fizoxy

Seeing mentions of clarkson to st mirren on loan on the Twitter

Twardzik is a possibility, and Faddy (if his deal in the states is still a goer). Other than that it will most likely be a couple of youngsters out on loan. So we should have the wages freed up from Grimshaw, Taylor, Robinson, and poss twardzik and one other to put towards a half decent midfielder or two. I'm guessing these will be loans.

To be fair, what someone "looks" to do and what other people will let them do can often be two very different things. But he does have experience.

Unless he has a clause in his contract, 400k seems a bit light. We have time on our side but it would help if there was some competition for his signature.

the only excuse for going with the same back four would be some sort of doubling down from McGhee on the idea that his selection wasn't the reason we got hammered. I'm confident that wont happen.

Law is injured

When we do well it is because we managed to keep our small squad fit. When we have done badly it's when we have more than a couple of injuries. This is the same for every other non old firm club. We simply can't afford to pay for quality bench players. With the money that was thrown at baraclough we should have went for relative quality over quantity. A single decent backup for each line is enough, with the youth there to cover in the instance we lose two players at a position. Hopefully we can manage to swing something to move twardzik, Robinson and maybe a couple more (Reid, clarkson) on this month and bring in a midfielder for cover, but realistically it looks like we will have to wait until the end of the season and reset, which is going to be interesting with mick, lasley, hammel, skippy, and Ripley all gone, and fletcher, Moore, Reid, twardzik and Robinson all following. I can see us trying to extend the oldies another year.

Ainsworth in for Grimshaw was a given, but it makes no sense to me that we played hammel, law and Pearson out of position and brought in a guy who just returned to u20s action this week, when we could have put one of our backup midfielders in midfield and left the rest alone. You can also argue that moving hammel also made Johnson less effective. I wasn't expecting anything today, and maybe McGhee wasn't either so decided to try some stuff again?

The settled back four conceded three at home to accies, our defense is not that good. Today we got horsed because our midfield was also not good.

Or maybe a marking job for chalmers?

My guess is Hammel to the middle and chalmers at lb

So, any ex 'well midfielders available for a comeback?

I presume they are also in midfield, making it 4.

Looks like Laing and leitch are in midfield for the u20s today.

It would be kind of shit sitting in the back row and having people leaning on the railing behind you. Seems like a fair enough request that really shouldn't bother folk.

one measure of the lack of quality in our game may be how few SPFL players are in the national team, which itself is hardly decent. Also, when did we (or our opposition) last have a player that you'd pay to see?

A lot of it is down to factors outwith our control, such as more football on tv and multiple alternative family entertainment options. However, I think there is plenty that can be done to make the game more appealing. I'd start with a bigger league because I have absolutely no desire to see us play kilmarnock or Ross county four times each, and neither do I want to pay over 20 quid for the privilege. Yes, this will introduce so called meaningless games, but I don't think the cut throat atmosphere of the smaller league is conducive to bringing in young players or attempting entertaining football. Also, it would be nice that if we were to introduce new fans to the game that they are not made to feel like children / criminals and have to sit in shitty seats and can't even enjoy a beer with the game. It will be interesting to see if anything comes of the whole SFSA manifesto that was published today, will we see some movement? or will it be filed with the Henry mcleish report and the other think tank recommendations from years past?

Is bara back scouting with them?

I love Lionel, but we can't have one of our highest earners (I would assume due to the recent new contract off the heels of his huge contribution on keeping us up) being an erratic bench player. I'm guessing this will be more about trimming the wage bill, but there should be some sort of fee. I am hoping that we use this window to undo some of the unnecessary moves from the summer. I'd consider extending Lionel as one of them since we had Thomas in the wings and were touting ourselves as a club that develops youngsters.

Doubt there's any significant money involved. I'm guessing this also allows him to play in the u20s if he isn't getting full games, and he'll at least get one more cup run out. If he is impressing in training, then this is pretty much a risk free move to get us through a congested few weeks.

You seem to be in the minority regarding law. He's been the first choice RB under three managers now. The problem with many of our support is that they want our players to improve, but they also refuse to change their opinion of a player if when do. Others just like to stick with the same scapegoat for their Motherwell career. The suggested replacement I'm guessing is Watt, who has hardly been a colossus in the u20s. When do you propose to let go the ones you want to let go? At the end of the season when their contracts expire? Realistically in January we can send back the loan players and maybe move some guys onto other clubs, but someone needs to want them first, and the player has to agree to take a wage cut, which would be stupid. I can see Reid and possibly clarkson going out on loan for the rest of the year, but we're stuck with the others.

Penalties would be more interesting if everyone could run in once the whistle goes. Would also stop those stupid run ups.

They should have priced each plot based on the likelihood of a player scoring from there and had a prize if someone scored from your plot. If an opposition player scores from it you pay a forfeit, and if the referee sprays his stuff on it you get a free pack of razors. I see absolutely no holes in that idea at all.

Some good observations there. I offered to with some of the website stuff since I work in that area for one of the biggest fundraising organizations on the planet. Got told my request would get passed on, then heard nothing. Wouldn't really mind if someone had addressed the points above, but to not hear back and see the same mistakes being made again and again is a bit shit. I'm in the camp with those who really want to see it work, but feel they could really do with a handful of folk who are willing to put themselves out there and promote the society. We've seen the club benefit from some of the creative minds that have passed through this forum, and there are some really hardworking and innovative guys in the bois, so these people exist.

I think the big failure was that the society expected people to make the full payments in the first place. First impressions last. But if something isn't working you change it, so at least they're doing that.