StAndrew7

On his day, there weren't many better shot stoppers in the league than Kelly. A "modern" keeper needs to be able to do that as well as collect the ball and relieve pressure for his defence; Ox being the perfect example of that and what a difference it's made. Also, lol at these stats:

Can't help but feel this is the warm up to a contract extension, now that Ox has been announced. Good #content too, great to hear the praise he's got for Ketts and the coaching staff helping him with his fitness, diet etc.

Anyone else think there's a dig at Douglas/the previous WS heads in there? Interesting wording around the engagement and communications...

Agreed, but the difference is, is that Ox is actually made of something stronger than a stale poppadom, unlike Kelly.

They both started last match; Ketts has said that AP isn't quite fit enough to start/won't be risked from the beginning, so really not sure who is ready for that, aside from Watt or Maswanhise.

Moving to Ravenscraig in its current state (and with a lack of any real future planning about what it will become outside of the previous pipe dreams) is a total no-go for me. If we did move there, you'd expect public transport links to improve; the Club would need to effectively demand they did otherwise everyone would be driving or walking. The former wouldn't get past planning and the latter, as you rightly point out, isn't possible for quite a few fans. ... and is an absolute pain the arse to get to as a result.

Aye, a very grown up and dignified response, which some would argue after yesterday's petulant rant he doesn't deserve in the slightest.

I think it's both; the WS are working jointly with the Club to interview potential appointees to the Exec Board and co-options to its own. They released this statement earlier today: https://thewellsociety.uk/2024/10/02/update-on-board-recruitment-progress/?swcfpc=1

Aye, I work in construction consulting/design so totally appreciate all the nuances, too. Very much in the heavier side of industry, rather than fitba stadiums though.

I think it was spoken about at one point (or maybe even they did), but I don't think they do. It was sold in April 2021 for £215,000 and prior to that in 2002.

Aye, I was about to make this point. Also, as Stephen's document points out (as do others above), this kind of project would wreak havoc on the local community and the Club: Knowetop would more than likely lose its car park due to both the demolition and construction work, The astro would more than likely end up as the contractor's compound, removing its use for years, Traffic etc. towards Our Lady's would increase, as would noise for the neighbours on that side, Access to Fir Park Street and the School would be restricted, as would residents' access and parking I could go on, but aye, it's not a small undertaking. Definitely needs serious thought and appreciation of what it means (along with significant engagement with the local community and residents) prior to anything going ahead. Now, you need to include consultation events as part of significant works like this but they're normally limited to one or two evenings. I think if it does go down this route, the Club will need to go above and beyond that for hearts and minds purposes etc.

Good post @joewarkfanclub. Just to pick up on the investment point you make; McMahon and Dickie bleated on about it for years at the AGMs, going back to well before COVID came about. Kept going on about "we've got an amazing story to tell" then promptly did fuck all about it, because we were doing fine financially. As you rightly point out, the re-energised Well Society board arrives in October and wants to (rightfully) have more of a say in the Club and act like an owner and all of a sudden the messaging around the "money in the bank" required every year is peddled at the AGM, along with the catastrophising about budgets, lack of cup runs and so on. I think it's quite telling that Derek Weir (for all his faults), decided to go before the investment discussions went much beyond initial introductions. Definitely feels like distancing himself from it, aside from having opening chats with the parties.

Same; he was never "elected" into such a position, either. The arrogance in suggesting that's what he was there to do when he had no mandate to is off the charts. Like you say; "the 29%" are all individuals who can vote and can represent themselves just fine, thanks.

There was definitely chat about us not wanting to pay compensation for him when we appointed Hammell.

Aye it was spending double what was going to be invested over the piece by the WS and EB in the in the first couple of years or something.

I think this is my issue with the whole thing; what other benefits, exactly? Backing an investment based on what "might" have transpired is incredibly risky, particularly when said investor doesn't have any track record in the area they're wanting to invest into aside from making a couple of sports documentaries. There was absolutely no substance to any of what Barmack offered, other than "this is the kind of what we'll do with AI and other shit". There wasn't a definitive business plan in any shape or form, there were incorrect figures used etc. It wasn't just the value; it was the whole thing. The £300k number I quoted was just the tip of the iceberg for me, you can see that from my previous posts on the matter. It's just the first one I go to for demonstration of how shit the whole thing was. I agree that the Society needs to start showing progress on things; I mentioned over on P&B that I'm concerned they've given this month as a date for announcing the first strategic partner, for example. I'd caveat that with that we do need to remember that Society is effectively starting from the ground up; there are significant governance issues within the Club which need to be sorted; not least how board members are appointed and also how to put in place checks and balances to avoid us getting into the situation we found ourselves in this year. Effectively five people were in control of whether or not an investment should be recommended to the club shareholders. Also, my understanding is that the recommendation/vote for the investment at Executive Board level took place prior to the wider members of the Society's board being consulted and asked to provide their own position on the matter to properly inform its representatives. That also needs sorted, or was just a massive overstep of their roles by the two WS reps to vote in favour without consulting their peers. As a random thought, was Douglas interviewed when he was appointed, or did he just get a seat at the table because he was on the WS Board? Did any of those who became Board members at that point go through a formal interview process, providing examples of where they've had direct input and membership on an Executive Board of a football club? I doubt it. I don't think anyone is against investment on the right terms, with the right people at the fore of it providing X,Y,Z which benefits the Club, Society and the local community. Time will tell if/when that happens, but I fear if the Society doesn't start to provide more solid updates on it, people will start to get restless. I'm willing to give them time but the quote of October for the first investor is just a rod for their own backs, as it'll give folk wanting to see them fail (not suggesting you are one of those) ammunition to get started.

I don't think anyone is questioning his commitment to the Club or the record of the work he's done alongside McMahon which is overwhelmingly positive. He says as much in his statement; the Club is being left in a secure financial position, setting up the WS as majority owner etc. What he neglects to mention in his statement is that he was willing to throw a lot (if not all) of that work away over the summer to bring in an investment which (blatantly, imho) was a terrible deal for the Club and would completely undermine, or even remove majority fan ownership. £300k for immediate effective control and Chairmanship of the Executive Board to someone without any previous experience of running a football club? Surely he can see the irony in that, given what he's said about the Society's sub-committee in his statement? The Society has put in triple (I think probably more) that in its time and not gotten anything other than a nod of thanks in the accounts and at the AGM. He has tarnished his good work with what happened this summer and with this final statement. I'm sorry, but you can't play down just how serious his actions over the summer could have been for the Club. The WS as majority owner has every right to interview who it wishes to appoint to the Executive Board as its representatives. The fact that he resigned as chair of the WS board because the opinion of the majority didn't agree with his own and subsequently remained in his seat on the Exec Board which was to represent the WS as a majority owner until now, is an absolute nonsense. To then to have the gall to expect he retains this seat effectively "just because" of his previous record absolutely reeks of cronyism and is everything that's wrong with Scottish football as a whole from top to bottom. There's a dignity in accepting that you've lost with grace and good wishes. This isn't it.

Yup. His seat as a Director was to represent the WS on the Board. He resigned from the WS, saying that he didn't align with the viewpoint of the rest of the WS Board on the investment and remained on the Exec Board in a seat which was his because he was there to represent the WS board which... etc. etc. etc. Aye the 29% is basically the remaining individual shareholders; I think maybe 15-19% of that is in the hands of three or four individuals; one of whom I understand is Dickie and another is perhaps John Boyle?

Aye, I'm posting much the same over on P&B. Trying to re-write his role, clearly.

I initially read that wrongly; I thought it said the interview panel wouldn't have someone with experience but it's actually just the sub-committee he has an issue with. Bloody hell, what a petulant man. The self-entitlement to just always be involved in stuff because he's always been involved, too. Like, perhaps mention in your statement how colossally you fucked it with the Bramack situation? No? Nothing? The whole 29% shareholders thing; like, we look after our interests ourselves at the AGM, mate. And we trust the appointees to the board from the Club and WS to look after them. Also, anyone who's in the 29%... we're not in it for a return or the money. We're in it because we want to have our own bit of the Club.

I thought that was just for certain cases; maybe serious foul play or something? I may be wrong, though. Can't be arsed going through the appeals process articles etc. Edit: it might be at the panel's discretion if they add one or not; this article on Shinnie the other season says that: https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/12860527/aberdeen-unhappy-with-graeme-shinnie-s-extended-four-match-ban Edit of edit: Turns out I could be arsed and aye, it is: 11.9.34 The Tribunal may make the following Determinations: (a) that the Claim is upheld and the sanction rescinded; (b)that the Claim is upheld but that a lesser cautionable offence occurred and that the said lesser cautionable offence be recorded and the automatic sanction for that offence be applied; (c) that the Claim is dismissed and the original sanction is reimposed; (d) or that the Claim is dismissed, the original sanction is reimposed and, where the terms of Paragraph 11.9.37 are applicable, that an additional match suspension shall be applied. 11.9.37 In the event of a Claim being dismissed the Tribunal must then Determine whether: (a) the Claim was an abuse of process or a delaying tactic for the sanction originally imposed; or (b) the Claim was frivolous, vexatious or entirely without merit. So basically, it's up to the Tribunal to decide if it's wasting their time or not to appeal it, then they can decide to add an extra match. It's not necessarily automatic.

Fair. Who was the random midfielder we signed a few years ago under Alexander for 6 months who was announced and then disappeared into the ether?

This is data for the last calendar year from Wyscout on our midfield. Only midfielder we have playing more forward passes than Davor is Miller and he also has the most defensive successes as well as the best pass completion in a number of areas.

I'll concede that point, but there needs to at least be some acknowledgment of the fact Davor isn't the only one who's the issue in the middle of the park. Halliday is just as bad and (I think) worse because he's able to hide in the centre circle. Davor is the one going deep to receive the ball just about every time. I do think Sparrow can be the energy we're missing in the middle for now but he's (rightly) been held back until he's up to speed.

*And 4th in the league and in a cup semi final.