The Big Relegation Thread

[DeeTillEhDeh]

21 minutes ago, Sarto Mutiny said:

They won't reconstruct the league to save us. We're not Aberdeen.

Or Motherwell.

[Arch Stanton]

Or St. Mirren. 

[Busta Nut]

On 19/02/2023 at 17:27, Swello said:

I'm most interested to hear what Joel Sked thinks.

Typical they all decided not to appear on their podcast this week eh? 

[Swello]

3 minutes ago, Busta Nut said:

Typical they all decided not to appear on their podcast this week eh? 

haha - I'm listening to it right now - utterly jambo-free

[Archie McSquackle]

That was my first reaction listening to it last night. Very disappointing!

[Jacksgranda]

17 hours ago, Sarto Mutiny said:

They won't reconstruct the league to save us. We're not Aberdeen.

Indeed

[VincentGuerin]

Counter-intuitive, I know, but if I were a Motherwell fan, I'd be deeply worried about having just hired the guy who won two games in a row as caretaker.

The caretaker bounce is common, and hiring them often a mistake. Just last season Burnley's Mike Jackson (an internal promotion like Kettlewell) took over a side that had picked up 4 points out of 21, took 10 from the next available 12, and then they reverted to type and got relegated anyway by collapsing in the last four games. It was quite similar, battling to a couple of big home wins, players re-energised, crowd re-energised. Then they fell apart.

Kettlewell got the two wins, and you can't quibble with that. But St Mirren are poor on the road, Hearts average at best, and Motherwell statistically were likely to win sometime. I'd be suspicious of those two results.

For what it's worth, Motherwell have seemed decent when I've seen them this season, but then so have Dundee United, so a small sample size can be misleading.

Edited February 23, 2023 by VincentGuerin

[Sarto Mutiny]

Liam Fox won a couple of games as caretaker as well. Just throwing that one out there.

[staggy1929]

15 minutes ago, VincentGuerin said:

Counter-intuitive, I know, but if I were a Motherwell fan, I'd be deeply worried about having just hired the guy who won two games in a row as caretaker.

The caretaker bounce is common, and hiring them often a mistake. Just last season Burnley's Mike Jackson (an internal promotion like Kettlewell) took over a side that had picked up 4 points out of 21, took 10 from the next available 12, and then they reverted to type and got relegated anyway by collapsing in the last four games. It was quite similar, battling to a couple of big home wins, players re-energised, crowd re-energised. Then they fell apart.

Kettlewell got the two wins, and you can't quibble with that. But St Mirren are poor on the road, Hearts average at best, and Motherwell statistically were likely to win sometime. I'd be suspicious of those two results.

For what it's worth, Motherwell have seemed decent when I've seen them this season, but then so have Dundee United, so a small sample size can be misleading.

The thing with the new manager bounce potentially waring off is that Ketts probably only needs a few more wins to create a fairly large gap between the others at the bottom. This genuinely could be enough to lead them into a favourable position by the split.

For what it's worth I think it's a shoot out between ourselves and United for bottom.

[VincentGuerin]

12 minutes ago, staggy1929 said:

The thing with the new manager bounce potentially waring off is that Ketts probably only needs a few more wins to create a fairly large gap between the others at the bottom. This genuinely could be enough to lead them into a favourable position by the split.

For what it's worth I think it's a shoot out between ourselves and United for bottom.

It's true, and a win at Killie would push Motherwell to the very fringes of the discussion. If they lose there, though, suddenly it looks grim for them pre-split. Two away games against direct rivals followed by Rangers. Only 'winnable' game pre-split after that is United at home. Their feel-good factor could vanish very quickly.

In contrast, United have home games with Aberdeen and Hibs, both of whom they've already beaten, as well as St Mirren, who are poor on the road, and Motherwell themselves.  I see more scope for them picking up points than Motherwell.

County's run looks quite tricky, they need point on the board in the next two games, really.

Killie's fixtures don't look great, either. I'd be more concerned with their run than United's, for example.

A lot hinges on this weekend. But if Motherwell don't win at Killie, there's still a big question mark over them.

Edited February 23, 2023 by VincentGuerin

[staggy1929]

5 minutes ago, VincentGuerin said:

It's true, and a win at Killie would push Motherwell to the very fringes of the discussion. If they lose there, though, suddenly it looks grim for them pre-split. Two away games against direct rivals followed by Rangers. Only 'winnable' game pre-split after that is United at home. Their feel-good factor could vanish very quickly.

In contrast, United have home games with Aberdeen and Hibs, both of whom they've already beaten, as well as St Mirren, who are poor on the road, and Motherwell themselves.  I see more scope for them picking up points than Motherwell.

County's run looks quite tricky, they need point on the board in the next two games, really.

Killie's fixtures don't look great, either. I'd be more concerned with their run than United's, for example.

A lot hinges on this weekend. But if Motherwell don't win at Killie, there's still a big question mark over them.

Can't argue with any of that really, I know from here on out it'll be said every week but this weekend is the biggest of the season for the bottom 6 clubs. I think County have an ability to pick points up at home when we shouldn't, every time we've been bottom or thereabouts we've managed to get a run together so the fact we've not looked like doing that as of yet with our fixtures is a concern. I think with United the club is in a really toxic place at the minute and Fox is out of his depth that's why I reckon it's probably between us two.

I think with Killie they have a really good manager with a pretty average (being kind) squad, I can see them getting points at home but they desperately need points on the road.

it'll be draws all round this weekend to piss everyone off.

[RostokMcSpoons]

Kettlewell has 'well' in his name.
Nominative Determinism FTW!

We'll be fine (see what I sort-of did there, eh?)

And if he's not fine as a manager, he'll make a very good tea boy.   Nominative Determinism will find a way.

 

In all seriousness, the board came down to a choice between someone who'd just done the seemingly-impossible, and got two crucial wins in a row... or a chap from England who didn't have much name recognition, and another English chap with masses of name recognition (some of it for the wrong reasons).
You could have made a case for each of them, as an outsider.   Any of the three that could be 'the wrong choice' just as much as the right one.  Kett's really did come across very well in all the on-screen interviews though.  Plenty of the energy that was sorely lacking from the team over the last few months.

The Killie game will go quite a long way to showing if it was a truly good move, but we've already seen our players, when they're really putting in the hard yards, can be good enough to get us out of the mire.

 

[LiviLion]

5 minutes ago, RostokMcSpoons said:

Nominative Determinism will find a way.

Jim Goodwin likes this

[Brian Graham’s Lovely Hair]

Watching Well on Sunday, their defence had improved a hell of a lot compared to the game v Hibs a few weeks ago. That will help their cause a good bit. 

[Swello]

48 minutes ago, VincentGuerin said:

Counter-intuitive, I know, but if I were a Motherwell fan, I'd be deeply worried about having just hired the guy who won two games in a row as caretaker.

The caretaker bounce is common, and hiring them often a mistake. Just last season Burnley's Mike Jackson (an internal promotion like Kettlewell) took over a side that had picked up 4 points out of 21, took 10 from the next available 12, and then they reverted to type and got relegated anyway by collapsing in the last four games. It was quite similar, battling to a couple of big home wins, players re-energised, crowd re-energised. Then they fell apart.

This was pretty much where I started - but when he was appointed, my gut reaction was "that's fine".

I think the decision is as much about not rocking what has been a very unstable boat at the precise point where the team is setup in a way that actually suits the players we have in the building, which really hasn't been the case for a calendar year at least. 

If there had been an absolutely outstanding candidate up against him, then I might be thinking differently but there just wasn't - and TBH there hasn't been the last few times either as our job is -clearly- not a very attractive one.

Lastly, he's not been given a 3 year deal - he's been given to the end of next season which is pretty much the minimum to describe someone as "permanent" and probably has the effect of not allowing anyone to feel too comfortable.

[capt_oats]

50 minutes ago, VincentGuerin said:

Counter-intuitive, I know, but if I were a Motherwell fan, I'd be deeply worried about having just hired the guy who won two games in a row as caretaker.

The caretaker bounce is common, and hiring them often a mistake. Just last season Burnley's Mike Jackson (an internal promotion like Kettlewell) took over a side that had picked up 4 points out of 21, took 10 from the next available 12, and then they reverted to type and got relegated anyway by collapsing in the last four games. It was quite similar, battling to a couple of big home wins, players re-energised, crowd re-energised. Then they fell apart.

Kettlewell got the two wins, and you can't quibble with that. But St Mirren are poor on the road, Hearts average at best, and Motherwell statistically were likely to win sometime. I'd be suspicious of those two results.

For what it's worth, Motherwell have seemed decent when I've seen them this season, but then so have Dundee United, so a small sample size can be misleading.

I mean, sure...but we promoted Robinson in almost exactly the same circumstances (worse in fact) and he ended up being our most successful manager since we were finishing 2nd under McCall.

It's a question of whether the issue for us this season has been the players or having a guy in charge with literally no previous first team managerial experience assisted by a guy whose record in management was relegating Albion Rovers and 12 games at East Kilbride.

[PauloPerth]

17 minutes ago, RostokMcSpoons said:

Kettlewell has 'well' in his name.
Nominative Determinism FTW!

We'll be fine (see what I sort-of did there, eh?)

And if he's not fine as a manager, he'll make a very good tea boy.   Nominative Determinism will find a way.

 

12 minutes ago, LiviLion said:

Jim Goodwin likes this

 

Arsene Wenger not so much.

[Phillips455]

As long as we don't suddenly give out a 2+year extension halfway through a season. That happened to both Robinson and Alexander, and nearly straight after was their decline.

[Swello]

8 minutes ago, Phillips455 said:

As long as we don't suddenly give out a 2+year extension halfway through a season. That happened to both Robinson and Alexander, and nearly straight after was their decline.

Yes. Given the number of Motherwell managers in our history - regardless of their success - that have moved upwards rather than sacked/mutualled, it's not something we should ever feel the need to do hastily. 

[Al B]

I think the difference for me is that, for Motherwell fans who have been watching our team fairly closely for the last 6 months (18 months probably), you could see that the last 2 games weren't just "new manager bounces", there were specific tweaks and changes that Kettlewell made to the side and the way we set up, that made massive differences.

Playing Van Veen as part of a 2 is something that in all fairness a lot of us spotted and have been crying out for for a long time, and yet Kettlewell was the first to actually not just try it, but actually try it with KVV as the deeper of the 2. Any time Alexander or Hammell tried to find someone to play with him, they had made KVV the 9 and tried to shoe-horn someone in to be running around him, and it just wasn't working. Kettlewell was the first to realise that KVV might be better as the deeper one and stuck Obika up beside him to just pull the ball down, make it stick, lay it off. Both players are thriving off it and it was great to see the 2 of them just laughing to each other as they knew the Hearts back-line couldn't deal with them.

Hammell has maybe been unfortunate in that Butcher and Casey had come in and hadn't had a chance to play by the time he was binned... but regardless I don't think he'd would have set a back 5 up in the way that Kettlewell did.

That stability at the back, and the dropping deep of KVV has allowed a midfield 3 that, although it's the same guys, has a chance to be much more complete and balanced than they have been, purely because they are now able to focus on their job and what they do best, rather than having to do the jobs of 2 or 3 positions.

 

So aye, there's been enough tangible tweaks and changes there (without going full tonto and changing anything and everything) for me, to alleviate any fears of it being nothing more than an initial "bounce"