The9

Edited for controversy.

The (Rulebook Ric swearing lots) YouTube video of Crouch scoring the penalty in the 2-1 shows an unusually thin line of segregation between Block 41/42 (I was 4 seats from it, the net was over only a few seats in Block 42 which was otherwise away fans) but there was also the 41/42 walkway open - and the corner next to Block 1 was a wider netting. Both lines were heavily stewarded and policed. If Hampshire Police were happy with that last time they'll be happy with it again this time. If people don't think they will need to get their tickets in advance, and expect the ticket office to be open on the day, next to 3000 Skates and a huge police operation, they are insane and shouldn't be allowed in the ground anyway, as a danger to themselves. It will sell out (with a slightly reduced capacity) unless our lot get blase about it and assume they can't get tickets anyway.

If they are wound up they will cease to operate. The winding up order is set for Feb 10th, and I'm fairly sure that will happen even if they go into admin first. However, King's Lynn who were wound up in early November '09 appealed and played 2 matches before the appeal failed and they ceased to exist, so it IS possible the game will be played even if they were actually wound up.

I'm going to argue this both ways : The British Isles includes the Republic of Ireland, and Northern Ireland for that matter. So (very) arguably that's a definition of British. However, even Northern Ireland is not "British" but it is part of the UK, as evidenced by the full title "The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland". If NI was part of GB it wouldn't need to be mentioned separately, would it ? It's not called "the UK of England, Scotland and NI", is it ? (Before anyone starts, Wales is part of England as per the Act of Union which is why it doesn't have a separate legal system and isn't represented on the Union (Jack) flag, and don't talk to me about the bloody Assembly). But anyway, Roy Keane is a bit of a bell-end.

I actually have that lot in the garage, my auntie brought me one back about 10 years ago. Absolutely zero chance of me wearing it to St Mary's EVER though...

To be honest about 5 dressed as arabs, which is what it'll end up as, would be a lot funnier.

We won't get a bye as the tie will be played. If it's played and we lose, THEN they fail with an appeal, that will be the interesting one - pretty sure in that case they will draw a bye in the 6th Round rather than re-instate us. Other than in 1999 when Man U's withdrawal put a "lucky loser" in the 3rd round draw, or when a team has broken the competition rules, you don't get reinstated.

To answer this, King's Lynn FC were wound up in early November, appealed, played 2 more games and ceased to exist on Nov 24th - so assuming they have the right to appeal IF they are wound up, then the game will almost certainly go ahead. Of course that assumes they still have access to their training ground, phone lines, the squad doesn't sue for breach of contract and/or just leave, etc.

It bloody wasn't with the sh11thouses we sent down to Fratton last time.

Yes, people would think that, but they'd be a bit simple.

I was shaking. Couple of things here, firstly it definitely won't be Feb 13 at 3pm, police will move it, noon on either Feb 13 or 14. Secondly, if they are wound up on Feb 10 they will NOT be able to fulfil the fixture and we will get a bye. Also, there's a minimum price for tickets set by the FA so we won't be able to shortarm them on the receipts. Bloody mad draw though

Indeed you did not. I got it via email yesterday from a Spurs fan in Amsterdam, so I suspected immediately it might not be Saints-born... the bit slagging us off for existing was a clue.

27 is Jamie White's number, you can't give away squad numbers that are already taken by contracted players, especially when they're on the list we gave the Football League at the start of the season and haven't left. Trotman's 12 and Mellis' 35 are only Fonte and Seabourne's respectively because the loanees aren't coming back to Saints, which can't be said for certain about White at the moment.

TBF it does include a bunch of never-play younger players who were all we had in August, and a couple of can't-get-rid-of others... as well as a near entire team of Pardew signings.

I wouldn't, despite the inclusion of Mikael Bloody Nilsson.

Hah, was that the game when you stayed in Southampton overnight and then got a 5am train to Aberystwyth ?

It's like guile, but not as intelligent. And Michael Bridges is shiiiiioite, and has been for at least 5 years, in case there was any doubt. Carlisle reject.

You're not allowed to do that during a season. It's just a training bib, means nothing.

Speak for yourself, I've got a trip to Tranmere already planned and paid for on the date of the 6th Round... ...and what exactly is the attraction of getting to Round 5 and being patronised by the national media and their inaccurate reporting anyway ?

Just been creating a "cup-tied" list. Of the signings/loan returnees/extensions since July : Cup-tied : Seaborne, Fonte, Martin, Otsemobor, Poo-lis. Available (if fit) : Barnard, Gillett, McLaggon, Antonio, Gobern, Lambert, Harding, Lancashire, Hammond, Jaidi, Murty. (White, Poke and Thomson are also cup-tied but not available for selection anyway). Might have missed some out, hopefully not.

Well we already knew he was a bit thick. He also claims to have watched Saints on Wednesday and said we played "really well", which is an interesting spin on things, cos I thought we were predominantly a bit gash, hoofing it and not creating much, timewasting mostly and without looking too troubled.

It originated on a QPR Forum, so they both copied that. Personally the thing about Rooney scoring from over 20 yards automatically being awesome but any lower league goal not mattering was the bit I most related to.

Would be surprised if he didn't take over Paterson's number which was 17, failing that the lowest available one is 41, which is frankly rrrrrubbish. Hold on, who is/was number 27? Oh yeah, Jamie White.

He said "was lacking", so I suspect the opinion has already been formed. FWIW from first team, pre-season and reserves watching I've seen him probably getting on for 10 times, and I thought he was reasonably pacy, worked his guts off closing people down (which actually works at this level) and usually showed decent finishing ability when given opportunities. Seemed to have the right attitude as well, enthusiastic and hard-working. He should get more opportunities at a (slightly) lower club, especially one where a striker has just left. He has already showed he can score in this division and might well turn out to be a decent player, but he wasn't going to get any nearer the Saints team without playing, and has wasn't quite ready for regular starts yet. Good luck Pato, maybe people in Southend will be able to spell your name ?

I suspect he'll get abuse, because the only people bothered enough to make a noise about it will be the mongtards at the back of the Northam, and they mostly do abuse. Now why that kind of reaction wasn't offered to Richard "Skate for 5 years but so bad they loaned him out loads" Duffy the other week, only the thickies can tell you. I mean I couldn't tell you the first thing about Barnard, but I know an ex-Skate when I see one...