capt_oats

Was between Ainsworth and Kennedy for me. Kennedy looked pretty assured physically though if he could curb the urge to ping cross field balls into the East stand he'd improve tenfold. In the interests of rewarding positive play though I've gone for Ainsworth. Involved in both goals and a couple of cracking runs, he made a difference.

Also, from the sounds of it McNamara's been punted on gardening leave. he's still an employee at United.

Thought the game went pretty much as I expected it would. We looked a bit nervous and lacking in confidence, tried rolling the ball out and playing from the back but reverted to old habits. Given our lack of confidence and the fact we've just sacked the manager and Craigan's had one session with them it's to be expected. Thistle are a fairly decent, if toothless team so wasn't surprised to se them knock the ball about 1st half. On the whole the shape looked a bit better and can't argue with the team selection. Thought Grimshaw looked a lot more solid at right back than Law while Kennedy impressed again some poor distribution aside. Surprised we got 90 mins out of Pearson and Ainsworth was unlucky with that run. Cracking tip over the bar from Ripley first half too. All in all will take the 3 points. If that XI gets a run of games and a bit of confidence behind them hopefully they can do alright.

Agreed. The only thing that I would say is that my interpretation of Baraclough leaving was that it was a mutual thing rather than him being dismissed or being 'asked' to leave as it's portrayed in the Herald piece. It's possible that Baraclough leaving was the resolution agreed upon from the discussion between to two parties rather than it being Hutchison's intention at the outset of the conversation. That's me being fairly open minded though. Even then it seems odd that the Chairman wasn't party to the conversation. There's a lot of that interview that, being kind, is naively worded at best. For example his assertion that "we looked at a number of people who were not left field but still very credible and could have done the job" is meant to reinforce the community club aspect and say we want a manager who "buys into what we're trying to do" (whatever that actually means, it's a turn of phrase that even McManus was using in his presser yesterday) but really to me it's an admission that they could have appointed someone with the skills to do the job but instead placed far too much emphasis on non-footballing/coaching elements of their criteria and ended up with a guy that nearly got us relegated. And...they want to appoint the same sort of guy again.

Quite. Or they looked at his relative success with Sligo but drastically underestimated the relative gap between the two leagues and circumstances. For me, in terms of the manager position the whole community club patter should be a distant second to the question "do you know how to set up a back 4 properly and stop conceding goals from crosses at this level?"

Don't know if this has been posted, apologies if it has. Some of the stuff in the 2nd half of this is quite interesting in terms of new manager: http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/13783224.Motherwell_chairman_Brian_McCafferty__Letting_Ian_Baraclough_go_was_the_right_thing_for_him_and_club/

I agree. On the whole the plans for the club are definitely sound and though you could argue that it's possibly a bit idealistic the logic behind what they're trying to do is clear but I think they've obviously made a mistake on the playing/football side of things and they need to acknowledge and recognise that (sacking Bara as early as they have was a pretty good starting point). On a basic level they need to work out exactly what sort they're looking for in a manager and whether those expectations are realistic (for the budget we have). Hearing Les say quite emphatically that their strategy hasn't changed did make me wonder, which is what prompted that question the other day. Their strategy (on the managerial/playing side) does need to change, they've just had to sack a guy that they took long enough to appoint 9 months into his job so clearly their appointment and the criteria for that appointment was flawed. It's far to reductive to just bring it down to "Baraclough's a shite manager", "the players downed tools" or "results didn't go his way" there's more to it than that and the idea of an identikit Bara turning up and us going through the same motions doesn't exactly appeal. They really need to sit down and appraise what their criteria were for his appointment and look at why it didn't work. For me on the outside looking in it's down to the fact that on the face of it they appointed a guy who ticked a lot of their boxes that should probably be deemed desirable but of secondary importance but failed when it came to the coaching/playing side of things which is clearly the most important element.

I'm not sure I'd say that someone with SPL experience should be a deal breaker. Someone who knows the Scottish game would definitely be desirable but to be honest I think the bare minimum should be a candidate who has managed at a decent level with a reasonable amount of success (ie: not league of Ireland, league 2 or the conference) and shown that they can actually coach and put a competitive team out on the park. I seem to remember Hasselbaink being mentioned last time around and he's gone on to do well with Burton but I really don't think we're in a position to take punt on an inexperienced guy at the moment or an unknown like we did with Gannon & Baraclough.

The Finns are not keen on Simo leaving it seems: http://www.iltasanomat.fi/veikkausliiga/art-1443147519452.html

If that's the case then fair enough and it's probably quite unfortunate. The whole thing sounded utterly desperate either way.

I was having a nose through some Reading forums last night and noticed that at the time there seemed to be a general consensus amongst their fans that Taylor's move was a good one for him and that he had more than enough about him to play for us. Suggests to me that either Reading fans hugely underestimate our league or Bara brought in a player and had no idea what to do with him. On reflection both are probably true. Either way he should be nowhere near our first team just now. Will actually be interesting to see if he gets any game time under Craigan and if he improves any (which wouldn't be hard). The easiest way for Craigan to get fans onside from the start tomorrow is by him dropping Taylor.

It's not even as 'official' a story as an agent leaking his name. It's just off the back of his name appearing on betting markets and some 'content' being generated from that. Klopp was 3rd favourite at 8/1 yesterday FFS.

Listening to Shiels being interviewed yesterday evening was utterly painful and only reinforced to me that he shouldn't be anywhere near the club. In truth if his first port of call is to do a fairly desperate sounding public interview on national radio for a job he was overlooked for first time around then it'd suggest to me that he doesn't have much confidence that he'd get the job, though that may just be wishful thinking on my part. There's a fairly marked difference between simply expressing interest in the job and his appearance on Sportsound last night.

Even if it was a valid clause I'd be absolutely amazed if Jake Taylor has a 'must play if fit' clause with us. If he were some sort of wonderkid then maybe but he's 23, out of contract at the end of the season and Clarke punted him out on loan to Leyton Orient last season where he played 3 games. In fact the only loan that he's even made double figures in terms of appearances was his loan to Exeter City.

he did, when he was punditing on the play off game with Weir & Strachan.

Coyle's at Houston Dynano

Kenny Shiels on Sportsound just now basically doing a public interview for the job. Bloody hell.

Ah! Hadn't seen that. Chalmers at left back then.

Cheers. I'd noted all that stuff and had a idea of what it covered given the announcements about re-structuring, marketing manager's employment etc. Though wasn't sure as to whether it was fitting under a specific brief or simply just a streamlining or basic improvement of business practices under the new owner. Essentially whether there was a 'strategy' specific to the playing side of things or was it a broad more holistic approach. I suppose what I was wondering was how the strategy itself marries in to the first team managerial role, if it indeed does, and by extension how it affects the sort of selection criteria we're looking at, if that makes sense. For example are we looking to go down the 'head coach' style route with a narrower remit than a traditional manager. Edit: For clarity, the reason I was asking was I noticed when Mr Hutchison was interviewed by Richard Gordon last night he was asked about the sort of candidate the club would be looking for and his response was "our strategy hasn't changed" and wondered how in practical terms the strategy applied to the criteria for appointment.

Alternatively there was chat about Grimshaw having played right back for United's u21s so possibly he might be an option there and keep Kennedy in the centre. Though I'd imagine if we've got him in on loan and United see him as a CM the he'd be expected to be playing there.

Is Hammell actually injured or has he just been rested the past couple of games? If he's fit I'd imagine he'd be in. I'd think we'd maybe try and balance the midfield by going with Chalmers on the left. By all accounts the Thistle right back is pretty rapid. Like others I've very interested to see what sort of team Craigan puts out. Given he's been talking him up a lot recently I wonder if we might see Cadden get a game. Given it's against Thistle it wouldn't be outrageous to start him then switch with Grimshaw after about 60 mins. Ripley Kennedy - Laing - McManus - Hammell Ainsworth - Lasley - Cadden - Chalmers Moult - McDonald

This. Just to clarify, my mention of the 'win the league' comment wasn't an attempt to re-write history or pass off Baraclough's tenure as being the result of a media conspiracy or that the fact he's out a job is for any other reason than he couldn't turn it around. All I was saying was that he didn't help himself. No more, no less. If he had gone on and won games consistently and actually shown that he could manage the team then he'd still be in a job. It's difficult to argue with thisGraeme's comment above.

Genuine question, what actually is the 'Club Strategy'? Obviously I've heard Les bang on about it and also heard Flow discuss what we're "trying to do" with the community stuff and being better organised and the like. However without wanting to sound like a dick the more I've heard the more idealistic and naive it seems. To the point that it's beginning to sound like our football "strategy" is "we'll bring in a manager who can identify and sign some players cheaply that we'll sell on for £££s". It's almost like we've become completely distracted by some overarching 'project' that we're overlooking the fundamental part of having a manager in place who knows how to set up and put a winning side on the park. Say for example, we've got two options; one experienced guy with a decent track record and one bright, blue sky thinking up and comer who talks a good game and says he's going to develop our youth team. In this circumstance which guy are we going to go for?

Quite but it was something that the media picked up on in a sort of 'point and laugh' at the unknown English guy at Motherwell type way. Not suggesting that there was some sort of a media conspiracy or that it's *why* he lost his job. All I'm saying is that the coverage he got off of what was a throw away comment very early on damaged his credibility as soon as he walked in the door. It's less the comment itself and more how it was treated. Ultimately if he had put out a well organised, well coached team that won games none of that would have mattered.

I agree in so much as the selections, tactics thing is a complete fundamental and bottom line thing. If he had put out a team that won games he'd, presumably, still be in a job. Nevertheless, I don't think any of the other stuff helped his case though.