dennyc

Was there last night and disappointed that Killie did not stick to what they agreed. However, Killie are entitled to charge the full £22 if they want to. So £5, although annoying, is a fair concession. Several seasons ago Dundee Utd charged full admission price in similar circumstances. Thankfully not against us. Now if you think our own Club should make a gesture, how about they allow the voucher (to include those people who Killie took note of) to represent £5 towards a Fir Park ticket this season or towards a Season Ticket next season? A nice way to recognise the fans who made the worthless trip yesterday.

Jack Charlton v Leeds and possibly Gerson v Flamengo. Both in floodlit friendlies in 1960 I think

Livingstone had played for the Under 20s/Reserve team two days previously. OK, only 45 minutes, but that was probably a factor.....which Robinson ignored in his post match comments. Livingstone was unlucky that he had to end up playing for so much of the Celtic game. I'm sure he would have done fine if he had only been called upon for the last 20 minutes or so. I wonder how many others had played in a competitive match only two days earlier.

I think it is only right that the Club continue to honour the contract of a player injured whilst carrying out his contractual duties as long as he is adhering to an agreed recovery programme. I doubt whether, legally, there is any alternative. Also, if there is a reasonable expectation of him returning to fitness shortly after his current contract expires, I think it would be fair and reasonable to offer him a final short term contract of say 6 months, After that I would imagine there will be Insurance Cover which will kick in if his career is over due to that injury. I understand there is a history of players having to call it a day to collect a decent payment rather than prolonging matters trying to endlessly get fit to play.

Maybe as someone suggested earlier there are exceptions up to a higher limit if the players involved are U21? I remember the Rangers Newcastle dealings as well. Rather than performance I think that was all about Ashley reducing the wage bill at his big club and ripping of Rangers at the same time. Otherewise I'm sure Mark McGhee would have losded our team with top players from Bayern Munich and other German clubs.

Dont know the rules buf common sense would suggest any one team in the league cannot loan more than one player to any other team in the same Division. Otherwise , as an example, with Celtic being challenged by Rangers, Celtic with a massive squad loan three players each to Aberdeen and Kilmarnock so they can play against Rangers but not Celtic. Or, if there is an affinity between two clubs or Managers, a club in trouble like Dundee borrow 5 players from from Aberdeen and they then catch us. And can you imagine the implosion up here if Liverpool had loaned Solanki, Clyne, Matip and a few others to Rangers this January in addition to Kent who is already at Ibrox. All very unlikely to happen but there has to bs a limit just in case. Maybe lower within the league than cross border

Hughie Ferguson would be a great nomination for The Scottish Football Hall of Fame . Although individuals can make a nomination, I wonder if that's something The Well Society could take on board as it might carry a bit more weight coming from such a high profile body. Ferguson certainly merits a place when you consider the likes of Frank McLintock was entered some time ago. Although McLintock had a good career at Arsenal, I don't think he ever played at a senior level in Scotland and he only ever received a handful of caps. Tommy Docherty is another inductee with little playing time in Scotland and limited success on the field or as a Manager. Sailor Hunter is also mentioned in the article about Ferguson and his record of managing Motherwell for 35 years could also merit his inclusion.

£20 sent via Paypal. Well done Iain

Finally found the details I was thinking of regarding share out % of League monies.This was agreed by all Clubs other than Celtic who insisted on receiving their full payment as guaranteed League winners. It was a one season only arrangement but it did happen and Aberdeen were party go it. Permanent changes to share out and voting were not voted upon as Aberdeen indicated they would side with Celtic to provide the required number of “no” votes to block such changes. As you say, presumably because they were looking to finish second for a good number of years. League position at end of Season 2012/13 % of 2012/13Net Commercial Revenues 1. 17.0% (was 17% last year) 2. 10.5% (was 15% last year) 3. 9.5% ( was 9.5% last year) 4. 9.0% (up 0.5 % on last year ) 5. 8.5% (up 0.5 % on last year ) 6. 8.0% (up 0.5 % on last year ) 7. 7.5% (up 0.5 % on last year ) 8. 7.0% (up 0.5 % on last year ) 9. 6.5% (up 0.5 % on last year ) 10. 6.0% (up 0.5 % on last year ) 11. 5.5% (up 0.5 % on last year ) 12. 5.0% (up 0.5 % on last year ) That’s my understanding anyway. Apologies if it’s bollocks.

I thought James Scott’s brief appearances were the most encouraging part of the pre season games. I know he is still young but he looked strong and smart enough. I was looking forward to him getting a few run outs this season, probably off the bench for 20 minutes or so. Ah well, there’s always next pre season. I wish Sammon no I’ll will and hope he contributes. But hardly a signing to get the juices flowing.

I thought the change to the distribution of monies did take place for that one season. By finishing second we actually received less than we would have had under the usual distribution rules. We played fair with the other teams and it was us that made the biggest sacrifice. Celtic refused to reduce the winners’ share. Maybe Aberdeen refused a more permanent change but the monies were adjusted from second down. And that Included where Aberdeen ended up.

I thought everyone but Celtic agreed to the adjustment to the league position monies. Aberdeen scuppered the efforts to change the rule that meant two "No" votes resulted in no change. In effect when the OF were both in the top league, by voting together they could fight off any proposal that weakened their position. With Rangers gone, it seemed likely that the number of votes required to deny change would be increased (as Celtic would be on their own) thus making it a fairer position when Rangers inevitably returned to the top flight. Aberdeen stated publically that they would support Celtic in not supporting any such change and at that stage the whole thing was dropped without a vote taking place. A chance well and truely missed.

Replace Frear with Taylor-Sinclair and bring in Dunne and I could go with that. Given his form after the Winter break I just cannot understand why anyone in their right mind would dump Dunne. Seems like there are still a lot of haters out there, irrespective of how he performs. But I think Robinson will definitely start with McHugh and I'm not convinced Johnson is here to sit on the bench. Also I suspect Tanner will need time to get properly match fit. But isn't it refreshing to have decent options. Good luck Mr Robinson

From what I can gather O'Halloran is off to Australia. To be announced next week after final details sorted out. Pity.

Sadly I believe Livingstone are tearing up an excellent grass pitch to replace it with an artificial surface. Seemingly it's an attempt to reduce ongoing costs. Hopefully I have been misinformed,

That's the way Gemmill has them playing....sideways, sideways, back... followed by a hoof forward to a giant striker. No different from the way he has had the U21s playing all year. Earlier comment about making Robinson look like Pep Guardiola is spot on. Anybody who saw the matches against England and Andorra will know what I mean. Painful to watch and all creativity stifled. Emphasis on not losing rather than winning. To a degree I can understand that approach with the senior side, but for fuxsake just let the kids play their natural game. Looks like most players are terrified of giving the ball away by trying anything remotely offensive. Campbell seemed to spend most of the game playing immediately in front of the defence and playing one twos with his Centre Backs. Don't think he crossed the half way line. There are some decent players in there but you would not know it from the way they are set up. I think the two Centre Backs must have had more touches than anybody, mostly as a result of passes from their own midfield. Only stuck with it until the end because of Campbell. Even that might not tempt me next time up.

Would be good if the other Ranger's target was Ryan Hardie. Excellent goal scoring record when on Loan at Raith (last season) and Livi (since January window). Natural goal scorer and an alternative style to what we have at present. A good foil for either Bowman or Main. Also young enough to spend time with us before moving on for decent money. Livi will want to keep him but surely we are a more attractive option

According to Graham in the Ticket Office you can ask for seats further back and they will accommodate if possible. Seemed to appreciate that giving Season Ticket Holder/Well Society Members first crack but insisting they take seats with the poorest view did not make sense. Ask and you shall receive it seems.

On Peter and Roughie last night, both Gordon Smith and Alan Rough were confident it was not a penalty and actually said they could not see any contact being made. A huge contrast to what Stewart and Thomson said on Sportscene. That said, Stewart and Thomson seemed to be trying to convince each other it was a penalty despite the TV evidence. In my opinion none of the three incidents merited a penalty.

Pony Express finally delivered to Fife. Great effort guys. Another fantastic read.

It's an interesting debate and I find myself agreeing with some aspects of both arguments. On the one hand, we are all enjoying watching better performances on the pitch with players of the quality we all want to see wearing Claret and Amber. Given the overall financial situation, this would not be possible without using the monthly income from the Society, albeit this goes against the original concept under which the society was established. As long as the good performances continue it looks like good value for money. If results go the other way, is it good value then? With regard to establishing a Reserve Fund for unforeseen circumstances, I think this is essential and the sooner the better. One of the biggest drains on resources in the past few years has been upgrading the pitch to one that is fit for purpose. Fortunately that situation has been resolved but Fir Park is an old stadium. What if another unforeseen costly repair is required in the near future? How would that be funded without access to a Reserve Fund? We are told the monies raised by the proposed Share Sale are to be placed in such a fund and for the reason stated I think this is essential and should be a condition of the sale. Should we keep asking the same group of people to keep on contributing more and more? I too would like to see a more concerted effort being made to attract new investors, but if existing members are prepared to contribute more then that is a decision for them to make. But eventually that well will run dry. One question I do have is this. If monthly income increased to £200k or £300k (very unlikely I know) would all of those funds be immediately invested in the team and day to day expenses? Surely at some stage the Society has to say " We are keeping some for a rainy day. You as a football Club will need to operate within your own resources". I also see lots of comment about repaying Les. I also look forward to when this is the case, but let's do it on the basis of the terms agreed.......Transfer Income, Double Your Money Deal and eventually the balance on a Repayment Schedule after the original 3 year Interest Free period as passed. I would hope MFC see the repayment of Les and John Boyle as their responsibility and not that of the Society. Only if the Club cannot generate sufficient income to meet any scheduled repayment should the proposed Society Reserve Fund be turned to. I have a fear that the Share Sale proceeds will be used to repay Les "early" leaving us high and dry in any emergency situation. Other than MFC being in a default situation, I do not want to see members' monies being used to repay Les. I suppose I am trying to think long term, rather than just short term coupled with an excellent performance on the field. All about balance..... in my opinion of course

Agree fully. Went to the match with a Hibs fan and so did not sit in the Motherwell section. Also travelled back to sunny Fife with a bunch of Hibs fans. Every Hibs fan I spoke to thought Hibs took the lead against the run of play and were fortunate to be ahead at half time. They were impressed and surprised by the quality that Motherwell showed throughout. They were shocked we had the stomach to come back from two down. The contrast with the Ross County match is spot on.

I thought the problem in the first half was that Cadden seemed to be tasked with tracking Dorrans rather than being free to play his natural game. When Dorrans drifted inside, Cadden followed him leaving acres of space behind Tait who was instructed to push forward. I lost track of how many times Tait was forced to chase back 60 yards because a terrible crossfield pass (McHugh?) was intercepted and no-one was filling in behind. Windass and Wallace must have thought it was Christmas. Also stretched our back three which created even more gaps. Despite that,we matched Rangers and created a good few chances. Second half, Cadden was freed up and Tait had cover whenever he pushed forward. Windass and Wallace more or less disappeared as an attacking force. Cadden was also able to drive forward and create problems for Rangers....and Dorrans if you recall his booking. Found the match both encouraging and frustrating. So near but miss out again. Thought our defence was much improved on last season and that includes the much maligned Dunne. Fisher did well when he came on but disappointed by Rose. Would have preferred Campbell's battling qualities to close down Rangers midfielders. Surprised at how much time McHugh wanted on the ball. Robbed countless times. First game of the season for me and pleased with the progress I saw. Although, like some, the persistance in playing with a back three worries me

A good point and I accept it. As you say we cannot compete with the likes of Burnley in terms of wages and facilities. Just think we could maximise our return if we can persuade him to sign up for a bit longer in the absence of any concrete bid at this time.I think he is a better player than some folk are giving him credit for.

I thought Henegan was doing well until injuries kicked in, particularly Tait being out. He then ended up getting dragged all over the place trying to fill in across the back line. Got caught out a few times whentrying to cover at right back. Settled down when Cadden moved back which coincided with a reduction in goals conceded and our eventual safety. Might not be a popular view on here but I would offer him an extended contract as I feel he will continue to improve and his value will rise. If the Clubs mentioned are seriously interested then they must have identified something they like. My view, too early to cash in.