Onthefringes

What’s he missing out on? Exposure at Ibrox, Darkhead & the city clubs’ aside… not a lot. It's a risk. Opportunity to progress, more moves come with more responsibility.

Nae bother. He could’ve done, but, the injury concern doesn’t fit the narrative. Players signs for the benefit of the club said no player, ever. Not me with the issue though. As I mentioned, it worked to our benefit. Perhaps reading what was said rather than who said it would help.

What’s happened is good and acceptable for good of our club? Expansive question. Lots of variables, nature of the subject and a system that means not everything would be good and acceptable to our club or have options not to be explored? Could as easily be the actions of the club that the player and his representatives think they would be better served exploring said options. Different way of doing things. Definitely, big difference in exploring options and throwing toys out of their pram to get their wish.

Discussed at length before, David Turnbull signed a deal for David Turnbull. The revisionism is disingenuous. It happened to work to the benefit of the club. Not every renewal does.

Think some need to reign in expectations… I’d wager not everybody leaving will be replaced

Bravo.

Whatever. No problem understanding our energetic midfielder is going to be much easier to replace than a 30 goal a season maverick. Bracketing him alongside McGinley, Carroll et all does the kid a disservice. On replacement, I’m far from convinced the budget and current contracted players give us the changes some on here are expecting.

Deary me, it’s a wonder you’re not on our recruitment team.

We get it as you’ve alluded to more than once. There’s not a player in our squad who isn’t infinitely replaceable. Up to those tasked with the job to develop our next batch better than pay the system lip service in my view. You’re right, it’s a wild guess. Easy to deduce from the article that he favours crossing borders for now over remaining at home.

That’s fair enough, some think he is given the interest. Doft my cap at the fact that he wants to further his career, obviously disappointed he’s leaving but wholeheartedly behind his decision for all the right reasons.

He was a first team regular under Kettlewell so that kinda negates your statement. Pointed out before, picked up a strain pre-split. Your closing gambit is a nonsense 😂

Imports 🙄

😂 Scrambling for relevance returns. It’s really not that difficult.

It’s not the lack of sponsor which may or may not delay unveiling…

He may well have the ear of some at the club. Plenty involved in academy and parents won’t entertain that thinking…

Time has told? Over 50 appearances in last 2 seasons. Been lucky enough to be in company hearing our recent managerial appointments give expert opinion that he’s got the attributes to progress.

Quite the take. Think most will trust Kettlewell’s judgement over yours right enough - he’s been open in his assessment too. This warming the bench you speak of, at least be factual - Slattery retained his position after securing a point at Kilmarnock, Kid reclaimed his place before picking up a knock pre-split, then got back in on full fitness.

Turn it up. Hardly immaterial given they’re asked to perform very different roles, hence, apples and oranges quip. May be some merit in individual points you make, but, can discount your headless chicken claim. Suppose it’s all in the understanding of the game. Don't think his inclusion when Hammell (who rated him highly) was emptied can be understated. Certainly wasn’t coincidence the upturn in form of Goss and the freedom afforded to Spittal. It’s all a moot point anyway.

Comparing apples with oranges.

One doth protest too much… For me, the tribute act are beyond parody- they’ve become everything they hated about the other and then some. Just to echo sentiment of others, 2 cheeks, same arse.

Fair comment. Worked in our favour.

🤣 Nae bother. Read what is being said and not just look at the words… Nothing said was a slight on the person. To think he didn’t look after himself to fit the narrative of being Motherwell minded is a bit of a stretch.

Yeah, out of context. Not disputing all of what you’ve said either, certainly not a slight on the player himself. His signing of that contract protected his interests post injury every bit as much as ensuring the club who developed him were looked after. He didn’t walk away from that contract for nil for example, hence, David Turnbull was David Turnbull minded.

Lots of variables in an ever difficult process. Hypothetical for now as we don’t know players’ intention. I’d expect those with the grasp on development football and particularly those involved in this player would argue club haven’t moved enough to protect their asset. In reality, it’s more than signing of a contract which you’ve correctly said can’t be forced. Any development monies are questionable despite set fees as the terms of future incomes are negotiable. I’ll rely on club accounting. David Turnbull was David Turnbull minded.