Onthefringes Posted May 8, 2017 Report Share Posted May 8, 2017 I don't really think we can judge Robinson's appointment until the end of the season. There's been a pretty equal mix of the encouraging- a tactical flexibility and willingness to change things, less 3,4,5 goal pumpings and generally improved performances all with a makeshift team- and the worrying- we're still losing more than we win and seem unable to cut out idiotic individual defensive mistakes. If he keeps us up,then job done, he's done as well as could be expected given the shambles he walked into. If we go down, then fair enough, criticise whoever you want then. Kilmarnock aside, he set up like this against Rangers & took a deserved point. Hasn't changed anything since except personnel at his disposal. Inexperience over experience has been a major factor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wellman Posted May 8, 2017 Report Share Posted May 8, 2017 Kilmarnock aside, he set up like this against Rangers & took a deserved point. Hasn't changed anything since except personnel at his disposal. Inexperience over experience has been a major factor. we didn't have Lionel sitting behind the front two with no idea what to do . Which also meant Cads had the responsibility for the whole right side and he was never sure whether to go or stay . Add to that the two in midfield constantly being out passed by Ross county's three didn't help . Then of course to bring on Jules (seemingly great potential ) who has now played worse than ZFA (which I didn't dream would ever be possible ) I think it will take months of therapy to build his confidence again.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Del_Superwell Posted May 8, 2017 Report Share Posted May 8, 2017 Aye, things are bad, negative in the extreme at the moment, but, to add lies to the argument helps nobody. Are you implying current club chairman Jim McMahon or as has been suggested Derek Weir is still behind the scenes have no business prowess? That's a corker even from you... It will never change? We are in a period of change just now, yeah, not setting heather on fire currently, but, we're slap bang in the middle of what was heralded as a five year process that has had more moves than a game of chess to date which advocates what we end up with will differ from what we have now. A five year process that Les Hutchison fucked off from within 18 months, that to me should be a concern within itself. I've never bought into or believed the well society can make a success of this, where's the evidence of it? We are sinking quicker than the titanic but hey ho we've just to believe everything is perfect and just get on with things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Posted May 8, 2017 Report Share Posted May 8, 2017 A five year process that Les Hutchison fucked off from within 18 months, that to me should be a concern within itself. I've never bought into or believed the well society can make a success of this, where's the evidence of it? We are sinking quicker than the titanic but hey ho we've just to believe everything is perfect and just get on with things. I'd be interested to know how you'd ideally like the club to be run? At the moment, although it's still a bit of an ongoing process what with Les needing repaid etc, we have a Chairman and a Board of Directors that call the shots. We have a major stakeholder - the Well Society - who are on hand to invest money if/when it's required or deemed beneficial. The onus with fan-ownership, however, is to try and ensure as much as possible that the club is operating within its means. The other option, going by what we've had in the past and by what other clubs tend to have, seems to be that we would have a Chairman and a Board of Directors that call the shots. We'd have a major stakeholder who would presumably be on hand to invest money if/when it's required or deemed beneficial. Given we're unlikely to attract a billionaire, however, it's probably safe to assume that the onus would be on trying to ensure as much as possible that the club is operating within its means. Don't get me wrong, I understand and largely agree with the vast majority of criticisms of the actual Well Society itself (ie. the group concerned with generating membership and running the Society) but I'm not quite sure I understand the thinking that having one random businessman as major stakeholder is any great deal different than having the Well Society as major stakeholder, given the club is still largely run like any other Scottish club of the same size. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Del_Superwell Posted May 8, 2017 Report Share Posted May 8, 2017 Well my opinion on it is nothing more than i expect to see a relatively successful team on the park and quite frankly we don't have one, I just dont see any sort of ambition to become a regular top 6 club which in my opinon is where i feel Motherwell should be. I've had some folk tell me we have the second lowest budget in the league and others tell me that isnt the case, we've signed signed some absolute dross from the depths of English non league clearly not cut out for the top flight, now i'm perfectly aware there's probably not a billionaire out there who would want to come in and buy things but i want us to be able to attract players of the calibre of the Randolphs, Hutchinsons, Higdons etc and be able to make money on while also being successful in the league, thats not happening in my opnion hence our current league predicament. My general belief is fans will buy into successful clubs if they like what they see on the park and at the moment I certainly don't like nor do a number of other people I know so that's why I have an issue with our current ownership set up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Posted May 8, 2017 Report Share Posted May 8, 2017 Well my opinion on it is nothing more than i expect to see a relatively successful team on the park and quite frankly we don't have one, I just dont see any sort of ambition to become a regular top 6 club which in my opinon is where i feel Motherwell should be. I've had some folk tell mel we have the second lowest budget in the league and others tell me that isnt the case, we've signed signed some absolute dross from the depths of English non league clearly not cut out for the top flight, now i'm perfectly aware there's probably not a billionaire out there who would want to come in and buy things but i want us to be able to attract players of the calibre of the Randolphs, Hutchinsons, Higdons etc and be able to make money on while also being successful in the league, thats not happening in my opnion hence our current league predicament. The Well Society has only been the major stakeholder for a matter of months. I would suggest its a bit unfair to start suggesting fan-ownership has much to do with us not being a top six side or not having a relatively successful team on the park. I'm sure we'd all love to see guys the likes of Randolph, Hutchinson and Higdon playing at Fir Park. However, firstly, I'd take some convincing that players of a particular calibre would come to Fir Park at the moment whether it was the Well Society or Ann Budge at the top. And secondly, decisions on recruitment are made by a Chairman and Board of Directors, a portion of which represents the major shareholder, so it's no different from what it would be if we had a singular businessman as the major shareholder. Ultimately, your issues with the recruitment policy have a lot to do with the current Club Board but very little to do with fan-ownership. As for your point about folk buying into a successful club rather than an unsuccessful club, I don't think there's any question about that. But that argument stretches to attendances, season tickets, merchandise etc every year anyway so, again, it's not massively different this time around. I think there's a disconnect between what you perceive the Society's role as and what it actually does. The Society isn't there to fund the club, the club is there to fund the club, with the Society in the background available to provide investment here and there - something it manages perfectly well at the moment. John Boyle tried for years to sell our club and nobody was the least bit interested. It just seems a bit pie in the sky to suddenly assume there'd be anybody with any cash whatsoever interested now that we're fan-owned, never mind someone who'd also be quite happy to throw that cash at bankrolling a top six squad. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Onthefringes Posted May 8, 2017 Report Share Posted May 8, 2017 we didn't have Lionel sitting behind the front two with no idea what to do . Which also meant Cads had the responsibility for the whole right side and he was never sure whether to go or stay . Add to that the two in midfield constantly being out passed by Ross county's three didn't help . Then of course to bring on Jules (seemingly great potential ) who has now played worse than ZFA (which I didn't dream would ever be possible ) I think it will take months of therapy to build his confidence again.. So like I said... Hasn't changed anything since except personnel at his disposal no? The system has remained the same with dire consequences. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capt_oats Posted May 8, 2017 Report Share Posted May 8, 2017 The Well Society has only been the major stakeholder for a matter of months. I would suggest its a bit unfair to start suggesting fan-ownership has much to do with us not being a top six side or not having a relatively successful team on the park. I'm sure we'd all love to see guys the likes of Randolph, Hutchinson and Higdon playing at Fir Park. However, firstly, I'd take some convincing that players of a particular calibre would come to Fir Park at the moment whether it was the Well Society or Ann Budge at the top. And secondly, decisions on recruitment are made by a Chairman and Board of Directors, a portion of which represents the major shareholder, so it's no different from what it would be if we had a singular businessman as the major shareholder. Ultimately, your issues with the recruitment policy have a lot to do with the current Club Board but very little to do with fan-ownership. As for your point about folk buying into a successful club rather than an unsuccessful club, I don't think there's any question about that. But that argument stretches to attendances, season tickets, merchandise etc every year anyway so, again, it's not massively different this time around. I think there's a disconnect between what you perceive the Society's role as and what it actually does. The Society isn't there to fund the club, the club is there to fund the club. John Boyle tried for years to sell our club and nobody was the least bit interested. It just seems a bit pie in the sky to suddenly assume there'd be anybody with any cash whatsoever interested now that we're fan-owned, never mind someone who'd also be quite happy to throw that cash at bankrolling a top six squad. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmcalpin Posted May 8, 2017 Report Share Posted May 8, 2017 John Boyle tried for years to sell our club and nobody was the least bit interested. It just seems a bit pie in the sky to suddenly assume there'd be anybody with any cash whatsoever interested now that we're fan-owned, never mind someone who'd also be quite happy to throw that cash at bankrolling a top six squad. Good posts Jay. Ok if you don't like fan ownership what is the alternative Del Superwell? Its all very well to say that you don't like something but what is the alternative right now; what would you do? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyRoss Posted May 8, 2017 Report Share Posted May 8, 2017 If he doesn't respond with a post about not being interested in the business side of the club I'll be utterly stunned! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Del_Superwell Posted May 8, 2017 Report Share Posted May 8, 2017 As i've said on numerous ocassions on other pages i have no idea what the alternative is to the Well Society if i did i'd have mentioned it by now. My opinion is there's always someone out there who would take a chance buying the club but were so set on fan ownership that wouldnt bother to even look at it, again thats just my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbcmfc Posted May 8, 2017 Report Share Posted May 8, 2017 What we really need is a David Murray, Brooks mileson or Vladimir Romanov to come in, employ Leanne Dempster and everything will be rosy? Is that us upto speed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Del_Superwell Posted May 8, 2017 Report Share Posted May 8, 2017 Money is everything in football and the only way to progress we dont have anybody with that sort of money so we will just need to settle for mediocrity, We will just leave it there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbcmfc Posted May 8, 2017 Report Share Posted May 8, 2017 Middle of the top flight is about our level, I can live with that. Clubs need to live within their means. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmcalpin Posted May 8, 2017 Report Share Posted May 8, 2017 As i've said on numerous ocassions on other pages i have no idea what the alternative is to the Well Society if i did i'd have mentioned it by now. My opinion is there's always someone out there who would take a chance buying the club but were so set on fan ownership that wouldnt bother to even look at it, again thats just my opinion. You're not getting off the hook. If as you think, the club is going down the tubes, what do we do now? Time is against us and we have to come to a decision. In recent years there has been no white knight waiting to ride to our rescue and I doubt if thats changed. Not taking a decision and doing nothing is not an option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelboy Posted May 8, 2017 Report Share Posted May 8, 2017 Looking at our league only Rangers, Dundee and Hearts have really had change of ownership in the past 10 years and only really Dundee was fresh money coming into the game. There are no buyers out there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dossertillidie Posted May 8, 2017 Report Share Posted May 8, 2017 it's still mind boggling that we didn't just appoint robinson until the end of the season,see what happens and then go from there,giving him an 18 month deal was a joke of a decision.surely there has to be a clause that if we go down,we part company and it doesn't cost the club a penny,even if we somehow manage to stay up,robinson still needs too go. I believe there is a clause and I also believe a deal until the end of the season would possibly provide too much uncertainty over the future, a reasonably stable albeit short contract was to install some faith and confidence in everyone Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busta Nut Posted May 8, 2017 Report Share Posted May 8, 2017 I wanna hear more about Del's plan to bring in a bored Arab billionaire 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supermarv Posted May 8, 2017 Report Share Posted May 8, 2017 I wanna hear more about Del's plan to bring in a bored Arab billionaireBig money signings, and win the league Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ropy Posted May 8, 2017 Report Share Posted May 8, 2017 I wanna hear more about Del's plan to bring in a bored Arab billionaireIs it the same website as Thai Brides? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WishyWell Posted May 9, 2017 Report Share Posted May 9, 2017 Apparently the training was a shambles when McFadden was taking it while McGhee was away hence the club going looking for Robinson. That's actually just not true. If you know someone in the club who is telling you this, then I would take everything they say with a pinch of salt from now on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Onthefringes Posted May 9, 2017 Report Share Posted May 9, 2017 Apparently the training was a shambles when McFadden was taking it while McGhee was away hence the club going looking for Robinson. Appointing McFadden as an assistant when he had no experience in taking training, especially knowing fine well McGhee wasn't there most times, was every bit as galling as the managerial appointment. That's actually just not true. If you know someone in the club who is telling you this, then I would take everything they say with a pinch of salt from now on. If our information is correct (Nae Chinese fortune cookie chat on this one) there is an element of truth in both statements. It's been done to death, time to move on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pepper Posted May 9, 2017 Report Share Posted May 9, 2017 There is no way we would have brought Robinson back if the McFadden appointment had worked. It's quite obvious that it didn't and I'm not surprised in the slightest. There was a lot of head scratching from people in the game/media when the McFadden appointment was announced as he had seemingly made it known to all and sundry that he wasn't interested in the slightest in making the move into coaching. It was a failed attempt to justify keeping him at the club and it has cost us badly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milo Posted May 9, 2017 Report Share Posted May 9, 2017 There is no way we would have brought Robinson back if the McFadden appointment had worked. It's quite obvious that it didn't and I'm not surprised in the slightest. There was a lot of head scratching from people in the game/media when the McFadden appointment was announced as he had seemingly made it known to all and sundry that he wasn't interested in the slightest in making the move into coaching. It was a failed attempt to justify keeping him at the club and it has cost us badly. Sadly I think this is the case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Onthefringes Posted May 9, 2017 Report Share Posted May 9, 2017 Mark McGhee was about to embark on a 6 game suspension. Certainly made sense to have a different opinion in there given we were in freefall. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.