capt_oats

Surely he's not eligible to play for them with the recall happening outside the window. Anyway, 23/24 has been a wild ride.

Curcic was one of the first ones I thought of as well. Shivute as well. and this guy...

Yeah, I mean I don’t expect to pitch up tomorrow and there be a big bag of money on the table but it’s been brought up at previous AGMs and IIRC McMahon conceded that it was something they’d let slip. Given it’s something that they’ve put on the agenda so it’s not unreasonable to ask how it’s developed. Bearing in mind McMahon felt he had to point out that the video wasn’t the only part of the project I’m curious to hear how they’ve got on with whatever else they were working on… Agree completely re: the CEO, ideally you’d be expecting it to be announced they have somehow set to go. If not then…fucking hell lads.

Looking forward is a stretch but I'm definitely interested to see what's going to be covered as I get the impression that with McMahon having stated his intention to step down and Weir being clear that he had no intention of being interim this long in the first place there's probably far less tolerance towards them for the sort of flannelling and kicking the can down the road that we've heard before. They bought themselves a bit of time with those updates in January but given the sort of timelines they've set themselves there really has to be some sort of concrete progress now (IMO).

It definitely wasn't clever. So... It's our AGM tomorrow so I'm looking forward to finding out how successful it's been (my expectations are not high).

In fairness, I'm pretty sure Spencer has started almost every game for Huddersfield since he was recalled and by all accounts he's legitimately doing well. Ultimately that's the difference - if we're picking up the players at that level who their clubs are investing in to make a step up rather than the makeweights then chances are we're getting someone in who can do us a decent turn. Genuinely laughed reading that because I felt daft at having not joined those (quite obvious) dots...Yes! I'm curious to see precisely what's on the agenda at the AGM on Wednesday with all this sort of stuff floating around in the background.

In fairness, I don't disagree that we've been panicked into bringing him back but in terms of timeline it depends on how long it took the English FA to process Barnsley's appeal. The English FA are generally quite strict with that sort of thing so I'd be surprised if Barnsley actually Jedi mind-tricked them into Shaw coming back. Bear in mind they basically told Blackburn to f**k off after there was an "administrative error" in their submission for Duncan McGuire's loan: https://www.theguardian.com/football/2024/feb/06/mcguire-transfer-collapsed-after-blackburn-pressed-wrong-button-on-website We announce Shaw was back on 8th February (2 days after that Blackburn appeal) so I guess there's a chance that we've legitimately agreed the deal prior to the close of deadline then sorted out the paperwork - similar to Butcher last season who was announced on 4th February - with the window having closed on 31st January. Anyway, vaguely related to our Oli Shaw mercy dash I just noticed this on a thread on FPC (it's been a while). It's possible it got lost in all the noise around chucking a 3-0 lead but it seems we had a late bid for Aidan Keena binned on deadline day. Either way it seems as if Shaw coming back was the most last resort thing going.

Thinking about this it reminded me of Kettlewell's comment on a podcast (maybe Open Goal?) back when he got the job along the lines of he felt that we were understaffed. It kind of makes me wonder if this is still an issue - I know we promoted Ricky Foster to replace Archibald's short stint in the LDC role and I know we've had Clarkson in the dug out most games but given his actual job is Head of Academy you wonder if we're either short or asking people to double up. Either way, we definitely feel lighter in the coaching department than we were when either Robinson or Alexander were at the club. In fact @Handsome_Devil's comment about the stat Alexander threw out about not conceding from set pieces feels especially relevant in that respect.

Not even a cult hero. Just a straight up hero for 'well fans of a certain vintage ie: many of the posters on our thread. 61 goals in 156 games. Part of of a team that finished league runners up and finished the top scorer in the league that season. Played at a World Cup while on our books. Some boi.

I found myself unreasonably annoyed at Kettlewell's post-match yesterday largely because it was such a callback to Hammell last season. It's good that SK is acknowledging that we're losing soft/bad/cheap goals and it's probably fair to say that players need to take individual responsibility. However, last season Kettlewell fixed the issue by adding a new player to the group (Hammell signed Butcher to play in midfield) and moving away from the back 4 to a back 3 - which worked very well. In this case we didn't sign another centre back (fair enough we have something like 6 anyway), we've not changed the shape and Kettlewell shows no appetite to swap out an underperforming goalkeeper. If we're not actually going to make any changes like that we're back to asking the same players, in the same shape to...just defend better? That brings us back round to a question about defensive coaching. You can get away with blaming individual mistakes every now and again but as you say, if we're losing the same types of goals on a regular basis then it's absolutely pointing to a deeper problem. Besides the unpleasantness this is sort of the problem I have with Paton as well along with the fact that I don't actually think he's particularly suited to the role that he's currently being asked to play but he's a fixture there anyway.

I clipped a GIF of it but it's so low res it's not really worth posting. The highlights of the game are here though and the wee man scores both.

Aye. I also think there's kind of been an assumption that Devine's just a RB/RWB which isn't actually the case. Was the shout when we signed him not that most of his appearances Rangers have been at LB? So in that respect it wasn't really Kettlewell reverting to the sort of thing he was doing earlier in the season by shoving Spencer out there.

He had 2 year or something left on his deal at QPR when we signed him so it's not unreasonable to think he's on a decent wedge. The story seems to be his weekly is at the top end of our scale but it's not wild instead it was his signing on fee that made sure he wasn't leaving money on the table. The season we signed him on a permanent our accounts show we spent £542k on players (we paid fees for 5 or 6). I'd guess the Kelly deal accounts for a chunk of that. Aye. Lawleff basically said that it was Robinson who initiated his signing Alexander just waved it through and signed off on it. Alexander wasn't even the manager when Kelly was announced so odds are the loan had been set up by Robinson/Foyle. Robinson resigned on 31st December, Kelly announced on 6th January. Alexander was confirmed 7th January.

Sure there is. Whether he’s actually good enough is a different question but IMO the position Paton is playing in this current system is a better fit for him than any of Alexander’s 433, Hammell’s 4231 or Kettlewell’s initial 352.

Aye. It's been very much out of sight, out of mind. Although tbf, he's apparently been injured the last while at Walsall. (Hamstring) Ironically there's probably a spot for him in the team with this 3421 we're using at the moment which there wasn't really before.

This is kind of where I am as well. Looking at seasons with Robinson and (regardless of what you thought of him) Alexander both managers seemed to be in lockstep with Burrows. Although Ketts has always been diplomatic with regards his relationship with Weir and McMahon I don't think it's unreasonable to say there doesn't seem to have been the same sort of synergy there given Burrows was pretty much out the door when Hammell was emptied and it's been the shortest of short term thinking ever since. Tbh I've always wondered to what extent Hammell was a Burrows appointment. Even at the time it didn't feel like an obvious Burrows decision and tbh it had the look of folk on the board trying to flex and clipping Flow's wings a bit after the fall out of the Alexander era. I guess we'll have to wait for the Burrows memoir on that score.

Tierney is also contracted for next season.

Something else re: Kettlewell is that he's still "only" 39 which is something that I guess gets lost a bit given his time with us and at County. He was 38 when we appointed him so to put that in context Robinson was 42 when he got the job replacing McGhee. McCall was 46. I think I'm right in saying that the only younger appointments than Kettlewell since I've been going to Fir Park have been McLeish (35) and Davies (34).

In fairness that can really be put down to a couple of heavy defeats against Rangers and Celtic - 1-6 against the **** at Fir Park when we were down to 10 men, a 0-4 against Celtic at FP and a 6-0 at Parkhead on Trophy day when the team were on the beach having just confirmed Europe during the mid-week. There's 16 goals. His actual goal difference is -17.

It's been mentioned before but suppose one of the problems Kettlewell has in how he's viewed is down to the distribution of his record. It's very much been feast or famine in so much as 9 of his 19 wins came in the 14 games of the 2nd half of last season after he took over from Hammell whereas only 5 have come in his 25 league games this season.. He went into this season with a completely unsustainable 64.2% win rate in the league (9 wins from 14) and is currently sitting on 20% for this season (5 wins in 25). The flip of that is that he's only *lost* 36% - so he's actually unbeaten in 64% of his league games this season, almost two thirds. If there's a more even distribution over his time then it's doubtful this is anywhere near a conversation. I've said this before but IMO we're probably only 2 wins short of where we might reasonably expect to be in a fairly average season (*looks at losing 2-0 to Livi and 3-0 at County*) those margins are pretty fine. I'd say, at this moment in time I'm still very much a Kettlewell sceptic - the start he had was exceptional but unsustainable and I acknowledge that if he keeps us up then he'll more than likely get an extension which is fair enough because there's no denying he's been dealt a tough hand with all the restrictions that have been placed on him. Equally I have my doubts about his long term suitability - the fact we've gone from looking to all intents and purposes defensively sound to having one of the worst defensive records in the league with essentially the same players at the core doesn't really reflect well and that's not really assuaged by the players he's backing ie: the Harry Paton and Oli Shaw of it all. I notice someone has updated the List of Motherwell managers page on Wiki (for league games only) and while it's slightly annoying its been separated out into interim/permanent it gives an overview of how he actually compares to other managers (again it's worth noting that McCall only had Rangers in the league for about 1.5 of his seasons in charge). I've gone back as far as Davies for reference - the only real comparisons based on number of games are Black, Malpas, Gannon (ish), Brown and Baraclough. It gives Kettlewell 39 games and 14 wins combined = 35.8% so he's won more than he's lost (and Hammell 5 wins in 24 games = 20.8% who erm, lost more than he won):

@Div just posted this on the P&B Twitter - we've only won 1 away game in the league all season (at Tynecastle) but apparently we've only lost 4 which is a record only the top two can better. I mean, we'll lose this one but still, what a weird season.

He changed the team that beat County last week for the Cup game and look what happened.

Yeah, I thought it was interesting as well. I'm looking at their LinkedIn just now and I'd (genuinely) be interested to know how we'd integrate their tools. The 'shrug' was more that the actual bit of blurb was/is quite vague in terms of practical application. Especially when you read the wee spiel from Daws: Like I say, cool... It's been mentioned before that we take part in TransferRoom - which is in itself quite easy to get your head around and you can see where the value is ie: it's essentially a big transfers conference and provides a platform for clubs/agents to do business. The Off The Pitch erm...pitch is a bit less clear as @Busta Nut asked earlier "What is this? Is it an accountant?" which is an entirely logical conclusion to come to when you see "football finance data partner".