Kmcalpin

Seconded, the pitch looked to be in first class condition. Credit to the ground staff.

From a very selfish perspective, an away tie against a team whose ground I haven't visited before. But for the greater good a home tie against a small side from the lower leagues or outwith. We don't get many home ties though.

Just watched the TV highlights to watch key moments in detail. They show what a great goal Johnson scored, by beating defenders and hitting the net from an acute angle. The Heats defenders did little wrong. The challenge on MacDonald - looked a red card. Up front I thought Moult and MacDonald worked like Trojans all day and the former was rewarded with a goal. Johnson had a decent game although service to him at times was poor. Grimshaw had a decent, but not great game, and you certainly couldn't fault him for lack of effort or tenacity. Pearson had a decent game but put in some rash tackles at times and I'm not sure we played him to his best use. Didn't think Lasley played well - too often outmuscled and passing was poor but given his recent absence can't be too hard on him. It was worrying the way our central midfield just disappeared in the last 20 minutes as Hearts put us under the cosh and I doubt if MMcG will have been too impressed by that given his liking for a competitive engine room. We didn't play well at the back although I have a degree of sympathy for Kennedy. He's a big lad but met an even bigger lad who was always going to cause trouble for our central defenders and keeper - we just didn't play him and his annoying sidekick, Delgado, well. Maybe lack of preparation? McManus struggled too. Didn't think either our full backs played well. Stevie Hammell was guilty of bad decision making and gave away too many stupid fouls and a potentially costly and entirely avoidable corner in the late stages. Against a side like Hearts you simply cannot afford to do that - he obviously forgot Jim Gannon's advice. All that said, I don't know who else would have played any better at left back. Both Hearts goals were avoidable as Mark McGhee will be pointing out to his charges this morning. For the first Kennedy was outmuscled not surprisingly but Mcmanus and Hammell looked all at sea with Ripley not covering himself in glory. For the second, a great shot but just look at the space and time the lad had to pick his spot. I counted 5 players round about him but not one made an effort to close him down as they backpedalled - a typical goal that we lose. Overall though not a bad result. I think we have the makings of an 8th/9th/10th placed side if McGhee can instill more organisition and harder working ethos into the players. Some mates I spoke to independently of each other said that at Dingwall last week the home side weren't any more talented than us as individuals but were far better organised and worked far harder off the ball than we did. That also applied yesterday I'd say.

Overall I was pleased with a point, which was the correct result. We certainly played better today but the performance was very mixed. On the plus side we created a lot but were somewhat wasteful and yes we played some decent football. On the debit side our defending and midfield play wasn't the best at times. A physical and big Hearts 11 proved to be a real handful as we knew they would. Man for man we matched them for skill but couldn't match their work rate or physicality. Their off the ball play was clearly better than ours and as the Traveller (an acquaintance of several years standing who sits beside me I discovered today) said to me they could throw 3/4/5 bodies in front of the ball to block goal efforts where as we could hardly muster one. It was the first time I've watched the new Hearts and was left somewhat deflated. They're very physical and cynical which they don't really need to be - maybe the Craig Levein influence. I'll watch the highlights before I comment further.

I think you're right about that. From memory, at the recent Well Society evening MMcMG said something like "Jack Leitch wasn't ready to start" in a passing comment. Maybe someone else who was at the meeting could verify that.

Financial losses aside, there will probably always be a need for short term cash injection around January. This is when cash flow is at its lowest and most clubs need some kind of buffer at this time of year. That doesn't mean to say they'll make a loss over the year though.

I agree Ian but there are fans who were against it from the very outset and will not change their minds no matter what. I guess that in the middle there's a "grey" element who could be persuaded to join and those are the ones the Society is rightly targetting, but don't ask me to quantify them.

Thats it in a nutshell for me. If we accept that fan ownership is not the road to go down and that there is no wealthy white knight on the horizon and that Les Hutchinson does not want to own the club long term what do we do? Simply close the club down? We have to be realistic here - the Society is not for everyone, it never has been and never will be. Nothing will change that fact.

The club's accounts are quite separate from those of the Society - only shareholders receive the club's accounts.

Agree with most of that but think Laing or Johnson would replace Leitch in the starting line up, going by MMcG's comments last week.

My thoughts exactly, in hindsight my use of the term "cover" was wrong. I wouldn't be unhappy if Ripley went back to Middlesborough and we used that cash to source a defensive central midfielder to play alongside Pearson. We also need 2 replacement first choice fullbacks. The question as to how much Stevie Hammell can give us is fast becoming academic given his injuries.

I'm not so sure. Is Samson better than Ripley? Mibbes aye mibbes naw. Taylor - I'd agree. Grimshaw - not bad but no standout. Central midfield continues to be a weak area for us and it needs fixed PDQ. Mark McGhee said that we need more cover there.

The more I thought about this the less concerned I became. Ok, we're not in a great position financially, but we shouldn't overreact to this. For the past good few years we have had to have a cash injection/loan in January, traditionally the leanest time of the year, to tide us over. In the past this has come from Directors or the Society and this is what the auditors are referring to although it hasn't usually been spelt out quite as clearly.

There's always a risk when summarising lengthy text that you miss out important information and perhaps you've done that here. Yes, the auditors do say what you write but they also say that the Board is reasonably confident that, if additional funding is required, that the club will be able obtain it to allow it to continue in existence for the foreseeable future. Incidentally, going by your moniker, are you a travelling man?

You seem to have some "inside knowledge" of playing matters. What is the source of your information?

Had it not been for the Society the club would already be in administration. It may be a straight choice between an uncertain future and no future at all. Don't forget that these accounts are for the year up to the end of May and will not include the Lee Erwin transfer fee or Jamie Murphy's add on, which taken together will be worth about £530K. Certainly not an encouraging position to be in but things should become clearer at the AGM on 7 December.

This. Quite a lot of anti Mark McGhee feeling already beginning to surface going by some posts. I don't pretend to have any inside information but like Andy was at the meeting at Fir Park a week ago. Mark McGhee has been to some Under 20 games and was planning to attend last week's game and taking training sessions. He also said that Les Hutchison had got across that youth was the way ahead. He was also able to single out Dom Thomas and Dylan Mackin for praise and obviously knew a fair bit about both lads. In our current situation survival is our priority and given that, most of us would sacrifice blooding youngsters for fielding experienced pros and getting a result.

A lot will depend on who is fit and if we picked up any further injuries on Saturday or if we sustain more in training this week. Certainly a dose of good luck wouldn't go amiss - I'm hoping its a case of swings and roundabouts. By all accounts Inverness had no luck against Partick on Saturday.

Some truth in that. Over the past two weeks especially, injuries and suspensions have taken their toll. Big Mick isn't exactly playing the best footie if his career but MMcG said on Monday his experience would be missed yesterday and that we are light in central defence. A shocking refereeing decision in the Inverness game caused us problems yesterday. Until January, the bossman has to get the best from what he has and change the style of play to suit the players. Some players may find themselves out of favour and others may get their chance. In January he'll need to wheel and deal and it seems defence and central midfield will be his priorities. This season results will be important as will getting a bit of luck. From TV highlights yesterday it seems to me that County's penalty was very soft - maybe those who were at Dingwall could verify this? Taken together with the penalty decision last week they have made the difference between 10th and 11th places. We can't rely on good luck though.

Sadly, that has been true of the service our strikers have received in many games this season Allan.

Just watched the TV highlights and yes we were very poor. I feel sorry for the fans who travelled north and had to endure that torture. Hopefully everyone arrived home safely. I've heard Mark McGhee speak a few times now and he won't tolerate players not performing consistently. Maybe not the type of manager to shout and roar but he'll know who is pulling their weight and who is not. By his own admission he still has a lot of changes to make and hopes to bring in one or two new faces. It seems defence and central midfield have caught his attention.

Presumably then a significant proportion of our support are "clueless morons". A very harsh view of many of your fellow Well fans. There are a lot of things on the playing side that Mark McGhee has yet to change by his own admission. Time will tell.

Presumably Chalmers was injured? That was the last thing we needed - 2 left backs out of action. As for Luke Watt - MMcG (note not MM) did not mention him on Monday evening when asked what young players might might the grade. If young Watt is not even on the bench that must be for a reason. You can't tell me that if he is playing well and has the right attitude then Craigan, Robinson and McGhee would all ignore him. They see him at first hand week in and week out and know more about him than we do. As for Taylor, I have no problem with MMcG selecting him. Until today he had not seen him in action and understandably wanted to see what he could or could not do. I would be more worried if he picked his team based on comments on this forum. Whether he will pick him again is another matter entirely.

I can understand why you're a bit apathetic towards us at the moment, but don't understand why Leeds United V Rotherham might be a more attractive proposition. Leeds is a bit further away than Dingwall and would take you longer to get there (and also more money). Leeds is mid table in the English Championship and Rotherham is bottom. Entry at Dingwall is £20 as opposed to £26/27 at Leeds. Still each to their own.

Celtic, Partick Thistle, Kilmarnock, Aberdeen, and Dundee are a bit less physical than the rest. Teams like Ross County, Hamilton, St Johnstone, Inverness and Dundee United are a bit more physical. Nothing wrong with playing physical football but someone needs to remind some of these teams, in crystal clear terms, that they're playing soccer not rugby.