Andy_P

Copied from today's Scotsman....

That's a nice wee find that wiki page, though I can spot a couple of inaccuracies in there. I mind there was a topic on the Accies forum about the LC not so long ago, and one of their club officials who posts on it confirmed they actually went from 1934'35 to 1985'86 without winning it. A four team tournament with Albion Rovers one of them and you only win once in over 50 years Towards the end there were a few held at Fir Park that I remember attending one I don't which may be one of those being referred to. I was down south for the weekend but remember us playing Accies on a Friday night a few days before Christmas which had the likes of Krivokapic and McGrillen to name but a few involved when McLeish was in charge. That would have been 94'95 season.

Criticism per se isn't an overreaction at all and there's lots of it handed out on here week in week out whether its about the team, management or club in general and discussed thereafter. But just as some folk believe its completely within their right to be as brutally negative as they want, so too you have folk who believe to support is to don the claret and spectacles, see no wrong and be 100% happy clappy. There are always going to be clashes between those two types of polarised viewpoints. And then you probably have the majority in between occasionally straying narrowly into either camp depending upon the circumstances. But the trick for me is to get your criticisms across in such a manner that you don't look like an arse who is ranting for the sake or if or is simply fishing to start an argument and wind folk up. Starting a thread titled "Ross Forbes - Not good enough for the SPL?" and making your case creates a thread for a debate. Starting a thread titled "Ross Forbes - Pish" is only going to anger folk and the debate gets lost in amongst the mudslinging.

Pretty dispiriting stuff. Its all the more frustrating when you think howe they've worked their arses off for the last 3 months to get themselves to a position where a European place is just about theirs for the taking and then we hit the buffers. Lots of huffing and puffing from us without creating anything clear-cut at all, Sutton's header off the line aside. The rest of the chances were half-chances. In contrast I felt that Falkirk defended pretty stoutly - often unfortunately pretty comfortably - then every wee while would break up the park and look pretty incisive making our laboured play look all the worse. Disappointing when you have to admit that you've no complaints at losing at home to the team at the foot of the table, but there you go. Fourth hasn't gone yet but I find myself looking back the way once again. What an opportunity wasted today to pretty much nail fifth. Hearts failing to win at Paisley could prove significant in the end mind you. Ordinarily you would expect them to beat Killie next week and us to lose at Parkhead so assuming its them and not St Johnstone then given the goal difference they still need to win at least two games from the last five more than us to overtake us. St Johnstone could still pip Hearts ofcourse but at best they'd be in a similar position. Perhaps with the pressure of at Parkhead we can show a bit more than we've seen in the last couple of games and hopefuly get things back on track again with a view to tackling the final five games and seeing the season out on a high.

There was a comment from Broon a week or two back about the general fitness of the players. There was a remark about they were fit and how Archie Knox had worked them hard, but how this was merely a forerunner as to what they'd be in for come the summer. I think the term he used was "superfit". That being the case, we'll see then what if any difference there is in Rossco if this perceived lack of fitness for the SPL is accurate. It has been a disappointment to see him slide out of things throughout the season. Turning point for me was missing the penalty at Accies. That really seemed to dent his confidence and its never quite returned. Today I thought when Las went off it was the ideal opportunity to give him a run alongside Jennings in central-midfield and bring on Humphrey then offering us a bit more creativity and someone who can strike a ball around the edge of the box. I agree with Sieb that after initially surprising me how well Lasley and Jennings have done together, they have looked really "samey" the last couple of games and it would have been interesting to see how he fitted in alongside Jennings.

Yeah, I must admit his showing was one of the few positives today. First game at Fir Park for him I believe it was and I was pleased for him that he turned in a very solid display at his home ground. It may or may not help him win over some of the doubters but at the very least it should alleviate some of the concerns folk obviously have about him. But he's not a laddie by any manner of means, he's not untested in the SPL and I'm sure the management will know enough about him to have formed an opinion without having to see him play in the last half a dozen games. Until our final placing has been confirmed I'd be inclined to stick with Ruddy.

Grim stuff and if you can pick a Man of the Match out of that you'll be doing well...

Are you viewing at work? I get the same when I'm at work and put it down to some images being blocked by whatever software they have in place. No apparent rhyme nor reason to it and if its something worth viewing I'll look again when I get home.

Does Maryhill and Greenock count as Europe? ....If the last manager was still around granted!

Going to be hard to find someone for this one but thoughts and votes please folks...

Uh oh! Seeing the nick of some of the tighter than tight strips Puma produced for the African nations as something of a fat bastard Puma making 'Well strips fills me with dread!

Agreed, although there's no guarantee for any transfer I suppose. I think at roughly the same time Forbes was helping Dumbarton to promotion, Mark Archdeacon was having a bit of a nightmare at Albion Rovers, so yeah its not going to be sweetness and light all the time. But I do think as things stand if we have the strength in depth to cope with a couple going out, loan deals for the fringe youngsters offer us and the player more positves than negatives. Its perhaps one of the downsides of not having a reserve side that there's a few "in-betweeners" stuck between the 19's and the first team so it makes sense to keep them match fit, gain experience and build up some confidence by letting them go out and loan. It also puts them in the shop window if they prove not to have a future at the club.

What about Stephen Pearson? Would he be up there with similar numbers to Cusack? Can remember 2 or 3 red cards for him during his 'Well career.

It's Innes Ritchie, Stef.

I suspect as Jay says the club might well take a hit on the day but I think its a promotion with the best of intentions in terms of trying to attract new fans, welcome some lapsed punters back into the fold and to try to give the team a little extra backing at what will be an increasingly crucial stage of the season - remember it will be the last non-top six opponent we'll face. It can work, as can be seen with our mate Darryl who's now a season ticket holder at Fir Park having seen his first ever Motherwell game courtesy of a similar freebie. As a season ticket holder myself I have no quibble with folk getting in free in this promotion. It might erode the value of the season ticket by a few quid but there's a greater good here I think.

Might have changed now but there was a limit though to how many home games you can broadcast of any one team. I'm sure it was four which when you take away 2 Old Firm games only leaves two other home games for each of them. They would generally only be towards the end of the season when the telly companies would "hope" to catch them winning the league in that game. So you're right, it won't have been very often, albeit there are a few examples if you go back further enough.

Know the one you're referring to Gazzy, that was a half-twelve on a Saturday afternoon. First game after they lost the league at Fir Park as I recall The one I'm referring to would have been under Butcher I think about 2004 or 2005.

I can remember one definite and one possible. The definite, McGhee's first season we played Rangers in a midweeker at Ibrox, lost 1-0 to a lateish goal. At Parkhead a couple of years earlier we were there on the opening day, a Sunday afternoon, which I presume would have been live too.

Kampman was only there for about six months. I think it was 1998 but he came in around the February and was gone around the end of September, start of October the same year. Can't be much difference between Kampman, Gannon or to chuck a name in from the past Bobby Watson who took over from Jock Wallace, I'm estimating around November 1983 and would have been gone by May the next year.

Those are key points in this debate for me. Regardless of how you rate Michael Fraser there are few who will argue that he isn't of the same calibre as Ruddy. No slight intended on Fraser incidently. Just I believe in Ruddy we have something a little bit special and beyond our normal reach. And as such be it Michael Fraser or whoever happens to come after Ruddy is going to have a really difficult task of replacing him, simply because memories of him will be so fresh. You hope whoever comes in gets off to a flyer. Clearly ability plays a large part but Woods was getting similar to Fraser before he'd even settled in at Fir Park after replacing Sieb, Billy Thomson the same coming in for Maxi, both very popular and highly rated keepers at the time. If there's a hint that Ruddy's replacement doesn't have anything like the same capabilities then I fear for him a bit in terms of the reception some of the support will give him.

Yeah that's what immediately struck me too. I've not long since turned 36 and have seen a dozen of those listed in the flesh. I suppose if you are being picky you could say the more recent players had have the benefit of an increased number of subs avail to pick from - was something close to 100 of Johnny Gahagan's appearances not from the bench. And pickier still there are more games nowadays, with the likes of Kirkie and Softy, and the others who were around in 80's even having some 44 game league campaigns to add extra games to their tally. But I think the point still stands that even today with the opportunities available to players to move on, under the right circumstances some right impressive service can be built up.

But then again the game after we made it to the Scottish Cup Final facts show we barely got above 5000 for the visit of Hibs in not too dissimilar circumstances - an exciting finale to the season for us and by their own high standards a fairly nothing season for them. Not a huge amount of difference. Similarly a month before the final we were playing in front 3500 against Dundee United. I think you if you look hard enough you can find crowds for games that can back up whatever particular argument you want to put forward. You can't simply take two crowds and treat it as a like-for-like comparison. So many factors come into play when making the comparison. How were were doing? How were the opposition doing? Was it pissing down or sunny? Was it midweek? Was it the start of the season or the end? Did we or the opposition have anything to play for? Was capacity reduced for redevelopment? Did we have a daft kick-off time or was it played on a daft day? Did we have a few games compressed into a short period around one of the games and so on....

Voting in our MOTM polls backs that up Gullane. He's come from pretty much nowhere to looking, on current form, like he's going to be a stick on to win the thing. Since the Aberdeen game he's never been out of the top three in the voting and has won the last three (not including Tuesday or yesterday). Standings up to last weekend are >>> here

Thoughts and votes please folks...

I thought he said 590 for what its worth. As for the game I felt it was a point gained rather than two lost given the clear cut chances they had. Would have taken that prior to kick-off so wasn't unhappy at the point. Eyebrows were raised a little with the team and formation we started with but to be fair in a defensive sense before it was changed at the break, it was only in the last couple of minutes of the first half that they threatened. It's not a set up I'd hope to see as the norm but I don't think it should be dismissed out of hand completely. With more practice at it I think there's a place for it in certain games or at least in certain stages of games where a bit more solidity is required. Where the formation did fall down was going forward where we offered very little. Could understand the theory of trying to utilise Humphrey's pace but it never really happened and to be honest had he managed to burst through on goal I wouldn't have a huge amount of confidence that he would be able to finish. I still see him as a very raw with much work to be done when he gets into the final third both finishing and crossing. Strangely it seemed like it took St Mirren to bring two of their more renowned threats on in Mehmet and Dorman before we began to look a bit more threatening ourselves though we still rarely if ever tested Gallagher to any great degree. But all in all, quite content to come home without us having lost.