Saints Strike Back: Episode II - An Analysis of the Window

Hello all, please have a look at my analysis of the window... http://www.theitchenperspective.blogspot.co.uk/

Return of the Jedi's next, right?

I should hope not after I substituted the Empire with Saints! St Mary's doesn't exactly resemble the Death Star either...

No, and no-one's planning to blow us up either.

Haven't checked your blog before, but I find it very well written! It is an antidote to Neil Allen style writing and includes some great use of conjunctions! Even so, possibly might be worth breaking a couple of paras. And, I don't like the font, but that's just personal taste. I'll keep an eye out for your match reports from now on.

I hope we don't sign jar jar binks, that would make us a laughing stock.

Good read cheers

Looks like Les Reed has balanced the books: Back of the envelope calc suggests income from sale of 3 players (Schneiderlin, Clyne and Mayuka) is about £38.0m whilst the purchase of 6 players (Van Dijk, Clasie, Juanmi, Martina, Romeu, Soares) is £35.2m plus 2 domestic loans. In addition, JRod being back is equivalent to a £10m+ signing for no fee.

If Soares, Romeu and Van Dijk play at the same level as Clyne, Schneiderlin and Alderweireld, the team will be as strong as last season but the extra strength in depth should avoid the problems faced last year when suspensions and injuries started to impact on results in mid and late season. An exciting prospect, but it's as well to remember that even clubs with players worth tens of millions don't win every match, see Liverpool, Chelsea, Man U.

Great Blog, good read thank you cant help but think the name makes it sound like a blog about Thrush though (just kidding!)

Agree with your sentiments, nice read.

Assuming you are using this blog as practice for a career in writing, my only suggestion would be to try and adopt a more natural, conversational style - it's a blog after all.

At the minute it reads a little too much like a solicitor's letter with a few too many uses of "furthermore". And it's safe to assume the vast majority of people reading this will be Saints fans so there is plenty of stuff you won't need to bother explaining - you're not writing an introduction to Southampton FC for the BBC world service. Get to your opinion.

Anyway, I liked it and nice to read sensible balanced analysis.

Hello all, please have a look at my analysis of the window... http://www.theitchenperspective.blogspot.co.uk/

Good stuff. My only slight criticism would be that transfer windows slam shut rather than swing as suggested in your opening line.

Good stuff. My only slight criticism would be that transfer windows slam shut rather than swing as suggested in your opening line.

I would suggest that the transfer window was broken and was boarded over.

Agree with the analysis and the arguments for bringing each player in, only slightly worried that these players are maybe at an earlier stage of development than those we brought in last summer, therefore could be a rocky first half to the season.

Good stuff. My only slight criticism would be that transfer windows slam shut rather than swing as suggested in your opening line.

That's Spain you're thinking of, where they definately do slam shut. In England they kind of swing backwards and forwards a bit while somebody keeps looking out to see if there's any more, before quietly closing it a couple of hours later.

I expect Mr. Murdoch noticed that there's more headlines to be had from slamming than from swinging, so next year it will be back to slam shut.

Well we now have at least 3 different types of blog poster:

Billy ****e, who could go on Youtube and be our TrueGeordie type of commentator; Redslo who provides the in-depth, analytical and intelligent approach - probably too verbose and information-rich to be a youtuber and Sotonnick (I've capitalised it deliberately) who is starting out.

I'll critique the latest passage rather more than some might. This is because it does seem as though the blog writer ultimately does wish to reach a wider audience and because views have been sought. Sometimes a "It's good." isn't really that helpful and something more in-depth gives more food for thought.

I'd prefer something along the lines of "As the transfer window closes" or "packs its bags for its annual autumn break" i.e. don't write like every other unimaginative hack/copy-writing clone out there as an opening.

The first sentence as a whole is neither especially interesting nor sufficiently crisp as a start. It is somewhat banal. You need to learn how to use commas: sentences have natural pauses as does speech and not every pause needs a comma.

"The question remains, however, will RK...?" better English than your wording.

Atrocious English: 'exited'. Verbs that mean 'left' include 'left', 'depart', 'transfer to', etc. I'll mention that specifically and not nit-pick every part of the blog because it reinforces the above point that really you should want to distinguish yourself and promote good habits (many of which, it is hoped, would by now be ingrained).

Having got to the middle of the first large paragraph, I find two things. Larger paragraphs are not a bad thing: people who complain simply have not read enough demanding material, much of which is oftentimes portrayed in much longer and obtuse passages. I do find, however, that you jump around in your style failing to really develop an idea or any structure and while the format is a paragraph as such, really the piece so far simply reads like a number of slightly-connected, but disparate ideas. I have before commented on Redslo's blog and would suggest you look at how he uses paragraphs. Another suggestion would be to see what other posters deliver e.g. those on RAWK; many are surprisingly erudite and well-expressed notwithstanding the stereotypically-negative view of the 'Scouser'.

This does also read as though it is a repetition of a scatter-gun monologue, delivered at a fast pace. In one paragraph thus far you have talked about: the predictability of players leaving, the need for the black box and recruitment team to have to work, TA, gazumping, Les Reed, the need for replacement players, Nigel Adkins and his tactics, NC and his perceived strengths and weaknesses as a footballer, CS and his ability, the view of him by Southampton's fans, his prowess in a game and ... I'll stop there.

My first question is: what is it you want to write about? To you it will be obvious but you either need to address these topics in far more depth or you need to choose just part of it and concentrate much more on that e.g. "The role of Les Reed", "The perception of fans regarding players replacing those who left in the summer" so there is something more than either (possibly) a high-level overview of a number of topics or a disjointed mix of ideas and comment.

The short part of the paragraph on van Dijk is better because it sticks to one subject, explores it and is thus much more coherent.

I would look at the use of 'furthermore' in terms of its use, its repetition as the beginning of two concurrent paragraphs and where the link and flow between the paragraphs are: again, they are disjointed.

When talking about Caulker: "He showed...demotions", well, what is a 'demotion'? (relegation, perhaps?) and I have to say that stylistically it reads like a cut and paste passage that has been re-used so often the underlay has worn away. Again, with Stekelenberg, once you have referred to him use the personal pronoun rather than repeat his name: it's clunky and unnecessary and suggests you don't know English very well.

I'll leave it there with three further comments:

1/ Don't worry, I have no intention of critiquing your work again (!);

2/ My view is that is reads as though it was written by someone who has been trained to write copy for websites although it is not as bad as that;

3/ I don't know if you read (I suspect little) but just reading a few books ought to give you an idea of how the written word flows and then you'll instinctively copy it more and stylistically your writing will improve a great deal.

Thanks for the constructive criticism folks!

We need a true George. We do, really do!