fizoxy

A lot of it is down to factors outwith our control, such as more football on tv and multiple alternative family entertainment options. However, I think there is plenty that can be done to make the game more appealing. I'd start with a bigger league because I have absolutely no desire to see us play kilmarnock or Ross county four times each, and neither do I want to pay over 20 quid for the privilege. Yes, this will introduce so called meaningless games, but I don't think the cut throat atmosphere of the smaller league is conducive to bringing in young players or attempting entertaining football. Also, it would be nice that if we were to introduce new fans to the game that they are not made to feel like children / criminals and have to sit in shitty seats and can't even enjoy a beer with the game. It will be interesting to see if anything comes of the whole SFSA manifesto that was published today, will we see some movement? or will it be filed with the Henry mcleish report and the other think tank recommendations from years past?

Is bara back scouting with them?

I love Lionel, but we can't have one of our highest earners (I would assume due to the recent new contract off the heels of his huge contribution on keeping us up) being an erratic bench player. I'm guessing this will be more about trimming the wage bill, but there should be some sort of fee. I am hoping that we use this window to undo some of the unnecessary moves from the summer. I'd consider extending Lionel as one of them since we had Thomas in the wings and were touting ourselves as a club that develops youngsters.

Doubt there's any significant money involved. I'm guessing this also allows him to play in the u20s if he isn't getting full games, and he'll at least get one more cup run out. If he is impressing in training, then this is pretty much a risk free move to get us through a congested few weeks.

You seem to be in the minority regarding law. He's been the first choice RB under three managers now. The problem with many of our support is that they want our players to improve, but they also refuse to change their opinion of a player if when do. Others just like to stick with the same scapegoat for their Motherwell career. The suggested replacement I'm guessing is Watt, who has hardly been a colossus in the u20s. When do you propose to let go the ones you want to let go? At the end of the season when their contracts expire? Realistically in January we can send back the loan players and maybe move some guys onto other clubs, but someone needs to want them first, and the player has to agree to take a wage cut, which would be stupid. I can see Reid and possibly clarkson going out on loan for the rest of the year, but we're stuck with the others.

Penalties would be more interesting if everyone could run in once the whistle goes. Would also stop those stupid run ups.

They should have priced each plot based on the likelihood of a player scoring from there and had a prize if someone scored from your plot. If an opposition player scores from it you pay a forfeit, and if the referee sprays his stuff on it you get a free pack of razors. I see absolutely no holes in that idea at all.

Some good observations there. I offered to with some of the website stuff since I work in that area for one of the biggest fundraising organizations on the planet. Got told my request would get passed on, then heard nothing. Wouldn't really mind if someone had addressed the points above, but to not hear back and see the same mistakes being made again and again is a bit shit. I'm in the camp with those who really want to see it work, but feel they could really do with a handful of folk who are willing to put themselves out there and promote the society. We've seen the club benefit from some of the creative minds that have passed through this forum, and there are some really hardworking and innovative guys in the bois, so these people exist.

I think the big failure was that the society expected people to make the full payments in the first place. First impressions last. But if something isn't working you change it, so at least they're doing that.

Who was it that missed the sitter at the end? Taylor?

Unless skippy is in a midfield 3 that is.......

Interesting, straight up 4-4-2 Ripley Law kennedy McManus chalmers Ainsworth Grimshaw Pearson Johnson Robinson skippy

Can't argue with a point away from home at this stage, but we certainly have enough to win it. Based on McGhee's comments on giving folk a chance, and lasley being injured, I think we may see Jake Taylor make an appearance, or hopefully leitch. I can see skippy and ainsworth starting this one too. Can't see where else he will make changes, unless he brings in Laing at the back.

Maybe not a "must" win, but I see a win against killie as potentially being a huge confidence boost for the players and support. There has been a marked improvement in a week, and I think that this will continue with a 2-0 at killie.

Good call Texan, clever move on their part. Still, not going to complain at a point away from home. The chances we created at the end were encouraging, and Robinson really should have converted one of his three. Maybe we can employ an ice hockey style system where we have two forward lines who play half of the game each. Maybe bara was a visionary

I thought the rule was changed to narrow down what is considered inactive. If pawlett being in an offside position was seen to influence the play, then he should have been given offside. In this case id argue that the whole point of his positioning was to distract the defenders.

Was the guy who started offside and walked back not offside as well? or was that Rooney?

We played the same way when he was here the first time, with McCormack being the Johnson.

Looks like a 4-3-3 with lasley in for Laing. Don't see Grimshaw playing on the right.

I mind Adams first goal, he brought it down on the edge of the six yarder and finished from a tight-ish angle. From then on in he was pretty much used in midfield, where he did a decent job. Toastie had a decent career, with some good seasons at the top level. What's the story with junior burns? I've heard a lot about him being a hard luck story.

I also had high hopes for Denham, which ended after that game against Ayr Utd where he was absolutely roasted. I mind the 0-0 game against rangers, I thought it was Ritchie that got mom though?

Since talking about the past seems to be more popular than dealing with what's being served up currently, I was thinking about players I thought were going to be a big deal, but ended up falling by the wayside. This stemmed from watching the Flamurtari highlights the other day, and seeing Mchugh, Slane and Forbes all score. I never thought Mchugh would amount to much, but the other two looked like they were going to join the production line of top left footed players form MFC, but Slane went to Celtic and turned out to be a total banger, and Forbes just didn't have the pace to compete in the top division. From an earlier era, I thought that we'd done a great piece of business getting Stevie Nicholas from Stirling Albion. He had just recently roasted Hibs, and it looked like we were going down the route of picking up the best from the lower leagues (Derek Adams was signed around the same time after scoring a barrow load for Ross County in partnership with Neil Tarrant). The guy always showed flashes, but it just it just didn't click.

Ainsworth and hammell injured, other than that a full squad to pick from.

I'm surprised this wasn't better attended. Maybe next time scheduling it for after a Saturday home game might be more popular? Assuming the club helped with promotion. One thing I feel that the club is poor at is promoting our past, and generating a bit of nostalgia. The podcast has done a great job of that so far, and deserves more support. If the well society saw this as a networking opportunity they really dropped the ball here, as they should have done more to bring people in.

We paid 100k for Iain Ferguson, fees in the early 90s were silly due to no Bosman ruling.