Vietnam91 Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 1 hour ago, well fan for life said: SOD better win POTM or you lot are dead to me. Does he get a clock and put out to pasture? Is so, count me in. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capt_oats Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 16 hours ago, Stevie Kirk said: Cheers. Average time leading games 14.6 minutes is some stat. Opponent scoring first in 68% (SIXTY EIGHT) of our games is a giggle as well. Then again, mind in Robinson's last season when he was on course to relegate us and we hadn't managed an equalising goal until January and we had a new manager. Others have mentioned it but there's definitely something to be said for the indefatigability of this group. Tbh, I wrote a big screed about Kettlewell the other day but ended up deleting it. The gist was that one of the curious things about Ketts is that where other recent managers (Robinson et al) would probably have changed something, anything in the face of a run of 1 win in 15 or whatever it was Kettlewell by and large stuck with what he was doing - he hasn't gone out to try and shitfest wins. Which ordinarily you'd expect some sort of credit to be given. The same criticism can definitely be levelled at Kettlewell as Hammell in so much as on a fundamental level he hasn't been able to fix the defensive side of things however the obvious trade off is that we were losing games under Hammell. Whereas with Ketts we simply haven't been winning but we've still been picking up points. I think it might have been @YassinMoutaouakil who mentioned this a while ago but some of the football we've played under Kettlewell in patches has been the best we've seen aesthetically probably since McCall. But it doesn't really feel like that in the grand scheme of things. Even on Saturday, a lot of our messiness on the park came from us rushing and trying a bit too hard to play football. Ironically, St Mirren's goal was a case in point, if McGinn just hoofs that ball from SOD then their goal the corner doesn't happen and they don't score. It was interesting to listen to both managers post-match interviews with Kettlewell saying he didn't think we were at it (we weren't) while Robinson's giving the same sort of patter we're all familiar with in saying it was a good performance from St Mirren. Was it? Really? I think a lot of the discourse around Kettlewell at the moment is kind of informed by how much mileage you have with him. There are plenty who have never been convinced by him and he hasn't really done enough to win them over so it's just a case of the jury being out for some. He's not the first Motherwell manager to be in this position and won't be the last. I think this season kind of comes round to a couple of points @crazylegsjoe_mfc made in a post over the weekend, specifically the below: On 31/03/2024 at 10:00, crazylegsjoe_mfc said: I can't speak for everyone's aspirations but I often see Motherwell fans on here and elsewhere saying they'd be happy with 10th. I won't be relaxing until the arithmetic confirms it, but we are very much looking on course to do that now. I think it's hard to be critical of the manner in which we've gone about it. Not being delighted with his decisions doesn't always have to equate to him deserving the chop. I'm not sure if anyone was expecting the race to survival to be pretty and free flowing with a young manager and young players. I think the difference between this and other seasons (like last) is that we've previously gone on a fantastic run to beat any relegation fears, whereas this time we are doing just about enough. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevie Kirk Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 I’m also very much alligned to the idea that we simply scrape enough points to keep ourselves 6 or more points above the 11th place team until the end of the season. If we avoid any brown trousering and keep the gap as is, then for me Ketts can say job done. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wellboy1991 Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 Well that’s interesting…. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
camer0n_mcd Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
well fan for life Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 Can't work out what's more shocking. The development around investment or that big Jon Obika's out for Saturday. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MurrayWell Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 Anyone else got the fear we'll end up giving away a huge chunk of the club here? If the terms are good and the investment matches it then fair play, but previous chat was that the investment offered wasnt up to much. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ill Ray Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 Any whispers or rumours about who’s buying us? Hopefully not a YouTuber who’s opposed to having the initials of their name switched. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctor Manhattan Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 A "US-based family". It's the Glazers, isn't it? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dezz Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 Would Taylor and Travis be considered a family yet? Welcome to Motherwell the Swift/Kelce family. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rod Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capt_oats Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 Tbh, the interesting thing about that incredibly brief statement is that it feels quite carefully worded. It's a "US based family" which seems separate to the mooted investors previously mentioned ie: it's not that Australian/Middle Eastern mob. Also, it feels relevant that the investor has "expressed his desire to work in partnership with the Well Society". Which again, given the previous offers mentioned were talking about diluting the WS ownership down below 50% - working "in partnership with" suggests a bit more balance. Then again it goes from "US based family" to the "investor" having "expressed his desire"...which is it lads? A family or a single investor? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Aldo Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 2 minutes ago, capt_oats said: Tbh, the interesting thing about that incredibly brief statement is that it feels quite carefully worded. It's a "US based family" which seems separate to the mooted investors previously mentioned ie: it's not that Australian/Middle Eastern mob. Also, it feels relevant that the investor has "expressed his desire to work in partnership with the Well Society". Which again, given the previous offers mentioned were talking about diluting the WS ownership down below 50% - working "in partnership with" suggests a bit more balance. Then again it goes from "US based family" to the "investor" having "expressed his desire"...which is it lads? A family or a single investor? It's a family but the dad is in charge. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welldaft Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 (edited) 24 minutes ago, MurrayWell said: Anyone else got the fear we'll end up giving away a huge chunk of the club here? If the terms are good and the investment matches it then fair play, but previous chat was that the investment offered wasnt up to much. Yes and No. With the vast amount of relevant financial experience that Jim McMahon and Derek Weir have I very much doubt they would agree to even this next stage unless they felt it was likely the Well Society / fan base would approve. The previous chat was based on hearsay. I don’t doubt that may be accurate but perhaps the terms have changed since then. Either way I assume way we will all still have a vote regardless when more details emerge and we have something final to vote on. Edited April 3 by welldaft 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctor Manhattan Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 5 minutes ago, Ron Aldo said: It's a family but the dad is in charge. 17 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busta Nut Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 25 minutes ago, MurrayWell said: Anyone else got the fear we'll end up giving away a huge chunk of the club here? Yes. Most 'Well fans will be thinking we'll get millions out this. I know not a lot about these but I heard one bid was fucking ridiculous and the other shite. The ridiculous one has been binned by the look of it. Get this in the bin and let us get on with it. McMahon was called out on his investment slebbers and we've now got a guy desperate to push something through before he fucks off 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gianfranco Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vietnam91 Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 (edited) Quote Both parties will now work on formalising these into a legal framework which can be put to a shareholders vote. This is the most important part of the announcement. It infers it is going to a shareholders vote. So a full shareholder vote directly or can the elected WS board as our first line of defence/scrutiny* determine if it goes any further to its membership. Because as the entity being asked to surrender/sell/relinquish/dilute* its holding then its pretty much the most important factor in all of this. The motives of an outgoing chairman keen not to leave a David Murray type legacy will be very different to a newly elected WS board and newly appointed CEO who want to make a go of things. Derek Weir left the club last week. As far as ambiguous statements goes, that's pretty much up there and its timing is questionable. It's yet another example where the lines between the exec club board and the Well Society have been blurred/manipulated* and lack of respect shown. It'll all come out in time however. (*delete as appropriate per your personal opinion) Edited April 3 by Vietnam91 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
well fan for life Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 Not to sound all sensible here but would it not make sense to hear what the terms are before we either bin it or take it? 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santheman Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 (edited) My take on it is why would we appoint a new CEO and why would any new CEO accept the position if he/she knew that any potential investor was wanting to take a majority stake in the club and appoint their own man. I'm sure our new CEO would be fully aware of any offer before he took up the job so that gives me a bit of comfort that it might well just be investment with no desire for full control. As always the proof will be in tbe small print. Edited April 3 by santheman 0 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.