joewarkfanclub

Vietnam 91's post on P&B provides a very informative document on the pro's and cons of both scenarios. Remaining at Fir Park and redeveloping the POD is the lowest cost/risk scenario. But if we are serious about building a club for the future then we need to move. The problem with that scenario is that it is expensive and needs so much good will to make it happen. However, if done properly and it includes retail, conferencing, hotel and other revenue generating avenues, it could actually move us substantially as a club. However, it would need done correctly and there would be a lot of ducks to line up as Dundee have found.

I had hoped the club would run free buses, or at least subsidise them a little given the cost of the ticket prices and their share of the gate. Would make sense to do so and try and encourage as many of our fans as possible to make the trip. £20 seems a little on the steep side and makes this look like a missed opportunity to keep the feelgood community club thing going.

Aye, thats always gonna be a problem. However, with advances in engineering, surely we can build something along the lines of what Hibs have done at Easter Road with their stands behind the goals. It would look better aesthetically and remove some of the issues with "sightlines" that currently exist?

Not sure, but I think at the point of McMahons statement he and was still in control of the club so in a position to instruct others as to what was put out and what wasnt. On this occasion, I think Dickie has wanted to have his say and folks have let him fill his boots knowing how it looked and what the fallout would be.

Cheers mate. Apologies to everyone for the font if it made the post difficult to read. I tried to be smart and include "quotes" but it seems to have thrown everything out of sync! They will be taking the controls for the telly off me soon! 😆

Firstly, apologies for the lengthy post. Ive had to read the clubs statement again a few times to make sure Im understanding it correctly. Dickie has clearly wanted this to be published "I feel I need to outline the circumstances of my departure." So neither the club nor the WS have done his legs here, albeit they could have refused to publish it. I was previously of a mind to thank the guy for his service and move on. But there are a number of things about the whole thing that bother me. Firstly, being born into a family that had enough money to buy a position on the club board does not in itself make you a suitable person to hold that position, regardless of how much experience you subsequently gained in the role. Dickie by his own admission (and McMahon) were the architects of the WS previous incarnation post Les Hutchison. An incarnation that was set up to be kept at arms length and have little influence over the day to day running of the club and used as a cash cow to support the club when required. Most fans have been rightly critical of this incarnation of the Society as it appeared very poorly run and had no apparent direction. Douglas Dickie was Vice Chair of the Society and Club Boards at that time. He had the power and influence to do things differently. He chose not to. As an outsider looking in with no connection to any individual on either side, this whole thing appears to have kicked off last October when Society members had the audacity to vote in some younger board members with energy, enthisiasm and a vision for what fan ownership should and could be. These individuals appear to have rocked the boat and the "old guard" could no longer keep the Society at arms length and control it as they had in the past. Now, this could merely be coincidence, but it appears to me that it was about this time that the mantra of the club not being financially sustainable going forward without outside investment first appeared and the now infamous "video" was hastily produced We all know what happened over the summer so no need to re-hash that. But as Mr Dickie claims in his statement "the Club is on a sound financial footing, the best for around 25years" Both positions cannot be true. I do also wonder about the departure of Allan Burrows and how all that came about? Did he want more for the fan ownership model? Was he being thwarted? Did he become frustrated? Were there already murmurings about changing the model and selling the club? Hard to believe that someone so devoted to the club would suddenly resign for no reason. The facts as I see them are..... Motherwell are a fan owned club. Fan ownership has been paid lip service by the old board for way to long. The majority shareholder has now realised it can actually exert some power within the club and has chosen to do so for the benefit of the club and the fan ownership model. A club director has chosen to support a path to effectively end fan ownership, despite his position on the Executive Board being inextricably linked to his position on the WS Board. Said directors position is at that point untenable. He resigns from the WS Board but he refuses to resign from the club board. The WS win the power struggle and invite applications for a new executive board. Said director reads the writing on the wall and decides in a fit of rage to go out punching and try to stir up some ill feeling towards the WS. So in summary, I no longer feel I can thank Mr Dickie for his service. It could have been so different. But ultimately he has chosen the nature of his departure and I do not think it reflects well on him.

Made the mistake of going onto FB to discuss this. Mr Dickies supporters are on full attack mode. Is it an age thing? Im 55, but even I have a greater grasp of the internal workings of our club than some of these muppets!

You would then immediately get into the subjective opinion of the officials on whether they thought the ball would have crossed the line without the intervention of the handball. In Caseys incident, Im not sure it would. It would probably have hit him in the chest and come back out.

Well, I accept I am totally biased. But for me he looks like he tries to keep his arms close into his chest to avoid making himself bigger. Its not a natural position, but he certainly doesnt spread himself or appear to deliberately handle the ball. I think thats why its important to know the reason given for the red card and the wording of the current IFAB guidance. Context is everything in these decisions.

I dont think both incidents are the same as Souttar is further from goal and Butland is behind him, but I do think you need to go back and watch Caseys again if you think that was a save. Its a very similar motion to Souttar in that he throws himself in front of the ball to block it and his arms come up across his chest as a result. No question it hits his hand(s) but he hasnt exactly dived full length and tipped it round the post!

Why was he sent off then? It was the reason given on Sportsound after the game.....

Hard to say how really bad Danzaki was or wasnt. He came in when the club was an absolute carcrash and the manager who signed him got emptied within weeks if not days. Clearly SK didnt fit into SKs style of football. The good thing was that we managed to move him on quickly so he didnt end up stinking up the dressing room. Its something Kettlewell has been pretty good at.

Mich'l Parker! 😉

Havent seen it in real time obviously, but Souttar isnt right on the line and the goalkeeper is behind him. Is that a certain goalscoring opportunity? FWIW, I dont think Caseys is that clear cut. It hits his hand on the line no doubt, but I think there is an argument to be had over whether it was deliberate or whether he made his body bigger. Personally, I think the answer to both is no, but it may not matter depending on the current wording of the laws surrounding such incidents

Thats why I cant find it! 😆😆😆

Thats why I think tweaks to the current set up are the way to go. I think Davor or Halliday are probably fine by themselves just now, at least until Paton and/or Slattery are back. Its both of them together I have an issue with rught now. For me, dropping Miller into his natural position and putting Sparrow into the midfield further forward would allow us to press further up, support the front players and retin the ball more. Unfortunately SK seems to want to use a pecking order in team selection and Sparrow is behind Halliday and Davor in that order.

Who was that against? I cant find it

Its the age old dilemma for a club our size. Do we try and play more football at the risk of losing more games. Or do we continue as we are playing more pragmatic, but ultimately winning football. It would be nice if we could play more football and keep winning games, but it doesnt always work out that way. Personally, I think with a few tweaks and the likes of Paton and Slattery coming back into the team we wont be far away. Until then, I think we are stuck with a Davor/Halliday double act. Not my personal preference, but it seems to be SKs.......

Im hoping that part improves when the likes of Paton, Slattery and Nicholson all return. Of course there is more we could be doing now. I really like what Ive seen of Sparrow. He has a drive and an energy going forward that none of our other midfielders have. My preference would be to play Miller in the deeper role and have Sparrow supporting the front players. But that means SK dropping either Halliday or Davor, and I dont see him doing either.

Just seen the highlights. What a save from Ox in the first half. Even better than the pen save. We have upgraded big time in the keeper department.

Another tough test at a difficult away venue. We still havent found the right formula for midfield. But if we can remain defensively resolute, Hibs defence should cough up enough mistakes to give us a chance. Going for a score draw.

Lennon Miller for me. 2 goals, coulda had the hat trick and generally our most composed player. Creditible mentions for Oxborough and Ewen Wilson.

Not our best performance today. But I felt it was solid enough first half and we were handling St Mirrens size and tactics fairly well right up until their goal. Id like to see it again to see if there were things we could have done better, but it was a lovely turn and finish from Phillips. Thought we did well to get back in it after that. Couldnt really see if it was a penalty or not. There seemed to be a tangle of bodies at the back post but couldnt really see if the claim was justified. Great finish from Miller to put it away and he took his second one well also. Second half, the game seemed to to unravel for the referee in a Collumesque kinda way. There were a number of rather bizarre decisions and bookings and the players did well not to allow things to boil over. Thought after it went to 10 aside we crafted the better of the chances and Miller and Stamatelopoulos could both have had us out of sight. Overall, a good 3 points aginst a tough opponent. Onwards and upwards to Easter Road next week......

I can only assume that its his application that is the issue. He clearly has some talent given the clubs he has been at, but he has never made it at any of them. The fact we are farming him out so quickly after giving him a 2 year deal (with a 3rd year option) is a concern. Hopefully he has been told to go and get used to the Scottish game and come back fit and ready to stake his claim in the starting 11. It would be pretty shit for him, but mostly us, if his Motherwell career is over a couple of months in.

Not sure about that. He has been blowing out his arse pretty much every game he has played so far. He is definitely getting fitter and is in much better shape than when he arrived. But whether he has 70 mins in him remains to be seen. That said, I agree we need to start him at some point and see what he has in him. If we need to take him off at half time, so be it.