dennyc

I agree with that and would love it if we refused entry to their fans. But that's not going to happen. Other Club Boards are not going to demand change either and we know the football authorities will continue to turn a blind eye. Strict liability will never happen in Scotland. Two Clubs will ensure any effort to introduce it in fails. The only thing that seems possible is that their numbers at away games could be reduced. Hearts and Hibs have gone down that route I think, and got pelters from the Glasgow media. But Hearts and Hibs can fill the empty seats with their own fans. We cannot. And remember we were the bad guys when Burrows restricted the number of Rangers' fans at the play off game. Not that I care about that as anybody aware of the background knows Motherwell were justified in digging their heels in. So given that reality, what would you do on a match day? Refuse to kick off? Abandon the game? Forfeit the game? Risk a riot and injuries by wading in? As far as I can see all Motherwell (and the Police) can do is ensure fans head to the area they have a ticket for and ensure only those fans with valid tickets make it through the turnstile. Beyond that what would you do? It's a genuine question as I am struggling to find a solution. I also agree it is a numbers thing but I think the same approach would be taken if it were 4000 Aberdeen, Hibs or Hearts fans in the away stand. And dare I say it, if we had 4000 fans away at Paisley. Maybe that's why some Clubs have restricted OF fans to 500? tickets. To make control manageable?

I would like to ask the journalists where they got 'Motherwell value LM at around £4m' from. Did anyone from the Club actually say that? Who? Or are they quoting that figure to ease the way for the Clubs they really care about. Smells like the push there was in the media to get John McGinn to Celtic at a bargain price. Hibs held out and eventually got a better price with better add ons from Aston Villa.

My thoughts are that if everybody is standing up, whether it be top or bottom of the stand, it is impossible to say for certain how many seats are vacant. You can see folk standing in the stairs right enough, creating a health and safety issue. But if turnstile records show that there were 200 empty spaces then that is more likely to be an accurate figure than some random guesswork. My interpretation of what Caldwell actually did or did not say. He did not say that the number of Celtic fans meant they could do as they pleased. He did say that the Police and Security team, faced with a situation, decided that clearing the congestion and returning folk to their correct seats was not a practical option given the numbers involved and taking into account safety issues. If the Police were prepared to accept that non action, are we really saying the Club should have overruled them? I assume the Police Match Commander has the final say? If the Club had gone against that instruction, I wonder who would have been liable for any resulting injuries. Caldwell did accept that there was an issue with fans electing to go bottom tier despite having upper tier tickets. That is an issue that must be addressed by him and the Club and should have been thought about ahead of this game. Had it been, we would not be having this conversation. But it clearly wasn't. He also said that First Aiders were able to access the stairs so that aspect was covered. At the end of the day, I believe the Police made the call and it was the correct one given the situation they and the stewards were faced with. Unlike last time there was no evidence of exit doors being forced open or stewards/police assaulted to allow non ticket holders access. But lessons need to be learned and the Club Security team, aided by the Police, must have a system in place to ensure visiting fans can only access the area for which they hold a valid ticket. Tynecastle has a similar issue regards upper and lower tier ticketing but from what I witnessed when we visited last season, their stewards/police intervened before overcrowding became an issue. Nobody was allowed to stand on the stairs either. Although that meant Motherwell fans with upper tier tickets had to move elsewhere, under protest. Easier to do though with a few hundred compared to several thousand. I think we should be relieved no injuries resulted but at the same time look to the Club to ensure the ticketing situation is not repeated. However it is impossible to stop 4000 or so fans from standing up if they want to. I also think the Police and League Authorities will have the same outlook.

Finished 1-1. Given the celebrations looks like Zimbabwe qualified for finals.

Excellent goal.. Received ball just inside the box, made room and snap shot across goalie. Celebration was pretty good as well.

Nah, he needs to Take it to the Limit

He stopped a certain goal after others fell asleep. And a headed clearance earlier saved another goal. Far from our worst defender today but let's just focus on any fault we can home in on.

Don't know about Park's part in things but if true it is pretty unprofessional. What I would like to have confirmed is who actually pays for the repairs? Rumour in the past was that Celtic agreed to pay if we did not go public, over charge, or make a fuss. But that all fell apart when Burrows highlighted the extent of the damage a few seasons ago. Perhaps something our new Board will address? Even after all their Uefa fines, I'm pretty sure they can afford to pay.

The SPFL authorities need to bite the bullet and tell all Clubs that if damage caused to away grounds by their fans is not compensated within a reasonable timescale, then those repair costs plus 10% (increasing add on if repeated} will be deducted from sponsorship/performance monies and passed directly to the Club(s) affected. Once it starts to hurt financially maybe the issue will not be swept under the carpet. I wonder if there actually is something already in place, but not enforced. But I also long for the day that we are financially able and willing to withhold tickets in such circumstances. All hell would break loose if we did and I suspect the Authorities would penalise us if we stuck to our guns. It is an issue that requires discussion at an SPFL Board Meeting. If it happens again this weekend then it's time for Motherwell and others to stand up.

For me there is little to choose between Casey and Balmer. Both take no prisoners when it comes to defending but both can be careless when clearing the ball under pressure. Both contribute when it comes to attack. Might come down to who fits better with Gordon, who appears to be a fixture and a leader. And suspensions will be a factor given how 'robust' both are. Certainly not a bad dilemma for Kettlewell to have. Add OX and the upgrade on last season is massive. I also think Wilson has improved defensively which is credit to him and the coaching staff.

Scored a few goals in HJK's run to group stages as well. One of his mates was telling me he has made a good living out of the game. Invested his money wisely if what I was told is accurate. Good luck to the guy.

Three of us buy our tickets together. That involved linking all our season ticket accounts so one person could buy the lot. So if all nine are ST holders linking the other 8 to your account might work. Not sure if there is a limit on joint purchase numbers though. Linking accounts does not stop folk buying their own individual tickets at other times. Easiest solution might be to phone the Office and explain the issue. Surely they would be happy to sort you out.

Exactly my understanding as well. His Statement certainly brings out his arrogance and feeling of entitlement. As Steelboy highlighted, no mention of his part in and support of the Barmack proposal which would have diluted the holding of those he would have us believe he champions. A proposal which was clealy going to be rejected by a large majority. Regards that 29%, if you were to deduct his sizeable shareholding and that of those shareholders who are also Society members, I wonder would that 'unrepresented' 29% would reduce to. Also is it not the role of the elected Board as a whole to represent ALL shareholders? As happens elsewhere, whether football related or not.

The only difference between the two incidents was the distance from the goal, and that difference was minimal. Both players threw their body at the ball to defend the goal. Casey deliberately blocked the ball on the line with his arm. Souttar deliberately.......even McCann commented that he moved his arm to the ball......blocked the ball three yards out with his arm. Both were deliberate and intended to deny a goal. On that basis, why not both red cards? Consistency does not exist in Scottish football.

Exactly Motherwell boss Stephen Robinson acquitted of assaulting partner | Football News | Sky Sports Reading this paints a whole different picture to what some would like us to believe.

And of course had the game been at Tannadice the home commentator would have remained totally calm and not gotten excited at all at his team scoring from a penalty deep into injury time to book a semi final place. As others have said, any complaints should be directed to Premier Sports. In fairness I think the complaints from Utd are regards the Broadcaster rather than Motherwell. It is quite funny though.

I think it was announced on the night as 8337. But not 100% certain given I was struggling to make out the tannoy announcement.

Got me intrigued so i had to check out my seat. It is greyed out so fine, but what I did find when I started a fresh purchase was that not all seats shown in blue offer a seat number when hovered over. Some do but most don't. So I guess that despite the 'blue' coding on most, they possibly have been purchased but did not turn grey when sold. Certainly is confusing though.

I take it goals from corners, penalties, free kicks, own goals and substitutes don't count then? Are we even allowed to celebrate them? Can we then also ignore any goals we concede from corners, own goals, free kicks, substitutes and penalties? Or perhaps it does not apply both ways? You do have a point regarding our style of play at times and I share your frustration with Kettlewell's team selection at times. But the fact is we are doing ok at present and he seems to have improved our defensive set up. I do concede that I would also like to see more goals resulting from magical sweeping moves, but playing to a strength is hardly a poor option. And until we sign a Bellingham or De Bruyne I don't see things changing that much. Especially as you have already written off Tavares, Maswanhise and all bar one of our new recruits. I'll celebrate any goal we score no matter the source. England nearly won a World Cup playing to the same strength. Some of the goals we scored last season were as good as you will see anywhere. Whether from open play or free kicks. And was it McGhee that used to insist that every player be in our box defending at a corner because the majority of goals teams concede come from that source? Maybe some of those corners, penalties and free kicks we score from result from decent moves that our opponents have difficulty dealing with. Or maybe credit goes to Miller and/or Halliday for their ability to deliver the ball. And we have scored in 80% of the competitive games we have played so far this season. Fairly consistent. But I guess that positive assessment does not fit your agenda. But credit where credit is due. Ignoring the fact we were third top scorers last season and then dismissing goals not scored from open play to validate your argument is certainly creative. As is pointing out that we score some goals after making substitutions. Some might say that was also a positive and a direct result of some astute management decisions. I guess it all comes down to the argument you choose to promote.

69 games 20 Losses, or so Wikipedia says. I can't be bothered checking. Stats can be used in lots of ways. I agree SK can stubbornly stick to his guns and it drives me crazy. But harping back to that poor run last year proves nothing other than you have nothing more recent to cast up. He is doing just fine for now. Guess that's why his contract was extended.

Given the ovation the team, including every one of those players you mention, received at the end of yesterday's game you appear to be in the minority. You must have been spitting feathers if your stream picked that up, or the Bois chanting SOD's name at one point. Ask anyone who was there yesterday whether Vale showed quality. I guess he must have done though, given the calls for Kettlewell to start him against United. And his introduction helped Miller. But none so blind as those that refuse to see.

For me it is a close call between Halliday and Davor. And at the start of the season I would have opted for Davor given how rank Halliday was last season. But in recent weeks I think Halliday has moved ahead and his experience and ability to wind up opponents helps his case. I'm in no way getting at Davor but to include Vale given how he has improved the team when coming on as a sub, somebody needs to miss out. But Davor's energy replacing a tired Halliday after 65/70 minutes would be no bad thing. Hopefully with us ahead in the game and looking to stay that way. I think most agree that an isolated Robinson ( or any isolated striker) is not the way to approach the game on Friday. Also our set up is becoming too predictable. Aberdeen exposed that in the first half. But I am not convinced Kettlewell will see it that way.

So predictable. Yet another dig at Kettlewell. After we had won three in a row all you could talk about was the bad run we had LAST season. What did you think of Vale and Tavares yesterday? How about the impact Maswanhise had in previous games? Even Halliday is now earning his keep. Just to pick four you have written off because your favourite manager brought them in. Sure there has been a couple of questionable signings but 16 out of 17 failures! Utter nonsense.

The lone, isolated striker thing just does not work for us. No matter who that striker is. For all his effort yesterday,and the good things he did 30 yards out, Robinson was a let down anywhere near goal. Kettlewell needs to look at a formation that starts Moses supported by Vale. Would also let Miller play that bit deeper which suits him better. The difference at Pittodrie yesterday was there for all to see. Tavares could have earned a start as well, although Maswanhise might feel a bit aggrieved. That last 25 minutes certainly should have given Kettlewell food for thought. Amazing what can be achieved when we put our opponents under pressure rather than letting them dictate play as was the case for 60 odd minutes.

i've not been his biggest fan but Halliday is getting picked just now because he is playing well. The one that needs binned is Robinson with Vale, Ebiye and Tavares starting on Friday. With Davor missing out. Allowing Miller to play in his best position. All three of those substitutes were the reason we nearly grabbed a point yesterday. Vale driving forward made a huge difference. But I fear Kettlewell will again start Robinson despite him being terrible anywhere near goal. Might be a confidence thing but we cannot wait forever on him finding the net.