capt_oats

Since we've had a few outgoings here's the squad as it stands (based on the published First Team on the official - I see Wilkinson's still there ). Feels like we're definitely short of RWB, LWB, CB, a midfielder and (probably) an across the front 3 forward. I wouldn't be committing all our recruitment to it but between Biereth, Spencer, Gent and Furlong we've had a decent return on sourcing players from the PL/EFL Championship u23s in specific areas of the park which hasn't always been the case - Luka Belic and Zak Jules anyone? Even McKinstry was broadly fine until Kettlewell got the gig and binned him out the team.

Re-signed, McGinley was a Robinson signing, Maguire is an academy product.

We've also been involved with the Transfer Room thing as well which I'd imagine helps streamline the process as well. 2021 - https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-hibs-motherwells-transferroom-ticket-24305484 2022 - https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/local-sport/motherwell-rub-shoulders-euro-giants-26462825 https://www.transferroom.com/

He was linked with a number of PL clubs while he was still in our academy so I guess had a similar kind of hype as Semple - Liverpool, Leeds & Brighton (September 2020) Per the news story about him leaving he had a serious knee injury and missed pretty much the whole of last season. We announced him signing a "short term" deal in June then punted him out on loan to Annan in July.

I think there's a lot in that that's true. In that there's a certain type of fan who has a pretty skewed idea of the level of player we're going to be signing. Although, I could be wrong, it also feels like there's a scepticism/dislike around Daws because it was Alexander who brought him in so when this narrative is being floated there are plenty of folk willing to just go along with it without thinking. As @crazylegsjoe_mfc says our recruitment isn't by any means perfect and my original post wasn't intended to white knight anyone but that Tweet isn't only selective it's actually quite disingenuous and as others have said as a metric it has no real context. Incidentally, Tierney still has a year to go on his deal after this so there's still time for the wee man to come good once Kettlewell fucks off. @RandomGuy.'s post is spot on as well. You look across the likes of Shields, Tierney, Wilkinson etc and for the most part you can see why they were signed. In fact, in the case of Shields he's exactly the type of signing that a section of our support loves to moan about us not making - the "why are we signing players from the English lower leagues? We should be targeting players from Scotland!" crowd. Anyway, to re-up a post of mine from last month here's the comparison between the signings with Foyle as HoR and Daws - make of it what you will. We signed around 83 players (give or take) both permanent and loan during Foyle's 6 years at the club and 44 since Daws arrived in 2021:

I mean, I've a lot of time for Nick McPheat's posts but other than having another dig at Daws I'm not sure what that actually tells us other than we have a high player turnover (which isn't exclusive to Daws time at the club). Like, I know what he's implying but Van Veen was signed on Daws watch...he's no longer at the club because we cashed in on him. We sold Big Sol. Sean Goss saw out his contract, Shields found another club because he wasn't going to get games under the new manager, Woolery moved for an undisclosed fee, Joey Efford found another club. I could go on... Of the 19 who have moved on the majority have either moved to other clubs or they've seen out their contracts. As I've said before I genuinely don't think Daws track record is markedly worse than Foyle's was and unlike some of the jobbers Robinson and Foyle brought to the club we're (apparently) not having to pay them off Casper Sloth style. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Other than Wilko actually scoring some goals is him moving on after 6 months any different to Alex Fisher, Theo Robinson, Dean Brill, Jordan White or Sloth who all bounced after 6 months and were brought in with Foyle as HoR? Even in the case of Souaré - the other of the "two permanent signings" who are already away he signed a short term deal and now he's away. Ultimately there has to be some sort of accountability from the manager because it's him that's OK'ing the signings Souaré's injury record was known, we had him in on trial - Kettlewell still signed him anyway. Same with Obika - Kettlewell actually re-signed him.

If he wants to have this 343/523 as an option then we probably need a wide forward, someone who can play "anywhere across the front 3" to use a Robinson-ism (I think @dezz actually mentioned this on the Terrace Patreon that went out the other week). If we're planning on using 3 forwards with any sort of regularity then only having 4 (one of whom is extremely injury prone) is probably leaving us a bit light and this idea of sticking Slattery in that role can get to f**k. Tbh, it would make sense why Wilko was the one to be let go as he's probably the most awkward fit for that shape from the group of him/Bair/Obika (assuming we actually signed him to play as a second striker) as he's neither a target man nor someone who could play as an inside forward in the way Biereth can and obviously he's the one we've be able to get a taker for. For me we're in the market for a LWB, RWB, CB, a #6 and a forward. Like, I genuinely don't see how anyone could look at our GA column and think the defence isn't a priority. Especially as we're actually scoring goals.

Tierney's been out injured with a hamstring issue since the start of December.

Wilko signs for Colchester Utd for an undisclosed fee.

Huddersfield. It's Furlong who's at Hull. As @rowsdower says it depends on what the agreement it. If there's a recall option then there would be nothing to stop us. Whether we'd want to is a different story. As @crazylegsjoe_mfc pointed out a few pages back when I'd raised the question given the injuries to Blaney and Casey the loan to Dundee seemed very much like a line being drawn and (while I wouldn't expect him to say anything to the contrary) Lamie was quoted as saying he'd be open to making the move permanent so given he's getting games at Dens I can't imagine he'd be doing cartwheels at the idea of being hauled back to ML1 to cover our injuries. Not really. Not least because Mugabi's right sided and Lamie's obviously left so we wouldn't really be solving anything there. We've been using Bevis in the centre of our back 3 on account of the injury to Butcher and it's not really his game but equally it's not Lamie's either - I *think* we tried him in there once or twice in the past. We're also covered for the left side of the back 3 with Blaney and Casey the latter of whom kept Lamie out the side in the 2nd half of last season but is out with ankle ligament damage but should be back at the end of the month and the former has been absolutely fine but appears to have tweaked his hamstring. @YassinMoutaouakil gives a good explanation of why it's likely Bev has stuck around as long as he has on the other page: And that's the thing the impression Lamie has always given when he's been at Fir Park is that he thinks he should be a first pick and his nose has generally been put out of joint when he's been benched whereas Bevis seems a lot more comfortable with his squad role. The issue we've had is that we've probably had to rely on him far more than we've intended on account of injuries. I doubt Dundee would be as daft as to f**k things up like St Johnstone did with their PCA for MacPherson (where they announced they were signing him on a PCA before the window closed so St Mirren recalled him meaning they'd to hand over cash to get him back) but if they wanted to offer the bag of balls they originally put on the table when Lamie signed the PCA with you originally I doubt we'd stand in the way of things to make it a permanent move.

100% not even as a bit. Genuinely curious to see the difference between him at St Johnstone compared with us.

Aye. I think that's the caveat/distinction I'm making in saying as long as they aren't being viewed as credible replacements and you kind of alluded to it in your previous post re: Toby/Gent. As long as we're not viewing McGinley coming back as a replacement for Souaré and we're actively looking to recruit additional bodies (the James Furlong rumour for example) then...fine?

I mean, I'd have thought we'd have been contributing to their wages anyway and tbh, I'd be surprised if having them back would move the needle much in terms of what we're planning on doing by which I mean if we've got the opportunity to bring the players we want in I doubt we'll walk away from that because we're having to pay Barry Maguire and Nathan McGinley. Looking back to summer a lot of the movement out was down to the fact that we felt we had too many players and (I guess) we were trying to get the wages:turnover ratio under control - or more accurately if we wanted to bring players in we needed to move a bunch out because there was no appetite for us sitting on 26/27 bodies with a bunch of them not contributing as was often the case when Robinson and Alexander were here. The irony there is, of course, that we've found ourselves in the position where we don't have enough players. Either way, as @crazylegsjoe_mfc already mentioned Barry Maguire can't play for another team other than ourselves or Kidderminster so unless there's some weird loophole (I don't think there is) I'd imagine he'll see out the remainder of his deal as an option for our bench and seeing as McGinley didn't play a minute for Thistle then we're not stuck with him so a mutual consent to let him go and explore other opportunities is on the table - again, I'd be surprised if that actually made much of a dent in our budget.

It's been interesting to hear Kettlewell speak about the transfer stuff. I'm paraphrasing but he's essentially been saying that he wanted to add a couple on top of what we already have/had - which at the time was pre-Souaré/Spencer leaving so we were sitting on around 20/21 bodies. Taking him on his word that means that ideally he'd like a squad of 22/23. Making the assumptions that Wilkinson is next to be announced to have left and that McGinley/Maguire coming back aren't being viewed as credible replacements for anyone that would leave us with a current First Team squad of 18. Realistically we could be looking at another 4 or 5 to come in. Again, reading between the lines from what Kettlewell has been saying it sounds like he's expecting to be busy in this window. I mean, we brought 9 in last January so I guess 4 or 5 sounds do-able - Jimmy Furlong, a RWB, a CB and a #6?

Spencer leaving is annoying, as is the fact that we had him playing LWB for the majority of his time here. I guess we'll have had a heads up about their intention to excercise their recall option in advance. Anyway, here's an updated squad list (which I suspect will be seeing a few more amends in the near future):

Definitely. I don't think the point @dezz was making was particularly difficult to understand either. It was a case of Kettlewell trying to make something work given the circumstances. I mentioned this in the match thread but given the timing and our injuries and Hibs call ups yesterday was a fixture that seemed to be a pain in the arse for both sides and it's fair comment to point out that Hibs were hamstrung as well. We were missing 5 players who have had regular first team involvement in Blaney, Shaw, Miller, Casey and Spencer (4 of them starters, the other our most used sub) plus Wilkinson and I guess we haven't had the opportunity to replace Souaré either. For a squad whose numbers have been trimmed on instruction missing 6 or 7 players through injury, suspension or as yet undeclared reasons is a problem. The fact that a glance at our bench saw 5 school weans, Nathan McGinley (who hasn't kicked a baw since getting 1 (ONE) minute off the bench against Hearts in September) and a substitute goalkeeper suggests that our squad was stretched pretty fucking thin. From the 9 subs available only 2 have had any sort of regular first team football and both of those of those are coming back from long term injuries. I mean, there are legitimate questions about how you choose to set up in those circumstances and the broader issue of squad building but calling that "our so called 1st team choice" is a laugh. We had Bevis being flanked by two full backs with Blair Spittal ending up at wing back (again) and Calum Slattery wide right FFS. Don't get me wrong some of those may well be Ketts making weird choices but either way that is literally no one's first choice anything.

Aye. 100% this. That's definitely how I saw the Kettlewell post-match as well. It feels like there's a strong element of folk projecting what they want on to it. I genuinely didn't think anything of it beyond him reminding folk that he's still a young laddie who's on a learning curve to pre-empt any criticism then I saw someone on Twitter criticising Kettlewell for "digging Gent out" and I was like, "Huh?" ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Tbf it's a big ask for Bevis to be playing two positions at the same time. On the square pegs in round holes thing and recruitment in general, I'm genuinely curious to see how/if Kettlewell addresses this. It feels harsh to be criticising Slattery when he's being asked to play in a role that's totally not him - similar to the Wilkinson/CM thing - as @Casagolda mentions it looks like we brought Wilko in with a view to sticking with the 3412 that worked last season but have since pivoted to the variations of this box midfield and the 523 despite us having to shoehorn players into these roles. I guess what I'm wondering is whether or not we're going to be actively recruiting to allow us to play players in their actual positions during this window ie: if (as seems to be the case) Wilkinson's being sacrificed is that to bring in a better fit or is it just the case that he hurt Kettlewell's feelings by telling the press he'd never played centre mid in his life and had no idea what he was doing when he was chucked in there. Incidentally, I don't think there's a chance that we cancel Shaw's loan. I think Kettlewell is entirely invested in him.

@Ron Aldo mentioned it in the match thread but no Wilko in the squad at all and no reference in the tweet?

In fairness, as someone who occasionally dips into TDBF that particular poster seems to get wildly bent out of shape very easily. Very weird pass agg posting style. I had a laugh at their wee huff earlier in saying they wouldn't be posting any more info after this.

I had a swatch at Kettlewell's post-match and noted that he's talking about us needing to add to what we have for depth (which is a fair comment and consistent with what he's said before). Dunno, it's a case of reading between the lines but it sounded like ideally we'd like to see a bit of movement. Obvs that's Souaré out the door now and McGinley back in (for now). It'll be interesting to see how quickly we get bodies in the door. Last season was obviously unusual on account of the break landing in November through to mid-December rather than January but the bulk of our business was announced pretty last minute - of the 9 we brought in Danzaki was the 28th January, Furlong, Aitchison were announced on "deadline day", Obika the morning after with Butcher and Casey after the window closed. Either way, the way Kettlewell's been talking it sounds like he knows we need bodies in. Also, with Blaney apparently injured now and Casey still out long term(ish) would we be inclined to recall the Bathgate Maldini from Dundee although I've seen a couple of mentions on their thread that he's injured as well? Is that right @Ludo*1? Like, I'm not advocating it but if we've not had a left sided centre back on our agenda and we find ourselves short it'd save a bit of time having to recruit one.

Is Boyle not away with Australia? Like, don't get me wrong I still think we'll lose but I'm fairly sure I'd read that Hibs had a bunch of players missing although from the sounds of it we're going to be missing a few with injury anaw. I get the impression that this is a fixture that's just a pain in the arse for both teams tbqh. This isn't where I saw it but here's the quote:

That's Pape Souaré away.

Massively this. Don't get me wrong, I'm still very much a Kettlewell sceptic (and have been since he got the job). As I've said before he feels very much a short term, temporary fix to me - a guy who's come in and wildly overachieved but also someone that the next manager will benefit from with him having cleared the decks and done all the shitty stuff the board have asked be done (excess trimmed, wages:turnover ratio brought under control etc). I agree with both @Casagolda and @thisGRAEME's points that Kettlewell has been his own worst enemy this season. Outside signing/re-signing players with known injury problems I think our recruitment has been fine. The issue has broadly been how Kettlewell's handled them. He'd have had no real argument had he been emptied before yesterday - we've been a side that's been underperforming. I think it was @Swello who mentioned a while back that most of the same criticisms we had of Hammell could be levelled at Kettlewell. The difference I guess is that the squad haven't collectively chucked it. However, having said all that, the whole narrative in the build up to the Livi game was that it was a must-win and Kettlewell should be getting his jotters if we didn't. Whether that would have happened...we'll never know but as I said last night it feels pretty churlish to be moving the goal-posts on the fact that we won (which was literally the one job he had) and litigating the opposition and performance in the second half especially as we were a team without a win in 15 and had the game won by half-time. It's not like we scraped a 1-0 win in the 97th minute or whatever. As Graeme said further up the page - baby steps. So take it for what it is - a good result in a game we needed to win. We've all seen better Motherwell sides than this come unstuck in these sort of fixtures. Clearly one swallow doesn't a summer make but as I said yesterday, it's really up to Kettlewell what happens now - he's got himself a January window so we'll see how that goes and to echo your point from ages ago - given every other manager we've had has been given an opportunity to fix things in January he could probably have felt a bit sore if he hadn't. Either way the only way he gets credit back in the bank and keeps the fans onside is by winning games of football.