Jump to content

Recommended Posts

If rumours are to be believed, his negative influence around the changing room etc, then this is probably best for all parties. Yes the club will have to swallow a hefty percentage of his wages for the season but its a small price to pay to get rid of a bad apple and one thats not likely to feature in the first team. Just a surprise that Motherwell were stupid enough to take him back...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He must be the best salesman in the country.

Putting aside his lacklustr effort at times, he always slowed down our play (which was slow anyway) when we attacked. Even though he has the ability to play and go past people he often chose to dive.

When you see what Trapanovski and Thomson bring it is night and day.

Good riddance 

Edited by Glen Scotia
Edit
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Twinkle said:

 Just a surprise that Motherwell were stupid enough to take him back...

If we have any more injuries our kit man will be named on the bench.

Joking aside he was very good for us 1st time around. Hence why you gave him such an stupid attractive contract.

All that said it rarely works 2nd time around but….Tony Watt with a point to prove could be a very decent option. 

Edited by welldaft
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, welldaft said:

If we have any more injuries our kit man will be named on the bench.

Joking aside he was very good for us 1st time around. Hence why you gave him such an stupid attractive contract.

All that said it rarely works 2nd time around but….Tony Watt with a point to prove could be a very decent option. 

I’m not sure Tony is one of those guys who reacts positively to adversity. Tony needs to be coddled, and indulged, and made to feel special and important. If you can be arsed with all that then he’ll do a job for a while. 

Give him an excuse to feel hard done by and the petted lip appears and he makes sure everyone knows just how  unfairly he’s been treated.

I’d say the question for Motherwell fans is whether the rest of the squad is poor enough to justify pandering to Tony. If so, he might relish being the main man again. He’s not someone to use to juts bolster the squad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, PartyFears2 said:

Heard from a couple of people that MFC are paying more than half of his wage. 
 

75% in fact
 

if true, pretty funny 

How much is he on supposedly!?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Pull My Strings said:

I’m not sure Tony is one of those guys who reacts positively to adversity. Tony needs to be coddled, and indulged, and made to feel special and important. If you can be arsed with all that then he’ll do a job for a while. 

I’d say the question for Motherwell fans is whether the rest of the squad is poor enough to justify pandering to Tony. If so, he might relish being the main man again. He’s not someone to use to juts bolster the squad.

I mean, I don't think you're that far off the mark with the part in bold but he was an excellent player for us previously largely for that reason. He was a good fit for Motherwell because we indulged him and in many ways built the team around him.

Goodwin seems to be an arsehole so if he didn't fancy dealing with Watt then fair enough.

I'd flip your question and ask whether Watt's ceiling is worth Kettlewell making the effort to get the best out of him which he's shown he's able to do. By all accounts Kevin Van Veen was *difficult* to manage but Kettlewell 'indulged' him and we got a 29 goal season out of him.

I don't for a second think we'll get that sort of return out of Tony Watt but given he's been at the club before and I'd guess is a good fit for the group of players we have then given our situation with injuries it's worth a gamble that we can get an approximation of the version that United thought was worth chucking that daft contract at.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, PartyFears2 said:

Heard from a couple of people that MFC are paying more than half of his wage. 
 

75% in fact. 
 

if true, pretty funny 

Not quite. 40% of wage but a loan fee of 185k probably covers another bit of the percentage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Butters Scotch said:

Motherwell played a blinder here but good deal all around I guess.

Have they? United have managed to get rid of a distraction. It remains to be seen what he’ll contribute for Motherwell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, capt_oats said:

I mean, I don't think you're that far off the mark with the part in bold but he was an excellent player for us previously largely for that reason. He was a good fit for Motherwell because we indulged him and in many ways built the team around him.

Goodwin seems to be an arsehole so if he didn't fancy dealing with Watt then fair enough.

I'd flip your question and ask whether Watt's ceiling is worth Kettlewell making the effort to get the best out of him which he's shown he's able to do. By all accounts Kevin Van Veen was *difficult* to manage but Kettlewell 'indulged' him and we got a 29 goal season out of him.

I don't for a second think we'll get that sort of return out of Tony Watt but given he's been at the club before and I'd guess is a good fit for the group of players we have then given our situation with injuries it's worth a gamble that we can get an approximation of the version that United thought was worth chucking that daft contract at.

 

What Goodwin did at the start of last season was talked him up, encouraged him and gave him the responsibility of vice captain. All I assume  for a fresh start, give him every chance to prove he can be a player and be a good influence in the dressing room. None of this materialised. I think after another meh season (remember in the 2nd tier) Jim has had enough. Rightly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Pull My Strings said:

Have they? United have managed to get rid of a distraction. It remains to be seen what he’ll contribute for Motherwell.

Time will tell but selling Watt to us a couple year ago only to get him back on loan whilst we pick up a chunk of his wages, a player that has previously proven himself in the league is pretty good business from them.

When he's on form he's a decent player so if it doesn't work out for them then they can always punt him back to us, a risk worth taking imo.

Going by the signings, it's pretty obvious Goodwin wanted to inject a lot more pace and trickery into our attacks (including the wing backs), players like Ferry, Strain, Ubochioma, Trapanowski which isn't really Watt's game. That's why it wouldn't surprise me if we now brought in a pacey striker as we really could do with one.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, WhatDayIsIt said:

If its 40% and £185k then Luigo Campano deserves a steak dinner tonight

TBF, @Alert Mongoose is rarely wrong.

 

To Tony Watt, he appears to be a bit of an arsehole, but a likeable arsehole in some ways. On the Motherwell thread I've described him as a child, and I don't think he's likely to grow up any time soon.

Hope we don't end up with egg on our face.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...