cambo97

Not as difficult as a corporate manslaughter charge and damages. I'm being a bit extreme but if the stairs were as crowded as mentioned it wouldn't take much, a last minute winner or controversial goal against and injuries would be likely.

If Police Scotland have prevented the stewards from clearing the stairs, the club needs to get this on record. It will be MFC not the police that will be liable if anything happens

It's been pretty cool and wet the last few weeks

I watched an interview with him where he praises the Argentinian coach for rotating his players to keep them fresh and how that worked well in today's game.

The shareholder info I have from the club says that voting closes at 12.00 noon on 22nd July, the WS voting would appear to also finish on the 22nd, it doesn't give them much time to get their voting in. When it comes to the actual WS Shareholding vote is a straight majority of WS vote gets 100% of the shareholder vote. So it doesn't matter if the vote is 50.001 - 49.999% or 100-0% the shareholding vote would be the same?

I keep reading that the aim is for WSS to get 49% shareholding and the WS (are the initials deliberately similar?) get 51%, what happens will the not insubstantial 23%(?) in private hands?

I've just seen this on the Companies House website, perhaps someone with more knowledge could say what it means: Previously it was:

If they are only there as WS representatives (as majority shareholders), I would disagree, WS should be nominating their board members for the executive board. But thinking about it a bit more (if they are WS reps) then the resignations from the executive board should have been first as that is the actual board in which their position is untenable; technically the position on the WS board is not untenable it's just a personal disagreement with the other board members at least until the membership rejects the offer.

I may be wrong but I thought Feely and Dickie were only on the board as WS nominated representatives, if this is the case, after their resignations from the WS board, surely their continued seat on the executive board is also untenable and they should also resign from that.

Putting on my "weeyin" pedantry hat, it's actually 2.1% (really 1 share higher than 2%).

It's never been that but even if it was there is still going to be the shoulder or big toe offside, just starting at a different datum point. But I agree with going back a few moves is wrong, if the referee played on then that should be it. Similar looking at possible offenses from corners when there is probably 4 or 5 all happening, some by attackers and some by defenders.

Just found the original email from 2017, it was £10 each with a minimum buy of 5.

What was the society board's decision at the time of executive board meeting, all I've read suggests that the society board vote was after the executive vote; therefore at that time, as StAndrew7 (I think, apologies if it wasn't) pointed out, it could be reasonably stated that they did enact this wishes of the membership who said they would consider an offer reducing the WS stake. And they now have that opportunity to reject or accept.

Technically it was only the personal opinion of the representatives as they didn't/don't know the opinions of the "thousands of Motherwell fans " at that time. Although I suspect the board split is similar to the overall split of the thousands of Motherwell fans

He's been injured for a while and I suspect he has been "trying his hand' at coaching and shown enough to get a coaching role. Maybe he's the one who has progressed Theo Bair and that's why he has been given the role but I don't expect that some posters will accept that as a possibility.