Motherwell v Kilmarnock 20/12/2024

[Happy Dosser]

dennyc: "And Killie might have had to change their half time game plan which was working a treat."

Quite right: get your "substitute  retalition" in first and take  the initiative. That's something for SK to ponder for future games if he is to improve as a manager.

[joewarkfanclub]

The problem was that his first substitution was a negative one by bringing on Davor for Halliday. That shows you are looking to hold what you have and gives McInnes carte blanche with his attacking substitutions.

Sparrow for Paton was fine. But the other sub shoulda been Maswanhise so McInnes had to keep an eye on the back door.

This isnt hindsight either, as me and my mate both said the same at the time when we could see the direction of travel.

Its one of my big bug bears with SK (who I still wholeheartedly support) but he need to learn from his mistakes, and in game management is still a big minus for me at the moment.

[grizzlyg]

In better news, as its 22nd December the nights are fair drawing out! 🤣🤣

[Kmcalpin]

Dan Casey appeal submitted.

[Spiderpig]

13 minutes ago, Kmcalpin said:

Dan Casey appeal submitted.

The incident was being discussed on sky sports football by the English pundits as well Dave, concensus was it was a ridiculous decision, and VAR is ruining the game.

Upholding the appeal is tantamount to an admission of guilt that the ref got it badly wrong, so it will be an interesting decision.

[David]

15 hours ago, Kmcalpin said:

Of course there's some truth in what you say, as the ebb and flow of a game is down to the performance and tactics of both teams not just one. However, it was quite clear on Friday that, even when presented with the option of advancing out of our own area, our midfielders quite clearly chose to be cautious and remain in situ. That was both with 10 and 11 men and clearly a conscious decision and nothing to do with Kilmarnock. 

I can’t dispute that we were cautious at points on Friday (as were Kilmarnock, by the way). However, I’d argue that it’s not as straightforward as a deliberate, one-dimensional plan to sit back after scoring.

Momentum is a massive factor in football. When a team concedes, it’s natural for them to respond with urgency—pressing higher and taking more risks. This often pushes the leading team deeper. Players react instinctively to pressure. When the opposition throws everything forward, the priority often shifts to holding shape and defending—more out of necessity than by design.

There’s also the psychological and tactical side to consider. Protecting a narrow lead can lead to a subconscious shift towards caution. Players might hesitate to make risky forward passes or push too far forward, not because they’re instructed to but as a natural response to the situation. This is especially true if confidence in the defence isn’t at its peak.

Context is also key. Playing with ten men for any length of time inevitably changes the dynamic. Even when we had eleven men on the park, there’s a recovery period—both physically and mentally—where players need to readjust after a period of sustained pressure. The caution you mention may well have been a mix of regaining composure and ensuring we didn’t concede a soft equaliser.

I’m not saying we couldn’t have been more proactive or that the tactics were flawless, that's never the case, but I think these situations are rarely as straightforward as they seem. What looks like sitting back might be the result of Kilmarnock’s pressure, the game’s momentum, and the very human instinct to protect what we had.

15 hours ago, dennyc said:

The momentum against Killie had clearly changed  but it was not just an immediate reaction to us scoring. We were comfortable for the 30 minutes after the goal up to half time. In the second half everyone in the ground could sense the equalising goal coming  and the Killie players certainly did.

My issue is that, despite that momentum switch, SK did nothing to alter the flow of the match until after Killie got the goal they deserved. Had he acted earlier maybe we could have regained control and gone on to win the match. Evidenced by the impact Maswanhise had when he came on and gave Killie something different to think about. Even with us a man down.

As you say, we are well placed in the League and SK deserves credit for that. But, how much better placed could we be if he was a bit more pro active. If he is not happy with the way momentum has switched or the fact we are falling deeper and deeper against his instructions, he has the power to try and change things. But he appears reluctant to do so until the inevitable happens.

You’ve raised some fair points regarding the flow of the match and the timing of substitutions, but I think there’s a bit more to consider when assessing Kettlewell's decisions.

Firstly, while the momentum did shift in the second half, making an early substitution isn’t always the answer. The manager has to take multiple factors into account. Which players to take off, how a substitution might alter the team’s shape, and whether the change will genuinely address the tactical problem. Bringing Maswanhise on later in the game clearly paid off, but there’s no certainty that the same impact would have been achieved earlier. Substitutions are rarely a magic fix, and their timing involves balancing immediate needs with the broader game plan.

Secondly, sitting deeper isn’t always a deliberate tactic but often a response to the opposition’s increased pressure, as I mentioned above. If Kettlewell instructed the team to push higher or play out more (which he was, by the way. He could be seen and heard from the main stand urging players to push out), and they struggled under that pressure, it’s less about managerial hesitation and more about the natural ebb and flow of the game. Momentum shifts aren’t always within a manager’s control, especially when the opposition steps up their intensity.

It’s also worth considering how finely balanced the match was. With a narrow lead, making changes too early carries risks, as they might leave the team more exposed. While an earlier substitution could have disrupted Killie’s rhythm, it also might have left us vulnerable, particularly as we went down to 10 men later on.

Finally, I think Kettlewell has demonstrated his ability to make impactful in-game adjustments, as shown by Maswanhise’s introduction. It’s easy to look back and argue a substitution should have come sooner, but in the moment, the manager's job is to assess the bigger picture: how the team is coping, the risks involved, and whether the players on the pitch can resolve the situation themselves. That’s not hesitation—it’s a measured, calculated approach in my view.

We’re in a strong position in the league, and while the manager's decisions may not always be perfect, they’ve played a significant role in getting us there. Momentum shifts and spells of sitting deep are part of the game, and they happen to every team in almost every match. I do think it's easy for us to sit here online and talk about what should have been done after the game is over, but maybe not quite as easy to do when you're the man in charge mid-game and the result is still there for the taking.

[cambo97]

1 hour ago, Spiderpig said:

The incident was being discussed on sky sports football by the English pundits as well Dave, concensus was it was a ridiculous decision, and VAR is ruining the game.

Upholding the appeal is tantamount to an admission of guilt that the ref got it badly wrong, so it will be an interesting decision.

That decision was nothing to do with VAR, they did their job and told the referee to reassess his decision; as it was a subjective decision they couldn't overturn it, just tell the ref he was an idiot and review it, which is what happened. VAR worked perfectly in this incident.

[Spiderpig]

32 minutes ago, cambo97 said:

That decision was nothing to do with VAR, they did their job and told the referee to reassess his decision; as it was a subjective decision they couldn't overturn it, just tell the ref he was an idiot and review it, which is what happened. VAR worked perfectly in this incident.

It was a general statement they made on VAR ruining the game, not specific to the Casey incident.

[texanwellfan]

How many top flight games has thatvref done? 

[santheman]

17 minutes ago, texanwellfan said:

How many top flight games has thatvref done? 

https://www.whoscored.com/Regions/253/Tournaments/20/Seasons/10351/Stages/23451/RefereeStatistics/Scotland-Premiership-2024-2025

[grizzlyg]

For anyone that saw st Johnstone penalty yesterday and thought it was harsh.   The VAR official was......  ...

[well_said]

22 minutes ago, grizzlyg said:

For anyone that saw st Johnstone penalty yesterday and thought it was harsh.   The VAR official was......  ...

Steven McLean,  who coincidentally is our var guy for both Celtic and rangers matches.

[grizzlyg]

44 minutes ago, well_said said:

Steven McLean,  who coincidentally is our var guy for both Celtic and rangers matches.

I thought it was Chris Graham.  Whoops