MelvinBragg

Is this the Craig and Archie effect? Jings?!?!? On to the game. Boyd and Miller being available is a concern. But as others have stated, Smith might not want to risk them on the surface at Fir Park. Brown's history with Scotland grinding out results against better teams has to be tempered with the fact that with Scotland he had weeks with nothing to think about other than said game. More time to address every miniscule detail. Whereas this game is just one of many he has to plan for... Line up wise, I'd go... Ruddy Hateley Craigan Reynolds Hammell Coke Lasley Jennings O'Brien Jutkiewicz Murphy I'd play O'Brien directly against Broadfoot. More likely to get something out of him than out of Papac. And although Sutton has been in decent form, I'd play Murphy as quick feet are more likely to give their back four problems. Predictions? I'll go along pretending not to care about the result saying that "these aren't the games that matter". And five minutes in, I'll be apopleptic with rage and screaming like a maddy (sooner if Boyd is playing). Result? Who knows but the earlier prediction of "they'll play shite and beat us" sounds all too familiar...

See, I've watched him closely. It might look like he's jogging back. But he seems to be putting everything into it. It looks to me like a fitness or pace issue rather than an effort issue. Unless he puts no effort in in training to improve his fitness. But nothing I've heard suggests that. Could it be that despite his clear ability with the ball at his feet, he's just not naturally athletic...?

Interested to see yesterday that when Fitzpatrick got injured that the choice was made to bring on Saunders and move Hateley to midfield. Now I appreciate we were trying to see the game out and Hateley is a more defensive midfielder than Forbes but it just struck me that a bit of an odd choice to shuffle the team about so late in the game when there was a straight swap available. Which got me thinking about Forbes. Do we have a place for him? It sounds ridiculous to say this about a midfielder who has more goals this season than our entire midfield managed last season. But does he bring much to the table other than goals? Set Pieces I keep hearing he is a dead ball expert, but I actually rate Hateley's set pieces better. Other than a couple of free kicks vs Flamurtari and some penalties, I haven't seen much in his set pieces to impress me. Range of Passing This is an area where he is excellent. Work Rate Again can't be faulted, he does try and work for the team. I say try because... Stamina/Pace For me, this seems to be an area where he struggles for whatever reason. he fades 60 minutes into games and doesn't seem to get about the park as well as even those older than him (Lasley being the obvious example). The last point is where I think the question lies. We all know that in the SPL, stamina and pace in the midfield is a big part of winning the battle. But we all like to see good passers of a football. Can we afford to carry Forbes lack of pace and stamina due to the goals and passiong ability? Gannon seemed to think so. Brown seems less sure. Thoughts?

For me, Fitzpatrick has the potential to become what Keith Lasley is. A decent SPL defensive midfielder. To compare their mobility is a moot point to my mind. Lasley has years of experience on Fitzpatrick, therefore his positional sense is markedly better. Fitzpatrick, if given the right guidance, can learn this over time. I think the problem with how he's perceived by some Motherwell fans lies with the semi final goal eveyone talks about. Expectation levels were raised by that. I personally don't think he'll ever be an attacking midfielder but that goal made him one in some fans' eyes...

I have to say that as someone who has a son who is 3 years old, I've had the explaining offside rule conversation in my head since the day and hour he was born. And I still can't get it right in my head...

For the first time I think, I've found myself saying... HOTD for this pish...

Me too but I think it was the attacking Hearts players...

Kirk's abilities are overstated now because of his part in the Cup run. I remember him getting dogs abuse when playing for us. A frustrating player if ever... Actually, I cannae keep it up. I just wanted to see how long I could compare Reynolds and Arnott before you had a stroke... Point still holds that both are held in higher esteem than they might be because they're seen as "our" players...

Are these not exactly what I was saying? All I'm saying is Arnott's abilities are overrated/overstated because of all the reasons I highlighted in your post. All things I was saying earlier...

Aye, but Joe McLeod scored in the 91 Cup run. Which kind of explains why he doesn't feature on this list very often when it comes up...

Again, he was overrated possibly because he was perceived as a 'Motherwell' man...

Arnott. Was. Not. That. Good. You've kind of made my point anyway. His technical ability wasn't great. His scoring rate wasn't the best, but he could work like buggery. He was highly thought of because he was at the club a long time, he had a habit of scoring goals against the Old Firm, and was part of the cup team. Why is he more revered than others from the cup team? Perhaps because he never played for another professional club? Because he is perceived as one of our own? I'm not saying he shouldn't be held in high esteem for that reason but that's got a lot to do with it. Compare him with how Tom Boyd is seen. As for the difference in how Fitzpatrick and Reynolds are perceived by fans, I'm at a loss. Normally scoring a winner in a semi-final would ensure legend status. But it seems it's been a bit of a millstone round Fitzpatrick's neck. Maybe less is expected of defenders. I really don't know the answer to that one. Like I say, it's not a science...

Thanks for illustrating my point...

Read my post above. Fans take to players for all sorts of reasons. Reynolds gets cut slack for the same reason that Arnott got cut slack in his last couple of seasons. Being seen (rightly or wrongly) as one of our own. Of course, this rule isn't hard and fast. Why do Lasley and Clarkson receive nothing but praise when Fitzpatrick and Quinn don't? Don't tell me it's all about ability. Cos Fitzpatrick isn't that much of a worse player than Lasley...

It works like this. Most of the players that play for Motherwell (like most other teams) fall somewhere in the middle of the spectrum regards footballing ability. You will have the likes of McFadden, Coyne and Cooper who are above this level. You will have the likes of Gulli Jonsson, Bob Maaskant and Mario Dorner who are below this. But there in the middle you have a wide range from Simo Valakari to Maros Klimpl, Rab Shannon to Paul Quinn, Dougie Arnott to Scott McDonald. Why are some of these individuals more highly thought of than others? Pick a reason. Workrate (or lack of). Loyalty (or lack of). Who they played alongside (Shannon looked a worse player because everyone else in the 93/94 was so feckin good, someone had to be the worst player in the team). Other random factors (I love Cusack partly due to his fondness for assaulting Hearts players). Fans take to some players more than they take to others. Why do I have more fondness for Valakari than I do for Klimpl when there wasn't that much between their abilities? Search me. If I knew the science of it, I'd be a genius... To sum up, fans are fickle. We like who we like...

And we have a winner!!!

Same rule. Different players...

I rate Lasley. Don't necessarily overrate him. He is a decent SPL midfielder who has got better with age only because he can read the game a wee bit better now. I know there are those on here who do overrate him, but for me he does a solid job, nothing more, nothing less... EDIT Forgot to add, he doesn't really fit here. There are a large number of the Well support who don't rate him. Yerself, kmcalpin and Neil are three that spring to mind right away...

Ah, I forgot to mention the other category. The 'one of our own' category. Which Jamie Dolan and Dougie Arnott fall squarely into...

The title says 'man love' not 'housewife love'...

Inexplicable man love? Why did I think this was going to be about Keith Lasley? Basically you are talking about cult heroes. Often foreign (easy to remember cos of the name) or hard men (easy to remember cos they boot your hate figures up in the air). On Simo. A better player than Jamie Dolan. By. A. Mile. Should be lauded, if for nothing else, for his part in our 2-0 win at Ibrox when Coyle scored twice. His mission that day was to mark Gazza out of the game. Which he did fantastically...

Aye, Colin Healy came in to Falkirk. And a couple of others if memory serves...

Would have liked another striker in, but when Craig Brown refused to let McHugh go out on loan, that told the story right there. For my money, if we could have got a striker in, letting McHugh go out on loan to a Div 1 team would have been a good idea. Toughen him up a bit, let him get built up physically. I reckon it would help him as I think he's too easily brushed off the ball at the moment. But it would appear not to be. If the right back turns out to fit the bill, it wouldn't be the worst transfer window. Aberdeen have done well, as have Kilmarnock though they're strengthening a very weak team...

That it for today then? Or are you working late, Burrows?

Someone gonnae post details cos the fishall cannae cope with all the traffic obviously...