Joeboy

That tackle for me is the one slight on Lasley's character. It was an absolutely horrendous challenge, but I must say I have never seen him tackle like that before or since. Any of his other challenges just come from him being combative and latterly perhaps a bit slower. Pearson on the other hand has that "up for it" streak in him. He has had more choice tackles as mentioned and he's also started shoving matches as a result of teammates getting fouled- something I've not seen from Lasley.

Ayr United, a lesser team than Hibs, cuffed us 4-0 in pre-season in 2012. What followed that was the most enjoyable league campaign in my twenty years supporting Motherwell. For that reason, I refuse to get my knickers in a twist over fitness exercises.

I was impressed with neither on first glance, yet I think the home is a belter without it. Not impressed with the third top whatsoever, I think the names printed on them looks absolutely ridiculous. It's about time the whole 1991 love in stopped in my opinion. This year we have had three events, a DVD and now this commemorative strip. The only reason this is still happening is because we have won hee haw since. Did we mark the 50th anniversary of 1952 in 2002? No, because we've won something since. Will Hearts have a commemorative strip for their 1998 cup win in a few years time? No, because they've won it twice since. It's frankly embarassing, and a stunt I would normally enjoy slagging the likes of Celtic and Aberdeen fans for. Maybe it means less to me as I wasn't old enough to appreciate us winning the cup in 91 (14 months old). I have the DVD and have watched and enjoyed it several times and I recognise that these guys are pivotal in our history, but even still it is total overkill. If I'm in a minority with those views and the whole 1991 thing is bought into by a decent amount of supporters and the club have maximised this revenue stream due to public feeling then fair enough, but I for one can't look at that top without cringing. The main thing that's came from the 25th anniversary of the cup win is the leverage its given Colin O'Neill to act like a rocket on facebook.

Law goes with my best wishes. He was one of very few players to emerge from the 2014/15 season with any credit for me, not because he set the world alight with his talent, more because he showed great attitude and endeavour when others downed tools. I think he was a competent right back for us over the two seasons he was here. He made a few mistakes, but for me not on a different level from any other defenders. The criticism he has got at times on here and at games has been considerably over the top and he has been made an unfair scapegoat, but we all know the East Stand needs/loves a scapegoat. Also contributed well with six assists last season as well. I don't think replacing him will be that tall an order, but he did do a good job for us when he was here.

If you are still referring to Baraclough, then it was actually McCall who signed Twardzik (twice).

I agree with you regarding Ripley and I must say although Twardzik was far from perfect, I thought at times he got unnecessary criticism and got treated a bit badly there. If Grimshaw came in on loan and we were left wanting to sign him at the end, then I'd call that a hit. I know things aren't quite as black and white as that, but it was the best way I could sum up Baraclough's eye for a player.

See, I don't know if he was that good a scout. He obviously signed our two most sellable assets in Moult and Johnson, but he also signed a lot of guff. Of his signings, I'd say: Hit: Johnson, Pearson, McDonald, Ripley, Grimshaw, Moult Jury still out on: Samson, Laing, Kennedy Miss: Long, Straker, Thomas, Grant, Fletcher, Chalmers, Robinson, Clarkson, Taylor. At that, you can barely give him credit for the scouting of McDonald or Pearson. Probably a bit harsh putting Grant down as a miss as he was a decent player, but didn't fit our system and had little impact.

Hilariously Ian Baraclough is set to be his assistant.

We probably found out about Hall right away, as it was more newsworthy given his presence in our first team last season. Whereas with Leitch, you're talking about a guy who didn't feature at all in the first team squad and didn't even make the starting 11 for the youth cup final.

Lucky you, missing CMWellfans breakdown over it.

Fair play, that answers the question loud and clear then!

I thought it was 23 and under?

Have the rules changed in recent years? When we reportedly ended up with £200k for Hall and £500k for Erwin, I always wonder why we didn't just hold out for compensation for Murphy instead of accepting £110k when he had six months left to go on his contract. Was cash flow that bad? Were the future earnings from the sell on fee a big consideration? As it turned out, we got Faddy on a free, finished second and it turned out fine, but I always found it strange at the time.

Go and have a wee lie down mate.

Some of the backlash to Hammell resigning both here and on twitter is ridiculous. I think a one year deal would have sufficed personally, but we are asking a guy who has played 550 games for us to take a significant drop in wages, his agent probably threw the second year in there as a condition of the lower wage for an added bit of security and I don't blame him. It's not like he will be on daft money, certainly not anymore, and given he coaching with us now as well, is it really going to be that much of a tax on us having him around next season? Some people plainly need to get a grip, he's been a fantastic servant to the club and although he's had an injury prone last two seasons, go and compare our win ratio with and without. Also, gutted to see Pearson go. Don't think the fee will cover the loss that a central midfielder with his stamina and a one in three goal ratio. Not many players of his type about and he'll be a tough one to replace.

If you weigh up both of them then they have different pros and cons. McDonald is 33 and has no sell on value, whilst commanding a big wage, that is true. But he is proven at this level and was absolutely vital to our team last season, I had him on nine assists as well as his fourteen goals. He has also been vital in the development of both Erwin in Moult since he returned. Moult had a fantastic partnership with him last season and the season before Erwin's stats were astounding. 1 in goal in 26 games before McDonald came and 5 in 12 after. The Scottish lower leagues is a market we have underused in recent times, in comparison to other teams and I think signing El Bakhtaoui would be quite a coup, but at the same time have substantial risk attached to it. He had an exceptional season last season, but the season before he only scored nine goals (seven in the league) so he hasn't really proven himself over a period of time. He's a player I'd love to sign and hope that we could nurture into a top flight player, but he's not one I would expect to come in, jump two levels straight away and take the place of one of our most vital, experienced players proven at that level. For me he's the type of player you'd sign to play alongside McDonald, not instead of.

It's rumoured today that Hibs are in to sign Holt, hopefully that means they are not signing McDonald. I'm sure they also still have Cummings, Keatings, El-Alagui and Boyle. Surely you don't need six strikers. Unless you're Ian Baraclough.

Agreed. I like Law and I'm often found defending him on this forum and this thread particularly, but the only position I would be comfortable with him playing is right back.

Aye, you're right. Totally forgot about that one!

I make that the most money we've got for a defender since we sold Stephen McMillan to Wigan for 550k, fifteen years ago.

I'm not fussed that much at all to be honest, about Hall departing. It differs from the Paul Slane situation as he was a creative attacking player and those aren't that easy to come by. Ben Hall was a decent centre back but he doesn't have any attributes that I don't think we can replace in due course, or even may already have within our squad. Kennedy, Laing and McManus are there as well as Ferguson, who despite me previously not rating him, looked far more accomplished than Hall did in the youth cup final. If the compensation of £60k a year is to be believed then we would be due £180k for him. That's a decent deal when you consider he isn't the finished article and we got less for Reynolds when he had played over 200 games for us. If that money can either eradicate the need to sell players to an extent or boost the budget a bit then I actually think we might be better off for him leaving. As for the lad himself, leaving first team football at his age to openly go back to playing under 21s football may be questioned. However, if the move works out for him then fair enough.

Despite his many injuries, in his first year back we actually only one league game he missed, 1-0 over Kilmarnock, through a penalty. When he returns from said injuries, he always seems to look match fit and has some engine for a nearly 34 year old. His goalscoring ratio last season would be envied by many strikers as well. Even if he does miss ten games next season, the contribution I predict he would give us in the other thirty is worth more than £100k in my opinion.

Exactly. No one will pay the money that Pearson is worth to us so I'd keep him at all costs.

I might be wrong but sometimes sticks in my mind about us getting 50k per year for Erwin's 11 years at the club. I do also think there was a later report that said the fee was a bit less than that as well though.

Aye, you're talking shite. I'm sure it would create positive culture and environment for our under 20s to come into if they never, ever got any time off.