I wasn't for punting Kettlewell during the bad run, simply because there was no sign of disharmony or lack of effort in the squad and apart from a couple of notable exceptions, there were few absolutely dross performances. Just fine margins, a missed chance, a defensive howler being the difference in a lot of games.
With regard to budget and expectations, there are a lot of people on here who simply won't forgive the signing of a player that doesn't work out. Newsflash.......every single manager in every single league brings in players who don't work for one reason or another. Is the suggestion here that Motherwell should be able to hire a manager who only signs players that work out perfectly ?
OK, we've got a smaller budget that most teams in the league, so bad buys show up more, but really, at the point of signing a contract, who would have put Moult above Fletcher ? There's that or numerous other examples we could bring up. Tommy McLean signed countless dross players in his time, but he also made some of the best signings ever.
Everyone wants the team to be the best it possibly can be, but you do have to make allowances for who we are, how big we are and what we have to attract players with (i.e. not unlimited money). Every season is a new opportunity to improve, but we'll have good games, we'll have bad games, we'll have highs a we'll have lows and, in our league, very fine margins in a few games will decide if we're chasing europe or fighting relegation.