Chez

maybe he's better than Charles? It's not as though Charles has been great when he has come on in games recently.

standard.

tremendous save that. Close to him, but zero time to react. Good lad.

that's the kind of chance that goes in 9 times out of ten in the prem.

He was one of my favourite players to watch. What a shame he got that injury. Lets hope he is still miles from his best.

Looks like the skate is injured. Shame.

my amateur lip reading conclude he said "no, that's fine" to RM when they briefly exchanged words. If you trust the understudy, as RM obviously does, it's a smart move. Limits the chance of a red and keeps Stephens sharp.

love that long pass to get us behind them after 30 odd short ones.

I'm glad we gambled on another hot youth prospect again rather than signing Winks, but it just hasn't worked out...yet. To be honest, I expected a bit more than I've seen so far, but time is on his side.

yeah, you are probably right. What he wanted from us 18 months ago is different to what he can get now.

£6m buys you buttons these days. It's nothing for a Prem side, but they will probably need to pay him £100k a week and that is a big decision on a player that really hasn't lit the Prem up. For us, it just a matter of can we bring in a player we think can score goals now AND in the Prem too.

Yep, Weird. Maybe they don't think there will be a big take up?

as with the Ings sale, because the player wants out, wont sign a new contract, then I totally understand the club wanting to recoup some funds (and not letting them walk on free) so they can reinvest. As always, selling players is not the issue, it's who comes in. Can we sign someone that can do a similar job, but with a much higher ceiling?

we had a massive hole in midfield and he no doubt was seen as another potential Lavia, who was obviously an amazing bit of business. I agree though. It felt like a bloody big fee to pay for another prospect with money much tighter. It could well turn out to be amazing business too, its early days, but it was a real sign that the club were going to continue their buy the very best talent they could afford, even if that meant talent with zero experience.

I notice that the KWP to Chelsea stories all emanate from Alex Crook. I know most see him a knob, but I wondered if he actually does get inside information from agents now he is on Talkshite or does he still just add two and two together to come up with his original (and not repeated) transfer rumours?

Not sure. I did monitor it quite closely, as our spending prior to relegation was obviously monstrous, but we certainly did recoup a lot. It prevented a meltdown, but it certainly doesn't mean we are cash rich. Money tends to be very tight in this league, with teams going for promotion usually losing tens of millions. If there is a player we can sign that we think can do a job now and also in the Prem too, then £6m for Che will obviously go a little way towards paying for them, cos I can't see us signing a top prospect for that money.

not seen it posted elsewhere, but Crook says Saints want £6m for Che https://talksport.com/football/1713914/transfer-news-man-utd-olise-liverpool-chelsea-phillips-newcastle/

why would you delete existing saints stuff? What's the benefit of doing so? Usually the reason to do it is because you are disgruntled/leaving.

to be fair, part of the reason the vocal support chose the Northam was because it was seen as the `standing' area. Is safe standing becomes the only section where you can get away with standing, that might impact things.

You posted: How is a free transfer not a win? I replied: When they are shit and you have to pay them for years. Are you now asking me what free transfers have turned out to be shit and thus not a win? If so, how about Winston Bogarde? Or were you only referring to Manning and the fact his signing must be considered a win because we got him on a free?

Not sure I follow. My comment was about whether a free transfer can be seen as anything else other than "a win".

Much rather watch Saints against someone like Leeds with 4k of their away fans than Rotherham, with a few hundred. A big away support creates a proper atmosphere at the match. That makes the game more exciting and more entertaining, win, lose or draw. The atmosphere is why I attend and not just watch games on TV. If there is no atmosphere, like at friendlies and league cup first games, I come away wondering why I bothered. It's pretty shit. Maybe football clubs are shooting themselves in the foot by hiding away fans in upper ties and the corner of grounds. They are effectively dampening the atmosphere at games, making attending them less desirable in my book. Sounds like you'd be happy if there were no away fans if it meant we had more chance of winning?

I've been pretty honest and clear in two posts now why standing near the aways fans is preferable for me, yet you decide to respond by calling my reasons `perverse'. Where do you sit by the way? On some sort of high horse I suspect. The best Saints home games I've been too are those with great atmospheres and that's usually when there are huge away crowds. Seeing Saints win is important, obviously. but going to games and actually enjoying the atmosphere and experience is also key. Without that, I don't see much reason to pay to attend live games. And that's why I wonder if I really give a shit about hiding away fans. Maybe that opinion is perverse actually.

when they turn out to be fucking shit and you have to pay them for four bloody years. Explain how that is winning? That's not to say I think Manning is fucking shit or his transfer a bad one.

As stated in my post above, standing in the Itchen and being next to the away fans is not about flicking V's, it's about being in the part of the ground with the most atmosphere. I don't need to stand near the away fans, I just prefer it at SMS.