The9

Delldays got banned, so I would suspect that might have been part of the reason...

Weird people on here even thinking we can't accommodate Lambert and Osvaldo, both of them can play up top or anywhere across the supporting 3 AM positions (and already have done). Add to that Rodriguez, who has already played everywhere across the 3 and up top, and Lallana, Davis and Ramirez who can play across any of the AM positions and often do, and we've got a very fluid and flexible front 4 who can interchange and are difficult to pick up for defences. You don't need a 4-4-2 to play two strikers, we've been fielding two of them in almost every match for a year already and barely using a front two.

An interesting consideration Bear, but I think it's more down to the club not knowing their arse from their elbow when it came to doing the photoshoot, hence them needing to photoshop the sponsor onto all the kits later and using whatever shorts looked vaguely right and got sent to them at the time. It took about 3 months for that kit to actually pitch up in the shop, so I don't think the players' gonads were even considered, and frankly it's just not good enough.

I just pay attention to the detail. Seeing as I just bought 3 pairs of adidas shorts in red, white and black all without the Saints badge on I just made sure I got the right ones. In other "you don't want to know" news, the Tiro '13 doesn't have a built in nutsack, whilst the Campeon '13 does. Now if you're a player, you're going to want to know if you need to bring your footy pants, aren't you ?

I think his reference to "quiet" was more a matter of joining an unfashionable club in a division where the focus would be on other teams and players, plus moving away from the capital city of the country he represents in a nation with very invasive fans and an ultra culture, rather than having the New Forest on the doorstep. We knew the rest of it in the thread on whether we would sign him already, he was having loads of problems with fans disrespecting him, not entirely surprising given his tendency to punch the odd teammate.

Something else I've just spotted - the shorts being worn in the advert for the current away kit are NOT the ones the team are actually wearing : Here's the Shaw ad : And the home/away kits : Note there are no seams on the front of the away shorts and a black panel on the back of them ? Those shorts are Tiro 13 style and are the same as the home kit shorts. But the ones they've actually worn in matches are these, the Campeon '13 - a notable seam across the front of the shorts, the 3 stripes reaching all the way down the side of the shorts and no black panel on the back or sides... They're also the ones the club are selling in the store : http://ssl.saintsfc.co.uk/product/13100/0000-9538 So we can just assume that as WELL as not having sponsors on, the shorts they used for the photoshoot weren't actually the ones Saints were going to wear either. The alternate black away shorts worn at Barnsley are Campeon '13 style too, FWIW, though the socks were just cheapo plain white ones with black adidas logo rather than the more expensive 3-stripe ones.

I've also noticed whilst searching that as well as the (well known) Air Florida / Rank Xerox / Draper Tools sponsors on the Patrick two shades of blue away kit, there were also two different colour sponsors for Draper Tools (dark and white). The white sponsor seems to be smaller so was probably used in televised matches in line with the regulations they had back then. Also notable alternate light shorts on Jordan on the links above. I've also seen a few pics of the all red change shirt worn against teams with white stripes which is nearly as weird as this season's red West Brom third kit (to go with their red/black striped away kit). I mean this : as an alternate of this : Not this :

Here we go - the team photo for 1989 has the "DRAPER" without the big black box :

Before my Saints-supporting time, but there's a different kit for August 1989 on here : http://www.historicalkits.co.uk/Southampton/Southampton.htm that ties in with what you're saying, plus the replica I have from that season has this sponsor on it : Going to see if I can track down an August '89 kit now...

Ah balls, Bale left on 25 May 2007 - Wayback has an archive of Saintsfc.co.uk/news on May 12th and the next one isn't until June, which only has the articles for June archived, so can't get to it as there's nothing with the May archive in it containing stuff from after 12th. Spurs website doesn't even mention the price, never mind any clauses : http://web.archive.org/web/20070528051220/http://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/news/articles/balesigns.html#

The Echo repeats the "no sell on" comment here :http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/10581204.Saints_in_line_for___2m_windfall_if_Gareth_Bale_signs_for_Real_Madrid/

Forecast OS article detailed exactly what was cashed in for the Bale deal, no mention of a sell on, because there wasn't one. Actually, maybe I should go back to the Bale stuff to see what the club said then...

Yes, it's completely wrong. The OS article about Forecast's purchase which I dug out from the Wayback Machine last week also only mentions future appearances and goals, and I've had it verified by a local journo from back when the Echo actually had access to that kind of inside info.

The only people I've seen saying this kind of stuff are very, very, bitter Skates. He's (once again) taken his opportunity and stepped up to a level many people wouldn't have expected him to perform at. It's a great feeling seeing his efforts rewarded, and it doesn't hurt that he comes across as a normal bloke who happens to be a footballer trying his best for his country, as opposed to an entitled Prem egomaniac who only sees midweek internationals as an obstacle to making money.

I'd just like to state for once and for all that there was NEVER a sell on clause in the original deal when Saints sold Bale in the first place. All we cashed in on were possible future appearances and goals.

That Ronaldo studs drag back nutmeg thing was one of the greatest things I've seen in football in the past 12 months. Shame the clip didn't show Ronaldo backheeling the ball in his general vicinity after the hoof, was most amusing. Brilliant skill.

I was surprised how well we did that for the Sociedad game, tbh. Seemed like there were nearly as many kids as adults !

Billy Sharp, Paul Telfer and KEN~!!!!wyne Jones for me. I don't understand why anyone would have a go at Sharp who was instrumental in our promotion and booted rather than given a chance (and now seems to be becoming unpopular as a result), Telfer was a model pro who always gave his all, and KEN~!!! never seemed to be as popular as his goalscoring transformation deserved. Never much into Jermaine Wright, thought he was average if more competent than some people gave him credit for. Oh, and I always thought Chris Makin should have been better than he actually was, so add him to the list. If anyone says Alan Bennett I'll have to "keel" them. Oh, and I did like Jelle Van Damme for a bit at the start, when he was a hoofing at Crouch behemoth at left back who ran out of petrol in his yellow Hummer driving to London, as opposed to the d1ck who refused to play for us in the Championship.

It does (finally) explain to me why JPT games began at 7. Kids for a quid might have seen a few more along, but then adults for a tenner might have filled the place.

They don't need to be bought, but they do need to be paid. I think it's highly unlikely we'd find an out-of-contract player who'd offer us more than either Mayuka or Puncheon and can't imagine that freeing up some slots for non-contract players was the logic behind it. Guly is strangely near the first team again now though. Agreed that we'd have sold if someone had met our and Sharp's terms. I suspect that the latter is the sticking point. We must have offered good terms to get him to leave Doncaster at a very difficult time, with us as a top 2 Championship side, the contract probably having a promotion wage hike like numerous others have had, and as a result he's priced out of playing for anyone outside the Prem, where he still doesn't have any experience. I can't see Sharp leaving until the final year of his contract, and I can't blame him for that.

Though he hasn't gone forward much in the first team, he only became a RB last season after a few years in midfield (and even played there against Stevenage in the League Cup last season) so at the least he's comfortable playing further forward.

Unlike them, we don't have 4 other Prem clubs within 12 miles and one of the most successful clubs in the country a mile and a half away.

Nike teams, Nike training kit. There's also an England one and a Man City one the same.

We're only just noticing that the club shop is more expensive than almost everyone else's then ? I did a breakdown of home shirt costs before the season started, we have the joint most expensive shirts with West Ham, the joint most expensive shorts with a lot of others, and the second most expensive socks. And with the 10% discount for ST holders, the prices are basically the same as everyone else. The discount kits website is great for team unbranded stuff, though it does sometimes take them a while to get delivery from adidas. Unsurprisingly given Saints' recent unexpected use of black Campeon away shorts, they're completely out of black Campeon away shorts at the moment.

I officially don't understand your argument. Or the bit about the scoreboard. Our non-selling of tickets behind the goals until last, the late sales of Block 43 Northam when the away team doesn't take their allocation, and the weirdness that is the complimentary tickets in the first few rows of Blocks 2-4 in the past couple of seasons have contributed more than anything to making the ground look empty on tv when in fact it's at over 90% capacity. The main cameras are pointing at the empty rows when the ball is on the pitch, not at the full stands the main cameras are located in.