Alanh

Agree with what? What he has written is mainly speculation and bluster followed off with the good old Lowe & Wilde out! There's nothing in there to agree with or debate, just the same old same old from one of a number of repetitive posters on this board. Don't get me wrong, St Richmond is as entitled as anyone to make his point, but to be honest he's made it so many times in the past we all know it now. The one great thing in St Richmond's favour is that he has regularly said supports the team at the match as a season ticket holder, and only moans on here.

I can understand people being demoralised and deflated, but for me it's summed up by my perception that last year I watched a team that got progressively worse in terms of performance over the course of the season, (albeit with a few positive blips like Hull, Bristol City and Sheff Utd). This season I believe that I am watching a team that has the technical ability to match any team in the division and that is learning in each match and is generally improving. I'm willing to give them a bit of space to learn - for example I'm pretty sure that Patterson will understand that he's got a responsibility to chase everything when he comes on at the end of a match where we are defending a slender lead. My hope for this season is CCC survival and I believe that we'll make it based on the technical ability that this team has and the fact that they are learning how to get things out of matches. If we can learn to close out games and score a few more goals we will pick up more points as the season goes on and that should see us safe.

Seems to me that St Marco, Scudamore and Micky are arguing over semantics, as so often happens on any forum. St Marco, your style of delivery is hugely contradictory - as evidenced by your claim to believe that goalkeepers are 'born' as espoused by Roose, yet also say that modern keepers like Reina use coaching methods such as studying videos of opponents to better themselves. Obviously all pro footballers, not just keepers, have a massive natural ability as well as a determined mentality, but every footballer will also improve through continual coaching, hence the way that clubs train players. The level that they improve to will depend on their ability, injuries, confidence, etc - loads of factors. FWIW I think it's disingenuous to say "His saves are making our coaching set up seem better then what it really is" and that, combined with your insistence on arguing the semantics of what others say is the reason you are getting so much stick.

Perhaps that's the one cast iron way for him to become popular with Saints fans - buy Pompey and run them into the ground.

The biggest issue I can see with us potentially losing Skacel is the loss of his experience at the back. If the new loanee steps into the position then we'll have three youngsters in the back line and for me that's one too many. On the other hand if selling Skacel helps keep Surman and Lallana then I think it's a sacrifice we've got to make.

1) Do you feel as fans we have a right to an investor? more so than other clubs in similar positions?No, of course we don't have a 'right' to an investor any more than any other club. We are more attractive than many other clubs, but unfortunately haven't yet found the right wealthy benefactor to invest in us. 2)what is the prime reason why the club has failed to attract investment under several different managements? I believe the prime reasons we haven't found investment are because we aren't in the Prem and also aren't in London. Beyond that the fact that we are a quoted PLC which has a stock market value means that investors know that they have to spend a load of money buying up shares in order to inherit a load of debt. The PLC element is not the significant barrier, but it does put a public price on the company which is difficult to change. Newcastle have a similar problem - buy the club from Mike Ashley for £250M and inherit a load of debt - and they aren't a PLC.Is it primarily the debt putting investors off or are we just not appealing? after all lots of debt ridden clubs get taken over Agreed, loads of clubs have debt and many more have more debt after being taken over. The ability to service the debt is the key thing and that comes from being able to see a revenue stream. Being in the Prem makes that easier with the TV deal money being confirmed every 3 - 4 years. In the CCC you are relying primarily on ticket revenue and ours (like most in the CCC) is in decline.

Interesting article suggesting that there are big problems ahead unless teams can get their spending under control. I hope it doesn't result in several clubs going into administration - not least because of the loss of jobs for the club employees - something which seems to be rarely considered by those that advocate admin for us. Interesting to see that Burnley and Cardiff (and probably several others) have an explicit strategy which relies on being able to sell their more valuable players annually in order to be able to survive financially. I guess the fans don't like it but if it's the difference between having a CCC club or a League 1 club or no club at all I guess it's preferrable.

No disrespect, but last week your concerns over football turning into a business had come to the fore so much at Saints that you couldn't bring yourself to want to go and see them. To me it looks a lot like you saying that the lure of Saints V Man Utd is enough to banish those thoughts from your mind, whereas the idea of supporting the lads in the bread and butter league games is too much for you. Hope I'm wrong and would love to see you confirm that you'll be at SMS as often as you can make it for the remainder of the season.

You have to look at the main reason for the academy slightly differently. It's there to develop footballers, some of whom will play for us for ages and others who will never make the grade with us, and all steps in between. The natural pecking order in football transfers will determine how long we keep hold of a player regardless of whether we brought them through our academy or we bought them from another club. There can be no predetermined plan to train a player up to a certain standard and then sell him when that level is reached as you have to have a buyer who is interested in the player for them to be sold. Just about the only way to achieve player turnover stability is to pay over inflated wages to mediocre players who will then not want to leave as no one else will match the wages. I'd say that is what we tried last year and I don't think anyone would say it has been a roaring success

You're right, none of your analysis is unfair. Also Saga played in a struggling team last season while DMG is playing in a young team learning the ropes, so they both face(d) different challenged. IMO the reason people cut DMG more slack is because he has come up through the ranks scoring at each level, he hasn't cost us much and he is showing signs of progress - much more effort and several decent goals - PNE, Norwich. Saga, on the other hand, gives the impression (primarily in terrms of goals scored) to have not delivered after commanding a decent fee and getting a juicy contract. Whether he has had a fair chance to deliver is arguable but I reckon that's the root of supporters feelings for each of them.

After his first half against Wolves I wouldn't put Cork at RB but would want to make more use of him in the middle. I'd therefore go for: Davis James - Pearce - Perry - Skacel Cork - Schneiderlin BWP - Lallana - Surman DMG Admittedly there is still the problem of finishing as that team doesn't look prolific, however I don't believe that Stern would fit into our style of play because he's not mobile enough; Rasiak is away for the season and while Saga had a good first 6 months, he done so little for us and AAB for so long now that I don't think he'd be better than any of the starting 11 so I'd leave him on the bench. For the bench I'd go for Bart / Tommy on rotation, Patterson, Saga, Holmes and Euell.

I don't think we have to pay it off completely, but i think it's too big at the moment and we need to reduce it to an agreed amount so that the bank will continue to support us. This would be less of an issue if our revenue were higher but with the drop in attenances there are few options.

I just don't see 4-4-2 as a magic key to unlock teams at home. Last night we often had four players in their box when we were attacking, with support from Surman and Schneiderlin. Robertson was only ever isolated up front when we pulled players back to defend and that would happen anyway in a 4-4-2 system. The 4 man attack is a result of the way that we are set up in a 4-2-3-1 and the freedom to swap positions that the system allows the front four to have - often resulting in a 4-2-4 when attacking. I don't recall that ever happening with a team who are playing 4-4-2. If anything that system encourages the resolute 'two banks of four' formation which is the last thing we need if we are looking to be adventurous and break teams down at home. I agree that we need a plan B but think it's probably more down to having a different style of player to come off the bench rather than a change to 4-4-2.

I think they are a good combination for the positions they are playing - certainly better than Wotton and Gillett who have also played there this season. IMO they both tackle, although Spiderman oftern seems clumsy and gives away fouls. The biggest 'complaint' that I have with them is their propensity to pass sideways rather than forward. I think Spiderman is the bigger culprit. Last night there seemed to be several occasions where he could have driven forward but instead played a square or backward ball which slowed down the overall attack. I'd like to see them both get an extended run in these positions as I think they are getting better and the positions are the most important in the team in terms of freeing up how the attacking 4 can play, and covering for the full backs when they go forward.

So all you are really saying is that you've fallen out of love with the matchday experience - why didn't you say that in the first place instead of coming out with (IMO) rubbish about concerns over retaining the quality in the team, not wanting to support 'assets' and yearning after some halcyon days which I don't think have ever existed.

Trite response, but if you want to see it that way so be it. I'm not trying to claim I'm a better fan that Colinjb or anyone else, just pointing out that IMO his views are flawed and insubstantiated.

Sorry, I missed your last line, which is equally pathetic IMO. The players have a value thanks to their contracts and they are employed by a company, therefore they are, along with just about every other footballer in the world, an asset. There is no way that is going to change so you need to get your head around it or forget the idea of supporting any professional team.

Pathetic reasoning for an adult IMO. How can you make your support today conditional on second guessing what might happen in the future? Saints, just like every other team see players come and go. It seems ridiculous to say "I'm only going to see them today if X players will still be at the club in the future" - it's still Saints, they'll still be a bunch of players in red and white stripes who want to win the game as much if not more that each of the fans in the crowd. You need to decide what you support - individual players, the team or some other aspect of whatever Saints means to you.

Do you realise how childish you sound using your 'Lowey (and Wildey)' nicknames? Not trying to defend them but every point you make comes across like that of a petulant child and devalues anthing you are saying. Your choice, but I think you'd sound more like a level headed person if you dropped the nicknames.

Obviously it's all down to personal choice, but for me I would happily pay for the 09/10 season ticket today if I knew the lads in the team would be playing the sort of football they played today regardless of any percieved big names in the team.

Just back from the game. It was a tremendous performance, but not a great surprise because we played as well, if not better in the second half with 10 men last week. The formation and style of play was exactly the same as the rest of the season, definitely not 4-4-2. Every one played well, but I thought Skacel did well to repel their attacks in the second half and occasionally provide an attacking threat. Also Chris Perry was excellent in bringing some steel to the centre of defence. This team have the ability to outpass any team in this league. At time Reading were chasing shadows and it was a joy to watch. We will stumble when teams outmuscle us but the boys are young and will learn to deal with that. All we can do is support them home and away and keep the faith.

Hardly surprising that you'll find some happy fans of a team up at the top of their league. I bet you'll also find a load of happy S****horpe fans as well and they were also relegated last season. Means very little to Saints IMO.

I agree completely. Even if we had another 7500 season ticket holders to generate an additional £43K per week we could afford a fair few of those players. The biggest concern about potential relegation is a further collapse in the crowd numbers. When Man City went down they still pulled in 30 odd thousand every game so maintained the revenue stream to be able to pay for players way above the regular quality of League 1. Leeds are also maintaining a fan base to generate revenues despite their problems.

...and that £6.44M equates to £124k a week - more than enough to pay for Rasiak, Skacel, Saga, John, Euell, Davis, etc and still have enough left over to pay the bank. It just shows how, now that we are pretty much entirely dependent on ticket revenue, we, the fans have the ability to directly influence the team available for selection. Obviously people have loads of different reasons to not go, from politically motivated to apathy, but if it were possible to persuade them to return we would have the financial clout to compete strongly in this league.

he doesn't seem to be able to play two games a week so missed some matches recently for that reason. Also he was one of the players who caught the bug that was going round and he missed at least one game because of that. Lastly, Pearce scored on his debut so retained his place and kept Perry out.