weeyin

McAllister was interested, but reportedly pulled out because he didn't think he could work under such tight financial constraints. If that's true, even less chance he'd be interested now. Would be happy to see him pull on a jersey and play in midfield though.

Aye, that's a great idea. Bring someone in to prove themselves on a 6 month contract, let them succeed, and after 6 months when everyone can see how good he is, have him poached for nowt by a different club.

Is that not the approach fans' favourite Tommy McLean used to take?

When you are an ex-pat, and especially now there is no MFC TV commentary to fall back on, it's scary to see how quickly you can fall out of the habit of watching or listening to a Motherwell game. When I lived down south, I followed my local teams - Forest Green Rovers and then Ipswich - so I expect I'd follow that trend and continue follow one of the smaller local teams. I wouldn't be lost to the game though.

In all the years I have supported Motherwell (around 45) I have never been at a match I thought we 'should win'.

Or our luck runs out. Our financial position is much tougher than when McGhee, Gannon, Brown or McCall took over so whoever the new gaffer is will have a big task ahead in both re-motivating the current team and moving us forward with less cash.

He leaves with his self-respect intact. I was happy to give him until the end of this month to turn things around - a chance he definitely earned - but fair play to the man. Our most successful post war manager (in terms of the league) is going to be a tough act to follow; especially given the expectations of certain factions of our fans. I doubt we will see 2nd in the league again for quite some time.

We had Sutton, Erwin, Moore and McHugh on the books when Clarkson was on trial, and we have Henrik on loan. I'm pretty confident, at that stage, most Well fans would have chosen Ojamaa over Clarkson as an option. In fact, if I had to choose, I'd still prefer Ojamaa over Clarkson and would love to see Erwin/Ojamaa up front with Moore as an option off the bench. Also notice there hasn't been much noise about Faddy after Friday's game.

I'll bet you a large sum of money Utd. don't score 9.

If you can't spell a player's name, your vote doesn't count.

It's the players that need changing even more than the manager.

Or in an hour and 3 minutes when we concede an early goal.

Because you get good players cheap, presumably and hope someone will stump up a hundred grand here or there from time to time. I'm not saying it's a great policy, but the business people on the board obviously decided that we are in risk-averse mode these days, rather than in speculation. You can always point to an Accies and say, well if they can do it so can we, but they did it by keeping costs low and playing the lower division for years. In our league Dundee Utd needed a benefactor to take over their multi-million pound debt, so it doesn't seem to be generating them huge profits either compared to their investments.

Of course, in a prefect world, every decision made and every penny spent would be a sound investment. But I disagree about the business model not changing. We went from a club who signed players on 3 year contracts and payed transfer fees, to a club who never pays a transfer fee and only offers 2 year contracts. That pre-dated McCall.

Short-termism is the curse of the professional game.

I know your being facetious, but our business model changed some time back when we started offering 2 year contracts due to financial restrictions. We don't have the money to risk tying up half a dozen youngsters on long term deals in the hope that one of them makes it.

I seem to remember the club saying after the vote that it was in their longer term interests to up the prize money across other positions because (obviously) they will finish not 2nd a lot more often than they will finish 2nd.

To be fair, there are savvy business minds at the club such as Derek Weir.

Could mean a foreign investor or just a non-Lanarkshire, non Motherwell supporting one. But again, that is just speculation until we hear more details.

Unless that someone wants to build a supermarket at Fir Park and groundshare us with Accies.

Unless you are a lawyer and have read every detail of the Trust's documentation, none of us can say exactly what Boyle can and cannot do with his shares. It's never that simple (as anyone down Ibrox way will testify).

Hopefully there will be more details after the meeting on Thursday. Maybe the potential buyer is someone who wants to control the club - which would mean the end of The Society being able to take a majority share. Or maybe, the potential buyer is someone who wants to develop the ground into a new Asda. Difficult to tell. A change of ownership isn't necessarily a bad thing, but equally could be a disaster. As with all these things, the (usually legally necessary) secrecy makes it difficult to assess. If a million quid load is all that's required to keep the "Community Club" the council should stump up the cash. Good for the community and a return on investment for the tax payer.

The Well Society has bailed the club out twice since it started. Maybe you see that as a waste of time, but for me, that was a good thing.

Raising investment from wealthy fans and local businessses was one of the goals of The Society, but none were interested. That's why we resorted to the loans instead. Realistically, nobody would want to throw money away at a club like ours.

From what I heard, the email implied that there was a potential buyer for the club and the 1 million would be sufficient for the Well Society to obtain the shares instead. That, plus it would allow them to restructure their finances over the next 5 years. The sad thing is, in the grand scheme of things, 1 million is peanuts when you look at the cash that flies around in the game. 1 month's worth of expense at Ibrox could set us up for 5 years.