coldonmac

Am in the East Stand, it's so loud you can't even make it out. Think the announcer reckons he's broadcasting at the Nou Camp to 75k fans. I was close to walking out before the game had even started as my head was bursting with it.

Any chance someone could have a word with the stadium announcer at Fir Park and get him to turn the volume down. Before the game today you couldn't even talk to the person next to you it was so loud. I go to watch football not to end up with a headache.

When haggling no-one offers more than the seller's opening price. So the Club is spot on at setting a high price for him and then if need be reducing their price.

I would have liked the Club to have clearly stated what the punishment/sanctions would have been. All the Club said was that "club could face extremely serious sanctions" if there had been a repetition. By coming out and announcing what the punishment would have been would let the fans understand the consequences of actions, but more importantly by having put the details of the (potential) punishment out in the public domain any action/threatened against another Club could be measured against this. How often do we Clubs being treated differently depending on who they are?

Anyone else having problems viewing/accessing the highlights on the Club site? Getting an error message saying that the highlights have been removed.

I'm not sure some of the folk who write on here or Twitter even know their left from their right... and in some case shouldn't be allowed near anything sharp! I'd say for Alan that it's a double whammy if the team gets beaten, it impacts on his role as a GM of a business which relies on results on the park to boost attendance and attract sponsors but also hits him as a fan. I'm glad I don't have to have those worries keeping me awake.

Mention what again Postie Jim

I thought Fraser Kerr was a steady enough player WHEN he played in his natural position of central defense. He was another one who suffered from being forced to play out of position.

Does anyone else remember the old Motherwell Travel Club? It was sponsored by Edenvale Financial Services and you paid a small joining fee, phoned the Club by the Thursday to book your seat and got cheaper travel to away games sure it was something like of £3 to St Johnstone, £5 to Hibs/Hearts etc. Wonder if that's something worth investigating/considering by the Club again?

How's the fitness of the players looking this year? Just wondering if the new fitness coach has made a difference.

I remember it as St J were all over us that day, we were living a charmed life. Hollis was unfortunate that it was only after he came on that things started to go right for them.

Intersting comment from Neil Doncaster when discussing reconstruction, he says "After next season we go back to the old voting rules". Does that mean back to the 11 - 1 required to make changes? This would tie in with the fact that the SFA/SPFL and (possibly) Celtic hoped Rangers would move back to the SPL in successive seasons. Thereby giving the rest of the Clubs the illusion they matter but knowing they would have the stranglehold over all the teams again.

Paul Lawson also on PFA website looking for a Club

As someone who remembers why alcohol at football was banned I haven't seen any improvement in the Scottish mentality with regards the ability to handle alcohol in the 30+ years since the ban was introduced to justify its return. Whether or not we like it football and alcohol don't mix. Also for a Club like Motherwell the chances are any income from alcohol sales would be outweighed by the increases in the costs. Currently very few Well matches require a Police presence inside the ground, but do you think that would stil be the case if alcohol was on sale?

I don't see how he can appoint 3 members onto the WS Board. At the moment there are 6 (or possibly even 7 if Douglas Dickie is still on the Board) Directors and a further 3 brings it to 9/10. Rule 53 state a maximum of 8. Also the Board composition under Rule 53 (a) states that "4 members of the Society Board (or such higher number as shall be required so that elected members of the Board are in a majority over co-opted members) will be elected by the members in accordance with such arrangements as shall be determined by the Society Board;" Then again maybe the Rules don't matter ....

You'd think if they were going to send out a "begging" email someone would have proof read it to make sure it was consistent ... In summary, in return for pooling their resources and providing the loan it is proposed that the consortium members will receive the following key benefits: all benefits of the Well Society's amber members LOANS TO MFC BACKGROUND AND TERMS (k) All the benefits which accrue to an 1886 member of the Well Society will be available to a lender

Nielsen had 2 very good saves when the game was 0 - 0. Both from snap shots from MacKay. If either of them had gone in it would have given ICT a boost and we could have struggled as we were not playing particularly well on Wednesday.

Wonder if McInnes will be called up by SFA for bringing the game into disrepute for criticising the refereee about Hutchinson's tackle?

Couple of decent assists and we'll all be dancing on the ceiling

According to BBC website, Scott McDonald has agreed a severance package to leave Middlesborough a year early.

I don't see the former Morton guy we had on trial in Spain in either squad?

Bombscare in what way?

For some reason, I seem to remember Leann saying that the voting requirements would change and required a certain percentage of the top league to agree and a percentage of the rest to agree for any major decisions. This would stop "the tail wagging the dog". But it was a while ago so I might have imagined (hoped) for this. As for the current 11 - 1, that will never change without a radical overhaul of all aspects of Scottish football as certain teams, for whatever reason(s), are allying themselves with Celtic and in other cases look as if they are preparing for the return of the other half of the Old Firm and wanting to be seen as their "friend". The rationale given for the 3 years without change was to introduce stability and make it attractive to sponsors etc. It all boils down to the fact that Doncaster et al have been pitiful with regards PR, they should have been making the information available regularly in a clear, concise manner ensuring that when an incorrect/misleading comment appeared in the Press that the correct facts were issued to ensure the fans were advised. That to me has been the biggest failing of this whole sorry escapade.

The reason it was all or nothing, as was pointed out at the Well Society meeting, was that the Clubs were prepared to make concessions on the bits they liked less in order to get the bits they did like agreed to. Ok, so what's proposed isn't perfect but it delivers a number of the changes we are looking for eg voting, financial distribution, one league body. To effectively "cherry pick" the good points is unlikely to happen. as certain Clubs will continue to block progress unless it's on their terms.

Also it means they would be eligible to play in the League and/or Scottish Cups so they could enter a "stronger" team for these competitions. Basically they get have their cake and eat it!!