Leaderboard

To be honest, it doesn't matter whether he appears as a striker or a midfielder on the team lineup. His job is going to be to link the midfield to the forwards...

Peter Martin is a stirrer, it was he who said Watt was a troubled soul, not Kettlewell, he said that was a bit harsh.

I was only joking, of course. However, there are many intelligent and football savvy people I know who would never post on social media, so I would personally never factor that in to a voting decision. There are lots of business that fail because the founders are passionate, intelligent and have a great product - but lack the skills to execute.

You’ve a great view and good seat but you now want your surroundings improved, ffs, next you will be wanting a good team to watch - some folk are never happy 😃

This is a bollocks sweeping statement and you know it. Kettlewell is responsible for signing injury prone players. He’s not responsible for every player being injured or getting injured. Him signing risky players is a fact that many of us have pointed out and will continue to do so. Therefore, it won’t be a surprise if he signs Jack. Your statement only stands to reason for the injury to Stama, which many have argued was down to poor decision-making by Kettlewell.

Been in the building for a while. Training facilities courtesy of his friendship with Halliday

Possibly but hopefully the board members have all seen what some of us have seen from those individuals and get no where near it

Cynical maybe, eyes on the bigger prize? Co-opted onto Executive board.

It's not about who posts on social media, but what they post. If their posts on social media consist of exposing the extreme flaws in the executive boards logic behind supporting the Barmack offer, for example, then I certainly would take that into account when voting. The thing for me is that the board of the Well Society aren't tasked with executing business ideas. They're essentially guardians of the club. It's the job of the well-paid CEO and the team employed by the club to execute on business ideas. I want to elect a board that I can trust will not be daft enough to fall for the kind of nonsense that the former chairman and a few of his friends did. I want people who will safeguard fan ownership and ensure that any prospective investor looking for any kind of control is scrutinised in a manner that Barmack clearly wasn't. If someone can offer social media, marketing, accounting, or any other skill, they can be involved without being part of the board.

For me, if Watt's starting, he needs to be up top. I'm not a fan of putting strikers in "advanced midfield" positions.

Isn't ignoring a person's qualifications and choosing to vote for someone who is vocal on social media how Trump managed to become President ?

Posted this on P&B, and figured I may as well post it here as well... I thought I'd share a few reflections on my decision-making process for the Well Society board before I finalise my selections. The first thing I've noticed is that many people are basing their decisions on what individual candidates contribute in terms of work experience, career history, and so forth. For me, that isn't a primary concern. As we've already observed, we can engage those individuals and their skillsets through the workstreams and various other projects. We don't need someone on the board just to make use of their skills or experience. If we're honest, if it were about experience and contributions, then individuals like Douglas Dickie and Tom Feely should be an automatic choice every single time. Both are immensely experienced with skillsets beneficial to the board. No, for me there is one criterion that outweighs all others. When there's a tough decision to be made, such as the Barmack situation, where the executive board might be leaning in a direction that doesn't quite align with fan views or interests, can those on the Society board be trusted to stand firm and vote appropriately? Or will they be influenced by a brief visit to the "big" board's offices for a cup of tea and a biscuit? I don't want someone on the board because they can enhance marketing, financial stewardship, or anything similar. I want someone on the board because they truly understand fan ownership. I'm observing many candidates who are undoubtedly qualified in their day jobs and career experiences, and I've seen many of them actively engaging on the forums and social media over the past few weeks. However, when we were all debating with Erik at 11pm on a Friday night, tirelessly posting counterpoints, researching different business models, meticulously reviewing each line and the phrasing of various plans and heads of terms, and working on documents to chart a new course for the Well Society in the face of allegations of lacking experience or credibility compared to the Netflix chap, many of these individuals were notably absent. Of course, that could be due to circumstance. Were they too busy? Had family issues? All of which is perfectly understandable. But, maybe it's because they simply did not think Erik's proposal was all that problematic? Everyone will make their choices based on their own criteria. But for me, it doesn't really boil down to what a candidate has achieved in their career, what experience they have, or what they "bring to the table" in that respect. We have multiple workstreams for that. I'm more interested in what they contributed during perhaps the most critical non-footballing issue we've faced as a club in recent times. And what their actions would be should a situation like that arise again. There is already one individual who was very vocal about how he felt during that time, and for that reason he will never get my vote. I'm sure he may well be a perfectly nice guy, but on this particular issue I don't feel I can ever trust him, no matter what other life skills he may provide. If he's really behind the idea of fan ownership then he can sign up for a workstream. He doesn't need a board vote. Give me someone who has spent their entire working life on a building site and doesn't even own a shirt and tie, but who will do everything in their power to protect the club from the likes of Erik Barmack over someone like a Douglas Dickie. Those who were part of that process know who they are, and those particular individuals will have my vote this time around. They stood up and were counted when they could have very easily just sat back and did nothing. There's one individual in particular who did more than most, and that particular candidate will be the first name I add to my vote later today.

I'd like to think most Motherwell fans will give him the chance he seeks. I have my views on him but hes a Motherwell player now and for that alone I'll support him , albeit I wont be taken in by any badge kissing LOL.

With a few days left before voting closes I’m still in the undecided group for my remaining selections . I’m looking to have as broad a selection in my voting as possible but there is quite a lot of overlapping between candidates re. what there going to bring to the table . The small videos are great but a simple list of what there main priorities and specialisms will be if elected would help . There’s a lot of overlap which I believe makes it tricky for members voting . On the plus side some outstanding candidates who are enthusiastic and appear to be more than capable of doing a sterling job .

Stamatelopoulos is out for 6 weeks. That’s on Kettlewell.

So Watt and Miller in midfield. We are still struggling to put 11 real players on the park.