CB Fry

Well, obviously not. He was sent here assuming a win/win for both clubs. We get a decent loan signing with something to prove, who might add something to the team and get us some points. Liverpool get to see if their loan signing can do it in the Premier League. It was a little mutually agreeable arrangement cooked up on deadline day. The point is that he hasn't done enough to be any better than the others: he's just as average I guess. I wouldn’t mind seeing him start today, somebody different. I don't think he's going to make much difference to our season though. His goals were good to begin with.

100%. Always felt like a better prospect than Targett for example. Real shame.

More famous as a TV Sports Reporter than a goalie to be honest. When he went on Wogan and said he was the son of God he was a figure a bit like Mike Bushell on BBC News is now. Was a different time.

After Ralph's comments today we can say that he's played his last game for us before he heads off for the next lucrative stage of his career at Manchester City, Tottenham Hotspur, West Ham United, Rajasthan Royals or wherever he ends up.

Indeed. I bet wherever Danny ends up I bet he won't be pulling down what Pelle was getting after he left us. 💰

So that's probably it, then. 8, 25, 11. A decent return, and good value for money. But he's not, as some make out, one of the best players who has ever played for us. I'd always have a lot more affection for James Beattie, for a start.

The other way of looking at it is after 33 matches Swansea already had six more points on the board than Fulham have now, also with five matches to go.

Far be it for me to say that posting on a football forum is an exercise in futility, but this thread in particular is breathtaking in that regard. This Scally is never ever going to change his view. He's seen some youtubes and "done his research", and thats it really. Turn it in lads.

But the story is the guy funding his flat has been a beneficiary of such government contracts and could be in the future. No not linking them and not seeing them as part of the same issue is equally silly.

I'm the opposite in that I would prefer it if the leader of the country and our democratic institution is not bribed off by gifts from rich men seeking favours. The idea that "well at least it isn't the tax payer" is really rather odd argument. Not particularly enthusiastic about our Prime Minister being so obviously and visibly a kept man.

From the photos going around, I think that is debatable to the point of untrue. For a temporary residence they seem to have done it up in such a niche/stylised way that it guarantees the next person in there will spend another thirty grand ripping it out.

I think as a general rule sell ons usually kick in as a percentage of the total but only if the sale is higher, ie the club makes a profit. I can't think of any examples where flop players are sold on and a sell on clause is still paid. The basic principle is that a sell on is a gamble of an increasing future value of the player being sold. Otherwise it would be just the original buying club paying for the same player twice over.

I think a redemption story is allowed. And jees does he go on about it. Reformed drunk, we get it mate.

A huge amount of that was due to the manager we appointed, and the players he had a big role in bringing in like Pelle, Tadic and to a large extent Toby and Mane. It's easy to backfit the narrative. But by the same token: Isn't it funny that the progress from two consecutive seasons of relegation battles to an 11th place finish isn't seen as "improving"? Especially with a manager with huge job security and support from the fans. Didn't Ralph find himself in a situation where things were growing and improving at the beginning of the season? Because that's exactly what happened, so bizarre you're making an argument here.

Not a Saints fan back then, then.

Looks like it. First two inaugurated and then used to promote the concept. Not really arguable that they shouldn't be in it.

What was the name of that Premier League team who finished fourth bottom, then the following season had a dreadful start and right in the relegation mix, from the start. Who was it? Right in the relegation mix they were. Anyway they recruited this guy, with loads of top flight experience, taking teams into the Champions League, competing at the highest level. Loads more experience and success than Pochettino had. Anyway they recruited that guy. But Nemi is correct- it is absolutely absurd to think that a Gao led Southampton would ever recruit such a person and I have no idea why people are even suggesting it could be a possibility. Absurd.

I've voted for him because he will always be my favourite ever footballer, even if he is a twat. I've gone through the same process with Morrissey so I can deal with it.

Gentlemen, the battle for 13th is back ON.

Well of course no one was supposed to predict it but my point is I don't accept the premise that now things have gone bad we have to leapfrog back in time and put everything in the context of Pellegrino and Puel etc etc. No one expected this much drop off because people thought we had a decent manager getting results from an average but not terrible squad. We finished the season 11th, the general opinion was we had strengthened. We have a manager with more job security than pretty much anyone in the league. That is the starting point of this season. But because things have gone wrong the narrative has changed the starting point back to 2017 or 2018 or whatever. It's just a false and delusional starting point, ignoring where the buck stops.

But that story has only become the dominant narrative now we're doing terribly under Ralph. The post summer transfer window feeling was the team was strengthened and the general predictions going into the season was solid mid table. Then we had threads about winning the league in the Autumn. Pretty much no one was saying we were heading into a relegation battle, or that the rot has set in etc etc. At the beginning of this season, Ralph "inherited" a team that finished eleventh. Not Pellegrino's team, not Puel's. His. A team that finished 11th with no major departures (PEH expendable) and some additions of his choosing. It's just absolute garbage that as soon as things go wrong some people just want to leapfrog back in time to blame "the rot" or "the big picture" or other such things to absolve Ralph of any blame. By the same measure I can't remember anyone crediting Pellegrino or Puel when we were top of the league that day. But now, what a surprise, let's lump them back in to absolve Ralph. Utter insanity.

Well, no, unless you are saying we should have stuck with Pellegrino?

I thought we were the fourth best team in the whole country in the calendar year of 2020 and thats not a blip it's a whole year etc etc. What happened to that? How do we explain that magical year where there wasn't any rot but not apparently there is rot again now? This forum has gone through the looking glass. Absolute insanity. Historically the forum cliche was the Alex Ferguson "give him time" routine, as long as the manager can bed in etc success will follow, no chopping and changing give him time to build his vision etc etc etc But with the Ralph cult the reverse is now true.....the longer the manager is here he takes less and less responsibility for the team he puts out. It becomes less down to him. Things go wrong in 2021 so we jump back to the year 2017 and blame that and blame Puel and blame "the bigger picture" and the rot that set in back then.....how on earth does that work? Surely you people can see that this is absolutely mad?

Both things can be true.

Why do you keep pursuing this rather bizarre line of questioning? We are a bottom six side forever now?