CB Fry

My contacts in Zimbabwe close to the club have confirmed to me that it is likely that possibly Les Reed will leave this summer.

So in summary we are not unique but, err, we are unique in a particular unique subset of clubs doing the same thing (strategy X) but better than/slightly differently to us (we, alongside those other clubs do strategy X but only we do execution Y, all the others do X/X because they are better than us). Which, by extension means we are unique among all clubs because no one else does X/Y because we are "pretty much the only club" doing it. You can get your head around that, can't you? And, to confirm, the subset if clubs that you have bundled us in with, and complaining do things better than us are Atletico Madrid, Burussia Dortmond and Chelsea. So you keep saying and saying we are unique and I'll keep saying we are not unique. Yeah, you ain't none too bright.

Here we are then. I've removed all the references to Dortmund, Atletico and Chelsea as you don't want us to be anything like them after all. Weird you wasted those sentences on them. Anyway, here it is. Let's look at it again, nice and slow... "We're pretty much the only club club trying to pursue this strategy that doesn't spread a wider net when recruiting replacement talent" Nope. Still utter, utter horsesh it. And just so you understand my conjunctions and sh it, let's be really clear here. Southampton Football Club are not "pretty much the only club" to do anything in relation to transfer business. We're not unique on any measure. We're not singular compared to any other Premier League, Championship or major European club. There's nothing we do, on player recruiting, retention, coaching, scouting, contracts, buying, loaning or how we pose the unveiling pictures on the website, that we would be "pretty much the only club" doing it. . So soz and that but how about get some perspective.

Ekon? He con.

Brett from Cameroon.

The African Dream is alive.

Green needle.

White and Gold.

I admire the little man's 100% record in his dealings with the top 7.

So you don't want us to spread the net and recruit more players more widely like Dortmund and Atletico Madrid, and you don't want us to loan out our spare players like Chelsea do. Fair enough. What do you want us to do?

If that Italian populist coalition hate the EU so much and be the architect of its destruction, why on earth are they bothering to "renegotiate treaties" like what soppy old eurocrats Nick Clegg and Ken Clarke would do? Nothing about a ref to leave or even just to unilaterally pull out. Fu cking olive oil swigging tiramisu munching bottle-jobs. Being that the average life span of an Italian government is about a fortnight I wouldn't be losing sleep if I was Junker. But, fair play to Five Star. Come a long way since Rain or Shine.

All that from a post that didn't mention the board Les Reed or anything connected to it. Great work sweetheart.

We're pretty much the only club that doesn't sign multiple players to replace when we sell one? Pretty much the only obe? Really? Also, bonus points for saying we should be just like multiple league winning, CL regulars, European elite Atletico Madrid and Dortmond. Yeah, why aren't we like them. And as previously said Redmond came in alongside Boufal as two options to replace Mane so bad example. Also, he's a young player we signed in the expectation he would grow and increase in value - last year he made the England squad. It's nonsense to suggest we signed him to be average and not grow in value. And if he turns out to be not good enough, surely that's an occupational hazard of "casting the net"? Or is your point thay we sign lots of replacements and cast the net wide etc etc but also they all have to turn out brilliant without fail? As usual with the pontificating around this topic it really just boils down to whinging about why can't all the players we sign be good every time.

In fairness, the orginal point specifically referenced 2-for-1 when we sell a "star". If Juanmi falls in that category then basically you're saying we go 2-for-1 every time we sell anyone which I don't think is particularly wise. Personally we should be trying to replace a star with one excellent replacement - following a 2-for-1 strategy risks quantity over quality behaviours. Boufal, at £17m quid is as much as we should have spent on a Mane replacement, buying two Boufals at that price clearly we weren't ever going to do. Nor should we. Boufal not working out is an execution issue, not a strategy issue, especially as Boufal even fitted the ideal profile of being a regular in his previous team.

Indeed. I'm looking forward to us signing a £40m striker who delivers 3 league goals in his second season. No doubt our fanbase will simply applaud the ambition and intent in the investment.

Selecting Ryan Bertrand wouldn't be adventurous either. In fairness to Southgate he hasn't got that much choice, and if you're consigning Dier and Sterling and Kane to the failure bin then there is not much hope. We haven't got anyone that will be better than Harry Kane. As predicted, all the players that represented new opportunities and "get rid of the old guard same old faces" are, already the same old tired old guard faces themselves. Let's bin off tired old hasbeens Eric Dier and Raheem Sterling and give the new generation a chance FFS.

We signed Redmond and Boufal in the same summer we sold Mane. Didn't go great.

Which clubs in our "peer set" will be paying double what we pay for players? Burnley got to seventh and their record signing is £14m. The likes of WHU and Watford and Newcastle have similar record signings to us. Palace pushed the boat out for Benteke and Sahko but hardly leaving us standing, we have plenty of players brought in at the just-under-£20m mark. We've certainly had more sat on the bench then they have... Can't think of any clubs around us that have spent nearly £40m on anyone. I fully expect us to break £20m barrier this summer, as will other clubs. And as for us "rarely getting our man", you might want to speak to a Stoke fan who seen us swoop in for plenty of players they were in for. Personally I can't remember a story of another club beating us to a signing - Toby excepted. Even the likes of Promes wasn't snapped up by anyone else, he just didn't go anywhere. So, all in all I don't really recognise this scenario you are painting. Cheer up.

Hughes could take about six months off and just wait for the inevitable sacking at Cardiff/Watford/Leicester/West Ham/Newcastle/Palace/Villa/whichever middling club panic sack a manager somewhere near the relegation zone in December. Newcastle and WHU won't give him the job now, but they might well do if desperate at Christmas.

... but you can't think of one thing you think he could actually say that fulfils that requirement. That's pretty vague and waffle-like for someone demanding of clarity from others. And in other news you haven't answered my question. I gave you the courtesy of answering yours. Funny ain't it?

Mistakes in transfer policy, managerial recruitment, general football strategy from the top down to the on-pitch cautious ambition. From what I have heard and read, yeah, fine. Fixes include the appointment of Hughes in the first instance. He's a big picture guy, and he also isn't going to overpromise as other chairmen have in our recent history, and he's clever enough to make himself a hostage to fortune and the blubbering tantrums of your average football fan. Interesting you can't answer my question but are demanding he (and now, hilariously, me) are specific. I'll ask again - What do you want him to actually say that would satisfy your requirements?

Difficult to work out which players you mean would have been influenced by the VVD situation as it wasn't crystal clear he wasn't going until late into the summer 2017 window, and we sold him before the Jan 2018 one opened. RK was saying not much more than trying too hard to force players to stay turned out to be counterproductive. You're reading too much into it and at the same time RK is over egging it because forcing Morgan and Mane to stay worked fine, and forcing Victor to stay also worked okay.

You actually think Ralph Krueger has that much of a towering influence over the Southampton fan base - you know the one made up of actual, real people. I know a few of those real people and they all are happy with Hughes staying and I am pretty darn sure they've reached that conclusion under their own steam rather than brainwashed by the words and actions of our Canadian chairman. I think we all get you don't want Hughes. We get it. Unfortunately for you it looks like we are getting him so try and enjoy next season.

What exactly is the "clear and simple message describing how they will fix them going forward" you would like him to have said?

Certainly possible. There's still a player in there somewhere and maybe Hughes (Pretty sure Nathan is on the list of players he tried to sign at Stoke) might just turn him into at least a first team regular next season.