Tweed

I actually don't think there were that many unforced errors last night. Our opponent to me were very positionally aware, doubled up on the player on the ball and blocked off the easy passes which forced us to try harder ones which we didn't have the ability to pull off. Yes, it is frustrating that we kept giving the ball away but to be honest I think it happened because Levante forced it. Goal one was a disgrace from our players though - I said elsewhere you could sit round the 20 best referees in the world and you would never get consensus on whether that goal should be given or not. However you could sit the 20 best managers in the world round a table and they would say that the Motherwell defence should have played to the whistle so I know where more of my irritation sits with that one. Goal two they doubled up, won the ball and played a slick passing move. Maybe we could have done more once we lost the ball but that one bothers me less. I thought we tried to play the same tonight as against Panathinaikos but our opponent were better drilled and ready for it and didn't let us and we had no second option which is why we struggled - my feeling is saying we fluffed our lines is a bit harsh.

Thought they were a very well drilled and organised unit, maybe without the same level of individual class that some of the previous opponents we have played. But what they did exceptionally well was make sure we could not play when we had the ball, the only time our creative players had any space was when Humprhey turned on the afterburners. I thought their defending was superb and that meant we were always under pressure and that is why we played less well.

Yes, had he been in their half he would have been offside. Why in the name of hell did they have such a high line at 1-1 after 35 minutes? Wasn't there but that was just unacceptable defending. Good ball and run nonetheless and great composure from Murphy for both goals.

What about three draws?

Strange, I thought the first tackle was much worse than the second. To me the first was a bit naughty because he had overrun the ball and frankly coulnae take it and was a day late whereas the second in my view was a very tired effort to get the ball, from which is eye never left. However for a foul to be a red card it needs to be: - professional foul - no - two footed - no - dangerous - I would surmise this was reckless (yellow card offence) rather than dangerous so no - over the ball - no - violent - no So to me Brines got both right as for me they were both reckless rather than dangerous. As for the left back it has to be Angol. He is the one who has some game time under his belt and if he wants to push up fine, one of Hateley's endearing qualities is that he is mediocre half way up the pitch so putting us under less pressure if we can do same at the other side who knows what will happen.

I thought Law was our best today, marshalled a very experienced midfield for the last 30 minutes and played some beautiful balls in the first half plus some good tracking. I thought Hutch was turned far too often and caught on wrong side far too often. Thought it was one of his poorer games for us (granted by his own high standards). Hateley was superb in the last ten minutes, the bman looked dead on his feet at 70 minutes but the second wind he got blokcing everything was superb. Really proud of the way they dug in today.

Well played Motherwell. It wasn't pretty and we were understandably not at our best but for guts and determination and a willingness to fight for the cause that is the best point we'll get at home this season. First half was all right without being brilliant. St Johnstone would know the exertions we had on Wednesday and their plan was always going to be to let us make the running and then try and hit us later on. And it was working to perfection. Second half we came out and we were tired, perhaps more upstairs than downstairs but the passes were long or short and we really put a lot of pressure on ourselves. As such more and more of the game was played within 30 yards of our goal and every time we tried to go forward and played a slack pass we were in more and more bother. This culminated in the red card and penalty. I didn't get a right good view of it so not going to comment. Was a bit disappointed we weren't sharper with the subs after the red card as we were a bit of a shambles at the corner (which from where I was looked like a cast iron goal kick). From then on it really looked like we had lost as the players looked exhausted, certainly the creative ones like Murphy, Law, Higdon and at the back Hutch and Ramsden looked like they had another goal in them too. But from somewhere a second wind came and Law played in a lovely ball and while the finish was a shank it gave us something to hold onto again and it is amazing how that puts another yard on the legs. Hateley who looked like a man who could barely stand after 70 minutes was suddenly popping up and blocking things all across the back four and Hutchinson and Ramsden were in control of their battle again. Although we equalised I do think had they kept parity of numbers they would have gone on and won as the fact we were burst did not change and if I was Lomas I'd have been raging with Vine, what an idiotic tackle he didn't need to get into. Also, he could have been off in the first half for a dive after a tackle by Hutch, looked like referee changed his mind when he realised he was booked previously. Anyway not that high a mark for performance but an 11 for guts and determination and for that alone we deserved our point.

Comparing what we did against Panathinaikos to what Dundee Utd did against Dinamo Moscow is just a pointless comparison. They played against a different type of opponent and they are a different sort of team to us. Going back to Lobey-Dosser's original point the question is did Motherwell not throw everything at it or were the Greeks so good defensively that they stopped us doing it. I thought we were dangerously open last week and tried everything to get in behind and their defence was just better than our midfield and forward players and manage to cut out the little angles and spaces we needed. On the TV last night you don't get the same idea of how the play is building but i suspect it was similar but we looked a bit slower, probably due to the heat. For the most part Panathinaikos seemed content to let us play when we had it and they knew that eventually they would either pick us off or we'd give away a set play or we'd just get tired. If we draw a more open opponent next time will be interesting to see if the jugular can be thrown!

We only got into this competition by default - a team coming third in our league is not judged as good enough for this competition and that is what we were, doesn't matter that Rangers were there by cheating because if they hadn't cheated there wouldn't be a second CL place. We went, tried our best and lost to a quality opponent. Aye it is never nice to get papped 3-0 by anyone but it is no shame, could we have had more of a go? Maybe, would that have meant we lost 6 or 7 tonight - possibly. I saw enough last Tuesday to know what we are capable of. The shooting boots really aren't on yet though. We need a wee spark on Saturday and a draw to get us excited on Friday would be grand too. Still a great time to support Motherwell. I couldn't get any consistency on the stream but from what I did see, we mainly looked really comfortable on the ball and if we can engender that we can only get better.

From what I have seen of Ojamaa, Daley and Murphy over preseason and Tuesday night Daley has offered more than the other two - he deserved his shot. Yesterday we came up against a team who tried to make sure Motherwell finished on 0 first and foremost and as such we struggled to create the way we did against Everton, Panathinaikos and Hamilton who all had a go. I think McCall was truly vindicated in making the change he did. And to be honest when Ojamaa came on he did just as little as the ones who had started.

You're at least in a minority of two...but the one thing is he is doing enough that teams can't afford to double up on Humphrey because he is providing enough of a threat elsewhere which in time may give Humphrey more wriggle room to create more. Unfortunately Humphrey wasn't quite on it yesterday, partly due to Marc Fitzpatrick playing well up against him and I suspect partly because he wasn't just 100% fit judging by McCall's post match.

On the high foot he also gave one against them when our boy's head was maybe a foot off the ground. Less said about that referee the better. Not that he impacted the game.

Thought the two full backs did well and Higdon did all that could have been asked of him. By having nobody within ten yards of him we are wasting him - we need to get McHugh, Murphy or Ojamaa (I don't care which) right beside him to win the knockdowns. Murphy had a frustrating game, looked really good and then made a wrong choice or a bad bit of control. Interestingly they are one of the few teams who have tried to stop the Hump with just one guy at full back and to be fair to Marc Fitzpatrick he really didn't let him in often at all. Fizzy should have been their MoTM but for me ours was probably Hateley - just.

Thought it was more an in and out sort of performance than a bad one. We did retain the ball well for long spells but we did seem a bit overly keen to fart about with it round the penalty area rather than get it in there. Though to be fair they defended well, Fitzpatrick did a super job on Humphrey who very rarely got by him. At the back we defended well though Hutchinson gave away an incredible number of fouls, maybe the odd one was harsh but no complaint with most of them and that was where they were at their best, whipping in dead balls. However fans like action, excitement, tackles and to be blunt apart from a few sporadic moments that had none of them though I suppose I can see through it with the possession, shape and confidence of our team (except in their area). But had I been a neutral I'd have been off to watch the cross gender canoe slalom elephant polo from the Olympics on the big screen in the boozer. And I'd have got my car out the car park before the end too.....

First half thought we looked pretty good for the most part, some good touches from most of them though still some bizarre decision making at the top end of the pitch. We need to be much more ruthless if we want to make an impact against a stronger opponent. Second half became a bit of a joke with the huge number of subs used but nice to see some of the young ones get a run out because I suspect we might need to use them more. Cummins is a good defender but really needs to become more comfortable on the ball, at the moment it is getting the hot tattie treatment. The penalty was the most blatant 'I just made an arse of giving you an advantage' decisions I have ever seen. Hutchinson is miles better at defending than any of our others, we must do everything we can so that he is 100% fit next Tuesday.

Aye, what Finlay said. We've lost Craigan and Clancy at centre half and the two first picks we have are seen more often on Holby City than the pitch at Fir Park. Ramsden we need to sign, the midfield is not a need to more a like to. Granted since then we have seen Carswell get more game time, and while you may say he struggled he is as good as just about every other second pick central midfielder in the league take out Celtic and given Law could be ahead of him there anyway. You can't judge Hetherington's defensive aspect on a friendly either as tackling is more or less not done. In a 90 minute game against a Raith team who penned us back for long spells he got caught on the wrong side twice, and on both occasions tracked back and won the ball anyway. I'm not saying he is an every week pick, but for a second sub he will more than do. We are at really tight belt time here, if Murphy goes we need a replacement attacking type player and we need Ramsden. Central midfield may not be as strong as with Jennings but it is more than adequate for 90% of the games we will play this season. And even with Jennings that ratio would not change.

Not so sure I agree with you there. We all know Lasley can do the job and Law was superb there yesterday. Carswell has never let us down and in a full game on Tuesday and the 20 minutes he got yesterday the boy Hetherington looks better than the kid he is. Throw in that Hateley can play there too though I do prefer him at right back I think the centre half issue is number one priority.

Lots of positives I thought today, considering how poor we were against Raith and how poor we must have been against Ayr to ship 4 this was a huge step forwards. Murphy and Humphrey both got into really good positions, balls in were a bit inconsistent and Murphy a couple of times made poor choices. Ojamaa and Higdon were in the game lots, Higdon should have scored twice - the one in the first half not sure whether the pass was behind him or it was just a really bad snatched finish but either way it should have been in the pokey. Again some wrong decisions made but signs were encouraging. Law put in a really good shift and supplemented the attack while dominating the midfield whilst Lasley (1st pass of the game apart) had a really good steadying influence. Hateley is never going to be a stand out player but he is really effective at bringing us out, when Saunders was at right back against Raith we were playing within 30 yards of our goal, when Hateley and Hammell are the full backs we are able to play the game further up the pitch which leaves us less exposed which given the centre halfs we were using was crucial. In saying that Cummins and Ramsden did pretty well for the mostpart though their set play defending was poor at times. Hetherington i think is a real good player. For one so young the way he reads the game is top drawer, he was a stand out and Tuesday and did fine again. Kerr did OK at centre half and Daley seems to be an improved player too. He did more tracking and he seemed to open the game up more. More of the same please sir. The full back who came on for Hammell whose name I've forgotten wasn't really tested and I'd like another look. Faddy did alright considering how few games he has had. Always been a magician with the ball but a bit inclined to make the wrong decision, today I felt his decision making has clearly improved since I last saw him for us though his passing was at times a wee bit heavy. On that showing though, if we keep that team fit we will have a good season, it is the strength and depth that concerns me, much like last year.

Aye, as from tomorrow you can't legally carry or drink on the train between 9pm and 10am. You also cannot legally be on the train drunk.

Thrilled that Faddy will play and looking forward to it but like others, if he aint going to be playing in the Champions League games I hope that getting bums on seats is not going to detract from the more important element of the game of getting our guys match sharpness and fitness up because it was sadly lacking on Tuesday night and given that Law, Carswell, Hateley, Humphrey, Daley, Ojamaa were clearly being saved for Wednesday and missed out because of the weather these guys really need game time before the popular nostaligia trip.

I'm all for helping the club but making yourself ill is probably just a little bit too far to go!

The lowish turnout could also be because six clubs had said no by the time the paper arrived meaning that, at that time, the ballot was rendered meaningless in the grand scheme of things. Given that, I'm surprised it was that high.

I actually feel for them all, effectively they are signing their own death warrant whatever they do!

Thing is, see if Sky pull out I'm sure STV and the BBC would be in buying it, they had it in the past but were priced out the market by the satellite channels and I remember watching Livingston v Partick on the Beeb. Aye, the deal may be less than now but to work out the losses as the full value of the package is mental. Sky will lose a lot of money, will they lose 17.5 million's worth, frankly I doubt it. But it is a pricipal thing here.

Personally I think it is a non-story. If he was pissed off or scared of been found out of telling porkies he would have completely walked, if he was pissed off about the statement he would probably have said to turn the story off him therefore I believe the statement 100%. And it is not unusual for SPL board members to not seek re-election it happens every year. Could also be Dempster has someone else she wants in post and she has twisted the arm (not that I think that for a second just saying).