dennyc

Some truth in that and I share your concern regarding the apparent low numbers of emerging Scottish youth in Scotland/England's top Leagues. But your picture dismisses those youngsters that were born outside of Scotland but qualified for Scotland through having at least one Scottish parent. So the "grannie" comment is a bit misleading. If you look to those who qualify via parents, then Tierney, McTominay, Gunn, Brown, Dykes and, closer to home, Max Johnston should be regarded as having successfully come through youth systems. Both here and elsewhere. Or do you think having Scottish parents is not enough to be regarded as "Scottish" youth? Hickey, Hendry, Patterson, Gilmour and Ferguson are products of the Scottish youth system and comparatively recent additions to the squad.. You can add McGregor, Robertson, Armstrong, Christie, McLean, Souttar, Kelly and Clark if you care to go back further. All in the current squad. And the McCrorie brothers who may yet break through to the Senior Scottish side. Might not be France or England quality but more than good enough for a place in our squad in their prime. And looking at the U21s, the two players who posters on here thought excelled in the last few days were Ben Doak and Kieran Bowie. Both born in Scotland and progressing well through English youth set ups. So, again, the Grannie reference does not apply. There are likely more from that U21 team but I cannot be bothered checking. We can always do with more talent coming through, preferably Scottish born and bred, but there has been a good few in recent years and I don't believe the situation is anywhere near as dire as you suggest. And if Clarke delves deeper to find those who qualify via grandparents, then good luck to him. He would be negligent to ignore any legitimate source open to him. Off the top of my head, only Cooper and Adams are grand parent additions currently. Hardly the majority. The problem might be getting the Manager to ease out senior players to allow scope for youngsters to be introduced.

If Kelly wanted test the market as a free agent, which would be sensible, he could agree to extend his existing contract to mid July including an agreement that he gets a cut of any Euro bonus we receive. That way he gets the best of both worlds and Motherwell would also benefit if he is selected. Did we not have such an arrangement with Gallagher covering the last Euros? But that might not be required even if Kelly is OOC. Not sure if the same applies under UEFA criteria and so for the Euros, but for World Cup squad players a payment is made by FIFA to the club(s) who held a player's registration for the two years prior to his country being eliminated from the finals tournament. If that criteria applies this summer, then we are well placed. And we would also be due a cut if Max Johnson made the squad.

McAllister - Too nice a guy Muscat - Thug but a decent record as a Manager Davies - Would argue with his shadow and always falls out with Board and players. There is a reason he has been unemployed for so long. Would cause havoc. So clearly Davies is the man.

Agree 100%. With the ability in our midfield hopefully Bair can win enough ball to provide them with some decent chances. Sadly, on that pitch, Livi have shown that getting the ball forward quickly and long is pretty effective. Not pretty, but effective. Don't think I have ever seen a decent game of football break out on that surface.

There’s not really any debate about Bair though, is there? Everybody agrees with just about everything you have posted. From his previous record, to the fact his signing made no sense, to the fact he would not be anywhere near first choice had anyone else been available or showed any ability to score goals. You have more than justified your criticism and backed it up. If you care to scroll back you will see that, when he signed, I agreed with your concerns. I still do, although I acknowledge what he does add to the team in the absence of a better option. But having expressed your views my point is that you appear unable to let it go until such time as the situation resolves itself one way or another. And that is Steelboy like. So, no, my observation was not “a lazy attempt at shutting down debate”. It was a way of saying that there is no debate and repeating those concerns time and time again is pointless. Again, nobody really disagrees with you. So you are debating with yourself. But ok, as far as Bair is concerned, unless the situation changes I’ll keep on scrolling.

I thought Steelboy was the one on this site that became obsessed with certain players. Bair appears to be your SOD or Spittal. Not quite Burrows, but getting there. Most of the time you are debating with yourself as everybody...including me....agrees with what you say. Perfectly valid comments and questioning of a risky signing policy. If I am wrong, point me towards anybody who has stated that Bair as a striker is up to the standard we require. Or even that we should have signed him in the first place......project or not. Being realistic, going on about Bair's lack of goals or his signing is going to change absolutely nothing right now. Taking into account our injury issues, the below par performance of our other strikers on admittedly limited game time, the fact our best young prospect is far from first team ready and finally the formation our Manager seems to prefer. The same formation he adopted last season. So not one introduced solely to counter this season's challenges. Every single Motherwell fan would gladly swap Bair for a regular goal scorer or welcome a structure that could facilitate a proven goal scorer being played alongside him. If either Shaw or Wilkinson is that striker then I trust Kettlewell to alter things. But nothing I have seen so far suggests that either of those players is the solution. Shaw's attempts against St Mirren and Rangers were poor and cost us points. What would you be saying if Bair had missed those chances? Wilkinson looks to have some decent ability but has no pace and dithers on the ball looking to get a shot away. He himself has said he is not a target man, despite his height. I sincerely hope my assessment of both players is wrong as all I really want is my team to win games. No matter who scores. Biereth might have been the player to replace Bair but Charles Dunne robbed us of that option for now. One thing was perfectly clear on Saturday, we were a better unit with Bair on the park than we were with Shaw and Wilkinson contributing the sum total of zero when they came on. At a time in the game when others were finding it tough to keep going I expected a bit more effort and support from both.

Don't think anybody disagrees with that. Lack of a cutting edge aside, were you encouraged by our general play over both games? And our ability to compete with teams whose budget and player quality is far ahead of what we possess. And the performance of our midfield and the often slated central defence, Rangers booed off the field despite defeating us and the obvious relief from Celtic players and fans yesterday suggests we are not the walkover we have often been. Obviously the results are extremely frustrating and questions over our forward recruitment are valid, but it looks to me like we are making solid progress in many areas.

So who would you play instead of Bair at the moment? Both Shaw and Wilkinson were pathetic when they came on and, as a result of them being unable to hold the ball or link up play, our defence and midfield were given less respite than with Bair on the pitch. As for their efforts to close down opponents? Non existent. With those two on the pitch, we had eight outfield players running their arses off while that pair strolled around without a care in the world. Bair is not a goal scorer and signing him seemed nonsensical to me. As stated endlessly on here. we are crying out for any sort of goal scorer to benefit from our general play. But on yesterdays evidence Bair contributed far more than those other two were willing to do. It's not just about ability. And if anyone is not encouraged by our performances against both Rangers and Celtic, then that is because they are determined not to be and are unwilling to acknowledge progress. Of course points are important. Nobody thinks any differently. But compared to the hidings we have suffered from both of them over recent years, yesterday and last week were a huge step forward.

I think this is what most fans would prefer. Sadly they are soon to move even further away from your proposal and go further down the route that ensures the "big" teams are guaranteed even more lucrative ties. And multiple chances to continue playing at some level if they blow it early doors. On the pretext of diminishing the threat that a European Super League proposal will raise it's head again.

Everybody is agreed Bair is not a goal scorer and if we had one ready to replace him then he would not be starting. But we don't, so he is currently our best option and the team is structured on that basis. Shaw might be that man but only time will tell. Repeatedly banging on about his shortcomings and blatantly ignoring any positive contribution is so blinkered. You were not so vocal regards Bair after the Hearts victory. Have you ever considered that, under our current circumstances, Kettlewell may be playing Bair looking for to him to assist others to take the chances he and the rest of the team create, rather than racking up KVV like numbers for himself? Kilmarnock being another positive example where Bair helped us win a game that looked lost. Was I delighted when we signed Bair? NO. Do I recognise that he has contributed towards our excellent start to the League season? YES. Do I expect him to feature in the team for ever and ever? NO. Where I do agree with you is that Kettlewell's efforts at finding a KVV replacement have fallen short. That's not really unexpected though and in truth Kettlewell did highlight how difficult that task would be. He was quite open that goals would likely have to come from other areas to compensate. And that is exactly where we are at. I assume Bair has now joined your list that includes SOD and Spittal. Players whose every mistake is shouted from the rooftops, but whose every positive contribution is ignored.

Agree Ferrie may well have potential. But let’s be realistic. He is nowhere near ready for the first team. Most obvious is how easily he gets pushed off the ball, bullied. Cannot fault his effort though. I think we have scrapped our reserve team, which is a pity as maybe that would have given Ferrie a chance to develop and mature physically in a fairly competitive setting. Not sure what he can learn at youth level. Sadly a sign of the times at most clubs. If it’s a comparison of Bair, Shaw and Ferrie. Bair is big, strong and links up well. Works his socks off. Sadly not a natural finisher as his record shows. Shaw is mobile, links up well, decent in the air, looks to have a bit of pace and has scored goals elsewhere. Admittedly he should have done better when fed by Paton. Given more game time he is likely to be our top scoring striker this season. Ferrie has potential but that’s it at the moment. If Obika and Wilkinson are ever fit again, then they will also be ahead of him in the queue and for me that speaks volumes. Like you I was in despair when we signed Bair, looking his record elsewhere. I saw it as a waste of limited funds. Unlike you I am trying to move on from that and recognise what he does contribute to the team. Tynecastle and yesterday proved that he can add value. But somehow Kettlewell has to find him a goal scoring partner to play alongside him which might be a challenge given our preferred formation. Had we won yesterday, I doubt we would be having this debate today. If Bair is eventually dropped, then Shaw seems the best option to me.

I don't understand what this MJC abuse is all about. Seems personal from what I have read and not solely based on his comments. I don't know him or anything about him other than what he posts on here, but for some reason he has got under a few folks skin. Is it because he gave his honest view regarding Hearts being a club with their own identity who have a large fan base? Or because in his opinion they can generate a great atmosphere in a stadium whose construction helps to make it an intimidating experience for visiting teams and fans? Or is it because he personally has not had any run ins with their fans? Or is it because he does not hate them like he is meant to? I think everything he said is accurate no matter how unpalatable some may find his honesty. And I have not read one response that provided any evidence he is wrong. He also commented that all Clubs have a small proportion of fans who can cause issues. That is also true and it is fact that Motherwell are no exception. Some on here appear to take exception to that home truth. And before I also get slaughtered, I thought our fans on Sunday were fantastic...before, during and after the game. As they have been all season at any game I have attended. I do get that MJC comes across as overly negative at times, especially when forecasting the result of an upcoming fixture. I actually find his predictions quite amusing and his about turn when he is proven entirely wrong even more so. Dare I say that might be just his way of having a wee laugh. I detest that bloody song Hearts fans sing. To many bad memories. So I disagree with him on that front. But it is part of their identity and it is miles better than anything we have produced. I certainly don't believe a rendition of 'Up The Well' on Saturday would inspire any of our players or encourage the home support to join in. And it certainly did not last long as part of the set pre match entertainment a few years ago. I also disagree with his opinion of International football but he is entitled to his view. I know a few folk who agree with him, for a number of reasons. I understood a Fan Forum was a place where fans could post their opinions on all things football. Mostly about their own club but also about football in general, including opposition Clubs. MJC's Hearts comments were made in the Hearts match day thread so I see nothing wrong with that. Am I wrong? Or is Steelmen Online a forum where being positive about any other Club leaves you open to abuse, no matter how well you back up those comments. Even from someone labelled as a Moderator? Similarly if you express any negativity regards Motherwell or our fans. Nobody is going to agree 100% with everything that is posted and that is fair enough and expected. Healthy in many ways. That should stimulate a reasoned debate and an interesting discussion but that is certainly not the case this time around. In my humble opinion some folk need to take a good long look at themselves and maybe even grow up a touch.

Just checked back what Martindale actually said. Livi's share of VAR costs was £200k after finishing mid table. So a bit less than I quoted, but more than initially suggested under that sliding scale when it was being promoted. No surprise there. I wonder if Clubs think they got value for money? For a good few Clubs the knock on effect on budgets must have been substantial.

Exactly this. Martindale at Livi spoke in similar terms a couple of days ago regarding the need to balance the books. He put a figure on Livi's situation saying he had to find £400k, by whatever means he could......player sales, contracts cancelled or renegotiated, additional sponsorship as examples. In other words a mix of reduced expenditure and increased income. I think many Clubs are similar in that contracts cancelled does not equate to all, or in some cases any, savings being available to the Manager for player investment. What I found scary was that £250k of their shortfall was purely down to the introduction of VAR. I assume we have a similar cost in that regard.

Personalities play a big part amongst those middle ranking clubs. We got more than our share of media coverage under Burrows, often due to initiatives or innovations he supported. Whereas the only time I recall St Mirren getting a look in during those years was when Burrow's counterpart (John Needham) made an ill advised comment regards Rangers fans and the River Clyde following a Celtic defeat. Other than the big five clubs mentioned I think it is more or less equal coverage for us lesser lights. Kettlewell seems to have a decent relationship with the BBC and has featured fairly often. McFadden and (Cantwell comments aside) Foster contribute regularly and are not shy about bigging up Motherwell. So I don't think we are that hard done to.

I agree with the above, 100%. I would ask though, does this influence also extend to Rangers? Cantwell's dying swan act first seen at Fir Park has continued without challenge and has now made it's European debut. The only person who highlighted his behaviour at Fir Park was benched immediately by the BBC. Wonder why that was? For clarity, I think it does. But may I suggest that you yourself are influencing folks' perception by concentrating purely on Celtic and playing down the effect of other Club's media manipulation. Walter Smith suggested as a prime example a few posts ago was more or less dismissed. Even Aberdeen in recent years given the amount of time Sportsound devotes to their success... or otherwise. Hearts under Begg? It will always be the case that the perceived bigger teams and their larger fan base will benefit from greater media coverage and carry greater clout when it comes to suppressing or placing stories. I don't see that changing. It's what sells more newspapers, retains media access to grounds and inspires dedicated phone in participants. But yes, Rodgers is an annoying twat.

Walked back along Gorgie Road to Haymarket after the game as did quite a few Motherwell fans from what I saw. And had a pint in a pub yards from Tynecastle before the game. Chatted to several Hearts fans along the way and on the tram. Not a sign of bother. Not saying I have never seen confrontation over the years but Sunday appeared peaceful. I remember being pursued along *Brewery Lane" many years ago having consigned them to another year of lower league football. Happy day! Perhaps Hearts recent results had an effect on things this weekend. My experience is that all non OF fans tend to create more bother at away matches where a small number think they have a point to prove. Motherwell included. I have also been at a few non Motherwell Hearts and Hibs games in recent times and have not come across any bigoted goings on. Admittedly I have not been at any local derbies or games against either Old Firm where I guess such disgusting behaviour is more likely. To the contrary, I have not been at any Celtic or Rangers match, regardless of opponent, where religious bigotry and just plain disgusting behaviour has not been on display. So from my experience, and as someone who has lived and worked in Edinbugh since the 1980's, I don't think it is correct to class Hearts/Hibs fans in the same category as many followers of Celtic and Rangers. I say that as someone who has no time whatsoever for Hearts, going back to Texaco Cup games and having had to suffer the comments of Hearts fans throughout my working career. But I do agree with MJC. With 18000 fans cheering them on and the stands constructed the way they are, the atmosphere can be as electric and intimidating as any ground in the UK. So more credit to Motherwell on Sunday for dealing with that atmosphere and coming away with a deserved victory. And respect to the fantastic, vocal Motherwell support who made themselves heard from start to finish. That support was something a number of Hearts fans commented on post match.

I agree regards his lack of career goals and like you I have concerns about his record elsewhere. But at Tynecastle he worked his socks off, rattled every single Hearts defender, put in some thumping tackles, layed the ball off well, played countless one twos with colleagues. Still has areas to improve but a massive improvement from previous games and a performance that earned him a standing ovation when he was subbed. His team won the game and he contributed. Maybe he won't score a ton of goals or maybe he will. Time will tell. But as long as he contributes as he did on Sunday and helps the team to win, then nobody will care if the goals come from others. On Sunday's performance he deserves his chance.

Scored both goals in a 2-0 away win.

Oh I don’t want him anywhere FP. Just highlighting that most Hibs fans would welcome him back. Their other preferred choice is Malky Mackay. Media will push their own favourites though.

I think it is wise to be cautious at such an early stage in the season but to base any assessment on points gathered three games in as a means of gauging our position does not go anywhere near giving a true comparison of then and now. Under Hammell the players looked confused as to their roles and at times openly questioned tactics mid game. Hammell stubbornly refused to try any new set up…much like his predecessor…and seldom made substitutions until games were lost. Listening to his interviews was depressing as he appeared bemused and offered nothing. Much improved in all areas under Kettlewell and in fact he appears to be learning from any mistakes as Saturdays early substitution and change of shape demonstrated. He clearly has a plan and an approach which most players appear to have bought into and are enjoying. That was certainly not the case under Hammell. Or Alexander for that matter. And that 6 v 7 comparison takes no account of Kettlewell’s full track record or his previous managerial experience. My only concern is the quality of player recruited…on early evidence granted….but I would guess that there are factors other than Kettlewell’s preferences which dictate who we can bring in and who we cannot. Perhaps more so now than in previous years given the noises coming out of the Club. I’m guessing that given our ownership model that is unlikely to change. From comments here and elsewhere it seems Kettlewell is more in touch with our youth set up which is encouraging. Have to say, how telling is it that most of those posters who described Paton as a ‘waste of a jersey’ or ‘pal signing’ or ‘lazy signing’ have been remarkably silent on that subject of late. Not all, but most. Prior to his injury Paton had started to show up well and to my mind was man of the match in one game. So Saturday was not an entire surprise. Regards Neil Lennon and Hibs. We may not like him but nobody can deny he is a winner as his Managerial and Playing record shows. He is at the top of every Hibs fan I know wish list. I was at the Villa game and no way would Lennon have accepted such a performance or made no tactical changes mid match. Johnson’s after match comment that he was happy with how he set up and saw no need to change it was the last straw and an act of suicide.

So with all the professional expertise and insight the Club have at their disposal, what is your assessment of their recruitment policy so far? No cop out of " It's early days" or " Who would you bring in" or "We are skint". From what you have witnessed so far what are your first impressions? Marks out of ten if you like. Could/Should they have done better? Have they done their job well? Us fans always have thoughts about who we think might improve us as a team, but we don't employ a team of professionals, with a detailed knowledge of the market, who are paid to scour that market all year round, succession planning for the likes of KVV and Max J moving on and looking to possible injuries to key players. Where I do disagree with Steelboy is that his focus seems to be purely on Kettlewell and also there is no benefit in slaughtering players who I believe are trying their best. But as a fan he is entitled to express the concerns that he and others have. My view is that there are others within the Club who need to look at their own performance. From those charged with overseeing finance and investment, to those controlling structure and policy, to those with final say on recruitment and retention. Given the restrictions within which we are told Kettlewell has to operate, it is remarkable what he has achieved since he took over the Managerial role. How long can that last is my worry. Bottom line, initial evidence suggests our recruitment has been extremely poor but that failure does not lie solely at Kettlewell's door. The issues are much more deep rooted than that. But football being football, we will now win the Scottish Cup and finish top four.

How much is he being paid right now and by who? I thought he was released/walked away and is currently in receipt of no wages, so any employment right now would actually be an increase. Whether he would want to come to Fir Park is another matter. A deal to January might suit everyone.

I thought Souare was poor against Dundee and the run he made to open up space for our goal was just about his only positive contribution. Disappointing as he had showed up well in earlier games. Maybe because he is not up to full fitness, or perhaps team orders, but there were numerous occasions when a quick one two was on but after playing the first pass he stood still and the chance of a quick break was gone. Most passes he made were backwards even when forward options were available. And the amount of space he allowed for the cross Dundee scored from reminded me of the dark days under Alexander. I thought he was taken off because he was knackered and was being given the run around by McCowan. Which led to his booking and as suggested may well have hastened his withdrawal. Although by that criteria Slattery would never finish a match.. To me McGinley does not look up to full strength after his long illness, so I would be tempted to start Wilson even if he is the least experienced left wing back we have. Souare or McGinley facing up to Boyle is not a situation I look forward to. Early days, and Souare may come good. But for me the jury is still out. So in short, I think Steelboy does have a point although his comments are a touch harsh this early in Souare's Motherwell career.

It is a foul if an OPPONENT does that. But it is not a foul if a player from your own side knocks the ball loose, accidentally or otherwise. Essentially Casey could not foul his own goalkeeper. It is quite straight forward if you differentiate between the actions of an opponent and those of a team mate. The ball is not out of play when it is the goalkeepers hands. But an OPPONENT cannot touch him or the ball to knock it loose. That is the protection built into the laws. It really comes down to that. So a penalty could have been given against Casey or, if he had knocked the ball loose, an opponent could have knocked it into the net for a goal. There have been examples of teammates accidentally knocking the ball loose and play continuing. Whether or not it leads to a goal.