Andy_P

A major part but not the only part, which barring the 125th anniversary, you might be inclined to think was the only element of history that has been worth acknowledging in the past couple of decades. As a club Motherwell FC have done an absolutely incredible job of acknowledging the 1991 Cup winning side and keeping their legend fresh in the mind, but at some stage a line has to be drawn. In my mind creating a kit, which appears solely to mark that 25th anniversary, is just one acknowledgement too many.

Personally I'm just putting the sponsor free kits down to a late conclusion of a sponsorship deal rather than anything to do with the level investment. You'll remember we had a similar scenario only a couple of years ago when we had Commsworld, I think it was as our sponsors, but the replicas went sponsor free initially. My guess is that the manufacturers have just reached a cut off point where they have to get shipped sponsor or otherwise and the Motorpoint deal came after that cut off point.

Since another thread specifically about the 16'17 kits was opened I've popped all the relevant posts over on to that so we can leave this one for underboyle continue working on his sordid fantasies without reality getting in the way

For all the best wishes for his efforts that people have been giving him (and rightly so) it's telling that that two seasons on and there are still fans who insist he is never a "proper" midfielder and a similarly high volume who insist he's not a "proper" full-back.

I do enjoy it when we "steal" a player from a lower league English side. The seethe and bitterness at their man foregoing their charms to go to the backwater that is Scottish football never fails to raise a smile. And if it annoys Derek Adams even better!

Tait was listed on the team-sheet yesterday going by a Tweet from the boy from the Motherwell Times. I only arrived a few minutes before kick-off so I'm not sure if he was out warming up but that would suggest something has transpired that prevented him from being involved.

Aye, I'm heading up. Would seem rude not to given it's probably about as close an away ground to my house as I could get.

And nor should they!

That may well be true but going by McGhee's interview on the club's youtube site it's not the game he has in mind for the team to be at their peak levels of fitness and readiness. Over to McGhee's doubters, of which you are of course noted as being one Melvin, to determine whether that's an open goal for them to attack or otherwise. Me? Given the opposition it would be ideal but I can certainly see why an optimum level of readiness for the team would be the opening league fixture rather than the first League Cup tie, and that of course has a bearing on the work being undertaken on our squad building. Again in an ideal world it would of course be fantastic if we had our full squad for the new campaign pitch up on the first day of pre-season and give the manager the benefit of working with them for an extended period. Very rarely however is the world ideal. One recalls for example the infamous tractor image which showed off the plethora of new signings the manager had to work with in preparation for the new campaign. Equally I also recall a guy nearing his mid-thirties pitching up the day before season arrived and having the impact of taking the club to the next level. His name ofcourse, Davie Cooper. In which scenario did we gain most from there? So again in a sense if the recruitment is being done with diligence (which with the three from England at least suggests that is the case) then for me better we wait and get the right players in than - even if we have to wait until the English squads are confirmed and it takes a game or two into the league season than hitting the panic button and getting players in just to fill shirts.

Echo that. What I will say though I was in the shop getting the old man's Father's Day gift and the stock did appear to have moved towards a better quality embroidered badge rather the "plastic" style. Having seen some of the stuff produced for the SRU I was initially happy that Macron got our gig but haven't bought a single Macron branded item from the shop since I saw those badges. May be more inclined now.

What businessmen? With what suitability to run a football club and with what aims?

Actually on that score I noticed from the BBC's selective use of quotes from Motherwell website that they elected not to use the line..... Would it really have hurt them to include that? Sales backed up by as much publicity and discussion about sales and the next batch of players on the conveyor belt went some way to maximising the sums accrued at NDP and Tannadice in the last half a dozen years or so. I mean the BBC must have single handedly earned United a few grand the way just about anybody from United's youth team that looked at a first team jersey was talked up on their programmes and website.

Four of six friendlies you say?!?! That strikes me as being pretty thorough. Pleasingly thorough I should add.

My main memory of that trip and the great clips that were sent back was a shooting drill McGhee undertook with the strikers. He came away with a phrase "believe you me" whilst explaining the routine and demonstrating whatever it was he wanted to get across. He came across as if he had total belief in what he was doing and that it was right. It was discussed on the podcast the other night about McGhee's confidence, self belief and him being a winner and to me that clip epitomised his self assurance. You just felt good times lay ahead watching work with the players.

** TLDNR warning ** Each will have drawn their own conclusions as to what the delay in an agreement being signed off between Les and the WS and the repeated references from Jim McMahon about a deal only being signed in the best interests of the WS/MFC the other night pointed to. I thought it would be speculative and perhaps unhelpful to post views on what my own conclusion was but since the chat is now focusing on it, my tuppenceworth.... I see three strands currently. First we have, as Brazilian has pointed out, already in place the agreement for the five year period. Of course there are the get-outs if payments aren't made but given both Les and MFC/WS have signed off to this we must assume that both parties believed it achievable. Now I initially saw this, bearing in mind the get-outs, as an agreement that was to Les benefit. Perhaps however given the change this actually might afford MFC/WS that bit more security given we are only a short period into that five year agreement. In short if these negotiations don't work to Les' preferred outcome he can't take the huff and sell the club until the end of the five years unless it's a three strikes and out payment scenario. Then we have Les preferred outcome. Health issues have been mooted by some as a reason, I don't know and won't linger on that speculation but regardless of the reason he would appear to want a more swift conclusion than initially agreed. It wouldn't seem unreasonable to think that if his position has changed he should be the one to concede most ground. This is of course a billionaire we're dealing with and billionaires don't become billionaires by folding in business negotiations, philanthropic gestures made or otherwise! He may view the fact he's offering the club for £1 as the ultimate concession but I draw from what was said last Tuesday about repayments on top of existing debt on top of current financial models being unsustainable in the short term and that JIm McMahon wouldn't sign us up to a deal that would see the club fall down inside a couple of years, that Les would prefer his money sooner rather than later. Then we have the club and the WS. Now I do have a degree of faith that the investment and restructuring will see the tanker complete its slowly turnaround to a break point and modest profitability with a fair wind (i.e. transfer sales, reduced player budgets and new SPFL prize monies) this can be achieved over time. The longer we get into the existing agreement and the larger the repayments are of course it becomes more pressing to get revenue in from player sales to meet these repayments. But for now we have a little time on our sides and don't have our backs completely against the wall just yet. So where will the negotiations go? It's difficult to say as the situation at the club, as with all football clubs is fluid. Before Friday for example we didn't have a potential six figure sum coming in from the highest profile draw in the League Cup. A team could come in with a stupid money bid out of the blue for a player that changes our hand. Things happen that change positions and outlooks. Again it's all supposition on my part and I could be well off the mark with my interpretation of what's happening but I believe the WS have done well very not to be blinded by the fact that the ultimate prize of fan ownership is being dangled in front of them in a deal that would ultimately do them and the club no favours. I can only hope they continue taking that measured and considered stance to ensure a positive outcome.

Not that I'm disagreeing with anything you've said but they did mention there was an election coming up imminently for a place on the board as one of the board members is returning to Canada. Bit more difficult to ignore you if you're a fellow board member rather than mug punter I would imagine. The floor is yours....

I might have thought some of the remarks that came from the Well Society AGM the other evening would have put these contract renewals in a little more context. Based on what was said It strikes me that if the club can almost mark time for a season financially and on the park before they get a chance to make the adjustment to the budgets they hint at and take receipt of the increased payments that come from the new SPFL broadcasting deal, then that would be viewed as a success. These contract renewals kind of reflect that for me. Of course the manager will rightly seek continual improvement and there the increasingly pressing issue of the succession plan for our ageing stalwarts remains but it seems to me that by retaining Moore and Ferguson we're no worse off from where we were last season. Both will add depth to the squad for what you might imagine is no great outlay. Little risk at little cost is how I see it. Moore and Mackin will surely offer no less than what Clarkson and Fletcher did over the season with both having the incentive and potential to improve. Ferguson offers an option if Hall chooses to move on. And whilst I would personally prefer us to seek out a first choice goalkeeper again as a worst case Samson is of no worse a standard than some of our recent incumbents. And with them all being one year deals if they don't work out they move on with that the hope that with an additional years development behind them more of the U20's will be ready, or other targets will have been identified, to take their places behind them. But if they do happen to make an impression I'm sure that a revised contract offer will pretty quickly come their way.

Yeah, that was my first thought too that there should have been a template for each group set up in advance so the fixtures were revealed as each side was drawn so even if you didn't exactly know whether your game be would a Friday/Saturday/Sunday you would know immediately from the draw from what weekend the tie was going to be played on. The "we'll get back to you next week" and general vagueness of it all leaves it open to accusations of a carve up behind the scenes, particularly when the fixtures aren't home and away. As top seeds for example it wouldn't be unreasonable to expect your potentially most difficult fixture, against the second seed to be at home, so if it turns out we're at Ibrox then I suspect there will be plenty cries of fix. If we aren't at home against Rangers then what is the benefit of being seeded first other to have your name drawn out before the others in the group? As anyone who takes any notice of my opinions will know I'm very easily irritated as to what the Old Firm get away with in terms of buggering off for friendlies and having their post split games handpicked and every other fixture built around them it would almost immediately be a dent to the credibility of the revamped competition if some seeds found their pathway to progression smoothed whilst others didn't under the guise of "policing and security concerns and TV committments". I watch with interest but no great faith.

'How the SFA tried to revolutionise the offiside law' http://stv.tv/sport/football/240624-how-the-scottish-fa-tried-to-revolutionise-the-offside-law/

It's not isolated to football of course, you have the increasing number of NFL games in London and I think the English rugby side Saracens played a European Cup game in Belgium for example. But like those who've posted already I'm not a fan of the idea in the slightest. For me It's right up there with the awful concessions made to those who want to forego playing league matches to cash in on friendlies. I would vociferously oppose any attempts that Motherwell made to copy such a scheme or indeed, extremely unlikely as it would be, if were ever unfortunate enough to be the "away" side forced to travel to whatever country to play our fixture. Doncaster and his ilk will smugly stand and talk of increased exposure and opportunity and commend the innovation but there's some right fucking stupid thinking coming out of the Scottish football at the moment in the desperation to be seen to do something different. The attempts to involve Welsh and Irish sides in the Challenge Cup is another. Clyde v Dungannon Swifts in the pissing rain in Cumbernauld in November. Absolutely fucking mouthwatering stuff!!

That's a wee bit of a cop out David. Who are the players you believe we've accepted low ball offers for? I don't think anyone would say the transfer record is exemplary, nor would I disagree that the message being sent out occasionally had a whiff of desperation but there several examples of bids that were clearly way below a reasonable valuation that were booted out. So to say we always accept low ball offers is incorrect in my view

And to perhaps take the thread further away from its original topic in another direction you're dead right they wouldn't. What of course they'd seek to do is retain a presence both in Scotland with B teams whilst they disappear into whatever setup and league will provide them the finance and profile they believe they are entitled to. They would want their cake and eat it from the supporters who suddenly find themselves priced out of paying Champions League style prices every week but who would still turn up to support them in a Scottish league. I get that many nations allow B sides to progress up to the point they are in the division below the full side but I believe the day that B sides are allowed into senior leagues in this country the games a bogey. Happily though with each passing year and each new billionaire investor building clubs up across Europe the less the Old Firm have to bring to the table in terms of things like European leagues so the chances of them getting that move they crave gets a little further away.

Meeting is tonight at 7pm at Fir Park in the Millennium Suite. Who knows what goes on with all these databases that are held between the club and Well Society for various purposes but my own experience with this one is that the email notification was received timeously and has been followed up with tweets both by the WS and MFC. Perhaps an article on the official website might have been handy but at first glance seems fairly reasonable attempt at getting word out.

Really? This is the same Josh Magennis you were comparing Lee Erwin to in a disparaging manner around a year or so ago? Something of a blonde Josh Magennis was it you called him? Runs about a lot and can't score for toffee. Interesting change of opinion.

I did a wee blog about it here.... https://t.co/XWBjKzUpv5 My perspective? Don't want to see players or officials being attacked of course, but no moral high ground for Rangers to take given past misdemeanours. And where does this leave the authorities threat of sanctions when they can't control proceedings in their own back yard?