Big Trac

Aye, it just proves what a load of staged shite the big pretense of knocking back the first offer was. He'd told them to ask twice so it looked like it was a strain to leave Motherwell, but him and Knox were going to accept all along. Wee. Lying. Bastard.

Because Brown and Knox's agents contacted Aberdeen last week, as Aberdeen state on their website. http://www.afc.co.uk/articles/20101210/don...2212158_2241525

Motherwell website database is down. We must have been refusing to do business with wikileaks.

Archie will be away too. Sickening. What a pointless move it is. They might get more money, but not for long, as McGhee already found out now he's on the dole. What bugged me was that Brown said he was indebted to Motherwell, and he couldn't thank Motherwell enough for the chance they'd given him and Archie. Personally I could think of one way to repay that debt.

Ok. Not confirmed then. Who'd have thought you'd have found someone being pedantic on the internet.

Good plan. Beat them at their own game. That's all it seems to take. Boyle: "Will you stay?" Brown: "No" Boyle: "Will you reconsider" Brown: "Ok" Maybe he's just so old he can't really remember the last question.

Not a done deal, but looking bad now. Thought Brown would stay as he's too old to be chasing glory and money, (not that he'll get any but they always seem to think they will). At the end of the day it's up to him and Knox, but I thought he'd show more loyalty and even love for the club. Ah well. The way it seems to have happened is disappointing. You just want a quick decision, and we thought we had that. But then they ask him again. I think he's like Will Ferrell in Austin Powers, he just can't stand being asked several times. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxZQL_Is0mE

Just thought I'd put up a link to this guide for those travelling to iceland next week. (Apologies if it's been linked elsewhere and I've missed it.) Wikitravel Iceland Travel Guide Quite useful in general, but notable highlights include Visitors arriving by air should note that there is a duty free store for arriving passengers where they can buy cheap alcohol (at least cheap compared to Iceland). To find the duty free store just follow the Icelanders. No Icelander in their right mind will pass the duty free store upon arrival! Be sure to not exceed the allowance which is 1L strong alcohol and 1L light wine (less than 22%) or 1L strong and 6L of beer. The strong alcohol can be exchanged for either 1L light wine or 6L beer. Price of beer being around 600 - 800 krona - about £3.50 -£5 High food prices: ISK 400 - 1500 for a hamburger. ISK 1500 - 3500 for a three-course meal in a restaurant. The local Icelandic drinks such as Brennivín ("Black death") contain a fairly high alcohol content Last but not least, the lovely cuisine, such as putrefied shark cubes and singed sheep head. (Think they're seasonal thankfully) Also, Whale meat with optional grated puffin.

Luckily yes. I panicked when I read the thread title but common sense has prevailed for once.

Earlier in the season they came to fir park and played some of the best attacking football any team has played against us this season. The next time they came they were nervous after some bad results and Hughes tried to play a battling team against us, and Lasley and Jennings easily won that battle to drive us to victory. My worry this time is that without Lasley and Jennings we might not win that battle, and if they turn up and play football they might well blow us away again. But you never really know. Motherwell seem to have a surprise up their sleeve these days and you get the feeling we can always pull off a result...

Craig Brown and Archie Knox is also an anagram of I CAN GROW OX RICH BANKER, which makes as much sense.

Yup. There's no problem with the law. It's just some confusion (which might lead to tension) with a sudden change in practice without explanation. The Taylor report was published over 20 years ago. So why start doing something about it 20 years later? (Yeah, I know that's a little facetious, but you get my point) If people have been bringing drink or bottles in then I wasn't aware of it if they had. They could just explain that some people have, so that the rest of the fans know what the hold-up is about. I'm not actually that bothered, I just think that some communication can nip potential problems in the bud, and it's often ignored.

It doesn't bother me as I'm so late that there's no-one in the queue and just the one brain-dead boy asking about bottles and cans. It doesn't bother me too much, but it does make you wonder why it's necessary, and as Steve Diggle says, it's the lack of communication about it which irks people. There's been no incidents that I remember, so why get people's backs up for no reason. If there is a reason, start a dialogue, or at least inform people (through the club website or something) that it will be happening and asking for fans to co-operate. It might not really be necessary but it hurts no-one to ease possible tension.

To be fair, quite often that's because they're not half as good as they look through claret and amber glasses, but even great players like Faddy have to make a big move elsewhere before they are seriously in contention for a place. It always bugged me that he scored for Scotland just after he moved to Everton.

I agree. Buzz is nowhere near the keeper Ruddy is. He was a flapper who was good at shot stopping, but that's about it. The only place Buzz will be our best keeper ever is in his head. We've had tonnes of keepers better than him. He was above average at his best, that's all. While Ruddy still has his moments of madness, he's becoming more and more solid and dependable with every game. He's a good shot stopper but also (crucially) commands the box well. (I don't think he was at fault at all for the Rangers goal. It was Reynolds ball all the way and will be forever. If Ruddy'd gone for it he'd have been acting like a mad flapper. ) Ruddy still has to eradicate the odd error from his game, and stop having the occassional rush of blood to the head. But I'd argue that he seems to be doing that now. He needs to do that consistently before he can be properly judged though, not just in half a season.

Exactly. It should never be given if you DON'T see it. Dougal contradicts himself and his position all the time. Basically, he's always looking for a way to say it wasn't the refs/linesman's fault, and that they're right. You wouldn't hear him say, "I gave the penalty because I gambled on their being contact." He'd say, "I couldn't see it so I couldn't give it." Or you would if there was consistency.

I watched the game again when I got back home. They showed the goal in line with play on the far side from the linesman looking across at him. The linesman kept his flag down until Forbes touched it, then he raised it right away.

I don't think he's a cheat in this case (though I do think that referees etc. get influenced by the media and crowds in favour of the old firm) I think it was incompetence. He saw Forbes tap it in and thought, 'He must be offside.' He didn't actually know if he was because he hadn't been watching properly. Anyway, linesmen are just wee nyaffs who want to act like big men and get noticed so that people will think they're important and they'll get on telly. They're usually itching to raise their flags. (Though they'll quite often keep them down incorrectly for the same reasons.) That guy was a midget mutant with wee man's syndrome like they all are.

I'm sick of hearing that Ruddy was at fault. He simply wasn't. It was Reynolds ball all the way. If Boyd shouted 'keeper' then it might be vaguely understandable, but even so, when you look at it again, you'd think that most defenders would have hoofed it clear anyway. I don't think Reynolds is a terrible player, but I think we're slowly seeing that he is an average player (or above average; I actually think he's better as a full back) who can play very well sometimes, and have lapses at times. Unfortunately, he chose last night to have a terrible lapse in the middle of what would have been a great victory. It's unfortunate, but I think he's just that sort of player. Craigan can be the same at times. Brilliant for 89 minutes, but makes one vital slip and we lose a goal. We just have to accept that if a defender is that good, they won't be at Motherwell, or will be leaving soon.

I thought Lasley and Jennings were absolutely immense in midfield. Never gave up on anything. Fighting for every ball. Using the ball well when they won it. I'm going for Lasley but it's a close call. Jim O'Brien had a good game too, and if he'd used his possession better in the second half then I might have chosen him.

I thought he was generally disappointing, but with flashes of good play here and there which showed his promise. He was guilty of being a little slow to react and was losing possession and giving the ball away too much. I still have hopes that he will improve and become a good player though.

Agreed. Though it's sometimes a luxury we don't have to have a player not fighting for possession. In saying that, I still think he gives us something which we quite often lack, which is technique. His passing and shooting are far better than most of the team, and I've spent too many years watching players get into good scoring positions for Motherwell only to have an embarassingly poor finish to throw somebody on the scrap heap because they're not as fit as some others. Yes, he maybe needs to work on putting a bit more endeavour into his game, but if you've got a team full of physical players with no skill or flair to unlock a defence, then we'll struggle. I like Brown and Knox, and think they're doing well, but my major worry with Brown is that he will almost always pick experience over youth, and that could count against Forbes. I think he might play him because he's had some games for the first team, but he might still view him as being too inexperienced. I'm not sure Brown would even consider an untested youngster. I worry that someone like McFadden would probably never have got in one of his teams. I hope I'm wrong, but it's hard to tell until we see how he deals with youth players in future.

Nice. (Though the term 'skilful wordsmith' is possibly slightly overstating it. Also, I wouldn't want to ask about the ethnic origins of the terminology, as it might lead to a dangerous and disturbing discussion of the ethnic roots of Motherwell fans, which might lead to some sort of time team dig to prove the existence of 'Wishae man' , so I'm assuming it's cultural rather than ethnic. But I digress; Nice.)

There you go then. So in the end, it was better to hold out for a decent offer (even if not a huge amount more).

That was why I put in the qualifier that I was exaggerating a little. But that's about the only one I can think of. We usually accept anything we can get right away. Actually, now I think about it, there was also the Lee McCulloch to Hearts incident, which backfired largely because we then accepted a lower bid some time after. But we generally will accept low offers when a stronger stance might get us more for a player in the long run.