capt_oats

Mentioned this before but this is probably one of my favourite Motherwell goals. It's pretty much a perfect illustration of the best Motherwell side in my lifetime. These are also goals that don't get the sort of credit they probably deserve either tbh - if Messi had scored either of these etc. The video of the Thistle game that Davies goal is from is here:

It's very much a case of me looking from the outside in but it kind of feels like Livi/Martindale lost the run of themselves with the Dykes deal and were framing Nouble in the same way hoping for a similar outcome. There's definitely an art to cashing in on an asset. If you've brought a player in on a sales pitch that is essentially based on "we'll give you a profile and won't stand in your way if an offer comes in" then it's difficult to square going public quoting £1m when it's clear that the player just isn't in that bracket and the way Livi/Martindale have played things with Nouble just feels really messy and it definitely hasn't done anyone any favours. It's understandable if the club/Martindale knew these court cases were in the post and were holding out hoping to cash in on the player but even allowing for some context it still feels like it's been really badly played. We learned that lesson early on and there are kind of echoes with Nouble and our experience with Marvin Johnson albeit I'd argue that McGhee and the club were very much playing the game and the fact we ended up selling him anyway (and banked close to £1m all in) kind of backs that up. Also, us "playing hardball" so to speak pretty much fucked us that season as we didn't have time to get his replacement over the line: https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/marvin-johnson-being-held-ransom-8736132 That experience essentially recalibrated our approach in terms of working with players, their representatives and quoting realistic fees in terms of player trading. In fact, I seem to recall a few posts from Livi fans making comparisons between us getting a deal done for KVV early and Martindale's approach with Nouble. Actually, was Martindale not talking to the press about us getting that deal done in one of his increasingly frequent 'woe is me' monologues as well?

Biggest non-story going here tbh... However what *is* interesting is that he's saying he wants to add a couple on top of what we already have: Feels like it's of note because it's essentially saying that we have budget to bring in a couple (given folk were losing their shit after mis-interpreting McMahon's quotes the other week) and also that he thinks we're short on bodies...no fucking shit Sherlock. Bring him home.

I know that there's been speculation about what type of contract Martindale does/doesn't have but traditionally a "rolling" contract means that you'd be due to pay him up for a set term (usually a year) from the point that notice is served - you don't get to just chuck his stuff in a box one day and say "f**k off Davie" with no compensation due - it'd cost you a year's salary or whatever the agreed period is. The "rolling" part of it is that it "rolls over" every day so to speak.

I agree and disagree tbh. I think everyone is on the same page that Shaw wouldn't be here if we hadn't seen injuries to Biereth, Wilko and (I for one am *stunned* this happened) Obika. So if that was the case we've an extra body there. Even then, solely in a numbers sense, we've 5 strikers (of varying quality and...reliability) which is still kind of manageable given the plan at the start of the season would have been to play with 2 up. You've 2 players for each position and one extra for cover. I assume in either situation Bair was intended to be either 4th or 5th choice. However it definitely becomes overkill now that Kettlewell seems to have decided that the box midfield definitely works (and has the added benefit of him not having to drop Paton). In that case we're clearly starting with Biereth so on the once in a blue moon scenario everyone's fit we're looking at 4 sat on their arse or we're doing objectively daft things like sticking Wilkinson in midfield. Which definitely isn't ideal. A couple of folk have commented on Wilkinson having been unused recently - I wonder if Kettlewell's taken the huff at Wilko saying to the press that he'd never played in midfield before and had no idea what he was doing.

I mean, Lennon Miller is also of school age no?

This is pretty much where I am. Even a win tonight doesn’t really move the dial much in a big picture sense. I mean, I think he’s done anyway but it feels like we have to work our way through this performative charade as a matter of procedure.

I wouldn't be be surprised if we offered Souaré a Tanner-style deal to cover him until he's fit again - which is fine although I'm sure certain elements of our support would get wildly bent out of shape about it. Whether he'd choose take that or not I'm not sure but it'd be in keeping with our general position of not cutting anyone loose who isn't fit and sustained their injury on our watch. Shaw's loan is for the season (per the announcement on the official) regardless of whether there's a break clause or not I'd be surprised if Kettlewell would send him back. Ketts feels like the sort of person who's not going to admit he's fucked it so will just double down on him - he signed him for County and has backed him when he brought him here (albeit it was after both Biereth and Wilko picked up their injuries). As you mentioned the other day Shaw is our most used substitute and has been getting chucked on ahead of a player (Wilkinson) who has actually scored some fucking goals. I'm maybe being unfair but I get the impression that the likes of Paton and Shaw are very much Kettlewell's guys. Anyway, I brought this up when Matty Connelly went out on loan but our First Team squad (as it stands) is currently 21 bodies (with 3 long term injuries - Souaré, Casey, Miller) which means we're picking from a pool of 18 players and we've essentially been chucking 3 or 4 actual school children on the bench every week, on the regular. I suppose it's a legitimate question as to whether we actually need to be moving folk out.

His profile isn't showing any specific injury stuff. He seems to have been a fixture on the bench recently - I take it the red block is indeed an injury though.

Following on from the Terrace Patreon @dezz did the other day about January wish lists - Only 8 appearances and 649 mins played in total this season at Millwall for Hutchy is it (unused sub today)? This is absolutely worth The Thread manifesting. Bring.Him.Home.

Exactly this.

Unless the club have extended his contract without announcing it then as of next week Kettlewell will have 5 months or whatever of his deal left. Dunno, it would be a surprise if that sort of severance would be a problem in terms of us bringing bodies in. I've seen quite a few comments along the lines of "some of these players are on to their 4th manager" or the like. Which is fair comment and, I guess, factually true but to Devils Advocate it there's probably an argument that this is more instructive about the limitations of our recruitment of managers. It's less about the players themselves and more about us appointing managers who, generally speaking have trouble adapting and/or evolving. We spend a lot of time talking about the Robinson era on The Thread, understandably because he and McCall have been our longest serving managers over the past 15 years or so. The thing with Robinson that allowed him the time (and the trust) to rebuild was the fact that he was able to change things up. When he realised his 532 Thunderdome had ran its course he pivoted to the Sexy 433 because he had a generational player in DT and just let him cook along with the likes of Campbell, Hastie and Gboly. He let that template run for a while before eventually resigning when he realised he was either a) going to relegate us and our form was damaging his brand or b) going to have to do another rebuild. Similarly McCall got time because he had more budget thanks to Dempster's zany approach to that sort of thing and also the fact that Rangers had gone out of business and the other city clubs were varying degrees of mince. It was only when the tap was turned off that we dropped like a stone, which refers back to the conversation a while ago that Stuart McCall Wasn't Actually A Very Good Football Manager. I guess that's it, for a club like Motherwell being able to evolve and keep on top of that is a large part of The Job and it's why you're probably looking at 3 years or so as being an absolute max in terms of shelf life now. Again, to repeat myself we've only had 5 managers have more than 100 games in a single spell since McClean - McLeish, Davies, Butcher, McCall and Robinson (clearly McGhee had more than 100 games over his two stints (150 - combined)). Since Robinson left we've appointed Alexander who had a genuinely superb 1st year in terms of form/results but was hired out of leagues where you have 24 clubs playing each other twice so the whole emphasis on reinventing the culture at the club probably isn't as great, Hammell who we don't have to re-litigate the fact had never managed or coached at First Team level and now Kettlewell whose trajectory seems to be mirroring his time at County. In the case of both Hammell and Kettlewell it feels like they were essentially appointed because they were here and willing to do the job rather than them necessarily being good fits for a club like Motherwell (which isn't to underplay the job Kettlewell did up until August). Even in Robinson’s case, it only became clear he had the skillset to be a good longer term fit once he was actually in the job. Like others his was an initial firefighting brief and IIRC our preferred candidate to succeed McGhee had been Owen Coyle. Either way, to boil it down, recently we've made short term appointments based on short term needs and are getting short term results - I'm not sure how accountable the players can really be for that.

That would surely require Barnsley to actually agreeing to take him back - which seems optimistic. Alternatively we/they find another team to take over his loan. Don't get me wrong, I think it's the right move but given Kettlewell not only brought him to Fir Park (albeit in last minute circumstances) but also signed him for County I'm not sure he's likely to be looking to cut him loose.

Of course he can be sacked. I mean, I'm not saying he will be but Burrows had announced he was stepping down and we still binned Hammell. It's still on those currently in charge of the club to act in its best interests. Tbh, I'd say that the most likely move in the event that Kettlewell was binned would be that we'd look to bringing in a short term guy. I mean Brown was originally only supposed to be taking a temporary role after Gannon exited so it's not like it's unheard of. Also, big up @dezz for doing the wish-list for the Terrace Patreon.

Matty Connelly loaned out to East Kilbride. That brings our First Team squad down to 21 bodies with 3 long term injuries - Casey, Miller and Souaré (whose contract is up in January).

Dropping the image into the thread - "concept" being the operative word here I think.

For anyone who hasn't signed up for McGarry's mailshot there's an excerpt of yesterday's posted on The Herald/Times websites.

Sort of related but that's a much more balanced take from Graeme McGarry in his mailout via The Herald landed this evening. Hat tip to that man (also sign up if you haven't already etc).

Just to the point of the comparison made with Killie. They reported an average number of 144 employees for the 21/22 season by comparison we reported 209 however we list Youth Football/Academy etc whereas Killie don't so again...colour me fucking surprised that ours is a higher figure. Kilmarnock FC 21/22 Motherwell FC 21/22

Noticed Scott Burns QT'ing this and well...where to fucking start: As previously mentioned the club had £4.2m in the bank per the last accounts vs £1.2m prior to the Turnbull sale so it suggests that the "transformative" money, in fact, hadn't actually been touched. Similarly the Scottish Government grant was to assist clubs with costs related to lost revenue during the Pandemic. Are we really taking shots at the club for like, using the loan money for the purpose it was intended? It's also pretty fucking clear what we spent a chunk of that £2.9m (almost exactly the amount we received for Turnbull) on ie: the stadium refurbs and new pitch which has resulted in the long term benefit that we're now no longer chucking six figures at the upkeep of the park instead IIRC the maintenance costs are the low 5 figures.. Also, in comparing our staff costs with Killie doesn't necessarily mean we're comparing the same departments but it also feels a bit weird given Killie were relegated and played a season in the Championship during that time - not exactly a like for like comp. On top of that if we're talking about our time as a fan owned club then we have a net profit of £4m+ in that time so.... As @Busta Nut mentioned yesterday McMahon saying we require "significant investment" is the most stating-the-fucking-obvious thing going especially in a league with the various city clubs receiving investment and 3rd place getting group stage football. Have we squandered money? Absolutely. Show me a club in Scottish fitba' who fucking hasn't. However, implying that the club have burned through £6m+ or whatever when they like...haven't is either disingenuous, misleading or simply bad faith tbh.

See my post above. On the 31st May 2022 we had £4.2m in the bank - prior to the Turnbull sale our cash in the bank on 31st May 2020 was £1,207,609.

Just to throw this in, here's a list of our published financial figures going back to 2005/06: 05/06: £50,000 06/07: £7,000 07/08: £380,000 08/09: (£704,000) 09/10: £18,884 10/11: £541,863 11/12: (£600,000) 12/13: (£184,500) 13/14: (£184,854) 14/15: (£1,150,000) 15/16: (£412,000) 16/17: (£104,000) 17/18: £1,720,000 18/19: (£436,000) 19/20: £346,590 20/21: £3,575,615 21/22: (£1,082,000) Cleary we know we're posting a loss again when this year's accounts are published but looking at this in a very basic way: Profits: £6,639,952 Losses: (£4,857,354) Net profit = £1,782,598 Our cash at hand at the close of the 22 accounts was £4,237,114 compared with £4,117,920 (2021). Even allowing for the unforeseen additional work on the East Stand and the various Bad Decisions through the 18 months from Alexander signing that extension it seems unlikely that we'd be 'skint' in the true sense of the word. Per the note in the Strategic Report:

100% Looking at what we do and presumably what we want to do including but not limited to; operating on a sustainable basis, providing the manager with a competitive player budget, meeting the vastly increased cost of our other activities including having a successful Woman’s Team and maintaining a fit for purpose Stadium, Training Ground and Academy facility... Dunno man, maybe it's just me but I don't see how having a 'reset' in the Championship helps any of that in any way shape or form nor do I see how playing in the Championship makes us a better vehicle for the necessary investment that allows us to maintain that stuff. So...let's not eh?

I'll be honest, I read it as the former. Essentially they've come up with an "initiative" that they're going to share rather than investment having been secured. I mean, I suppose it all depends what the "initiative" actually is. Is it a definitive commercial project or is it simply "here's some things the supporters can do to generate cash".