The9

Injured. I suspect that answers part II of your question too. I actually put Lee Holmes' injury down as a major contributory factor in our relegation, he was excellent in August when we looked like a mid-table side and as soon as he got injured our (alleged) 4-3-3 fell apart because he was the outlet for every pass and the key to our counterattacking. As soon as "James/Gillet -> Holmes -> cross into the box" stopped being an option we didn't know how to create anything and McGoldrick started hanging around on the halfway line instead of getting in to attack Holmes' early crosses. Personally I thought Holmes was streets ahead on Player of the Month for August as everything went through him.

Sounds like we played him in defensive midfield then. He set up a goal against Exeter in the League Cup with an excellent through ball as well, though I'm not sure it was actually the last pass. Just another example of a good player made to look poor by the lack of quality around him. He can't head, he's not the greatest tackler, but he can pass all day and he sees options in advanced roles - when there's someone to actually pass to that is. God knows why we've ended up playing him at DM when he should be playing in the hole. I'd rather Wotton as a DM, and Schneiderlin much more advanced.

Seeing as he actually seemed to have a clue tactically, pushing Euell forward and getting some results when the players put in the effort, and it saves us going through the rigmarole of finding another new boss no better than the last one when it's mostly the players at fault for their lack of effort anyway, I'd consider sticking with him. Then again, I'd take some b*stard that makes them run up mountains and that they're scared of any day. I actually think Wotte's outlook "I'm boss til July and then I'll take whatever" is remarkably refreshing. He's not too worried about someone else coming in if that does happen, and that sends a good message.

LOL, my public facade is complaining how unfair that is on the others...

We currently have Lloyd James in Wales U-21s and apparently McLaggon's Welsh too (and would be worth a game at U-21), so it might not be the end of it actually... 2 players called up is all you need to get a game called off IIRC.

I'm expecting there to be some "you've done well but you've only paid for a half - give me thirty seconds and I'll see if I can cripple a sub" thrown in for good measure.

I believe this is being taken care of, I know of two well respected (well, one well respected and one called Al, LOL) photomonkeys who are rumoured to be in attendance. They have previously been responsible for some reet top smashing and indeed marvy pics of us whilst playing for the Saints IFC team against various other clubs' fans. Unfortunately as I'm in work I can't go linking any linkies cos I don't have the URLs, and much as I'd like to I'm not gonna link the ones of me in Saints (IFC) kit already online on my Facebook account, even though there are about 50 of them in various matches. Rest assured though if either of said photographers are in attendance there will be some nice pics. They rock.

I would laugh a lot at that, we'd probably all be in the changing room at half time checking out the report !

The only info we've had so far says Itchen North.

Oh good you've found it. Now all you have to do is read the thread (ignoring my bits cos I was talking cobblers at the start) as you'll know.

You might want to look at the other thread, which contains a link to the rules.

I hope you're right. Just about being actually bought out, even if not necessarily getting back into the CCC. Call me touchy, but I *have* had this happen to my club before...

Is it wrong that I'm more bothered with SaintRobbie's use of the term "we are going to relegate" than the actual concept of us "being relegated", which is at least the correct tense? Or is it just that I'm resigned to us being cack and I've not yet completely given up on education ?

A lot of cobblers (ha!) gets talked in advertising.

In case anyone needs any ITKing about this Eastleigh market bloke I'm just around the corner at work ? HTH.

The worked up thing is because of a misinterpretation of whether 10 points would be deducted this season if a team was not affected by relegation. As it is, if they're not being relegated they don't need to worry, the 10 comes off straight away anyway. I look forward to the FL rewriting the rules again when a team runs up massive debts getting themselves HUGELY into debt with a team of superstars which puts them 30 points clear and then only loses 10 points, seeing as there's no mention of the deductions affecting promotion-chasing teams yet... As for the Saints link, there wouldn't be a mention of us staying up by over 10 anyway, because it was mathematically impossible at that point and people would have thought they were taking the Michael.

Controversial ITKer that I am, I would like to reveal exclusively that the grey shirts have white/gold letters on the back, as they didn't have enough red... ...not just the names either, the numbers too. And they didn't do any long-sleeved ones, the sods.

Adipure, not Adipure II. Adipures are for the traditionalist (except the coloured versions, which are for mentals) who harken back to the days of Beckenbauer and the Copa Mundial, but without the agony of screws biting into your feet, whilst Adipure IIs are for people who completely miss the point of creating a classic styled boot, and want pointless white ankle bits and lopsided laces.

Surely just fewer opportunities to be on tv full stop ? Given our usual live tv record, suddenly the Master Plan becomes clear...

Yes, but that doesn't stop the -10 deduction now from being contrary to FL rules. Edit - having now seen the exact wording it seems not...

The cut off doesn't prevent points from being deducted late this season, it just guarantees points WILL be deducted the same season if the Admin occurs before it. Also, part of the County Borough of Stockport extended into Lancashire prior to 1974, but not the Metropolitan Borough of Stockport itself, which is in Greater Manchester, so that's a pretty tenous claim at best. Having just checked the League Table, Stockport would need the 4 teams immediately below to win and Carlisle to overturn an 18 goal deficit in order to get relegated. Clearly there's no possible grounds for their deduction applying this season when it will make absolutely no difference. The facts are that the FL have ignored their own rules, this deduction should either have happened before March or should apply next season.

Especially one that thinks the plural of business is "business's" and can't spell "too".

I've figured out what the problem is with this : Its a paradox - Stockport were 13 points clear of the relegation zone last week, with the -10 now they are 3 points clear of it with one game to play. According to the League's rules if they finish in the bottom 4 then the points deduction shouldn't happen until next season, but without the points deduction they won't finish in the bottom 4, so they'll be safe, in which case the -10 should be applied this season, therefore sending them down. Ummmmmm... nice work Football League, you have built a paradox into your rules. I suppose at least they've realised it and everyone involved knows what they have to do.

I shall be bringing £115 to try and buy off someone's second half place too, er, gaffer...

I'll answer my own question : http://www.football-league.co.uk/page/News/LeagueOneNewsDetail/0,,10794~1644278,00.html I guess the justification is that Stockport are now within 3 points of the relegation zone and might be relegated. Nice for them to have a chance to stay up on the pitch...