MelvinBragg

I was told (and I think I posted on here at the time) when Gannon was appointed that when things went wrong, it was never his fault if you listened to him. His last couple of post match interviews really made me think of that reputation. I appreciate the fact that there is a limit to how much technique you can coach into a player after a certain age, but why under Gannon was our back four going backwards in terms of organisation? Clean sheets at Parkhead, Pittodrie and Tannadice seem like an age ago now. Much like Harri Kampman, Gannon in his short spell has done something that was required. Kampman got rid of a lot of guys 32+ whose reputations might have got them contracts with some Scottish managers when they were really past their best (Coyne, Falconer, Martin). Gannon came in to a threadbare squad and with a mixture of loans, frees and promotion of good young players managed to get a team ready to start the season. But despite his comments to the contrary, you never got the impression he was here for the long haul. And an abrasive personality in a manager is not always something a club with our squad size can work with. I said when Lasley and Craigan were discarded earlier in the season, that my fear was that we would need them later in the season. Some of Saturday's problems were ring rust on those players. And while I agree that players are professionals and should give 100% as we all do in our jobs, football (and other sports) require a degree of enthusiasm about the task in order to get the best performancer. And it is very difficult to be enthusiastic about working under a boss you don't like. We all knew the form of the young players would be up and down. Gannon's man management was poor in that he was unable to keep the older players onside for when this happened. In essence, thank you to Gannon for doing what was required. But JB was right in his statement. For various reasons, Gannon continuing as manager was "untenable"...

As soon as I typed that, I knew what someone's response would be. I earned that one, I s'ppose...

Not Leitch. Not McCall. Not Robertson. Other than that, I'm not bothered...

I did say in the pub last night that I thought we were too nice at the moment. Other than Coke a couple of times early in the season, I can't remember many crunching tackles from anyone in our team. Though I do agree with others that Hutchison definitely looks the man most capable of dishing it out...

Aye, us and everybody else...

For what it's worth, I reckon you're right. Having said that, it is only Wednesday, plenty of time for the weather to take another mental turn. I have a funny feeling ir could be that the roads and concerns about fans travelling being sued might be the reason and not the pitch...

To answer this question, I'd need the link to that really detailed Motherwell database website that I've lost. Because like a few people on here, I'm foggy as to who played in the early 00s and who just played in the late 90s...

Give you a clue, he wears number 4...

CIS Cup Final not a similar situation because we'd worn the away kit in so many of the rounds previous...? Must confess I was a bit miffed, if Motherwell get to a cup final I'd rather see them in Claret & Amber unless the away kit is necessary...

I'll not bother with Inverness, I'll go to the replay...

Dunno. Never did any harm when it was Dykstra and Philliben...

Aye, if only for their will to win. We need to find more characters like them. On your other point regarding Forbes being burnt out. It does concern me that he should look so jaded in November. I said to someone at the game yesterday that I wished we could cross Fitzpatrick's engine with Forbes' use of the ball. What might hold Forbes' career back is his lack of speed about the field...

I'd forgotten that particular classy number. And folk complained about the pink effort...

He's brutal. Someone offered to drive him back to Charlton. I'll give him a piggyback. Can see him becoming a Gus Caesar. Really promising at a young age, promise never to be fulfilled. I hope he proves me wrong, but I ain't holding my breath...

Forbes' goal return has disguised some very average performances (and his goal return has been boosted by penalties - Richie Foran?). The last time I saw Coke have a really good game was against Rangers. Having said that, both these guys can offer more technique and guile than Lasley and Jennings. Hately has been doing the spadework in the midfield well this season. However as we went looking for a winner yesterday following Aberdeen's equaliser, the thing that did irritate me was the apparent lack of urgency in the midfield (and indeed throughout the team). What we've seen of Jennings and what we know of Lasley says to me that they would bring some of that urgency. Indeed any urgency that was seen from us yesterday seemed to stem from Jennings after his introduction. Even outwith the midfield, I find myself wondering what difference a Paul Quinn or David Clarkson would have made in yesterday's game. Players with the real appetite for a battle. While I do appreciate the good possession football we have been playing, we do seem to be lacking just a bit of steely determination. We were missing Hutchison yesterday who brings a bit of that to the table. We had Craigan and Lasley sitting on the bench who can roll their sleeves up and get in about people. For my mind, Aberdeen had possession far too easily yesterday when down to ten men. Sometimes you have to fight for the right to play your football...

Fixed that for you...

God knows how we won, as a bigger table of rubber men, you'll never see. As mon_da_well says though, great night...

Maybe he thought naively that being journalists, they'd be able to read. The fact that the two names that the BBC mentioned were Craigan and Lasley, guys who have for the most part been listed in the 18 man squad every Saturday is maybe what pissed him off. If they'd mentioned McGarry, he might have been fine with it...

They actually got Pat McCourt from the English lower leagues. He was at Rochdale and was being linked with moves to Everton and Man City at the time. Rumour was however that he had some "refuelling problems". Backed up by another rumour I heard that when he first arrived at Celtic Park for pre-season training, Boruc was running past him...

And it's still too fucking dear. Doesn't really matter how many away games we have in November, I do not have £22 to go to a football match. Money gets stashed away all year for the season ticket, and gets put away for the 3rd round of the cup, and first day of the season. Don't accuse people of not being up for it simply cos you happen to have the cash to spend...

Having just read the BBC Alba thread, it sounds to me like Craigan's comments during his interview were equally, if not more, noteworthy...

What I was trying to say, but much more concise. Thank you...

He's on there saying "some will have to go, look at the team sheet", nothing more. With the exception of McGarry, anyone going into his office to complain could be given reasonable answers. Fraser -has been injured and Ruddy has been the man in possession of the jersey. Craigan - how could I be talking about you big man, you've played a good few games. Lasley and Jennings - can't be talking about you boys, you're on the bench every week, keeping the three midfielders on their toes. Fitzpatrick and DLS - you've been injured at the start of the season, bad timing, keep the head down and work. Now we might know that some of that will be bullshit, but which bits? Other than McGarry, who has been "frozen out"? On here, and in the press, it's all speculation... With one league defeat after Bonfire Night, no one in the squad can complain about team selections anyway...

Stockport fans did say that he would eventually put a foot wrong with the press. And if felt wronged by them, would not be slow to make it known. For what it's worth I think the apparent singling out of Craigan is deliberate to an extent. In doing that, it would be criticising a player who has a great deal of affection for the club and would therefore be reluctant to speak out disrespecting the club. But by doing so, it also sends a message to the other players. On the other hand, it's been made very easy for him to do so, given the number of clean sheets with Craigan in the team and without Craigan in the team. I stated when Gannon arrived that I had heard that players would love and hate him in equal measure. If you're one of his favourites (I would say Coke) then you'll feel protected and have nothing bad to say about him, if not (Craigan, allegedly) you'll feel shunned and as welcome as Barack Obama at a BNP meeting. What I would say is that it's up to the players how they react. A real strong character would be determined to prove him wrong any chance they got, kind of "I'll show you". If they're going to go in the huff, are they the type of people you want in your squad. Gannon should simply be clever about it and say to the players that the press are simply trying to undermine what they're trying to achieve by creating divisions. By not naming names, he keeps people on their toes, and doesn't alienate (for example) Lasley by saying "Lasley's for sale" in case with Coke and Forbes injured and Hately suspended he has to rely upon Lasley in December. The players like Lasley, Craigan and Jennings aren't naive enough to think they're in his thoughts for a starting place at the moment. But hearing Gannon's comments, I suspect most of them looked around the dressing room and thought that he was talking about McGarry, Fraser and Fitzpatrick. The first three I mentioned have at least seen some competitive game time this season...

Before the game and right now...