Tweed

And it didn't go in. Which kind of makes my point. I don't think Saunders could have done much more with it and we were relying on luck taht it fell to one of the good guys to prod home and sadly it didn't. I was really just refuting the statement that that was 'the chance' that someone made earlier on in this thread or in one of the other ones.

Could make an argument for Sutton, Jennings and Lasley but I just plumped for Sutton. Won everything in the air and some true grit to poke the ball to Lasley for the goal.

Rangers had all the game until they scored though they didn't create that many chances in that period. Edu on his bad foot from 30 yards - I'd have been inclined to let him hit it as well because most often it would have ended up in the stand. Sadly he burst the net with it. After that we came more and more into it though Rangers let us to a degree. We just lacked a bit of incisiveness in getting the position for the final ball and our overall speed was too slow as even if we were ahead of them their defence got back. But when we scored you could feel the momentum switch happening. And what a good goal it was. A great run and some great grit and determination from Murphy and Sutton to prod the ball to the next man and keep possession and Lasley seemed to have a gap you could drive a bus through to hit and he did it beautifully. It was a much better goal on the telly than at the time as you could really appreciate the build up. Rangers suddenly had to do something again and they did up it a bit and their wee bit extra quality told. Three times in a couple of minutes they picked out Jelavic on the left side of attack, first twice Hutchinson recovered for the team, third time he picked Naismith out beautifully and it was 2-1. The warnings were there for all to see and I think Saunders was just a wee bit aggressive in that period that gave him the space but that may have been a McCall decision so I'm not blaming him as such. After that we went back to trying to create again as once more Rangers sat back. Saunders' header was never going in as the angle was such he would never have beaten a keeper from there and the real chance was Murphy's. Had he put his foot through that then you never know what might have happened - I guess Alexander was still favourite but he probably wouldn't have held it and then it was a lottery. Overall our lot worked hard, tried their best and just came up a little short to a better team so I have no complaints and we certainly exceeded my low expectations. I find it hard to blame the ref for the penalty he never gave us as it would have been soft and he should have given us a free kick at the end but there was a couple I thought he should have given them too. But that was the best I've seen Motherwell play in weeks so if we can take that on to Kilmarnock and Stranraer only good things can happen.

IN a way thats the best way cos if all you expect is a doing then all you can get is a pleasant surprise. If you expect to win you can get a fucking bitterly hard to swallow reality take. I've had about six pints tonight and I've moved to an optimistic position of we might score whilst getting gubbed. Going to have to drink like the clappers tomorrow if I'm going to expect a win by kick off.

I remember Offside was on at the time and they showed funny images from the weekend and they had a shot of 'Well fans pishing against the back wall. I don't remember much soberiety either - certainly I wasn't.

Meant to go along last night but forgot till I looked on the web about 9pm. Glad it was positive. Any discussions around anything other than TV, season timing and size of league within the restructure bit? Just feel that this proposal has been sold as having many aspects yet there are only three that keep rearing their ugly head.

Been looking forward to and hoping for Stranraer but a night out in Edinburgh has had its hotel changed and suddenly practicality has me hoping for Stenny.

Maybe. Though Craigan made a good point about if they missed it then get the penalty - that wouldn't happen with a free kick so why should they if Rankin made an arse of it? Yet if they hadn't the ref would have had hell to pay. Really tough call for the ref whether to give penalty or not and I think upwards of 90% of them would have given the penalty.

Could be a lot worse. He certainly doesn't seem to give a shit about upsetting the Old Firm and generally is quite steady. Strangely we had him in the last round as well and as an aside we've won every cup game he has reffed for us. However we have never won a league game he has refereed as far as I can remember, last one of them being the 6-6 draw.

We could all throw tellies on the pitch

I wish more people would see this. 95% of the discussion and media focus has been on this and it is probably the least important part of the proposal. Its getting the distribution of wealth, length of season, timing of season, winter break, youth development, gate prices, insuring the financial penalty for relegation isn't armageddon right that will make or break Scottish football. Get that right then in time the league will develop into a better spectacle whether its ten, twelve or fourteen. But whatever we decide it needs to be left alone. CHanging the number of teams in the league every five to ten years doesn't help anyone for long term planning and in these days of financial meltdown teams need to do this.

See I don't see why every game matters is an argument from 12 to 10: At the split (i.e. with five games to go last season) St Johnstone were the only team with nothing to play for. The season before Motherwell were the only team with nothing to play for And I don't give a damn what size the league is the last day is never going to be meaningful for everyone. Therefore I have always argued that 12 is just about right. Throw in a play off system into the 12 team league and you create more positivity as right now finishing 11th guarantees you safety, make 10th a risky position do you think St Mirren would be as happy with a draw at Fir Park as they appeared to be back in September? Probably not (I know they made an arse of it and lost anyway but you know what I mean). I think that the chairmen have been bought by the perceived benefits of some of the other changes that are coming from this. More stability in lower league finances - good thing, earlier start which means better TV slots (e.g. Sunday 3pm rather than noon for a while) - good thing, winter break - good thing. All these things are likely (and has been statistically proven from other countries) to improve crowds. They also reckon that by having football on when England doesn't throughout July and much of August would increase the price they could command - good thing. Since Switzerland moved to playing earlier in the season their teams have performed better in Europe and improved their coefficient - good thing. What they have failed to see is that all these good things are masked behind the headline grabbing size of league argument. And there is such a significant groundswell of opinion that ten is not right they are going to alienate fans and some folk's opinions on this are so strong that all the good things above won't matter as they aint going to turn up on a point of principle. For me 12 with some tweaks would be my preference, the 14 campaign in the Record seems to be pretty workable too though I think it could cause some difficulty with season ticket pricing policies as I don't think an extra game with the Old Firm is compensation for having two games less than I paid for but that could be worked round. But in reality I don't give a shit about the number of teams in the league its all the other things that are more important. But that doesn't seem to be the case for most fans so they need to take heed. All that said people who are saying that teams are voting for greed may be right. But I think there are some clubs out there who based on their current financial plight could be voting for survival. And we may well be one of them based on the number of players leaving unreplaced in recent weeks. Whilst three years ago we would probably have never made the decisions we are today I think circumstance could be backing the club into a corner. However this is far from a signed deal and I think there will be noise to come for quite a while yet from the fans of many if not all clubs.

The rain wasn't that bad? It was pretty heavy and relentless for 12 hours. Drainage is fine but it needs the rain to go off first but playing on it won't have helped. Pitch is as good as I can remember it being in January and considering the kicking it took in November and December then that is some testament.

Scotland gets days like yesterday in every month of the year. The rights and wrongs of summer football need to be grounded with the snow/ice problems rather than the wind/rain ones.

Got to say I think people saying that the players weren't up for it are being unfair. Would agree that there is a lack of confidence and also in some combinations a lack of understanding meaning that balls ended up being passed to nobody. But if you think back to some of the balls that were delivered into our box and the way they were hurling themselves in front of it they were certainly determined to get the result.

100% agree. Not necessarily a better shot stopper but a better all round keeper no doubt.

'Keeper kept us in the game in the first half. Has to be him.

Weather conditions made it really tough. Overall a bit disappointing but both teams had their chances but just not the killer instinct though we were blessed that Randolph seemed to be stopping everything today - that passage of play that came from one of their corners about 30 minutes was unbelievable. Quality of the game was poor but better players than the ones on show would have struggled with the wind. Don't think anyone had an especially poor game. Forbes had his moments and a couple of times he played the right pass but those around weren't on the same wavelength making him look a tit. But he is so bloody slow. Given they had the best two chances and our virtually untested centre half pairings its probably a better point than it looks. Cutting edge is awol though.

Fair point but its not as if he has had the same recurring injury all the time he has had a series of nasty knocks and niggles. But I think it'll be a 6 month gig again for him and then McCall has a bit of time to decide if his face fits.

Do THreave or Stenny not have another game to negotiate before round 5?

Fitzpatrick deserves a deal for effort and he has stuck in when he wasn't in the squad, he has rehabilitated from countless injuries and is an unglamourous workhorse who is versatile. Exactly the sort of player we need. Fitzy must stay.

I hadn't at the time but I just did. I grant you that the strikers did well but Craigan won everything today and kept what is normally a lively strike force at bay. Time and time again in the second half he got a foot in as one of their front guys turned. He did nothing to put us ahead but did everything to keep us there and with our dodgy morale after a poor run that was crucial today. Don't think I don't appreciate what Murphy and Sutton did and how well they played but I think having gone ahead keeping them at 0 was more important than us getting to 2 or 3 as, as a team we'd have questioned ourselves.

I thought that was an interesting performance as there were some obvious changes to the pattern of play than under Brown. passing more until the right ball became available. pressing higher up the pitch. more use of the left handside and not the same reliance on Humprhey on the right. On top of that there was an ability to pass again. Not every ball worked but against Hearts we couldn't find our men from ten yards away, today our passing was generally crisp and accurate and sometimes even adventurous. Having not won in six our confidence must have been fragile so to score right at the start will have eased that and the fact it was such a wonderful goal was a wee bonus. In general play there was not much between us but our finishing was better than them and we eventually wore them down. Thought Craigan was pick of the bunch today - his positioning was spot on and he accepted they would outpace him but he won the ball every time as they cut in. And it was great to see three players chasing the ball down on the shy line in the 92nd minute when we were 4-0 up. Effort and application top notch. One swallow does not a summer make but that was brilliant Motherwell - thanks for making it worth the effort.

We're winning 1-0, Fitzpatrick with a sclaff. Steady first half hour. In real world, judging by forecast and whats going up there that the stand they working on they could live without absolutely certain the game will be on. And I'm going to make my Dens Park debut.

But to sustain 16 you need 20 because you need these teams that come up to be competitive and you need there to be somewhere competitive for them to go if they go down. But I think 16 is a lose lose financially: 4 home games lost 1 or 2 v Old Firm Telly money reduced I agree we need expansion but from the start we've got if we lose all that then some clubs will go to the wall. If we'd had this debate fifteen years ago in a boom phase then clubs should have been more willing but I suspect Kilmarnock if they lost four games and some telly money would go out of business - and I doubt they'd be alone. And its all well and good saying they vote for self preservation but I imagine some teams are voting for survival and the telly deal that comes from four OF games could see some teams defunct. I know people will counter we should change the voting rights so that a greater share is received by the provincial teams but again we pay the price for mistakes made years ago which effectively gave the OF right of veto and they won't sell themselves down the river the way we did. I think the change from 12 to 10 though is change for change's sake as there is going to be no marked difference apart from removing the split and its controversies and is being done to tick the change box. If the decision is that expansion is unfeasible we should stick with the 12 and spend the time working on the grassroots recommendations which should improve quality in every division. Having watched the Edinburgh, Glasgow and Lanarkshire derbies at the weekend the standard was drab so that is a goal worth aiming for. We can change the relegation criteria - e.g 2 up 2 down We can create a 2nd tier under the SPL - as proposed Earlier start date - as proposed. There are lots of good ideas in these recommendations but the number of the teams is the one that grabs the headlines and is the one that is wrong. As an aside we need a terrestrial highlights package when kids can watch to try and give them the bug. I got into football watching Scotsport on Sundays at 5pm. If I was an eight year old now where would I get introduced to Scottish football?