weeyin

That's my point, though. You either spend time and money individually evaluating the safety of every single seat in every one of the hundreds of stadia used for Euro competitions every season, or you define a standard and measure against that. It doesn't mean that some seats that don't meet the standard aren't safe, it means they don't meet the standard.

I'm not sure I would go as far as criminal. A little disappointing maybe, but inevitable when you are building match sharpness. I saw this quote from Alfred on Friday: “We had a situation where I was coaching a player to make a pass to another player and he asked, 'Who is that?' That again puts it into context." I'm confident we will be fitter and sharper in the next leg.

Any time you try and create a standard for something like a seat, it's going to feel a bit stupid. There will be a decent sentiment behind it to avoid being stuck on benches that are falling apart or old wooden seats that are a safety hazard. So they have to try and draw the line somewhere. Inevitably that will make some things look daft.

I always worry a bit when I see fans say new signings are "a replacement for X", because inevitably, that is who they are judged against. New players, new managers, new midfield. Let's see how they line up an play rather than expecting them to replace anyone. We lost Miller and Spittal, but ended up with Fadinger, Watt & Just. They were replacements from a headcount perspective, but that midfield (along with Slattery) was very different to the one that went before. And with Alfred's emphasis on more forward runs and more crosses, I expect our next midfield to operate a little differently again.

I don't think he'd be too high risk. The club is very big on evaluating character and fit for the team, so if they say he's OK now, I trust their judgement,

One of JBA's first jobs was to wave goodbye to Emersonn when he was transferred to Ipswich. Highly rated 22 year old Brazilian striker. 28 million Euros.

A classic example of a player who took pelters for years after he joined us for being big and useless.

My favourite kind of shot. Hardly any rotation on the ball, and side netting. Not a bad start to his Motherwell career.

I don't know about Brad Spencer, but I'm OK with signing an experienced midfielder. Not everyone will have resale value, but when you're oldest starting player is 25, it's a sign that a more experienced head or two wouldn't be a bad thing.

Good.

I thought Wilson was fine too. I think he comes under more scrutiny because of some previous performances, but he did OK in a makeshift defence.

Priestman and Fadinger were, not surprisingly, stand outs. I went for WIlliams, just because he looked the part in his first competitive start. I think we have a footballer there.

That's true. A few quid in the bank and no more squinting to look at their numbers.

Alfred seems to like a few more forward passes than Jens too. So that should be interesting. Early days, but it looks like we have a plan.

Faroe 'Nuff We've never lost a European tie wearing that shirt. Now take your pick - (they made me do my research to list the squad tonight).

No VAR. It's been a treat. I especially enjoyed the ref playing advantage, seeing the resulting offside then bringing it back for our free kick.

If Longelo and Charles-Cooke are fit to start next week I think we'll be fine.

I'm confident that will happen. I'd be very surprised if this isn't the weakest starting 11 we field all season. We had a much stronger 11 against Clyde in the first game last season, and we were mince for most of it.

Better teams won't be facing that line up.

Need to stay focused. This is the stage of the game where HB will be a bit more adventurous to see if they nick one.

He's not really a centre forward, but maybe we can turn him into one.

OK so far for a first competitive outing. Need to keep the tempo up second half.

You're welcome, Scotland.

I think so. From what I read about them, their business model is to act as a platform for globally distributing smaller clubs video streams.

There are plenty of counter examples to that, but that's not really the point. I vistied Wrigley Field last year, and they did a fantastic job refurbishing their classic building to keep its character, but bring it into the 21st century. However, as I said, I'm in favour of a new build, but there are legitimate concerns about its design. I honestly can't think of any Scottish team that has moved stadiums (stadia?) in the past 20 or 30 years where I was impressed with the new one. Forest Green Rover's plan for "Eco Park" is quite an attractive proposition, but that is budgeted at 100 million. I also have less faith in the local authorities or government in providing the necessary levels of support it may need. I do have faith in the current board to make good decisions, but any new build still carries mutliple risks, and mitigating those risks can lead to compromises we might not like.