MelvinBragg

Never said that there wasn't a place for guys like Slane. But the key guys for us will be our centre backs, centre midfield and centre forward(s). That's why Forbes, Hutchison and McHugh would be my priorities. You are right that guys like Slane can offer respite to the defence. But once again, only if you have people who can get the ball to them. For me our two key players outwith the defence this season are Coke and Forbes. If they can get the ball and use it well, we'll be OK. Slane will be a part of the team. But don't buy into the hype he's a key player. Not yet anyway...

Don't get me wrong, I think Slane has potential. And I would be talking to him, but he'd be down my list of priorities. I'd be trying to sort out the spine of the team first. Do you want to know why? Because without a decent spine to a team, you'll not win or retain the ball. And I don't care how many men Slane can beat, he'll not do much without the ball...

Slane doesn't concern me that much as he is a luxury player but we must be looking at Forbes and Hutchison in particular. These are guys you can build the spine of the team round. McHugh would be next on my list of priorities. Oh and while we're at it, Coke's on a one year deal. Start talking to him as soon as possible would be my advice...

Along with every other gaffer in the SPL?? Where would one find such a creature on our budget? And are there any centre backs in the SPL outwith the Old Firm who tick all those boxes? I'm not saying that we shouldn't strive to have that kind of centre back playing for us, but a bit of realism is required regards the constraints we are working under. I'm not saying it's impossible (I didn't think we could afford a six foot tall, two footed midfielder with good passing and we found Coke) but I think it will be very difficult to replace a man with Craigan's qualities (and yes I know he has weaknesses in his game too). You don't get 40 odd caps for your country (I know it's only Northern Ireland before someone says it, but it's not like the Faroes, San Marino or Luxembourg) without having something about you...

Not much call for a 50 year old centre forward though, is there...?

Though I agree Hately had a good game, it's a bit of a con to say that he only joined on Thursday or Friday. He'd been training with us for the previous two weeks. He won't have been totally unfamiliar with the rest of the players...

That's them up on the beeb now...

That's it in a nutshell for me. His comments were more striking than the actual change. The risk is that Craigan (I would imagine) is a respected figure in the dressing room. Any perceived poor treatment of him might result in alienating some of the players who've grown up round the club and look up to Craigan...

Where to start... First half, I would agree we looked nervous. Weight of expectations possibly given the optimism about the place? Having said that, re-watching the game on Alba last night, we created more in the first half than I remembered. I don't think Sutton was having that bad a game. Was winning a lot of ball but no one seemed to be getting close enough to him to make enough of the second ball. Second half, we did look a lot more dangerous. Every time we went forward, it looked like we could score. I think Murphy looks a far better player playing as a centre forward and the combination of McHugh and him has potential. Humphrey looked better than he had done previously but I have to say that could have been down to the fact we were putting the ball in front of him with no one to beat and no time to think, just enough time to whip it in. On the odd occasion he had more time to think or had an opponent to beat, he seemed to struggle. Maybe needs a wee bit of coaching on his decisionmaking? No coincidence that we looked better when Coke and Forbes came into the game more. Not sure if there's enough bite in the two of them to play as a midfield 2 in a 4-4-2 in the SPL. Having said that, Coke put in a couple of crunching challenges yesterday, obviously doesn't know McDonald's fondness for sending off Motherwell players. And now on to the defence. Hately did quite well for his debut. Obvious that he wasn't a natural full back but did well enough in the role. I like Hutchison, big and very raw, but I think all the tools are there for him to become a very good centre back. Reynolds even looked decent at centre back. Less said about Hammell the better really. Ruddy is the new Dykstra. Good goalkeeper, but some moments of real insanity. I didn't think Craigan was playing that badly and I thought his distribution was no worse than Hutchisons so the change, even though it worked, does strike me as a strange one. I can see the reasoning behind the Sutton change more as we were obviously going more for the mobile on the deck approach. How the likes of Sutton, Craigan and Lasley react to be benched or sidelined, and how Gannon deals with these players that we will need at some point over the season, will say a lot about each of their characters. Gannon has to be careful not to alienate players he might need to call upon. One thing's for sure. This is not going to be a dull season...

Tough call between Coke and O'Brien. O'Brien was solid over the 90 minutes and Coke only really came into it in the second half with the change in formation. But we only really came into it when Coke did so I went for him. His two crunching tackles also sent him up in my estimation...

I don't know what you mean...

I just wonder if Hately comes into this category? Interesting that he wants to bring in more young players, not necessarily for the first team right away but perhaps for next season. Good long term planning if we can afford it. And if one of these guys breaks through sooner than expected it's just a bonus. Although this "Development Squad" phrase is a new one on me...

I appreciate what you say in your post but I'm talking about people doing a complete about turn, not simply a re-evaluation of their thoughts. People who were wanting him to stay even after the Aberdeen and Celtic jobs came up and he made it clear he wanted either one, were three weeks later saying that they were glad to be rid of him. Now I know that's the fickle nature of a football support, but when you type it and it's there for all to see and read afterwards do these people not get a bit embarrassed. I'm not claiming to be right or wrong on McGhee. Or that I was so wise to spot flaws that others didn't. I was concerned in season 1 when we lost the home games to Hearts because in those games it was apparent to me that there was no Plan B. His signings were poor with the exception of Porter, Hughes and Hammell (it's taken another manager to get the best out of Sutton). Anyway, I digress. My point was simply that people have performed such a U turn of their opinion of his abilities in such a short space of time, it's embarrassing. As Andy P points out (I was only half kidding Andy) there is a touch of the King is dead, long live the King. And like you, I'm wary that all the gloating about Aberdeen's transfer actvity (or lack of) and their European result will come back to bite people in the ass. Not that I'll need to revise my opinion We could finish 10th to Aberdeen's 3rd and I still wouldn't wish him back here. Jim Gannon has my full support. Not to say I won't say if I think that something is going wrong. Problem is that seemed illegal on here under McGhee. Let's hope we've learned from that...

There is a wave of optimism kicking about this place and as a Motherwell fan, this can only make me nervous. Someone on this forum mentioned it could go the same way as Dunfermline first day under Davies a few years back. Optimism drained out of us by ten to five. I fear the same tomorrow. So it's with a mixture of optimism and dread I look forward to tomorrow's game. As for the team, I have no idea what Gannon will do but I would go with Ruddy O'Brien Hutchison Craigan Hammell Coke Reynolds Murphy Forbes Slane Sutton Obviously Coke would have more scope to bomb forward than Reynolds but the fact that he can put a foot in when needs be means he will also help with the defensive stuff. What's the score going to be? I have no idea...

I like the way Gannon is going about things at the moment. Too many one year contracts for my liking, but generally he's impressed me. Not proclaiming him a legend or the new messiah as of yet. BUT what I am finding irritating is the revisionist behaviour of some Motherwell supporters on here. I wasn't McGhee's biggest fan but up until a couple of months prior to the end of the season, there was a very small band on here who were willing to criticise McGhee. Now it's all the rage. One of two things is clearly happening here; people were either too stupid (or blinded by the media glare) to notice his flaws while he was here or they didn't have the balls to slag the man off when he was here. Either way, it is kind of nauseating seeing people who were saying "McGhee's a good manager, he'll be able to rebuild the squad" now coming out with "He'd have never been able to build a squad like Gannon has...". Right or wrong (time will tell which), at least I was consistent on McGhee. It seems to me that whoever is the Motherwell manager, some people will assume the sun shines out of his arse...

I would imagine the guy might be a centre forward. In every other position we have cover (good, bad, indifferent) but as far as out and out centre forwards go, it's John Sutton and, well, that's it. You'd have to imagine that even more than a right back, a striker would be a priority before Saturday...

Where did you find that he could also play in defence. When he was being linked with Hamilton, I vaguely remember thinking he was a defender. When he was unveiled as a midfielder today, I kind of assumed that I had been mistaken...

I do trust Gannon, but I think it's a fair question as to what Hately might offer that Forbes, Jennings, Coke, Lasley, Reynolds and various others than can play midfield don't. Maybe he's simply better than them, maybe he can play defence as well. It'd be a fairly dull forum if we didn't on occasions call into question some of the decisions made by the manager. Doesn't mean we're being negative, just means we're curious about the way that Gannon is thinking...

It does concern me slightly that of five signings this summer, four have been midfielders and one has been a goalkeeper. Particularly given the loss of Quinn, McLean, Clarkson and Sheridan (Obviously pluggin the Porter gap temporarily) leaving defence and attack undermanned. With the emergence of Forbes and Slane, our squad seems overly weighted towards the middle of the park. Unless either Jennings or Hately can also play full back...

Another midfielder?? I'm telling you, 2-7-1 is the way forward...

So which is it? From Mark Reynolds' girlfriend or from sources in Ibrox, make up your mind...

I think there's two aspects to this. I don't believe it's right to come on here and say that a certain player is "a bawbag", "a wee ned" or "a complete dick" based on rumour or one chance meeting in a pub. Even if you should know the person, it's not really fair game on a public forum where they are unable to defend themselves without exposing their identities. And I think that we're all entitled to a wee bit of privacy. However, irrespective of how many players read this forum, I think performances are fair game for criticism. Most people tend to stay away from the simple "he's utter pish" and go with "he was utter pish today". Professional players must know that this type of criticism (justified or not) comes with the territory. Any player coming on to a fans' forum must have a fair idea that there will be those there who don't rate them that highly. And there will be those that think they're the best thing since sliced bread. It's the way of things. If they can't take it, they need to grow a set. I'm not a believer in berating individuals in the team whilst at a game as I don't think it helps. But if players can't take negative comments on a forum then they shouldn't be on them... By the way, I'm Luc Nijholt...

I saw something about this somewhere on here a few days ago. Don't know if he's still (or ever was) with us on trial, but apparently can play either full back position. As an aside, things have gone very quiet on the transfer front. I know there's a wee while til the window closes, but the closer we get to that date it seems to me the greater risk we run of just picking up any right back and striker we can find and not the right man for the job...

Must confess I don't really care which current or ex-players read these forums. Generally I only comment on their footballing abilities (unlike some who are desperate to know what they're really like off the field) and the fact that some of them may read what I think of them will not make me change what I type. And I don't imagine the opinions of anyone on here will cause them to lose sleep. And if it does, they shouldn't be playing professioanl football...

That quote says to me that rather than use Saunders or Page at the moment, we're going to use Jim O'Brien there until we acquire a right back...