Former Motherwell Fc Players Thread

[Mintymac]

I’d have Louis Moult back if some kind of deal could be built in to the contract to protect the club .

 I saw enough of him to be convinced in games at tynecastle and McDermott parks that even not fully fit he was class .

what’s the harm in getting him in for preseason ,medical etc and take it from there . Surely that has to be worth doing as we’ll have loads of trialists in during that period and he could be properly assessed by our physios as to whether he can cope with the demands of first team football in SPFL 
If we don’t do it then sure as hell other teams around us will .
If it doesn’t work no harm done but if it does ……… we have a player . 
No brainier for me to at least get him up here .

Im sure a contract could be drawn up to suit both parties and after reading that herald article he’s a decent bloke and wouldn’t be hard to deal with .

 

 

[MJC]

8 minutes ago, Mintymac said:

I’d have Louis Moult back if some kind of deal could be built in to the contract to protect the club .

 I saw enough of him to be convinced in games at tynecastle and McDermott parks that even not fully fit he was class .

what’s the harm in getting him in for preseason ,medical etc and take it from there . Surely that has to be worth doing as we’ll have loads of trialists in during that period and he could be properly assessed by our physios as to whether he can cope with the demands of first team football in SPFL 
If we don’t do it then sure as hell other teams around us will .
If it doesn’t work no harm done but if it does ……… we have a player . 
No brainier for me to at least get him up here .

Im sure a contract could be drawn up to suit both parties and after reading that herald article he’s a decent bloke and wouldn’t be hard to deal with .

 

 

Jesus suffering fuck

Why don't we give Wullie Pettigrew a contract too while we're at it? I know he's drawing his pension now but class is permanent.

I'll take a contract too if we're handing them out to anybody. I mean I'm pushing 40, a bit overweight these days and my footballing ability is five a side level at best, but I did score a really good goal at the Palace ground pitches a few years ago when I was wearing the 17/18 home top that Moult wore when he put Rangers to the sword at Hampden.

I'll probably not offer the team much in the way of anything but neither did Moult when he was here this season so if SK wants to give me a call...I'll even bring my own boots.

[wellfan]

I’d like us to give Moult a short-term pre-season contract to see what's what. It could be drawn up in such a way as to protect both parties. For example, he gets a chance to prove his fitness and, if so, we get first refusal. If he's knackered, he finds another lower-league club before the season starts. I'm sure it could also be done in such a way that we offer him training and medical facilities and we only pay him a nominal fee. Surely something creative can be done, even just to help the guy out at little cost to us. Just a thought  

[MJC]

3 minutes ago, wellfan said:

Surely something creative can be done, even just to help the guy out at little cost to us. Just a thought  

Why? Because "we exist to improve people's lives"?

Inspite of what our social media team and some in our support like to think, we are not a charity. We are a professional football club and we can't afford to sign ex players who are well past their best for purely sentimental reasons.

We did this with McFadden after St.Johnstone had binned him, brought him back and he did nothing. The whole team even chucked it in a Cup tie to try and get him a goal and he couldn't. He even got made up to assistant manager/player!

Louis Moult was a great player for us, but that was almost six years ago now and in that time he has barely played any football.

We need to move on and stop looking back with misty eyes at players who were once good for us. We tried with Moult this season and he offered us next to nothing. 

Take the hint.

[Thunderlips]

I'd take Moult back easy. Full pre-season, Pay as You Play deal.

[MJC]

1 minute ago, Thunderlips said:

I'd take Moult back easy. Full pre-season, Pay as You Play deal.

I'd take Tommy Coyne back easy. Full pre-season, Pay as You Play deal.

[Mintymac]

2 hours ago, MJC said:

Jesus suffering fuck

Why don't we give Wullie Pettigrew a contract too while we're at it? I know he's drawing his pension now but class is permanent.

I'll take a contract too if we're handing them out to anybody. I mean I'm pushing 40, a bit overweight these days and my footballing ability is five a side level at best, but I did score a really good goal at the Palace ground pitches a few years ago when I was wearing the 17/18 home top that Moult wore when he put Rangers to the sword at Hampden.

I'll probably not offer the team much in the way of anything but neither did Moult when he was here this season so if SK wants to give me a call...I'll even bring my own boots.

If it’s of no detriment to the club financially why would we not have him in for a preseason . 
Can’t see why some people wouldn’t  think that is worth a gamble . Doesn’t work out …. Ok move on . But if it does happy days .

Its not something that I’m getting over exited about either way but wouldn’t completely Bin the idea . 
No reason to .

 

[wellfan]

18 minutes ago, MJC said:

Take the hint.

You take the hint. 

[wellfan]

1 minute ago, MJC said:

I'd take Tommy Coyne back easy. Full pre-season, Pay as You Play deal.

This is a ridiculous false equivalence. Just accept that there are two valid opinions. 

[MJC]

1 minute ago, wellfan said:

This is a ridiculous false equivalence. Just accept that there are two valid opinions. 

Tommy Coyne was a great player for us once upon a time. Louis Moult was a great player for us once upon a time.

There would be absolutely no point in bringing back Tommy Coyne as he is done and too old. And while Moult is clearly not anywhere near as old, we know for a fact that he has barely had a pair of football boots on in the last few years AND we know that we had him here on loan earlier this season and he couldn't get anywhere near required fitness and is clearly also done at this level.

There would be no reasonable justification for us signing Moult again this summer. It would be driven by sentiment, nothing more and we can't operate like that.

Steelboy gets a lot of flak on here, but he's said this a few times and he's bang on the money with it, that there are too many of our fans who see the players as their mates and no matter how little they offer, they're happy to have them in the team.

[wellfan]

1 minute ago, MJC said:

Tommy Coyne was a great player for us once upon a time. Louis Moult was a great player for us once upon a time.

There would be absolutely no point in bringing back Tommy Coyne as he is done and too old. And while Moult is clearly not anywhere near as old, we know for a fact that he has barely had a pair of football boots on in the last few years AND we know that we had him here on loan earlier this season and he couldn't get anywhere near required fitness and is clearly also done at this level.

There would be no reasonable justification for us signing Moult again this summer. It would be driven by sentiment, nothing more and we can't operate like that.

Steelboy gets a lot of flak on here, but he's said this a few times and he's bang on the money with it, that there are too many of our fans who see the players as their mates and no matter how little they offer, they're happy to have them in the team.

You are like a dug with a bone on this one. Enjoy the game today. 

[MJC]

Just now, wellfan said:

You are like a dug with a bone on this one. Enjoy the game today. 

Thanks, you too.

[joewarkfanclub]

20 hours ago, Thunderlips said:

I'd take Moult back easy. Full pre-season, Pay as You Play deal.

This.

No risk attached.

Saw enough in the brief glimpses we got last time out to show he has still got it.

He has had an op on the ankle that was causing the problem and has been in training for 12 weeks without negative reaction.

Much rather give Louis the chance to resurrect his career than have to suffer another season of Connor Sheilds.

No harm to the boy, but he is hardly ripping it up with Queens Park in the Championship.

[weeyin]

Shields has 5 goals in 14 appearances with Queens Park this season. Moult has 1 goal in 12.

However, if I was a betting man, I'd bet SK isn't looking at either option to replace KVV.

 

[wellsince75]

1 hour ago, weeyin said:

Shields has 5 goals in 14 appearances with Queens Park this season. Moult has 1 goal in 12.

However, if I was a betting man, I'd bet SK isn't looking at either option to replace KVV.

 

Im slightly concerned that SK thinks Mandron is someone to keep around. He speaks very highly of both Mandron and Obika.  Both big physical boys who work hard but neither will bring in lots of goals. 

Be interesting to see what transpires over the closed season. 

[Big Wispy Flossy]

People don’t realise that moult on a pay per play deal still causes mayhem from a budgeting perspective. We should have moved on years ago. Hopefully those in charge have similar thoughts

[Spiderpig]

2 hours ago, wellsince75 said:

Im slightly concerned that SK thinks Mandron is someone to keep around. He speaks very highly of both Mandron and Obika.  Both big physical boys who work hard but neither will bring in lots of goals. 

Be interesting to see what transpires over the closed season. 

Both are hard working players, yes mandron looks a bit short of pace but they are the big target players we have been short of in recent years, paired up with hopefully KVV For another season I think they have goals in them.

[Spit_It_Out]

Can we please stop bring back Moult nonsense FFS he is absolutely done as a player he will never ever be the player he was it's ridiculous talk.

I would rather young Lennon Miller got game time let's progress as a club not regress.

[Kmcalpin]

12 hours ago, Spiderpig said:

Both are hard working players, yes mandron looks a bit short of pace but they are the big target players we have been short of in recent years, paired up with hopefully KVV For another season I think they have goals in them.

Thats it Allan. Of the two I prefer Obika but thats on limited evidence. They both lack pace but are physical, hold the ball up well and create space for an out and out goalscorer like KVV or Moult. . 

[mfc]

14 hours ago, wellsince75 said:

Im slightly concerned that SK thinks Mandron is someone to keep around. He speaks very highly of both Mandron and Obika.  Both big physical boys who work hard but neither will bring in lots of goals. 

Be interesting to see what transpires over the closed season. 

I don't particularly rate either but I get our budget will mean that we will most likely keep one of them on for next season,we definitely don't need both though.

[wellsince75]

23 hours ago, Thunderlips said:

I'd take Moult back easy. Full pre-season, Pay as You Play deal.

A fit Moult is a quality player. He also cares about the club and would likely take the pay as you play deal.

I'm pro any decent "well player coming back, appreciate not everyone is. For me Faddy, Pearson, McDonald, Hammell, Lasley, Craggs are all good examples.  

Phil Odonnel returned when he was 32, another player written off due to injuries. , yet in his twighlight years was nothing short of superb and put in a further 77 appearances. Who's to say Moult wouldn't be similar. 

Having quality pros around, even if they play half the games are good for the first team + all the youngsters who can learn. 

[MJC]

7 hours ago, Spit_It_Out said:

Can we please stop bring back Moult nonsense FFS he is absolutely done as a player he will never ever be the player he was it's ridiculous talk.

I would rather young Lennon Miller got game time let's progress as a club not regress.

Of course it’s ridiculous talk and it’s only driven by sentiment. Had Moult never played for us and had instead played for Kilmarnock, for example, and been good for them five years ago but been more or less crocked ever since then no one would even be entertaining signing him now.

We as a club and a support have become too bogged down in this romanticised idea that bringing popular ex players back is a shrewd move, but we have been stung by it too many times. We literally had Moult here just a few months ago and had to terminate his loan because he couldn’t get fit enough. Indeed, he would actually still be here right now if he has got anywhere near the required fitness standard! Was that not a bit of an indicator that it just wasn’t going to work out? And yet some want us to bring him back again??

Only us!

[Inflato]

2 minutes ago, MJC said:

Of course it’s ridiculous talk and it’s only driven by sentiment...

 

Absolutely this!

I can't think of any other club that overdoses on sentimentality quite like us, including the arse-cheeks. The "bring back brigade", strip designs linked with the past, naming of stands and the annual 91 wankfest give me the boak to be honest.

Moult will always have a place in our hearts, but his days of playing at the level we require are over. Keep sentiment to watching repeats of Dad's Army.

[MJC]

28 minutes ago, Inflato said:

 

Absolutely this!

I can't think of any other club that overdoses on sentimentality quite like us, including the arse-cheeks. The "bring back brigade", strip designs linked with the past, naming of stands and the annual 91 wankfest give me the boak to be honest.

Moult will always have a place in our hearts, but his days of playing at the level we require are over. Keep sentiment to watching repeats of Dad's Army.

In fairness I don’t see anything wrong with naming stands after players and remembering the 91 Cup win, even if it’s a bit frustrating the longer it goes since it happened. 
 

But the obsession from the club and a lot of our fans about bringing back ex players is absolutely ludicrous. Obviously it has worked in our favour at times, but it’s the misty-eyed fawning over certain players, particularly Faddy and Moult that is so cringeworthy.

We re-signed Faddy for a third time in 2015 when he was 32, clearly done, unfit and had just been released by St.Johnstone a few months earlier. Fast forward a few months and he was player/asst manager. Then in January this year, we cut short a season long loan for Moult because he was crocked and unable to make any sort of impact for us, hardly surprising given that he’d spent the best part of the previous five years on a treatment table, and yet STILL we are getting some of our fans suggesting we should sign him again in the summer!

It must be great being an agent of an ex Motherwell player. They could be over 30, injury prone and feeling pretty down about their career prospects. But all the agent needs to do is just remind them that they played for Motherwell and they are suckers for re-signing ex players, so there’s always hope there!

[GazzyB]

 

The first re-signing of McFadden worked out very well indeed. We could re-sign him in July and I wouldn't mind a bit.

 

Also how on earth was this goal over ten years ago??!