Jay

Of the names mentioned (after Coyle pulled out), Simo was the choice for me. I completely get that when a prospective candidate tells you in the interview that they know the square root of fuck all about Scottish football, alarm bells ring particularly when you are in the midst of a relegation battle, but for me, you're either good enough for the job or you're not, and by all accounts the timing was the only thing that went against Simo. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but I think we're seeing that Robinson was the incorrect appointment. I have 100% sympathy with any gaffer who is unable to stop the rot because of the shambles they've been left by the previous gaffer, but that's only half the story here. Everybody who has watched us these past few weeks can see that the system and team selection forced in to it is farcical, and is directly responsible for leaving us impotent in attack and incredibly vulnerable at the back. I don't think it's far fetched to suggest that if we go with a back three in these last few games, automatic relegation is on the cards. If Robinson was adapting to the current situation and learning lessons as we stumble towards the finishing line, then I think there'd be far more leeway and benefit of the doubt afforded to him, but that just does not appear to be the case in the slightest.

I genuinely don't know, is the answer to that! If we were winning games, scoring goals, and in with a chance of promotion, would our attendances increase? My own personal opinion is that they probably would but I don't really have any evidence for that. To be honest, I'm not necessarily arguing that Motherwell are bigger than Falkirk, I just don't buy for a second that Falkirk are bigger than Motherwell, and certainly not because of attendance figures from this season. I've long since viewed clubs like ourselves on a par with the likes of Kilmarnock, Falkirk and Dunfermline.

If Falkirk were 11th in the top flight with three games left, would their average attendance be 5,032?

It's really hard to argue with that. I have absolutely zero problems with us casting an eye over the English non-leagues in the hope that we can identify a Johnson or a Moult before anybody else, and bring them to Fir Park on a promise of a move to a higher level back in England a year or two later. But our transfer activity in the last couple of seasons has suggested that this is about 90% of our recruitment approach, and it's clearly not working. A club like ours should be focusing on bringing through our Academy players and reinforcing the squad with solid SPL players who will "do a job" and keep us in the division. Then feel free to add to that with the odd English non-league player whose main role is to make us a profit in a season or two, if that luxury exists. Instead, we appear to be completely committed to the English non/lower-league player-for-profit project at the expense of a strong, balanced side that is able to compete in the short-term, and this season might be the one that sees us relegated as a result.

Sorry, missed this mate. Think it might just have been a one-off where, due to last minute circumstances, there wasn't anyone available in the POD Stand, but there'll be a presence there most weeks.

Certainly understand the confusion over the Society/club structure, it's something I wasn't entirely sure on myself prior to joining the WS Board & it's a point I've made numerous times - myself & Craig Hughes are now working on revamping all the content on the website including, we hope, making it as clear as possible how the thing actually works. It's worth pointing out, though, that in terms of the kind of club decisions that I think you guys are referring to, it's no different than it always has been and, I would imagine, isn't any different from any other club. We have the Board of Directors which is six individuals: Jim McMahon (Chairman), Alan Burrows (Chief Operating Officer), Graham Keys (Secretary), Leanne Thomas, and the two Well Society representatives Douglas Dickie & Tom Feely. I understand that the confusion over the structure might make folk believe there's loads of people involved in making decisions or that there's no leadership, but I don't see that as being the case at all. Just like most other clubs, we have a small Board of Directors calling the shots, amongst who is a Chairman, Secretary etc. There seems the same level of leadership and accountability as any other club in that regard. The impact of fan-ownership on the club's board is that one-third of it represents the Well Society members, but the actual club Board format remains the same. The Well Society Board's role is to run the Society, not the club. However, as the major shareholder, there's obviously discussions to be had on club matters so that the two Society reps on the club board are aware of the Society's opinions as a whole. Most of the confusion I had over the structure was the result of this "Supervisory Board" patter which didn't make a great deal of sense to me, and seemed to look a bit like committees to serve committees. However, having now seen the way things work first hand I do understand why it exists. I'm not sure it's the best model about, but it does serve a function - it's role is to discuss club matters, as mentioned above, aside from actual Well Society matters and basically ensure that the two Society reps are going into club Board meetings fully aware of the fan-ownership group's take on things. But ultimately, all decisions made at the club in terms of finances, footballing matters etc are still the responsibility of six Board members, two of whom are representing the Society. If you have any gripes about those decisions, it's still the same club Board that you should direct them at!

Twitter Q&A from last night: http://www.thewellsociety.co.uk/2017/04/28/twitter-qa-and-april-surgery/

Just clocked this, didn't see it last night and there wasn't a similar question on Twitter so I don't have a thorough answer right now. There is now a system in the Society where all e-mail questions, concerns, ideas etc are compiled and discussed at length at the next board meeting, with responses drafted up so all enquiries from members and non-members get a reply. I'll add this question and Dezz's one about businesses to the list to be dealt with in the near future, so there should be an answer for you soon. With that in mind, if anyone wants to ask anything, e-mail well.society@motherwellfc.co.uk and it will be discussed and responded to. As for last night, cheers to those who came along and those online who asked questions on Twitter. Just the first of hopefully a number of social media Q&As and it was only the second surgery, so hopefully things like that occurring on a regular basis - as well as what I've said above - will at least start to make things far more accessible and transparent for folk.

Hi mate, it absolutely is - there are plans to resurrect the Business Club which was a part of the Society in the early years and I do know this is something that is being actively worked towards. I'll get a more thorough response than that for you tonight though, as it's not one of the aspects I've been heavily involved in.

Absolutely, you know more than most that events are definitely on the agenda, just a question of selecting events, picking dates, and organising but I'd be hopeful it's something that will be pushed forward very soon. I'm still not sure if it's a football fans thing, a Scottish football fans thing, or just a Motherwell fans thing, but there remains a difficulty in actually getting folk to turn out for events, regardless of what the actual event is. We've had it with the podcast and the Society have had it in the past too, so it's about trying to organise things that will actually see folk turning out for. But aye, events are definitely in the pipeline. I will actually chase this up next week as things need to start being arranged, particularly over the summer, and it's been too quiet on that front lately.

Just bumping this ahead of tomorrow night so it doesn't get missed in amongst the irrelevant chat about new threads.

I imagine this on Thursday evening might be of interest to a few folk - April Surgery and Twitter Q&A: http://www.thewellsociety.co.uk/2017/04/24/april-surgery-and-twitter-qa/

Here you go mate! http://www.mfc1886.com/mfc-podcast-2016-17-episode-32/ Sparra is joined by Busta and Jay to look back upon the 4-2 victory over Inverness, look ahead to the visit of Dundee to Fir Park, discuss technology in football, the Well Society surgeries and reveal the winners of the Paterson’s Trophy Supplies MFC Podcast – Player of the Year and Young Player of the Year.

We're still celebrating it mate... Nah, just one of those weeks where time has been a serious issue but the cup weekend has come at a good time - looking like piecing together a podcast at some point over the weekend and it'll be up then, or early next week, to cover last week's win and the upcoming Dundee game!

Part of Craig & I's plans to revamp the website and turn it into an actual hub of information and updates, rather than just the online after-thought it currently is, is to have a "How It Works" section which will contain a very straight forward, very clear guide on how the Society actually works and what members should expect. Scope for additional, more complex information in there too (but I think the vast majority of fans, myself include, agree with you that the basics are what most care about). Definitely needs to be more clarification on the financing though so that all members are clear on what's going on, rather than having to discuss it on a forum out of natural concern.

New podcast this week: http://www.mfc1886.com/mfc-podcast-201617-episode-31/

We'll obviously never know the answer, but I wonder if there's any chance Samson might actually have come for the cross if he hadn't potentially had his confidence obliterated by sarcastic cheers and abuse from his own fans the past few weeks.

Just a wee heads up folks, the Society is going to be hosting monthly "surgeries" at Fir Park for folk who want to go along and ask questions, criticise, have a moan, find out more, or just have a general chat about fan-ownership. These will usually take place on the last Thursday of each month (midweek was chosen as there is already now substantial match-day presence serving the same purpose) and will be run by two board members each time. So aye, the first of those is tonight in the Centenary Suite, 6.30pm - 8.30pm for anyone interested in popping along, whether members or non-members. Obviously there are plenty of folk who don't live locally or just can't get to Fir Park for such things, so we're going to be arranging frequent social media Q&As to try and give everyone an opportunity to talk to the Society board in real time.

In terms of Yogi, I think I'm very much in the "underwhelming, but I can see why he might do a good job" camp. Certainly not the kind of appointment to get anyone's blood pumping (but then, I don't think there's been anyone linked with the job who would do that anyway) but there's no arguing he's achieved a good deal in Scottish football given the clubs he's managed. Wouldn't be shouting for him to be given it, but if he is appointed I don't think I'd be overly disappointed. I'm really not sure though where the frustration and claims of the club's search being a shambles have come from though. I'm not sure how long on average a football club takes to name a new gaffer after a sacking, but as far as I can see we've spent last week looking at CVs and putting together a shortlist, and half of this week interviewing folk with - it appears - an appointment before Saturday. Unless I'm missing something, I don't really understand how that translates to being either chaotic or dragging on in some way. I think it's more just a symptom of the anticipation and uncertainty among the support, rather than any real sign that it's anything other than a standard process.

Fair enough mate, admittedly I'd picked you up wrong thinking you met Society Board meetings rather than Q&As! I'm not clued up on the technology that's been used for previous Q&As, or what's been tried out, but it's certainly something I'm happy to raise when plans are being put together for the next one. I don't see any reason why, at the very minimal, there can't be a chat platform for folk to participate.

Completely understand that mate. We're also working on bringing social media Q&As and the like into play, so that folk don't need to be present at an actual event at Fir Park in order to quiz the board. Again, it's something that might have its flaws, but it's about trying to find solutions to the many problems the Society has, and at the same time improving communications ASAP, even if just a little at first. With that in mind, I'd be more than happy to take any suggestions you have to the rest of the Board.

A proper campaign targeting overseas members is definitely something worth considering. The distinct lack of any proper fundraising or recruitment campaigns has been telling. It seems the Society has viewed itself as a campaign, rather than realising that you get more success from properly ran campaigns which boast a certain theme, target, and/or time frame. The Double You Money offer is a great example of a fundraising campaign which has been pretty much handed to the Society on a plate, and it's no surprise that so many people have already increased their pledges as a result. I'll definitely be looking at how we can orchestrate other campaigns going forward, and the idea of targeting exiles is certainly a good one. However, I also believe that if we can get the Society to a point where members view it as transparent, engaging, and worthwhile, then that's something that will positively impact all members, no matter where they reside. All Society members, whether they live in Lanarkshire or not, can submit questions for discussion at every Society meeting. There has also been the recent introduction of allowing members to submit agenda items for discussion. Both of these factors have not been publicised enough, however, with brief mentions at the bottom of e-mails being about as good as it's gotten. We're going to be looking at properly advertising the fact that members can essentially dictate a proportion of the discussions at Board meetings moving forward. It's not something that'll interest everyone but, again, it's about small steps in the right direction.

Thanks for the feedback on the answers folks, lots of interesting points. Although I put forward the questions and made sure they were answered, I am certainly not 100% satisfied with the actual answers themselves either. Few good points above that I agree with and I'll be wanting to discuss those further going forward. In particular, I do think there has to be more scope for balloting members - even if it is just in an advisory poll rather than a binding ballot - and I concur 100% with G&F about the lack of elections to the board. I reckon I was probably voted on because I'm a vocal critical of the Society and folk wanted me to take those criticisms into the board room, and that's exactly what I'm doing - but if I changed my mind after the election and decided "I'm actually quite content just stoating up to the board room every month without actually rocking the boat, screw the folk that voted for me", I could end up remaining on the board for 5 or 6 years anyway without any issue. More accountability has to be introduced in some way (happy to take suggestions on that by the way). I also agree that the situation around the loaning of money to the club raises a few issues. I agree with Andy P that writing off the loans from the past is something that can be accepted as perhaps part of the teething process and early stages of fan-ownership, but I'll be looking for clarification moving forward as we can't be in a situation where, as joewarkfanclub says, fans are putting cash into a "block hole", where it's blown by the club on whatever it likes without any need to pay it back or, at the very least, without widespread understanding that that's the plan moving forward, so members are least know that's what their money is for.

Just a wee heads up - the questions I was asked on here and elsewhere (Twitter etc), I fired together and sent around the Board for answers. Includes G&F's questions about how the consulting over McGhee worked too. http://www.thewellsociety.co.uk/2017/03/09/recently-asked-questions/

Just for the avoidance of doubt, all Well Society Board members were aware of my own personal feelings on the managerial situation ahead of the club Board meeting on Monday evening. As were most folk on social media and at the 30th I was at in Kilmarnock on Saturday night come to think of it...