Motherwell FC - A Thread For All Seasons

[eliphas]

Of slight interest given the squad chat recently:

McKinstry knocking back a Queen's Park offer, now without club, and confirming what we all guessed/maybe knew is that it's because Kettlewell refuses to carry wingers he left us.

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-transfer-news/stuart-mckinstry-leeds-united-transfer-33420874

Not really going to bat for McKinstry here but it still seems mental to me that any manager restricts themselves so much that they don't carry a couple of other options that are outside the normal Plan A or even B.

[eliphas]

2 minutes ago, Busta Nut said:

aye, that's what I was thinking, early days blah blah blah

Aye, I think it's very early days tbh.

For me he had some nice touches in his cameos v Cowdenbeath and Clyde and a lovely goal v the latter. I didn't see the Edinburgh game and he looked fairly off it v Partick much like a load of the players

He's played, what, about 90 minutes across 4 games?  Well too early for any sort of shout to what type of player he is. 

[capt_oats]

1 minute ago, eliphas said:

Of slight interest given the squad chat recently:

McKinstry knocking back a Queen's Park offer, now without club, and confirming what we all guessed/maybe knew is that it's because Kettlewell refuses to carry wingers he left us.

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-transfer-news/stuart-mckinstry-leeds-united-transfer-33420874

Not really going to bat for McKinstry here but it still seems mental to me that any manager restricts themselves so much that they don't carry a couple of other options that are outside the normal Plan A or even B.

Tbf, equally not going to bat for Kettlewell, McKinstry is simply stating a fact rather than saying that's *why* he left.

Quote

"When I was at Motherwell I played and took my chance but things only changed when the new manager (Stuart Kettlewell) came in and he played a system without wingers."

I mean, he did, and he was very successful with it (which Ketts was quite quick to point out last week when yer man in the audience at the Meet The Manager was getting bent out of shape about "nOt pLaYInG wItH wInGErZ").

Don't get me wrong, you can absolutely read between the lines in what he's said there but he's not explicitly making that statement.

I suppose the question is whether it's actually worth carrying bodies on the off chance you might use them for 10-20 mins or whatever.

[Handsome_Devil]

9 minutes ago, capt_oats said:

Tbf, equally not going to bat for Kettlewell, McKinstry is simply stating a fact rather than saying that's *why* he left.

I mean, he did, and he was very successful with it (which Ketts was quite quick to point out last week when yer man in the audience at the Meet The Manager was getting bent out of shape about "nOt pLaYInG wItH wInGErZ").

Don't get me wrong, you can absolutely read between the lines in what he's said there but he's not explicitly making that statement.

I suppose the question is whether it's actually worth carrying bodies on the off chance you might use them for 10-20 mins or whatever.

I suspect I'll never get bored of expressing incredulity that in a squad of what, 25 senior players, we felt that there was zero room for a (probably) cheap-ish guy who had been our poty to mid-Feb, could play on either side if we wanted a plan B and could even have been a candidate to develop as a 10 over a couple of years if we were sticking with 3-5-2 or moving to 3-6-1.

We talk all the time about the risk-reward balance in signings and unless there's behind the scenes stuff we don't know about, not keeping mckinstry around given his flexibility, potential and presumably modest wage demands will always puzzle me.

[well fan for life]

I think McKinstry was fine but if he was a jobbing winger from Port Vale or whatever then the support would not have given a single shit. 

That and I know a few QP fans who thought he was absolute pony for them last season. 

[Jonnylosqualo]

We didn't win a game he scored in either. 

[18May1991]

3 hours ago, capt_oats said:

Are we training on a former Indian burial ground or something? 

[Allroy for Prez]

Even with a fully fit and available squad to choose from the likely hood is we’d be taking nothing from the Rangers and Hearts games. 

If we’re still sitting on zero wins, worse still on 1 point, after the St Johnstone game on the 31st then I think we’ll have every reason to be getting ratty about the situation.

Looking at the fixtures coming up, I honestly can’t see where the points are going to come from.

We’ve had literally months to prepare for the season and are barely able to cobble a team together for the opening game, and incredibly the situation has deteriorated since then. 

Having apparently not considered Moult as he was injury prone, signing Obika, Souaré and now Callachan with their injury histories is criminal not to mention absolutely chucking money away on wages for players who contribute nothing on the park. 

 

[Handsome_Devil]

23 minutes ago, well fan for life said:

I think McKinstry was fine but if he was a jobbing winger from Port Vale or whatever then the support would not have given a single shit. 

That and I know a few QP fans who thought he was absolute pony for them last season. 

Absolutely but he wasn't a jobbing 28-year-old, he was a local boy we could build a story round, would probably have been very cheap, would have offered the hint of a plan B and the very fact he was fine in his first season of senior football in the disaster of the Hammell squad suggests he had some level of ability.

I wouldn't have given him a contract for life or anything but giving him the minutes Aitchison got to see if he could adjust to being a 10, and possibly 12 months more, would have been virtually zero risk.

[MurrayWell]

I'm not so sure the not looking at Moult argument stands up to any real scrutiny. I doubt, given our recent history of signing folk with injury records, that was as much of a factor as is being made out.

He would have been on a considerable bit more than Jon Obika for a start and Dundee United would pay more than us. He was fine as a gamble when Burton were footing the bill for the majority of his wages. The whole 'he offered to play for free or on pay as you play', I'm sorry but I absolutely don't buy that. He's got bills to pay like everyone else, and I'd be appalled if as a club we even tried that. Also pay as you play deals aren't a thing. 

We all love Moult, but I find the chat around him as an option vs Obika as an option completely wide of the mark. 

[Handsome_Devil]

2 minutes ago, Allroy for Prez said:

Even with a fully fit and available squad to choose from the likely hood is we’d be taking nothing from the Rangers and Hearts games. 

If we’re still sitting on zero wins, worse still on 1 point, after the St Johnstone game on the 31st then I think we’ll have every reason to be getting ratty about the situation.

You definitely wouldn't bet on us winning either of the next two but it's the stereotypical 'good time to play them' so I'm not going to be as forgiving of two comfortable defeats as sometimes, should it turn out like that.

Including the cup the next four have the sides second, third and fourth from last season plus a revitalised Aberdeen. So aye, tough on paper but if we're going to do anything this season we need to snatch the occasional result somewhere - which tbf last season we showed ourselves to be more than capable of...even one big positive will keep us approaching an even keel come Perth but that game already looks like a test of our nerve. 

[Allroy for Prez]

1 minute ago, Handsome_Devil said:

You definitely wouldn't bet on us winning either of the next two but it's the stereotypical 'good time to play them' so I'm not going to be as forgiving of two comfortable defeats as sometimes, should it turn out like that.

Including the cup the next four have the sides second, third and fourth from last season plus a revitalised Aberdeen. So aye, tough on paper but if we're going to do anything this season we need to snatch the occasional result somewhere - which tbf last season we showed ourselves to be more than capable of...even one big positive will keep us approaching an even keel come Perth but that game already looks like a test of our nerve. 

Oh for sure, I don’t believe in just writing games off, anyone at Fir Park outside the Old Firm should be considered a real opportunity for points, and it is potentially a good time to play them.

The real crunch games this season however are going to be with Ross County and St Johnstone. We play them each early on and to win neither hardly puts down a marker for the season. 

[Alanos]

Is one of Obika’s rolls on the coaching staff to look after all the crocks?

Seems to be the correct man for the job.

[Handsome_Devil]

8 minutes ago, MurrayWell said:

We all love Moult, but I find the chat around him as an option vs Obika as an option completely wide of the mark. 

Perhaps I'm misreading but I think the frustration is people accepted SK's hard logic towards a fan favourite only for him to then sign Obika (and Souare) in a complete flip. He then compounds that by admitting his error before signing Callachan and overseeing a training regime that would make Peter Hartley and Ryan Bowman reluctant to get out of bed in the morning. I don't think many realistically think signing Moult was viable.

I'm 50-50 on SK but I really like the idea of backing a manager for five years and seeing how that goes rather than changing every 18 months... so since he's the guy in place, my bias is to give him the benefit of the doubt as long as possible. But ngl, there's some things he does which from the outside make that really hard at times.

Edited August 8 by Handsome_Devil

[MurrayWell]

18 minutes ago, Handsome_Devil said:

Perhaps I'm misreading but I think the frustration is people accepted SK's hard logic towards a fan favourite only for him to then sign Obika (and Souare) in a complete flip. He then compounds that by admitting his error before signing Callachan and overseeing a training regime that would make Peter Hartley and Ryan Bowman reluctant to get out of bed in the morning.

I'm 50-50 on SK but I really like the idea of backing a manager for five years and seeing how that goes rather than changing every 18 months... so since he's the guy in place, my bias is to give him the benefit of the doubt as long as possible. But ngl, there's some things he does which from the outside make that really hard at times.

Totally get that and appreciate the point of view, I'm frustrated at the injuries and risky signings too. 

But I think every transfer window this Moult vs Obika thing gets rolled out and I'm just making the point that so many more factors will be at play, the biggest one being wage demands. Not just a case of "here are two injury prone strikers gaffer, who do you want?" so I don't think comparing the two, because they happen to be strikers, has much merit.

Both probably viewed as risks, with Obika being less of a financial one. I just don't think Moult would have been considered from more of a financial perspective than a fitness one. 

To be clear though, absolutely with folk on the whole stacking the squad with injury prone players then management being shocked when they get injured. It's a ridiculous situation we find ourselves in and Kettlewell, sports science and recruitment have to carry some of the blame, rather than it just always being bad luck. 

 

Edited August 8 by MurrayWell

[Jim McLean's Ghost]

7 minutes ago, Handsome_Devil said:

backing a manager for five years

The chances of any manager lasting 5 years is absolutely nil.

Either they are good enough and get a move to a bigger club or they are shite and get binned. To be Motherwell manager for 5 years just isn't going to happen.

Stuart McCall was probably the closest we got to that and he should have moved himself on.

[Cedrics Mighty Well Army]

Apologies - been absent (in pub) so am just catching up.

Newcastle United have signed John Ruddy (aged 73).

[Cedrics Mighty Well Army]

2 minutes ago, Jim McLean's Ghost said:

The chances of any manager lasting 5 years is absolutely nil.

 

If the manager is backed by the board he'll stay 5 years or more on his "project".

However, if he is too successful we know a big club like St. Mirren will come in and steal him.

[Phillips455]

4 minutes ago, Jim McLean's Ghost said:

The chances of any manager lasting 5 years is absolutely nil.

Either they are good enough and get a move to a bigger club or they are shite and get binned. To be Motherwell manager for 5 years just isn't going to happen.

Stuart McCall was probably the closest we got to that and he should have moved himself on.

Yeah, look at the Raith Rovers manager. Had an excellent year and they punted after the first game. 

They might have been thinking about kicking him out anyway but it looks like a carbon copy of the Alexander situation. 

 

You either leave a hero, or see yourself sacked as a villian.

[capt_oats]

13 minutes ago, MurrayWell said:

Totally get that and appreciate the point of view, I'm frustrated at the injuries and risky signings too. 

But I think every transfer window this Moult vs Obika thing gets rolled out and I'm just making the point that so many more factors will be at play, the biggest one being wage demands. Not just a case of "here are two injury prone strikers gaffer, who do you want?" so I don't think comparing the two, because they happen to be strikers, has much merit.

To be clear though, absolutely with folk on the whole stacking the squad with injury prone players then management being shocked when they get injured. It's a ridiculous situation we find ourselves in and Kettlewell, sports science and recruitment have to carry some of the blame, rather than it just always being bad luck. 

I could be miles out but Weir was asked directly about the Moult of it all at the AGM and without wanting to put words in his mouth the impression he gave was that despite Moult's "I'll play for free honest" claim that some folk seem to have genuinely take seriously, the club never considered Moult as an option after the way his loan panned out.

I suppose the point I'm getting at is that the decision may not have solely been Kettlewell's. There's every chance the board said "f**k That".