Kmcalpin

I don't disagree with any of this. The Society and the club are 2 separate entities.

Out of interest how did the young lads play?

Central midfield and indeed midfield has been our achilles heel for a year or two now. I was surprised when Lasley was offered a new one year deal but thats history now. Pearson leaving unexpectedly made matters worse and McHugh's injury put the tin lid on it. I still can't fathom out why Johnson was not replaced as it must have been obvious weeks before his departure that he'd be off before the deadline. It seems to me that Clay, Belic and Lucas have all been ad hoc, piecemeal signings. I think it was Al B who said weeks ago that the "plan" might be to "muddle through" in midfield until January and hope we keep in touch with the pack. Then we can rejig things. That does indeed seem to be our only plan. Our ability to fight and compete in midfield was always going to be in doubt going into today's game even with a fit Lucas and predictably but disappointingly that proved to be the case. When Paul Hartley saw Cadden being moved infield he would know that it was a desperate last throw of the midfield dice for us and the match was well on the way to being won. Chris Cadden may turn out to be a great central midfielder in time but for now he's a wide right player end of. Other teams on a similar budget seem to be able to pick up solid workmanlike midfielders why can't we?

I agree about accountability but its unreasonable to expect reliability in transfer dealings. As long as I can recall, going back even to the days of Bobby Ancell, bad decisions have been made. Even Tom MacLean made some horrendously bad transfer decisions.

You are a fully paid up and current member end of. If you wish to make a one off payment or modest monthly contribution it would be very welcome but is in no way obligatory.

That could happen, however the plan is make the club self sufficient. A Society rep said, a months ago at a meeting that once the takeover of the club had taken place there would be still be an ongoing need for monthly donations and he hoped members wouldn't just assume that it was job done and stop giving. However the plan was make the club sustainable in the long term.

Given we're away from home this afternoon the midfield will need to be more combative and perhaps defensive than it was last weekend. It'll be a different type of game. That said I too would go with the same team.

A good bit of business by the club. Talks have been going on since the summer but these things take time.

Yes, but there are other trolls on here too. If anyone is going to be banned it should be in accordance with agreed guidelines. Online bullying and personal abuse would also have to be banned accordingly. I don't like wind ups but I dislike online bullying and personal abuse even more.

On what grounds?

Agree with your post Denny. I'm a bit puzzled though - I believe that Society income is about £8-12k per month. Allowing for normal outgoings, where is the cash going? I can only deduce that most of the monthly income is being fed to the club either as a loan or as a gift. I've no problem with that by the way. Yes, the Society has to raise its game. An update on membership would be a start.

Thought I'd start a new thread to continue this discussion. There are many and varied reasons for decreased site traffic and I wouldn't care to quantify their effect. The team isn't enjoying the success it had recently and that may be a club related reason. This influence will wax and wain. Then there's the internet effect. Generally, online football fora have decreased in popularity as fans have become familiar with them. Thats not peculiar to Steelmen online. No doubt there are other general reasons. Now on to the site specific reasons - my own opinion of course although based on the views of mates who don't now use the site. There's been an overabundance of negativity, trolling and online bullying that has put many off posting. For some posters its more about them than the club at times. For example "I'm not going to the game on Saturday" or "I'm not going to renew my season ticket". That kind of comment is perfectly acceptable if we're discussing reasons for poor sales/attendances etc but not otherwise. I've never felt the need to post that I wasn't going to a game as I didn't think it would be of general interest. Then there's online bullying and trolling eg treatment Leeanne, TrafficLight etc etc. I may not agree with theirs and other similar posts but I've never ever felt the need to get personal. Disagree fine but don't get personal. Comments should be confined to addressing comments and not about posters. Reasoned but robust debate, discussion and different opinions is what this site should be all about not abuse or petty name calling. In that respect I think the Mods could be a bit more assertive. Finally, talking further of the Mods, some of whom I know, they do a great job overall. Its an unpaid and thankless task and entire voluntary. To put matters in perspective, the site fulfils a very important role and every year helps the club financially (take a bow Iain). Without them the site simply wouldn't exist. To Ian (Bucs) and other Mods - thank you.

Absolutely Iain. Small away crowds should be accommodated in the South Stand albeit in a restricted area. Imagine the outcry if the club were to allocate a portion of the Cooper or East Stand to away clubs. POD Stand patrons are no different to other Well fans.

No, if you have joined, albeit you're paying by instalments, you are a member of the Society and as such are entitled to a vote in the Society.

I know from facebook there was a Society presence outside the ground for publicity shots - did they answer questions and encourage sign ups?

Great result today although I had to miss it. After brickbats on Wednesday the management and players deserve credit today. I hope I'm wrong about Clay and Lucas and if they can sustain today's form or somewhere near it I'll happily admit I was wrong. Is it possible that Clay and Lucas play better together than Clay and Lasley? These things do happen in football. COYW

Good post. I don't like the long balls either or the strikers playing so deep. I assume its because we have no creativity in midfield. We also defend far too deeply and narrowly and thats why we lose so many goals - 2 on Wednesday for example. I agree with UBH that theres others apart from Samson not performing. I'm not convinced of Tait, defensively anyway, and McManus is far from convincing. Heneghan is promising and left back is simply a problem. However, where I disagree with you is that I don't think we do have good midfield players, Cadden and perhaps the unfortunate McHugh apart. I don't rate Clay, Lasley and Lucas for different reasons and Ainsworth is very hit or miss. MacLean and Campbell are too young and inexperienced yet for us to rely on them and the jury is still out on the talented but frustrating Dom Thomas. In my view, midfield is our weak point. Cadden apart, there's no creativity or pace. Specifically Lasley and Clay are not competing, not supplying our strikers and not shielding our defence. That forces strikers to drop deep and it also leaves defenders, including Samson totally exposed. Their every error is therefore put under the microscope for all to see. I could even thole it if we lacked creativity but had a workmanlike and solid midfield but we don't even have that. Successive managers have failed to address the midfield, a critical area of the team.

Strike while the irons hot.

Pretty much my view. If he is a better keeper and is performing why wouldn't Mark McGhee select him?

Absolutely Andy. Well the club's future is now in our hands and its up to the support to make it work end of. A bit more professionalism from the Society would not go amiss either.

I'm one of the many who have not been impressed by Samson but there must be a reason why Brill hasn't been given his chance and only the management team will know that. I think the defence picks itself for tomorrow as does the strikeforce (Moult & MacDonald) but the midfield is another matter entirely. I'd start with Cadden wide right and Ainsworth wide left but beyond that......

A real shocker last night and we were beaten before we even took to the field due to poor team selection and totally inappropriate tactics. I felt sorry for young MacMillan, who acquitted himself reasonably well in impossible circumstances. Playing on the wrong side with no protection in front of you is not the way you want to start your first team career at full back. The midfield was a shambles there's no other way to describe it. We had no-one playing on the left - presumably Clay was meant to be playing there?? MacLean played wide right but really had a pretty anonymous game. O'Neils40yarder is right - I expected him to play wide left not on the right. Cadden was moved inside - why? He has all the attributes to play well there, but in his short career to date hasn't impressed there. Clay and Lasley should not be playing for different reasons and as I feared last night were outfought, outpaced and outplayed last night. I did feel for Moult and Bowman last night as they received shocking service and were not played correctly. It was painfully apparent after the first 20 minutes or so that the high ball to them just wouldn't work against a big defence. Changes ought to have been made well before half time but weren't. Samson had little to do but conceded 2 needless corners and didn't communicate well with his defenders. As for the game itself, Inverness were no great shakes but were organised, competitive, quick and worked damned hard off the ball. They defended well 40 yards out and worked their butts off to prevent us from getting crosses in (those that we did manage were usually overhit). By comparison we surrendered our left wing to them and gave them time and space in and around our box. Inverness's third goal was a defensive disaster to illustrate that - an opponent advances unhindered to the edge of our box and lets fly. How many goals do we lose like that? The first two were equally as bad. With the first, an opponent is given plenty of freedom to sling over a cross, under no pressure whatsoever with chaos ensuing and the the second is little better. As many have observed, the team lacks pace and hardness in the midfield. We have known about this weakness for years now, especially over the summer and done precious little about it. We've made bad signings/resignings eg McManus, Hammell (remember him?), Lasley, Clay, Belic, Lucas, and to a lesser extent Bowman and Blyth (maybe). Despite touting Johnson around we weren't prepared for his departure and have been caught short. Yes, we've been unlucky with the injury to McHugh but really last night was the culmination of a combination of short and long term problems. Good to see both MacMillan and MacLean get game time but it has to be in the right circumstances and they have to be afforded every help possible.

Probably Cadden, Tait and MacMillan (who was hung out to dry) were the best of a very poor bunch, but none deserved MOTM.

Would certainly agree that Brill should be given his chance and that MacDonald should regain his place. Midfield is a real problem though - Cadden must start but not in the middle. Best other option the the best of a very bad bunch, would be to play Ainsworth or Thomas on the left wing.

Thats my greatest concern followed by our butter fingers keeper.