Chez

firstly, he cant play at full back. He certainly tries hard, but he just doesn't understand the position, where to be, distances, when to tackle when to hold. He ain't got it. I think he could play there for five years and still not understand it. Obviously we are a little short handed at this moment, but right now Ralph is ruining his preseason by not getting him running at full backs, taking players on, crossing, shooting etc. To be honest I get a little fed up of flair players being mistreated at Saints. He, like many others before him, need an arm round them and confidence boosted to the max. Play them every week, get them the ball and have them doing stuff that gets bums off seats. But this never happens. They get half a game here and there. Have a good game, get in the side, don't take the world by storm in the next game and dropped. You will never get the best out of flair players like that . Got to trust them and back them. You don't see any other position treated like this.

I agree with this.

They have to throw some alternative options into the mix to show that they can walk away from an Ings transfer negotiation. If it becomes obvious they only want Ings, then we can drive a slightly harder bargain. Considering the quality of the goals Ings has scored against Spurs in particular, I'd be very surprised if was not their number 1 target, all be it they may be signing two strikers not just one.

was there anything like that from Ings? I dont think so. I saw him play poorly, have a bad game, but I didn't see a lack of effort, just a lack of fitness and his touch elude him.

until someone makes us an offer, we don't have any decision to make and that remains the case until his contract expires. I've said it a few times. If he doesn't sign a deal with us, which he hasn't and it doesn't look like he ever will, then the club simply can't afford for him to walk on a free. If an offer comes in, its simply a case of what do we hold out for. Whats the lowest we will accept. Buying clubs know this and have us over a barrel. The only situation that brings things back into our favour is if the buyer is Spurs, and they just sold Kane, and have little time to replace him, and Ings is their man. We then can drive a better bargain.

He got injured and came back when not fully fit. His lack of fitness meant he wasn't as sharp, failed to control some `difficult' balls, when previously he was able to, and the chances were lost. He showed frustration at himself for his body not letting him do what he had before. He wasn't good in that period, you are right there, but saying he was `completely disinterested' is inaccurate IMO. As a collective we were fucking terrible and every player wanting to win ought to have looked fed up and very annoyed. If you don't care, are not interested, then you don't show frustration and throw your hands up. he wanted to win, wanted to play better. Thats my take any way. I've seen a disinterested Saints player - Nigel fucking Quashie standing on the half way line with his hands on hips at Loftus road watching us concede without bothering to track back. He left for WBA two days later. Not a strop, no hands thrown in the air, nothing. He could not give a fuck.

I'd argue that in order to score goal we have to push too many forward exposing us at the back, which led to lots of goals. Our lack of talent to create chances therefore may actually be the problem, nit simply that defenders aren't good enough. Stop fullback bombing on for example and you will tighten at the back, but then watch us score fuck all. That said, having the likes of Bednerak playing right back and the likes of marking Saint Maximin absolutely killed us last season - so strengthening there is also required. Honestly, I keep reading that we are well set in all these positions, but in reality we aren't. We may have the right number, but the right quality? Not for me. Finding better on ur budget is a different matter of course.

Vestergaard out, Simeu in therefore? Our transfer policy would then be buy young talent and work them into the side as the older more established players depart. Ever so slightly scary, but could work if that young talent is the real deal and the transition period is jus right. I guess we have been doing that for some time to degree with Gunn (failed), Djenepo, Diallo, Salisu, Tella and now Perraud and Simeu.

a good window would be someone comes in and pays over the odds for a couple of our players that we aren't that fussed about, enabling us to strengthen, rather than just replace. Pigs might fly.

Not many England U21 international from the championship will go under the radar, so you'd hope we have had a good look at him, especially seeing as we had a pretty good idea we needed a left back from a long way back. I hope we had a very good long look at Omar Richards too who went on a free from Reading to Bayern Munich. With us going for Perraud, it will be interesting to compare these three players over the next three years (fat chance we will remember) as you would assume we could have got any of them had we tried. Having said that, why Richards would have turned down Bayern for us I am not sure...

Bowyer took a look and didn't fancy him ahead of Colin Maxin. Brum then won a batch of games to keep them up. I've rather have him than Bednarek at right back, but we need more competition than he provides.

can you give us a short synopsis of that criteria? Perhaps a four or five point check list that we on here can choose to ignore when its a player we'd like Saints to sign.

your post got a little lost in the Jones discussion. Interesting prospect - with Forrest already bidding for him. The question is, is he good enough to play in the Prem. I don't remember him in the two Derby games I watched last season. Have you any insight? I've watched one youtube video. He's very one footed, looks composed, decent pace, decent size. The clicks showed some decent passes and crosses, but not enough content to make an assessment. He wont be going for £1.2m. I think Derby has an option to extend his contract by another year, so he won't be walking for a free next summer. Probably have to pay about £5m before they got interested - I think Bogle went for about that as part of a dual sale to Sheff United.

If I wanted to get £15m plus out of Saints, this is the perfect way to tell them not to bother offering less.

Question folks. Just how large do you think the signing on fee pid to Ings will be, should he stay this season, then walk on a free next, assuming he has a sold season? If he is conservatively worth, let's say £25m right now, would he get a £10m, £15m, even £20m signing on fee (or the equivalent added to his wages)? Whatever the answer, that is the incentive for him to walk on a free - instead of spurs handing those millions to Saints and him seeing nothing of it, it could all go into his pocket.

who would appease them? How do you replace the `best striker' in the prem and with who? We have been here ourselves. Every signing appears a backwards step when you lose a star, but given time, the replacement can fill the boots, sometimes.

Big style. They had Carlos Vinícius on loan last season, so there is a gap there anyway that Ings could fill. Kane departs and they will be desperate for proven quality, with or without Jesus being part of the deal. That gives us a bit more power in any discussions. Both parties will want a result and levy will have to pay the going rate. If Kane stays and they come in for him, they will low ball us and we will be faced wiht that nightmare of take what they offer or allow millions to disappear off the balance sheet.

Buy a player thats better than you have and ship the lessor player out. Simple and I fully endorse that. But its not simple. In general, the way we are run (and have to be run from a financial standpoint) in terms of recruitment is one out, one in. Bertrand leaves we get a new left back. If someone comes in for a player with the right fee, we can then replace that player. What doesn't happen is we buy a player for a position we are fully stocked in terms of numbers, no matter how poor the `incumbents' are. The finances just don't permit it. The only option available is to try to ship players out, but offloading players that are deemed not good enough, on wages that are too high for the level below, is almost impossible. That's why Forster etc. are still here. Both keepers are out of contract next season. That is when you can make the change - unless of course you can ship one out. Suitors are not exactly queuing up. Celtic we are looking at you. Goalkeeping at Saints is a mess.

isn't that what we have done? Maybe not unaffordable, but a massive loan nevertheless on a sizeable interest rate that, if we don't start paying off will, in five years time, be over £100m. I wonder if that covered the shortfall in income to pay wages or is being used to pay for new players this summer as the next Sky payment perhaps coms in too late. Probably both.

Now I remember. Tricky situation. Put at risk a multimillion pound contract to do your old club a favour.

shudder. Remind me again of the scenario? Was he denied a move or did he indicate early that he was seeing his contract out and then put his feet up? Did Bournemouth mess him about a bit or was it all down to him?

fair point, but does trying hard actually equate to greater injury risk?

third (realistic) choice, not 10th. City don't need to settle. If City want to be best in the world, they cant afford to settle on 10th choice. Our aims and requirements are somewhat different.

big style. I wonder how much we spend compared to others. Where are we going wrong? Or are we? What's the story with Tella as that could well be the next big thing.

he's here until 2022...joy.