weeyin

Home win.

Given how many teams we play against that launch balls into the box, it's not a bad talent to have. I've said it for years now, that as long as he just keeps his passes short and simple he's worth his place in the team based on his aerial presence.

And Casey gives me the fear any time the opposition swings in a cross because there's a fair chance he'll be out of position.

I don't care as much what a defender is like on the ball, I need them to be able to defend. That involves marking the right man, compressing space, covering team mates, attacking the ball etc. I've lost count of the number of times this season that Casey has lost his man (or been nowhere near him) and been responsible for conceding a soft goal. He gets less stick from fans because he runs about a lot and makes faces, but his actual defending skills are pretty limited.

I also think making him captain has contributed to his dip in form. You see it happen to some players when the additional responsibilities on game days in training takes away some of their focus.

Casey has been more of a defensive liability overall this season than Bevis.

They can say what they like, but I'd still take Kelly over Roos on their comparible performances this season.

You're proving my point.

The only thing more eye-stabblingly painful than the annual "writing off new players we have signed" ritual is the annual "writing off players we haven't signed" ritual.

Their keeper is always good for a howler.

Win, lose or draw we will be fine. But we're winning this one.

No manager wants to be scrambling about. The challenge is that every player has an agent telling them to wait until the last minute because a better offer might come along.

Well, either him or Harry Paton.

Probably something to do with his 204 career goals vs Theo's 21.

Absolutely. Moult and Scott too.

That will certainly factor into out decision. And/or selling him in January. Of course the ideal scenario would be extending his contract another 12 months with a guaranteed release clause for a value both parties think is fair. The risk for us then is he is terrible next season and we get zero offers.

I read an article about Rotherham's financial struggles and the manager (I think) saying for anyone to put money in it has to be a "passion project" rather than an investment. That's the challenge for most clubs, and you have to be lucky to find someone who would treat it like that - like a fan who wins the lottery. So it's unlikely that any 'normal' investor won't want some sort of return and/or control.

Nope. We got peak Kev in his last season. Given his age and his normal goal scoring form of single digit seasons, I never wanted him back. Just bask in his record breaking season and look forward to the next Kev we uncover. I'd be happier if we kept Vale for next season.

Those are the questions members could raise at every Society meeting and/or directly with the Society Board. As far as I'm aware, the vast majority of members did not.

They can, but I'm not sure how that fits in with the Society's remit to be a fan-owned club, or if the Society can even legally exist in its current form if it becomes impossible for it to ever be the majority stakeholder.

100% this.

Bair against Livi, because not only was that a great goal but it really boosted his confidence for the remainder of the season. I also really enjoyed Slattery's against Hearts because it was a nice move and it was against Hearts.

In an ideal world neither side of the OF would win the title, but the seethe from the Rangers fans this week will be as funny as it is epic.

That's true. However, in the last fans' vote there was a significant majority who said they would "consider voting in support of any investment proposal which would see the Well Society losing its majority shareholding." Of course, they may change their minds when the details of the new proposal are revealed, but it doesn't fill me with confidence.

The "Double Partridge"