Andy_P

Your thoughts and votes please...

No captain I didn't perceive your comments on the policy to be critical if that's how my point has come across. I see the constant repetition of the policy as intended for ears other than our own. Hoping that, in much the same way people genuinely seemed to believe that every player who came through at Tannadice was great because Jim Spence repeated it on the radio or on a tweet every other day, it becomes ingrained in the target audience. Whether productive or counter productive, is up for debate I guess.

I felt the oft stated change of transfer policy after Les' arrival was all about laying down a marker in response to several years where everyone and their dug knew that we were, if not perhaps a soft touch, in little position to bargain given our precarious financial situation. Backed up by the fact it was now a billionaire owner who was making it clear that we wouldn't be mucked around in that department any longer I thought it was a good thing to do. But the whole policy of course is entirely reliant on having players that people want to buy! We can only speculate as to how players view the policy but I suspect you are largely correct with incomers from the English league being sold on a move to Motherwell in part by being encouraged that a move here could lead to fast-track to the Championship, Old Firm or wherever; or at the very very least a chance to showcase themselves in a league that whilst many may belittle, does have a fair profile.

I don't know. I genuinely thought on our last visit that with everything that was at stake, having pumped them 4-0 about three weeks earlier, the efforts the Bois had made with the card display and all that if we were ever going to get another result at NDP that would be the night. Yet it was as abysmal as any of the other four or five Motherwell games that preceded it at that ground. If they couldn't get themselves up for that....honestly, who knows? You could argue with some confidence that we've already crossed that line but we do seriously need to get a result on that surface before it does become a case of it being almost utterly pointless for some of our players to be involved there because it's played on their minds before a ball is even kicked. What you want and what you get are often two completely different things but I want to see an angry Motherwell performance if we have such a thing in us. I want us to get fucked right in about them from the first minute; seriously unleash some venom to release the frustration from previous pathetic efforts there and show that we won't go down in the meek fashion we have against them in the past. Tomorrow I don't care about stylish football. I just want to see them actually show they care and have the bottle for the fight that clearly Accies have for this fixture. Honestly, the apprehension and fear that we have about playing Hamilton Accies. What's become of us! Fucking sort it out Motherwell.

I don't wish Samson any ill will but In all honesty it's a signing of a player who you hope will never have the opportunity to don the gloves in anger.

No, no desire to have a go at the management and team here, and I don't disagree that team-building is far from instantaneous. But it's an argument that I think will only wash with some for so long and rightly or wrongly frustration will grow if we don't see a more marked improvement on what went last season over the course of this season. You can say it takes time until you're blue in the face but it's difficult to continually make that point when one of our peers who undertook a rebuild in much the same fashion as we did (mid-season change of boss, large incomings in two transfer windows) appear much further along the road than we are. Yes we certainly were of County's equal yesterday but you could argue the same since Baraclough took over? Certainly not. I think it would help enormously in building belief in Baraclough if we could put a good sustained run of unbeaten games together. Something that would clearly illustrate things are going in the right direction. It's not even so much getting a good result. It's the good result and then building on it. I mean we horsed Hamilton and St Mirren last season but within a couple of weeks of those results we were not only losing to those very same teams again but turning in utterly abject displays. We are so horribly inconsistent some don't yet have any faith in us to go beyond taking one step forward, then one back.

Hmmm... As I recall the Ross County game you refer to they didn't take all three points, they got the same single point they got yesterday. And whilst they might well have only equalised at the death as I recall they were certainly the better side that afternoon. So an improvement? Questionable, slight at best I'd say. But in the grand scheme that's neither here nor there. But let's keep the focus on Ross County for a minute. If so many players always need time to bed in, get used to the team and Scottish football how do you explain County's development as a team since Baraclough took over in comparison to our own? They signed more than half a dozen players in the January transfer window, as did we and made more than a dozen signings in the summer again along similar lines to ourselves, yet they look a bit good further ahead in their development in comparison to where we're at. I don't think it's unreasonable for fans to pose the question why that might be.

Quite tricky to write a summary about the game today. When's all said done I felt we did deserve a point. We certainly didn't deserve to lose that's for sure. But whilst I'm delighted to have got a draw from the game I'm struggling to shake off the feeling that by getting it the cracks may well be papered over - for make no mistake the performance was largely awful. We've seen fairly fast starts in previous home games but that wasn't in evidence today. We never really got going and didn't create much if anything at all. Yet for all that we might have scored a couple if Moult had been able to take advantage of the two half-chances that fell his way - one volley going wide, the other straight at the keeper. Yet we went in behind with County, whilst looking a fair bit more secure and at ease with what they were trying to do, having done just about as little as we had. We should have defended it better, should have played to the whistle but it did appear at first glance that there was a foul in the build up to their goal. In the second half I thought we improved marginally after Law made a game saving block early in the half. We certainly had the bulk of the possession but again looked as if we could play all day without scoring. Johnson did have the opportunity to play in Robinson for what looked like a chance from better angle than the one he faced but he got greedy and hit the side netting. Other than that? I'm struggling. I think if County had shown some genuine ambition they could have finished us off but they got too comfortable and paid the price for when we equalised with what felt like it was the one sustained piece of football playing on the deck all day. But the performance? One paced, lacking in verve and cumbersome. McDonald was deservedly hooked for being particularly awful, others could have had no complaints and many were anonymous. On team selection I don't think Kennedy deserved to be dropped for Laing and Taylor certainly hadn't shown enough to come straight back into the side either. There were however positives. The character to go to end, even if the display wasn't good, is to be credited. Another game without defeat is obviously welcome. But beyond the goal which brought relief very little to get excited about at all.

Your thoughts and votes please...

Dubourdeau at a guess?

Ha ha great to see these surface. My old man took them, some years apart. The top is against Brechin City on the day we clinched promotion in 1985. We won the league title the following weekend at Forfar. As has been mentioned in the 'Well Bois thread you can see how many fans took advantage of the gate being opened at the fence to watch the second half in the "away end". The middle one was taken prior to a Home Shirts v Away Shirts game the club hosted on the eve of the 90'91 season - essentially the whole squad split down the middle playing each other. The bottom one should be the opposite terracing if I remember rightly but I think you've put one up twice UBH.

If he played, it might only have been once or twice. I actually thought he was an Ulsterman. He was signed by McLeish around the same time as Roy Essandoh and a certain Mr Craigan.

See you say that but they always conjour up new innovative ways of punching you in the gut. I give you Odense for example where if we had scored that penalty with 5 minutes to go, we'd have had 5 minutes plus another 5 minutes injury time against 9 men to take it extra-time. Where upon you'd have had another half an hour against 9 men to get a goal that would have taken us into the Europa League group stages and the untold riches that could have brought the club.

Enjoyable afternoon. Attendance broadly as expected. We got around 2000 odd for Craigan's, around 2000 odd as far back as Johnny Gahagan's testimonial so between 2000-2500 is kind of par for the course for such games. Much credit to the 205 Bolton fans all the same who added to the occasion with their presence. I thought it was quite lively in parts and a decent enough spectacle for a friendly. Not a huge amount between the sides but Bolton probably did enough to edge it. I liked the look of Grimshaw who was very Pearson-esque at times with forward runs and there was a delicious pass he put through early in the second half that showed some good vision too. I thought you could see a difference in Robinson for the additional week he's had training with us. Some more of that and some further bedding into the team and there might well be a player there that will be some benefit to us. Taylor I thought showed a bit more, more so in the first half certainly. There were two or three runs he made that weren't picked up by team-mates when he was crying out for it and he was unlucky with that curling effort. Still a good bit to go you feel but steps forward on what we've seen so far. Lovely to see some old heroes back in the claret and amber once again and fine receptions for them all. I expect Crags will be bealin that he was on the park two minutes and we conceded! And as for Las himself it was wonderfully correographed for his laddie to come and score with the final kick of the ball. A great touch and novel play on the obligatory soft penalty that you get in testimonials. Nice too for him to take his acclaim around the stands at the end as well. Aye, nice day and only positives to come from it for me.

As well as the obvious opportunity to celebrate Keef's fine contribution to the club (some perhaps through gritted teeth eh Dave ) it also gives us another game to help bed our new signings into things further and give fringe players a run out. And shout abuse at Neil Lennon. Of course. Should be a good day!

I would like to think that the Well Society board, or their newly employed member of staff, will be aware of the sentiments being expressed over recent pages on this thread. They have an account on here, have answered questions and made posts in the past. Whilst it would be unreasonable to expect them to respond to every question posed about the WS, in the immediate aftermath of each communication release released I would certainly expect them to be looking in on sites like ours to see if the message they intended to get across has been received as they hoped. Clearly there is a desire from many for answers following recent interviews and communications and with talk of "challenges being set and accepted" it would surely be wise for the WS to engage as a matter of urgency with the people asking those questions. For me I'd like to see them throw the floor open to take questions from all interested parties. Set a cut off point for those questions to be received and respond as quickly and as fully as possible via a youtube style video that will mean geography won't be the barrier it would be if another meeting was held at Fir Park. It would also have the added benefit of being there to be accessed and referred back to to offer clarity further down the line. We have a media team and the facilities to host such a "conference" are already at the club so I wouldn't think it would be difficult to arrange.

As I understand it any money going from the WS to MFC should be a loan to aid with cash flow difficulties. The example I've heard quoted before was the SPL paid out bottom six clubs money in the second half of a season some months earlier than the did with the top six clubs and as such the WS helped out the club until the cash flow situation improved and the money could then be returned. Seems reasonable enough. The lingering doubt that I think some have with loans is that the very first, or one of the first, "loans" caught quite a number of people by surprise when it was revealed (despite much talk of ring-fencing members contributions) was it wasn't actually a loan but a purchase of shares. This was latterly explained away as the constitution not actually allowing loans to be made but it I believe it will leave doubt in some minds that it wouldn't be too much of a leap for a future loan to become another purchase, if the circumstances dictated.

It's another of those "more questions than answers" communications for me. First things first what are the immediate implications of the agreement being breached? Does this now give Les a get-out clause? Interest applied to the loan at a later stage? Access to revenues that will hopefully materialise as a result of recent investment? Why, when a reasonable timescale of five years for meeting targets both monetary and signed up members was discussed - reasonable given the massive amount of restructuring that has gone at the club and the additional personnel changes that have been made at WS admin level - a "challenge" is now being set less than a year since the takeover with just three months to achieve it? Frankly, it all begs the question is there now doubt that if Les doesn't see what he wants to see by December will, with that agreement breached at almost the first turn, will he be gone long before the five year relationship that was agreed upon?

Isn't it obvious you are going to get yours as a recorded video.

No. The two-pronged target is still there, well as far as I understand it. The first is to seek 2000 adult members to demonstrate there is a will for fan ownership. The second is the accumulation of funds so you have a kitty always there should there be a season or two where things don't go as well as planned. The club have ofcourse dipped into that kitty and been loaned money pretty much since the word go. I read that the WS is a failure and will never work but I would argue the very fact there have been sufficient funds raised to enable the WS to assist in this way is an achievement in itself. It's obviously more difficult to make the pitch now with a billionaire pulling the strings but the WS should have been much more blunt, much clearer and much much louder on the financial assistance and help they gave the club. I reckon for many simply being able to assist the club in a time of great need is as much a draw than having an apparent greater say in its overall running.

I'm cautious of the time this post was made wondering if there's some alcohol fuelled devilment involved. If said in all seriousness a quite ludicrous statement both in the dismissive remarks about those who have striven to atmosphere and backing if the team in recent years and as regards traditional Motherwell songs as you put it. How does any song become traditional without it starting somewhere? Keep doing what you're doing Bois. More power to you!

Your thoughts and votes please...

The upside to this is ofcourse that we were selected for just a single TV game in the opening batch meaning most of the games are 3pm Saturday kick-offs. You compare that with some of the recent campaigns, where with Europe on the go and being selected for TV quite often there were considerably fewer of the traditional kick-off times. Appreciate that does nothing for helping our exiles and far flung fans but it's a positive flip-side to being largely ignored by our media.

The discussion over the how's and why's of Higginbotham's relationship with the East Stand patrons has been done a few times but there's no denying it certainly adds to the entertainment......or at least it has thus far, seeing as the additional motivation of trying to get it up 1500 folk has mostly ended up with him being put off his game or when he has been inspired the overall result still hasn't gone his way. It still makes me laugh when I think of that game where he slowly inched his way off the park with about 5 minutes left taking the acclaim for the two goals he'd scored thinking he'd won the game for Thistle and within about two minutes of him planking his arse on the bench we'd gone from 3-2 behind to 4-3 in front with everyone chanting "Kallum Kallum what's the score" at him. Aye, his presence in a Killie shirt tomorrow certainly adds to the fixture for me.

As has been said before towards the end of last season Law had shown tentative signs he might have been able to develop into a reasonably steady full-back. I wouldn't lavish platitudes any greater than that on him other adding that he had shown some versatility across the season and to be fair his attitude was pretty decent in that he never hid or chucked it at any time, when others around him did. I'm guessing that Baraclough might have thought he could hedge his bets a little between Law and Watt thinking he may be able to bring on Law, and with apparent interest from English League Two teams before he re-signed, that he may even be able to command a modest transfer fee for him. Hence your two year deal. At the same time however having Law contracted for two years gives him the opportunity to gradually bring on Luke Watt knowing if he does develop as hoped, then he still has Law kicking about he can bring in when he wants to give Watt a breather or if he's needed as cover. Maybe.