David

Well, he best hurry along to the BBC booth! They've not spoken to him yet and they're demanding to know why!

I know we're all looking for things "that don't add up" all over the place, but I honestly think it's just a case of him not having a proper pre-season and not being ready. There's a difference between taking part in some training sessions and shaking off the rust of not playing for a few months and going through a proper pre-season. My guess is that he was likely brought in with the idea that he'd get eased in post-January this season then really kick on after a pre-season in the summer. I don't know if it was planned that this guy from Sligo in Ireland would be seen as the saviour of our defensive woes at this early stage. I'd hope we bring in another defender before the window closes.

Close between McKinstry and Johnston for me, but McKinstry's goal just edged it for him.

If he's picked he'll be playing alongside one of them, won't he? Personally I think big Sol, as likeable a chap as he is, just isn't cut out for this level of football. He's slow and not the best positionally. Lamie looked better when Sol wasn't in the team, so I'd play Blaney alongside Lamie, even though I think both of them technically play on the same side of defence.

Again, he could be the answer we need at the back, I'm just saying that we probably shouldn't base all our hopes on a 23 year old signed from Irish football. Ideally we try to bring in a more seasoned campaigner in this window to help.

I'm obviously not 100% certain, but it could be to do with him playing a full season in Ireland and last playing a competitive game on October 24th, which would be almost three months ago. At this stage he'd be just heading into pre-season, as the Irish (very wisely) play their league football during the summer, so I'm guessing he's basically trying to get up to speed. Also, while we announced his signing at the end of November, he was contracted to Sligo until January 1st, so he's only been with us for two weeks as a contracted player. I'm guessing we'll see him eased into the side starting in our cup game, and hopefully he'll kick on from there. One thing I would say is that it's probably not all that wise to put all our defensive hopes on the shoulders of a 23 year old lad who's played less than 50 career games. He could help make us better at the back, but this isn't Franco Baresi we're signing.

And although maybe not as big an issue, higher earners pay more tax up here in Scotland as well I believe.

Crankshaw has a record of 25 goals in 53 starts by the looks of Soccerbase, which works out at a goal every two games almost. That's a record that's not to be sniffed at, especially in the January window where the only players available usually are those that clubs can't wait to get rid of, or players who don't have a club and couldn't find one in the summer. By the sounds of it we've managed to stumble upon this lad, who hit 11 goals last season for Stockport in the National League before the manager changed system this season which saw his opportunities limited. He's not a guarantee of goals, but he's a decent gamble worth a shot in a window where business is hard to do, especially for clubs like us. He's clearly looking to get himself in the window and look for a move if things aren't working at Stockport. If we benefit from a few goals and he helps keep us up, then all the better.

Getting those kinds of players at any time will be difficult, never mind in the January window. We can but hope.

The difference between Davis at Rangers and McCarthy at Celtic is that Davis contract was expiring, so he was set to earn nothing unless someone else offered him a deal. McCarthy is under contract with Celtic until May 2025. He's not walking away from, what? £1.6 million in wages?

Even the best goalscorers in the game miss chances though. Do you want him to convert every opportunity that comes his way? He is a goalscorer. That's what he does for us. He's also the top scorer this season for any team outwith Celtic, Rangers, Hearts and Aberdeen. The likes of Killie, Livi, Ross County and St Mirren would love to have Van Veen in their squad. He's one goal away from his tally for the entirety of last season as well, so he's on track to improve this season. I honestly don't even know why he's part of the conversation when it comes to underperformers this season. Him and Kelly are our best players by a mile.

The really good ones are being paid a hell of a lot more than Van Veen is by Motherwell. Bottom line is, he's a goalscorer. He's been the top scorer for us in the two seasons he's been here so far, including this one. If he was the player he is now and also had a great work ethic we'd never have him. On top of that, he does a lot more besides just score goals. He's constantly pulling defenders out of position, drawing fouls, and he's hitting more shots and taking more touches in the box than any other player in our team, so he's doing what's asked of him. I'll say this. If he got injured in training tomorrow and was out for two months we'd be in big trouble. We could replace him with Shields who will run around all day, but last time I checked it was goals that won games and points, not miles clocked per game.

Exactly. The Head of Recruitment is tasked with more than jumping in his car and watching games or players that the manager has earmarked. This part here is key... "who fit with the philosophy, identity and style of play and build and deliver productive relationships with other clubs and key stakeholders within the industry." This is why we need a Head of Recruitment who is brought in independently of whoever the manager is at the time. Daws was brought in at the behest of Alexander, and is someone who's worked with him before. We can't appoint a backroom team at the request of the manager. It has the potential to cause so many issues when he eventually departs. In an ideal world we'd have a philosophy, identity and style of play determined by those who run the club. We'd have a head of Recruitment, identified and hired by the board, not the manager, who's in sync with that ethos and spends his time building a database of players who fit the criteria. Then we'd have a manager/coach who has been chosen because he agrees with and fits well with the philosophy decided upon by the people who run the club. I have to admit, as much as I think Alexander did a good job for us, I was initially surprised when he was brought in, knowing his style of play and the reputation he had at his previous club for how he set his teams out, and I was even more surprised when the club started taking on a long-term approach to signing players etc that fit within that model and philosophy. What I'd like to see happen now is for Daws to be released from his position (nothing against the guy, but I don't think he's a good fit) and replaced with someone who can identify the kind of players we need and often-times signed when Martin Foyle was here. We do need some long-term structure, and I did like the way the club seemed to be going down that road, but I just didn't like how much influence the manager had, and I didn't think his style of play was a long-term philosophy that the fans would get behind. Ideally, we should be able to hire a manager and when they move on we can bring someone else in who has the same ideas around philosophy and style of play who can plug into the current setup easily. Any manager hired should have a say on who his assistant is, but beyond that we need to curb their power, because it causes havoc when they inevitably move on.

The Head of Recruitment in the modern game is far more than just a scout. Not saying the manager doesn't have final say, but it's more complex than the old fashioned relationship between a manager and scout.

You're talking about a system that clubs utilised over thirty years ago. The game has changed, the way clubs recruit has changed. I don't know if a team of scouts is the way ahead.

Someone with a decent track record and who is not connected to our management team whatsoever. We've suffered with Alexander bringing his own guy in, because now we're in the position we're in now. Ideally the club would have a way they want to play, most likely involving bringing through youth players and finding gems that can do a job for a few years before being moved on at profit, and bring in a head of recruitment who can work within those parameters. We don't ever want a manager bringing in an extended backroom team or head of recruitment, because it causes issues when they leave.

Yeah, but you need to remember this is Scotland, where you can score goals, lead the team in shots on target, and touches in the opposition box over the season so far, but if you don't "run your socks off" then you're not good enough.

Yeah, I didn't really believe it had anything to do with my thread 😁

Within hours of me starting this thread. oops! 🤣

The problem, at least in some ways, for me is that we hired the current head of recruitment based on their relationship with the manager at the time. Daws worked with Alexander as his assistant at Scunthorpe United, and was obviously Alexander's choice to replace Foyle. The question I have is, did Foyle signal his intent to leave when Robinson got the boot? Or was he effectively removed to make way for Alexander's choice? For a club our size, the head of recruitment is a huge position, and isn't something that should be chosen by whoever the manager at the time is. If Foyle was ousted to make way for Daws then serious questions need to be asked, as he was doing a good job by all accounts.

Well, it's an internet forum and the football is giving me the fear, so it's worth a try 😂 Seriously though, I just thought it would be worth mentioning some of the other key players at the club to try and open to conversation from just slating the manager and players.

Although Daws hasn't been here that long I'd have to agree. I think Foyle did a really good job for us.

Can't really argue against any of those changes, although I would say that there's a chance Penney might still be here. Discussions are apparently ongoing. I'd maybe not drop Spittal, as he's most likely to score a goal at the moment alongside Van Veen, but would definitely look to replace Shields with McKinstry.

With Hammell under the spotlight and being scrutinised, I thought it only fair that some of the other key figures at the club see the same discussion. So, Nick Daws. Appointed head of recruitment on June 11th 2021, he was brought in the season after Alexander replaced Robinson, replacing Martin Foyle. It's obvious that Daws was Alexander's guy, having worked with him previously. Let's look at the transfer business we've done since he came in: Justin Amaluzor Kaiyne Woolery Kevin van Veen Liam Kelly Darragh O'Connor Mich'el Parker Callum Slattery Juhani Ojala Sean Goss Sondre Johansen Ross Tierney Jordan Roberts (Initial loan from Hearts, then permanent signing) Victor Nirennold Joseph Efford Robbie Mahon Liam Shaw (Loan from Celtic) Blair Spittal Paul McGinn Josh Morris Aston Oxborough Shane Blaney Stuart McKinstry (Loan from Leeds) Matt Penney (Loan from Ipswich) Rolando Aarons (Loan from Huddersfield) Louis Moult (Loan from Burton) One thing I would point out is that Amaluzor, Woolery, Van Veen and Kelly all arrived within a month of Daws taking the job, so how much we can consider them to be his signings I'm not sure, but it's worth considering that those players were most likely identified if not already being spoken to by the time Daws came in. Anyway, that's his transfer incomings thus far.

All of that is fair, even if I don't necessarily agree that parting ways with him at that stage was a good move. I hope to be proven wrong and Hammell turns things around and secures an 8th or 7th place finish.