie Collum effect right enough but the reason given was that, despite there being no contact, his challenges were reckless with potential of serious injury to an opponent. Intent or otherwise was not a factor as is still the case. And that was well before VAR and freeze frames. So the "interpretation" aspect which causes all the debate has existed for ages. I do think it was a pretty harsh red card and agree if a foul had been given and a yellow issued that would have been sufficient. I don't think it was violent conduct. And I doubt VAR would have intervened. My concern is that from less than 10 yards away and with a clear view, Mr Beaton saw nothing wrong with the challenge. There was high contact. As long as referees continue to be incompetent VAR is needed and will repair some of the damage they cause, but only if the Authorities learn from early errors and there is a clear consistency and accountability. Given that it is those same incompetent referees that are operating VAR coupled with the lack of openness regarding inexplicable outcomes then sadly I fear we will continue to be frustrated by its use. The wagons appear to have been circled regarding Andrew Dallas not intervening last week. The referee missed the foul on Lamie but if he was not pulled up by Dallas, then I can understand why he called time. No apology or "We got it wrong and need to learn from our mistakes". That does not give me much hope for improvement. Wonder whose turn it will to be aggrieved next week?

In Germany a referee even insisted a team be brought out of the Dressing Room to allow a penalty to be taken following a review. And Goodwin clearly knew it should have been reviewed given his questioning of the fourth official when the whistle blew. No doubt we will hear the usual "It is a new system and we will learn" standard response.

I guess the VAR official was finishing off his Bovril then. Before he had a wee look. It seemed to take forever.

That is the kind of situation that will evolve and common sense should prevail. Hopefully. But if they wind it back and confirm a corner/free kick leading to a goal was mistakenly given, should that not be overturned? The VAR refereee might already have had doubts as he watched the game in real time. Or is that just tough luck? It might all come down to how far individual VAR reviewers decide to go back. Same applies to "was the ball out of play?" I can just see Celtic and Rangers players badgering the referee about a corner from which they concede and VAR checking "just to be fair". Maybe I just don't trust our officials. I agree that reviewing to last dead ball seems to make sense though. But is there any firm guideline? And we need to see consistency.

According to explanations in response to the St Mirren game, not only do they look at the actual goal incident, they also look back to the entire build up to check all ok. How far back looking for infringements they go is unclear, but in that St Mirren game it was way back to when the attacking team got the ball. I would not have thought that depth of check is always required....as in that first goal yesterday... but I can understand why at the very beginnings of VAR use in Scotland if that is the general instruction then decisions will take time. Kick off after our goal also took ages so I guess they also ran that right back to check. God knows for instance what happens if a goal is scored from a corner that is wrongly awarded. I expect that look back instruction will be reduced. Might also depend on the teams involved as does all officiating in Scotland.

100% agree Rangers and Celtic were no place to throw in Miller or Ferrie. Could have set them back massively. I think we possibly would have seen them in the other matches as subs had things been going well and we were not chasing games. When confidence higher and pressure less. Hammell will introduce Academy kids but only when he believes it will benefit them and not set them back. There is a balance to be found, thinking long term. That said I do expect Cornelius to feature more before the break, but he is ahead of Miller and Ferrie development wise. Playing kids just because you don't rate Goss etc (as Yodo proposes} is crazy..............cue abuse! As for yesterday, Cornelius and O'Donnell made a positive impact when they were introduced so that should speak volumes to Hammell. And at the end of the day only officiating incompetence deprived us the chance of a point. Inept finishing might even have deprived us of a win. Subject to scoring a penalty that is. Depressingly similar to the home game v Hearts when we would have been level at 1-1 and on the front foot going for a win, but for the McGinn miss from a yard out, with Hearts then running up the park and killing us off. I still also believe finding a formation that includes McGinn, O'Donnell and Penney would benefit the entire team, including the under fire midfielders.