Joeboy

I certainly remember you singing a song about our own manager at the St. Johnstone home game, which hardly painted the bois or the club very well.

I agree with most of this. I had a bit of a go at Mick on the players thread, it's the fact we've seen how good he can be that makes how bad he's been so frustrating. I also think it's a common misconception he played well in the first leg of the playoffs. Great goal, yes, but one poor finish and one great save from George Long bailed him out from two dreadful mistakes at 0-0 in the first half.

McGhee's purple patches in charge of Motherwell have all come around a settled line up, since Grimshaw has left and a couple of others have been missing, his lack of plan B has been exposed. I felt sorry for him an extent with a squad filled with deadwood, but that sympathy quickly dwindles when we see how well Cadden has done, yet he was shunned for a major reshuffle which resulted in a tanking from Hearts. A lot of the players really do have to take responsibility this season. None more so than Stephen McManus for me, who has been such a disappointment since he signed. He looked ok in his first season, but I've a feeling now that was Hutchy carrying him, rather than the opposite. Even when we finished 2nd that season, we hardly had an impressive goals against column. He makes so many mistakes you'd expect an 18 year old to make, not a guy of his pedigree and experience, he constantly plays that long ball in between their centre back and right back, which we don't have a player who ever gets to. The only reason I have for not dropping him would be that you don't know what influence his experience has on the back line, but you could say his influence doesn't appear great. I like Hall, but we've tried Ramsden, Kerr, O'Brien, Kennedy and Laing at centre back since Hutchy left and the defence still doesn't seem any closer to the solution. Ramsden aside obviously, these are young players who when McManus was signed, you would have thought would have been brought on and looked comfortable playing beside him. Yet McManus seems the common denominator. People say he was good in the playoffs. The second leg, perhaps. He did score a vital goal in the first leg, but not before two dreadful mistakes went unpunished by Rangers poor finishing and Long's good goalkeeping at 0-0. I literally at times can not get my head round how someone with 26 Scotland caps, 3 SPL titles, 2 appearances in the Champions League last 16 who has been subject to a £1.5 million transfer fee. McDonald, despite his 9 goals, hasn't been the player I thought he would be this season either. Partially his fault, partially not. Baraclough using him as a 10 didn't work and neither has the last couple of games as a lone central striker worked either. He looked good in a partnership with Moult, who I think has been harshly dropped. Johnson, has been incredibly inconsistent. The annoying thing about it is, that he has been central to just about every good performance we've had since he came in, but on the days he doesn't do it, we don't seem to do it. I'd maybe throw Thomas on for a couple of games to keep Marvin on his toes. Thomas rarely disappears when he is on and is always endeavouring to make things happen, Johnson goes missing for large periods, like Saturday. Other than them, I don't have major issues week in, week out with any players. After the Dundee game, everyone was raving about Pearo's good season, myself included. He has had by all accounts three poor games since (I've been to two of them), but three poor games doesn't make him a bad player. When used effectively, Lasley has been good. At 36, he's not box to box like he used to be, but when he has been positionally disciplined he has been effective. I would definitely still be cautious about offering him any new deal though, when he'll be 37 most of next season. We always look far better with Hammell in the team than without, his composure at the back is key for us. I haven't been singing McGhee's praises in recent weeks, but I also think you have to blame Baraclough to an extent for his dealings in the transfer market. He gave us a massive squad, yet Taylor, Robinson and Clarkson were deemed surplus as early as January. To add to that, we have seen this thread criticise players like McManus, McDonald and Hammell for example, but is anyone that keen to replace them with Laing, Fletcher and Chalmers? A lot of blame lies with Baraclough for me when it's put like that. Players are underperforming, yes, but most of the fringe players he hoarded our squad with don't seem great options to bring in, even when things are going badly.

I agree with you and I'm happy we got rid of the deadwood the way we did. None of the January departures had a great effect on our season, Grimshaw aside and we did generally have far too big a squad for our supposed plan. But it does beg the question, why were we sanctioning Baraclough signing all these guys in the first place?

He did. That's why I started that paragraph saying he could be good, bad and lazy all in one game, you know the bit you conviently cut out?

Being a Motherwell fan, I take a sensible approach to players who aren't good enough at football, I try my level best not to slate them if they have a good attitude and apply themselves correctly. However, one thing I can't abide is players who don't apply themselves and have poor work rates. Vigurs was criminally guilty of this and what made it worse for me was the fact that above all this, he was very talented, but couldn't be arsed making the most of it. Ok, you could say there is an argument that we didn't use him effectively. I do think that summer McCall just signed the best players he could within his budget, without having a formation or starting eleven in plan. However, what that doesn't excuse is him strolling about the park nonchalantly every week. Time and time again he needlessly lost the ball, then stood with his hands on his hips making no effort to win it back. The singular occasion in my Motherwell supporting career I have made my way down to the front to shout at one of our players. That accolade is owed to Mr. Vigurs in Iceland. He needlessly lost the ball trying daft tricks so many times that night, then did nothing to win the ball back, decided he was above trying. At one point he just stopped dead, hands on his hips and turned round and smiled to the 'Well fans. On a good day, Vigurs would be good, bad and lazy all in one game. The most typical Iain Vigurs thing I can remember is when we beat Dundee Utd 1-0 under Black, the Friday night after McCall left. Vigurs could have slotted Ojamaa in to put him through on goal at the halfway line, instead he tried a daft shot from the halfway line that was miles off. I for one, am delighted that the egocentric, lazy waster no longer plays for us and he'll be subject to a few choice words from me on Saturday.

Law is a good top division full back for me and Watt is a good prospect. Signing a right back will only halt Watt's chances of developing further. Kennedy can also fill in on an emergency there. Genuinely can't fathom the want to sign many right backs at any opportunity. As above, we have three first team players who can play there. Reid was deadwood and wouldn't have got a game and as such left. Signing another right back would take us to Baraclough levels of hoarding, how many exactly do you want in the squad?

Reid, I can see, Clarkson not so much. Remember Faddy's deal is up on Saturday, Moore is at Ayr for the season and Mackin at Airdrie. That would only leave us chocolate Fletcher as back up for Skippy and Moult. As for Dan, sad to see him go. Won't impact our season at all but he has been treated harshly here I think, whilst conceding he did have flaws and mistakes. The defence last season caused him far more problems than he caused them and he kept us in some games single handedly.

Exactly this. It was the first thing noticeable when Francis-Angol got an extended run in the team last season when Hammell was out. Hammell eased off other teams pressure so much with his composure on the ball, whereas Zaine treated it like a hot tatty. As a result, we were under so much more pressure defensively with the frequency the ball was given away. Not only does Hammell's composure and passing help start our own attacks, it also stops opposition's attacks and limits their frequency with his ability to retain the ball. Several left midfielders, such as Jamie Murphy, owe the service up the line they got from Hammell a lot to their development.

Personally I've never found him to be overly suspect defensively, he makes mistakes like any human defender but I've never found them to be a major flaw in our side. I think he has aged and is not the player he was a few years ago, but that's just a natural process. I could probably name you a few better left backs in the Premiership just now, but I don't think that makes him any easier to replace on a budget like ours. Regarding other Scottish clubs coming in for him, Aberdeen also bid for him in January 2008 when we brought him back and I've heard that in 2012, Hibs (still in the Premiership) came in and offered him a rise on what he was on at Motherwell, but instead he accepted a new deal which had a decent sized reduction on what he was on at us at the time. Those are just two examples I can name, Celtic and Rangers aside, I have little doubt Hammell could have got a move nearly anywhere in the Scottish top flight if that was what he so desired.

Fair enough with Lasley, can't argue with that statement on him, but I can't help but think you are being quite harsh on Hammell. He was a first pick for Southend his entire time there and seemed to be quite well thought of. It's not like they tried to get rid of him- he started for them two days before he rejoined us. I think it was more the case of us having a few quid from the Paterson deal and him personally wanting to come back up the road. Both of them have been absolutely tremendous servants for us, absolutely no doubting that, but I've always thought of Hammell to be on a slightly higher level technically than Lasley and that if he had persevered down south he would have been able to play at what is perceived as a higher level for a good few years. The importance of his calmness on the ball at full back can not be overstated in my opinion, when he's not playing the lack of it puts us visibly more on the back foot. On another note, pleased Jake Taylor and Theo Robinson are offski. Any time I seen Jake Taylor he looked like he was trying to claim Brian Kerr's hide and seek title and Robinson was a totally unnecessary signing from the off who didn't do anything to impress me when on the pitch. However, his departure now makes McGhee's decision to bring him on against Accies all the more baffling.

I don't think an "odd glimpse" is a fair assessment. He's had some serious dips in form, granted, the start of this season in particular, but since he has joined he has been central to the vast majority of good Motherwell performances. Given he was bought for a nominal fee as an investment, if one year later where as you say, he's had peaks and troughs, someone is willing to start the bidding at £400k, then for me there is potential to make a lot more on him if he can show signs of consistency over a period of time, which I'd say he's en route to doing just now. Especially considering he has two and a half years left on his deal. To accept a bid just now, it would have to be around a million for me. There's no question that losing him would have a detrimental effect on our squad.

I looked at it last week when I thought people were unfairly decrying him shite. He played 59 minutes over six sub appearances, three of which he came on in injury time. The longest he was ever on for was half an hour.

I guess what I was trying to express is that their journey to being a full time player with us wasn't straight from our club. Kerr arrived on loan from Birmingham to debut and Hutchinson was picked up from Wallsend Boys Club at the Milk Cup in 2007 and instantly was a full time player. With the criteria I have used in above posts I wouldn't consider Lasley a product of our youth system. He was playing with Glennifer Thistle in the juniors and working as a spark when we signed him when he was nearing his 20th birthday. Pretty sure the reserves would have been his first place playing with us. Same regarding Craigan pretty much. I'm pretty sure Hammell joined us at the age of 15. What age did McFadden come to Motherwell then? He did make his debut aged 17 and I'm fairly certain he was in the squad list in 1999/00, when he would have been sixteen when the season started.

I don't know if I'm having that. Of that list, Hutchinson is a youth product of Wallsend Boys Club, Saunders of Queen's Park, Francis-Angol of Spurs, Cummins of Everton and Kerr of Birmingham (despite the fact he was here before he went south). There is a difference between blooding youngsters and signing other people's youngsters and playing them. You can add Steven Hetherington, Jonathan Page and even Dom Thomas to that list I suppose (pretty sure he left Celtic at 16 and went directly into a pro contract with our 19s). Half of the guys you are quoting there haven't came through our academy, which shows me that when we do trust youngsters in our first team, we only trust the development methods of other sides, not of ourselves. I also wonder if you could say McHugh, Carswell and Forbes had a fair crack of the whip. Certainly, when all three departed I didn't want to keep any of them, but McHugh only started 15 times for us and I reckon you'd be pushed to find many of them in consecutive order. He wasn't given any loan football till he was 22 so all he had to develop was ten minute bench cameos or under 20s football. I watched a lot of the 20s in the 2012/13 and 2013/14 seasons as my best mate's wee brother was playing in the team. McHugh had stagnated so much from playing at that level that there were games it looked so easy for him, probably simply because he was bigger and more physically developed than the guys he was playing against. At that age he should have been playing against adults, not kids. A prime example of the under 20s format failing someone. You talk about McHugh getting a chance. Gannon gave him a chance sporadically. Craig Brown signed Blackman, Casagolda and Gow, as well as having Murphy and Sutton already to put him down to sixth choice- yet still didn't loan him out. McCall signed countless strikers over his time here and even played guys like Daley up front to avoid choosing McHugh. When you can quote that we signed Casagolda to put McHugh down the pecking order, I reckon "fair crack of the whip" becomes null and void. I'm led to believe that Carswell asked McCall continually to go out on loan, but McCall feared losing his cover. When Jenno departed, we moved Law inside. When Law departed we signed Lawson and it was only when Lawson didn't hit the heights that he was given a chance. We used to often bring in a defender from the bench and play Hateley centre mid to avoid bringing Carswell in. As for Forbes, his "fair crack of the whip" came in a four to five month spell, where he managed to score nine goals from midfield. Craig Brown only ever played him at left mid, a position he clearly wasn't suited to. He did lack fitness/engine/speed, especially for a youngster, but he had genuine talent when he broke through. After the Brown era, under McCall, the only times I can recall him getting a game in centre mid were against Queen's Park and Clyde in the cup, a game against St.Mirren when Lasley was suspended and an appearance against Inverness when he was subbed on and subbed off. I don't think those examples, if you asked them, would say Motherwell done right about their development. Where these guys are now maybe part reflection on their ability, part reflection on failings in youth development.

I think our youth system majorly needs reassessing from the bottom up. It has failed so badly in recent years. The root cause of the failing has me wondering. It could be any one of Players not being properly nurtured, poor level of coaching Poor standard of players continually being recruited Players not fulfilling their potential Inability to attract sufficiently good players Players genuinely not being given a chance For me, it's a common misconception that young homegrown players are given a chance at Motherwell, particularly those from our own academy. None of our managers of late have given youth a fair chance. McCall was the best manager we've had in my time, but that was his main downfall. I can actually remember 'Flow defending McCall's youth development stats by name-checking the players he had given a chance to, including Ross Stewart......who's first team experience amounted to a minute at the end of the Ross County game to give Darren Randolph a standing ovation. You wonder whether it is because they genuinely aren't good enough, there is evidence to back that up. Of all our youth products currently playing professionally, only Paul Quinn, Mark Reynolds and Steven Lawless have left and are playing at the same level (Alan Martin too if you count getting a skelf in his arse on Accies bench) as Motherwell and really only Jamie Murphy and Lee Erwin are playing at a higher level than Motherwell. "Playing" perhaps an exaggeration for Erwin, again like Martin. If that is the case, then we need to evaluate why all the players that we bring through our youth coaching aren't making it, even at the top level in Scotland. I think McGhee is a good manager and I'm impressed with the job he's doing so far, but his only real progress in terms of youth is the introduction of Ben Hall. Fair play to him for having faith in an 18 year old to step in, but it's not like he's pitched him in at the expense of an experienced campaigner, he's being preferred to two 22 year olds, one of whom had never played professionally till the East Fife game in August. Time will tell if McGhee is willing to put his money where his mouth is regarding youth, but Saturday would make me think against it. If he really was, I'd have thought Luke Watt would have come in instead of Chalmers and Hammell would have stayed put or alternatively Cadden would have been a straight swap for one of the central midfielders. I am beginning to think that the failings of our youth system, coupled with Accies' success of theirs is beginning to cost us attracting the players we want in their formative years. If I was a parent of a child local to the area and my kid had an offer from Motherwell and from Accies, as much as it pains me to say it, I would advise them to go to Accies as they would have much more chance of making a career of it there than Motherwell, if the recent past is anything to go by.

The last I heard he was playing with the new Gartcairn junior team. However, I couldn't be fucked looking it up to be certain.

Had a quick look on soccerbase. Based on you writing off Moult after his first start, I thought it may have been a flippant comment

"Based on his spell at us" that's laughable. He played a grand spanking total of......................59 minutes over six sub appearances, including three where he came on in injury time. How anyone can judge him on that is laughable. Especially when in form McCormack, Clarkson and Porter were playing ahead of him.

Good shout, oversight on my part and I appear to have missed Dale Shirkie's singular appearance too. I'll fix and repost.

Attached here. Since the "Class of 02" we've had twenty nine academy graduates. Here is their contributions.

The way I done it was if a player had been with us prior to under 19s or 20s, he was included, otherwise he wasn't.

I looked at it a while back. From whom I considered true youth products, I excluded Hutchinson, Page, Francis-Angol, Hetherington and Cummins in that, due to them only joining us at U19 level, since the "Class of 02", currently only Murphy plays at a higher level, with Reynolds and Lawless being the only ones who play at the same level. In that time, only really Murphy has gone on and proved he can play at a better level. Only really Reynolds and Alan Martin have got moves to what would be perceived as bigger clubs down south other than him and it's safe to say neither really made it there. If you take out Murphy and Reynolds (proving to be the exception) rather than the rule then the average amount of games our youth products get is alarmingly low. I'll dig up the stats tonight, but it proves how much of a true failure our academy really is. Whether that is through reluctance to play good young players (McCall was very guilty of this) or the players not being good enough is open for debate.

I wasn't fond of Pearo's way of departing us in 2003, but when he left he played in Europe, won the league, there was obvious progression, as much as his conduct was below par, there was obvious progression, Law left us for a lower league side to play part time teams for more money, that's obvious regression, as I don't think he's the same player today as when he left us, as he is in and out a team in the division below. That said, in his time at Fir Park he was one of the best players I've ever seen play with us and if he comes back and plays well I'll be delighted, but will probably never be forming any fanclubs for him. I'd disagree with that. I think his biggest strength is his ability on the ball, playing football from the back. I'd say his biggest weakness is that he is prone to a defensive lapse/error. In theory he does have some attributes to play there, but centre back and centre midfield are too very different positions.

I was just wondering, at which point in Jack Leitch's short career so far did you decide this? Was it during his impressive first start in a 4-1 victory against Hearts? Was it his man of the match performance in a 3-3 draw with Celtic when he played beside a full back in central midfield? Or I'm guessing probably when he played at left back when Hammell, Francis-Angol and Ferguson were injured in a 2-0 defeat to Killie? Or probably some of his other limited game time in the first two months of last season, where established players around him were vastly underperforming, before he got a serious injury in October? He's not established or proven yet by any means, but claiming on his previous performances is utter nonsense for me. Just being negative for being negatives sake.