The9

Police wouldn't have allowed it otherwise, nothing to do with whether it was home or away, or the kind of club they are - there are laws on gatherings of certain numbers of people and the last thing you'd want is to organise a march only to be told to disperse before it's started. Seems like a sensible move to me. I have no problem with Palace aside from the "lobbing stuff at us when we scored in injury time to stay in the Prem for another week at their expense" thing, and even that's pretty understandable.

Take application form. Check it is completed properly, that the sum equals the number of tickets applied for +£1.50 booking fee. Look at applying fan's ticket account number. Wait 30 seconds for crap server to deliver fan profile information. Check eligibility (if ST or +4 aways). Tick form or whatever consists of processing it. If applicant is eligible, look at form again for additional numbers. Look at applying fan's ticket account number. Wait 30 seconds for crap server to deliver fan profile information. Check eligibility (if ST or +4 aways). Tick form or whatever consists of processing it. Repeat for each number listed on the form, up to a maximum of 8. Check payment details, process payment, print bus ticket, match tickets, stick in appropriate piles, add email address to list of people to be emailed. I can see why that would take 20 minutes if there are 8 applicants - but equally it could take a minute or two if there's only one person on the form. Plus they have to do it up to 3000 times. Actually more than 3000 times, as some forms will be incorrectly completed, or need chasing up. And some will be concessions so have to be treated differently... and so on. And they don't really want to email on completion, as it gets people panicking that they haven't had theirs, which means they have to answer the queries instead of processing forms. Plus there are people buying tickets for other matches... Now, if anyone needs a ticket office business process analyst, I am available at an unreasonable rate...

You clearly have too much money and not enough responsibilities. The weekend before Xmas is always a poor attendance anyway; people are skint and other people are roped into shopping. The last two derby matches at Fratton weren't sold out in the Prem, and we had a bigger following back then. "Normal" people don't like being told what to do, or how to spend their time. ...Or putting themselves in the position of being a target. The club are clearly making a ridiculous mark-up on the compulsory coach fare. £42 is a lot of money to watch a match in a sh!!thole. None of the usual away game fun, pre-match pub etc. There is a recession on, and a lot of people are either building up or paying off debts. Also, it's on the box, so people don't have to go to see it. So one of those reasons you gave is valid, and that one's only relevant if you accept that people would have to ignore the other 8 conditions and still want to go. I'm going despite it all, I've applied for some +1s, but we all know it's going to be boring shart surrounding general unpleasantness, and it's only the vague hope of seeing some history from Saints in person (and the same vaguely warped and definitely irrational concept of loyalty to Saints) that's got me there.

I'd be surprised if anyone in either ballot was unsuccessful.

I'd be inclined to think the people who aren't ST holders and have been to a lot of aways are the non-Southampton based fans - the very people for whom Portsmouth is as much of an effort to get to as Southampton - except this time they've got their usual occasional trip to Southampton plus getting stuck in a police cordon for 6 hours in the middle of their journey. So that doesn't exactly smack of hundreds of additional applications. The +1 for ST holders is fine and should lead to far more applications (I've gone in again for a couple of mates who don't meet the other criteria due to having kids etc but are proper Saints fans nevertheless). However, if fewer than half the tickets went on the first ballot (no suggestion that is the case, but there were clearly loads left), then it's not very likely that we'll sell as many second time around. It's not impossible that we'd sell out even in that situation as other ST holders who didn't apply first time could apply, but it's not that likely people will suddenly decide to apply having not bothered. Obviously the people who already have tickets from ballot 1 can only double their numbers with a +1, so if they weren't half the allocation to start with, they can't possibly fill the end on their own.

He was rumoured to be getting sacked on Saturday night, bookies stopped taking bets on it Sunday morning, then Gary Speed died and they left it until today to announce it. Mate (and former teammate) of mine is a Sunderland fan with a few connections and it was all over his Facebook on Sunday morning. It still has sod all to do with Saints though.

I know Pat from Poole remembers sharing a minibus with his old man and young Sam on the way to St Mary's (or maybe even The Dell, can't remember how long ago it was).

Charlie Austin got injured a fortnight ago and is out for months - they'd also already got Vokes in on loan the week before. And Rodriguez was only not scoring as many because Austin and Wallace are scoring them instead.

Lallana for me, looked brighter than he has recently, the tricks were back, he created loads down the left even in a poor first half for the team, and scored to win us the match. Richardson seems to be getting a lot of votes but I just put that down to him having one memorable rampage across field and setting a goal up. Lallana did all that and more, and vitally moved the ball quickly in the second half to keep our tempo high. Thought Richardson played well though, don't get me wrong.

Probably slightly worse than the Northam Numpties chanting "Steeeeeeeeve" after about 15 minutes. Hull worked hard, their movement was excellent in the first half and we were stagnant. Nigel clearly pointed this out, we were out of the traps from the whistle in the second half and never looked back - great management. As was bringing De Ridder on... when he did. On the way back to the car, I heard some bloke saying that we "only scored normal run-of-the-mill goals". Lallana did two Cruyff turns before crossing for Lambert's head back for Guly's (second time) smashed home volley, what exactly did he want ?

Re: the booing - what a load of planks. Re : being top of the league - actually we weren't at half time when the booing took place.

League One goalkeepers aren't as good. Also, we have decided against "just shooting" most of the time recently, so guessing he may have been working on passing moves rather than shooting. The other thing is subtle changes in your body over time mean that doing the same thing you always did produces slightly different results.

Just as they always are.

I just don't get your point. So I'll reword so we can have another go ! My understanding is : 0) They will get a -10 deduction for [parent company] going into admin - same as Saints' parent company did. then 1) More than one time in Admin is punishable by additional points deduction - it hasn't been punished previously until the club comes out of admin. 2) Failing to agree a CVA is an additional deduction but not going to know if that's the case until they try to come out of admin. 3) Failure to transfer golden share means no league place They're not "equal" : #1 will only not apply if they cease to exist first, otherwise they will definitely get an additional deduction #2 will only apply if they fail to agree a CVA #3 might apply as a result of #2 but some teams have taken a points punishment as a condition of re-joining the league under new ownership. Is this misunderstanding just about the semantics of "10 now, more later" rather than "more than 10 now" ?

But whether that is irrelevant is precisely the crux of it. They had to get out of admin to get into the League in the first place the last time around but they were in admin, whether they were in admin when in the Football League or not - their other admin was back in the 90s and won't come under this rule. There's no reason to completely ignore a period of administration under this rule, whereas the fact they'd had a points deduction in the Prem and came out of admin before playing any matches in the FL last time was reason for them not to be punished (legally if not morally).

Not following. 10 for going into Admin and additional (2/2/5 as illustrated) for going into admin again. That's exactly what you just said ?

Because they are debt-ridden, most of their revenue is still tied up with the conditions of the last CVA, and it appears that the only people who would want to take over are people who want to bury dodgy money transations.

So more than 10 points then.

The issue here is that "they" (the club) haven't. Though I'm sure the current lot have.

If I remember correctly the policy USED to be in practice that you got the first one free, if you messed up again then they charged you. I've never been charged for a duplicate by Saints, and I think I've (legitimately I might add) had 2 of them due to tickets getting lost in the post. None of this was under the current regime though. Then again Forest charged me full price for 2 more seats last time I went when the tickets disappeared between the hotel and the ground, and I even knew the bloody seat numbers of those.

Why, they were happy enough to turn a blind eye to it all when they were ramping up the debt and signing players they couldn't afford to pay or pay for ? Only dubious owners with ulterior motives like money laundering are likely to take over a failing club like that one, given the debt they're taking on board. Remember, when we went into admin we'd sold players, reduced costs and suffered on the pitch to try and run within our means, and the only people owed money when the overdraft was unexpected pulled was the bank. Cheats FC ran for nearly 3 years adding to their costs and screwing the likes of the St John's Ambulance. I bet HMRC can't wait to block their next attempt at a CVA as well...

Absolutely we did. Pretty sure they were in Admin back in the 90s too, so even them being punished in the Prem and that somehow being irrelevant to the Football League's regulations on basket cases won't get them out of a deduction of what should be (based on AFC Bournemouth's precedent) more than 10 points.

Pretty sure there was an upgrade to the AudienceView system at one point since 2001, we definitely got some additional functionality around 2004/5-ish. It's still cack though. The irony that aap3 have their name on the website and the kit and we have a useless ticket system (albeit probably nothing to do with them) hasn't been missed though.

That seems a reasonable response, 28_F.

I hate this thread.