MelvinBragg

Having just read the BBC Alba thread, it sounds to me like Craigan's comments during his interview were equally, if not more, noteworthy...

What I was trying to say, but much more concise. Thank you...

He's on there saying "some will have to go, look at the team sheet", nothing more. With the exception of McGarry, anyone going into his office to complain could be given reasonable answers. Fraser -has been injured and Ruddy has been the man in possession of the jersey. Craigan - how could I be talking about you big man, you've played a good few games. Lasley and Jennings - can't be talking about you boys, you're on the bench every week, keeping the three midfielders on their toes. Fitzpatrick and DLS - you've been injured at the start of the season, bad timing, keep the head down and work. Now we might know that some of that will be bullshit, but which bits? Other than McGarry, who has been "frozen out"? On here, and in the press, it's all speculation... With one league defeat after Bonfire Night, no one in the squad can complain about team selections anyway...

Stockport fans did say that he would eventually put a foot wrong with the press. And if felt wronged by them, would not be slow to make it known. For what it's worth I think the apparent singling out of Craigan is deliberate to an extent. In doing that, it would be criticising a player who has a great deal of affection for the club and would therefore be reluctant to speak out disrespecting the club. But by doing so, it also sends a message to the other players. On the other hand, it's been made very easy for him to do so, given the number of clean sheets with Craigan in the team and without Craigan in the team. I stated when Gannon arrived that I had heard that players would love and hate him in equal measure. If you're one of his favourites (I would say Coke) then you'll feel protected and have nothing bad to say about him, if not (Craigan, allegedly) you'll feel shunned and as welcome as Barack Obama at a BNP meeting. What I would say is that it's up to the players how they react. A real strong character would be determined to prove him wrong any chance they got, kind of "I'll show you". If they're going to go in the huff, are they the type of people you want in your squad. Gannon should simply be clever about it and say to the players that the press are simply trying to undermine what they're trying to achieve by creating divisions. By not naming names, he keeps people on their toes, and doesn't alienate (for example) Lasley by saying "Lasley's for sale" in case with Coke and Forbes injured and Hately suspended he has to rely upon Lasley in December. The players like Lasley, Craigan and Jennings aren't naive enough to think they're in his thoughts for a starting place at the moment. But hearing Gannon's comments, I suspect most of them looked around the dressing room and thought that he was talking about McGarry, Fraser and Fitzpatrick. The first three I mentioned have at least seen some competitive game time this season...

Before the game and right now...

As soon as Accies went down to ten men, I feared the worst...

Lasley is the one I'd keep as well. Not that it would come as any surprise to any on here, I've always been a fan of his. I think during some of the recent sub par performances of Coke and Forbes he could certainly have come on and added a bit of industry. He certainly looks more mobile than Jennings and while he doesn't have the same range of passing, he could certainly patrol in front of the back four in any enforced absences that Hately might have. Question is, is he too expensive to be a substitute? He certainly doesn't seem as far out of the picture as some given the fact he was brought on against Hearts, albeit only for a short spell. Craigan is a funny one. The defence certainly has been playing better in his absence. But a guy who is a first pick for Northern Ireland and has years more experience than any other centre back we have on the books, would you want to be letting him go? You have to figure that on some cold rainy nights in December when (if you'll pardon the expression) hairy arses are required to grind out a result, he'd come into his own. Whether he'll get that chance is another matter...

Agree pretty much with most of this post perhaps with the exception of the part where you refer to how many of our team would definitely start for St Mirren. I'd probably say Reynolds and that's about it. Some of our players on their best form would walk into their team but I don't think that's been shown often enough. Hammell is possibly another you could argue would get in their team. I'd have their goalie over ours every day of the week. Jack Ross or Mouatouakil? Easy answer there. Given their midfield has apparently bossed ours over the last two games, why would they want any of our players? And up front they have far more strength in depth. I cannot fathom how anyone was surprised by last night's result. We didn't help ourselves by how the team was set up (and by the sounds of it with our performances), but it was always going to be a big ask...

I share others's concerns about the comments after Saturday's match about a player distracting the rest of the squad. And don't really know what to make of it. How does one player "distract" the rest of the squad? Team spirit not being great is not what we need given the lack of experience in the side...

What's he saying?

No, but I'm a realist. Away to St Mirren was among the worst draws that Motherwell could have got. Given our record against them, there are few teams in the draw I wanted less...

Can any of us say we are surprised by the result? I have to say that I'm not sure where this belief that Gannon would automatically improve his team following Saturday more than McPherson would comes from. Not criticising Gannon, just think that he's not the all knowing messiah... Away to another SPL side in the cup was always going to be tricky. Particularly when it's a side like St Mirren where we always seem to struggle. I expected to go out of the cup tonight...

Can't say I'm really surprised by tonight's game so far. Going three at the back for the first time in ages in an important game is something I and others slated McGhee for last season so should Gannon also escape criticism? Seemed like a puzzling team selection when I saw it. Coke was subbed on Saturday and things improved, yet he starts tonight. Humphrey made a difference when he came on at half time on Saturday yet he's on the bench. As they used to say on Question of Sport, there are more questions than answers...

If you don't react, he'll go away...

Maybe not...

Sounds like we're not creating much from open play again this week...

Oh dear...

Hutchison on??

Anyone know how the penalty was won? Dodgy or stonewall?

Were I a betting man, I'd say 4-4-2... Humphrey Hately Forbes O'Brien Jutkiewicz Murphy I figure it gives Jutkiewicz a chance to play with a partner up front. Sutton might get thrown on for him later on...

From what I've seen from the games I've been at, this is a fair assessment. He may be more mobile than Sutton, but Jutkiewicz doesn't have same experience enabling him to bring others into the game as Sutton did when he was playing up top. I notice somewhere that Forbes was getting slated on the radio. When did he last have a great game...?

Myself and a couple of others had the good fortune to have James McFadden in our quiz team for the Association quiz a couple of years in a row. Quiet guy but knew his stuff football wise (even managed to point out when the quizmaster had got an answer wrong). Met him at a POTY do a bit later and he'd come out of his shell a bit. Could obviously remember what I drank from the Quiz night and bought me a drink without even asking. Met a couple of others (Clarkson, Quinn, Fagan, Fitzpatrick) at similar association events and they've all been sound enough guys. Thing is, playing for Motherwell is unlikely to (or shouldn't) give you a massive ego...

It was the single incident where he lost possession and got a slight pat on the coupon. Fair enough, go down if you think you deserve a foul. But the rolling around like he'd been shot was embarrassing. We've had our fair share of divers over the years, some of whom I've loved despite this. But invariably when they didn't get the foul, most of them got up and got on with it. Apparently (I didn't notice, someone else at the game said they spotted it) Gannon was, like me, going off his head at Mouatouakil at the same incident...

As one of the loudmouths in the second end section, I feel no need to apologise. It's not church, you know, and if you can't talk pish loudly at the football then where? I very rarely berate individuals in the Motherwell team (I was disgusted at Mouatouakil on Saturday more for his rolling around on the deck than anything else). I'm not expecting free flowing football all the time, far from it. But when we're not getting said free flowing football, we need to learn to pressure the opposition a bit better. Sorry if expressing that opinion offends anyone round about me. And as for the non football pish we spout in that section, well, you have to do something to get through games like Saturday...

Humphrey for me.