The9

Early on he looked panicked, even though he was part of the retrospectively decent clean sheet against Watford. He also was perfectly competent in an inexperienced back 4 in the cup win against Villa. Then when he came on after Fonte's injury against Man City, he put the thing on the ground and for the first time this season didn't look like he was just going to hoof the ball back up the pitch at the first opportunity. That looked like a big step forward for him, then he played against Liverpool a few days later. I don't think the huge gap in midfield where Wanyama was meant to be helped against Liverpool much either, as any defender will look bad if the opposition is given the time and space to play the ball in front of them, and he hasn't played since then. He's not good enough to start, but he's decent cover against bottom half sides with different strengths and weaknesses to Yoshida, and he hasn't been frozen out of a Championship side, nor are there any great concerns about his ability at that level as there are still going to be with Stephens, which is sufficient reason to keep him around. If we're just saving cash, we can run with Yoshida and inexperienced kids as defensive backup, but that's the kind of stuff that DOES get you relegated.

It was as much the genius idea of playing him alongside Chris Makin at centre back as Bennett himself, who ended up being half decent at the ar5e end of the Championship for the last couple of games before Reading got him back after 10 matches and then loaned him to Brentford, presumably when they realised we were skint and couldn't afford to keep him. Playing at Brentford, Wycombe, Cheltenham and AFC Wimbledon as he slid down the divisions, and as of August Cork City, all suggest he was never quite good enough for that level. For the record, that pre-season was the ONE occasion Alpine was right about signings (summer 2007) and with hindsight we were just trying to cut costs.

Not sure why anyone thinks this will have any bearing on Caulker, Stephens being back is just representative of how little game time Boro were giving him and the fact season long loans can only be recalled during transfer windows rather than any massive shift in policy.

We're nowhere near a relegation battle and will finish, at worst, in the position we are in (13th). Has everyone forgotten how dismal we were for the entire season when we actually went down? None of the teams below us (and one or two of the ones above) are as good as us. We'd need a disastrous run of injuries and suspensions to still be in the relegation equation in April.

I love it, and I've never played a Fallout game before and wasn't expecting to enjoy planting melons.

It hasn't been worth upgrading more than every 3 years since the new engine in, what, 2011(?) unless you're one of those weird pretend football card FUT people.

The important stats tend to be around distances sprinted rather than pure distance nowadays. Also it's difficult to see how it ISN'T a good idea to sub midfielders after about 60/70 minutes as the replacement is usually of barely worse quality and has a fresh set of legs to maintain those sprints when 70% of the opponents will have an hour's worth of fatigue. Even with the superb fitness levels of players nowadays subs still give you freshness and it's even more important without the minimum 2 day recovery period as players are much more likely to get injuries late on then.

I've got £100 on Newport County to go down out of the football league this season at 5/1, looked like a very safe bet when the millionaire Chairman left in March, they released all but 4 players and appointed Terry Butcher, but somehow there are currently 4 teams worse than them. Will be delighted if they stay up though, but it was good value for what looked like a certainty in pre-season. Betting on Saints to go down would just be stupid, it's not going to happen and it's not even close to happening this season, so there's no value there.

What's happened to all the pressure at Fratton? The last two games have shown it up for the excuse it is.

Nah, always been the same, people with no perspective knee-jerking like absolute bell-ends.

Booked hotels in July 2015, booked flights Southampton to Paris last Friday (after working out that it was cheaper and easier than Eurostar), now on my second ticket application for matches in Lens, Lille, and both Paris venues. Bloody UEFA only offering ridiculous priced tickets for Switzerland v Albania - which will be half empty and selling outside for 20 Euros... still, see what we can get and swap them in March if we get any.

I think he's been very good and we should sign him permanently, he'll have a year left on his contract by the summer so we won't have to pay much, should be able to cover his wages without issue as we probably already are, and he'd be an excellent option with Forster fit. Though if it's that or signing a DM in addition to the current lot, I think I'd go for the DM first.

I suspect he's more chuffed that every time they leave him out they concede goals and lose, and when they pick him they don't.

Didn't see the match, haven't even seen the highlights, but fairly sure the plan would be to have 5 across the back to give their wide men 2 players to deal with when going forward, or play them as overlapping full backs to give the Palace wingers defensive responsibilities, whilst leaving 3 in defence as a preventative measure against their quick breaks.

We drew one and lost 5 straight in Nov/Dec last season, did we go backwards then too?

Because young goalkeepers need matches to improve, so he's better served playing for the Dev squad than he is doing nothing for the first team.

But Bertrand came here after years of getting messed about by Chelsea - he might not want to go through all that again and could have a different attitude to it having been there and done that. Let's face it, when you win the European Cup on your debut it's difficult to improve on that.

Or Everton, who are a whole point ahead of us. Or, er, Chelsea.

Hard Time(s).

Not true, see the regulations above - there are an extra 4 points for CL group stage qualification and making the last 16. All the other points are the same.

The usual big-club pandering nonsense. Why they've managed to avoid Eastleigh v Bolton and shown Man U and Chelsea in totally routine home wins (even for Chelsea on current form) God only knows. Well, actually we all know why, bunch o' plastics.

The written agreement is the emergency loan, and actually, yes this is all perfectly logical. Either side can terminate a loan, but only the side with the permanent registration can agree to extend it. Though as season long loans can only be cancelled during transfer windows, once the transfer window is closed, if they've agreed a season long loan they can't recall the player.

Basically the only time a club can cancel a season-long loan is when the transfer window is open. The fact he's "only on loan until January" means it is by definition an emergency loan which has a maximum duration of 93 days (with the term agreed when the loan is set up). No amount of "gentlemen's agreements" will extend it beyond 93 days, because the only way they can do that is by arranging a completely different kind of loan, the season-long loan they don't currently have. The funny bit is that even if the Skates get approval for a season-long loan right at the start of January, Sheffield United can STILL recall him up to the end of the transfer window (i.e. until the start of February).

Talk to me when Ward-Prowse lobs the keeper from 30 yards on the last day of the season.