CB Fry

What dynamic and modern move for a football club who clearly have a visionary leader.

I wouldn't either. I'd bite their hand off, especially if the job involved spending huge amounts of money my business wasn't even required to generate in the first place. Money for jam I think I'd call it, and I'd be laughing all the way to the bank. Via a ego-massaging TV interview with Sky Sports News first, naturally. I think the idea that he was overpaid for the job he had is a valid comment to make.

So what? Do you think Burnley ' s chief executive should suddenly start earning more than Arsenal ' s? Because, gosh, their turnover is going to rocket as well next season. And, just a hunch, but not powered by huge amounts of free money from a dead man's cheque book. Well done on quoting something I typed by mistake, anyway. Freak.

Still doesn't justify earning at least 10% more than the chief execs of clubs with more than double that turnover. Especially when can't even generate more commercial income than Watford. £100m turnover is really not that much in the world of big business, and could have been significantly more with a better grasp of the opportunities.

....

He was, and remains, the greatest human being that has ever lived.

I'll say you are a SWIVEL eyed NUTCASE.

Keeping all our players and spending another £35mill on new signings seems by far the least likely scenario of all those available. Hoping for that is going to lead to disappointment, I'd say.

SAINTRichmond PROVES once again what a SENSIBLE and BalanCED forum contributor HE is.

What about all the other times we've beaten them in the last thirty years?

Still bothering with what?

You can win things in British football, and move up the standings and not win the league. You know that too. Anyway, let's remember these are half remembered quotes as the OP says. Can we stop saying "standings" now. I feel a bit ill.

La la land was Champions League with half the team from the academy. Nice try, sweetheart.

"Going up the standings" means win the league now, does it? Alright then.

I miss Wes, Frank, MLG and the rest of the forum brains trust lecturing us about our gigantic catchment area and how they would all be streaming into SMS from Truro, Devizes, Hastings and Guildford once we were established in the Premier League. Because people in Cirencester have a huge affinity to a middle - sized city in Hampshire, why wouldn't they all become Saints fans? Come on Katharina, stop being negative. Stop the Dell-sized mentality. Build it, and build it big. THEY WILL COME. We can do kids for a quid, flexible/dynamic pricing and sell lots of burgers. Oh, and my all time favourite Saints Web expansion suggestion: just sell 8,000 away tickets to City and United fans. And another few thousand to anyone who just happens to want watch a Premier League match. So many simply brilliant ideas. Just wasted. Build it. Build it. Build it.

You can make that leap if you like but I repeat you can believe that Man U can be convinced they can get him and believe everything Les said yesterday, as I do. And just to confirm, I don't think for one second that Man U have made a bid or had it accepted. I didn't even need Les to speak yesterday to think that. If they had, it would be reported widely as a fact, not least because MUFC are listed on the stock exchange and this would be a huge sum. It's not black and white.

Where in that Guardian article does it say they are close to agreeing a fee of £30m? It doesn't. Just talks about Man U being confident/convinced. You can believe Les Reed and accept that article on it's own terms for what it is. I do. Come and join me.

The story was about Man United’s confidence that they will sign him. Les Reed cannot, whatever he says, make that not true. Man U can base that confidence on a number of things, some may be based on sounding out people close to Shaw. Some may be from the fact that they think when it comes to the crunch we would take £30m for a left back. They are allowed to be confident about what the hell they want to be confident about. Les Reed cannot make that not true. Whether MUFC are utterly misguided is another matter.

This is exactly what I am getting at, an almost archetypal Saints Web post. Total good/evil and nothing in between. Not once have I called Reed a liar or questioned his integrity. I think everything he says is completely true and was pleased to hear it said so unequivocally. Great stuff. Anyone reading that Guardian article and thinking we'd accepted a bid from Man U and that Shaw was discussing final terms would be a ruddy fool. Of course we haven't. The world really, really isn't that black and white, Nick.

That's a good assessment of the situation. Definitely an element of Man United trying to work up a new story to distract from the Moyes fiasco. And also possible that Shaw's agent is playing games with Chelsea.

You are basing the there has been no contact line on what Les Reed said. And you are basing your 'sloppy' dismissal on the same, single, biased, source. Les Reed is not Shaw's agent, and he isn't Luke Shaw either. So the only "ground" between the two sources is what you want to believe.

As I say, believe what you like.

If it says they are convinced, then it says they are convinced. That's the article. Believe what you want. It's unlikely people connected haven't been communicating.

You're wasting your time trying to convince the forum "intelligencia" whose stock response to every single newspaper article they don't like is "made up lazy journo lies" yet merrily hoover up generic club PR statements and press releases like they represent total unadulterated pure truth. Because a business or organisation or government would never, ever spin, overstate or play out a line. Just journalists. Yep, just them. The only people in the entirety of humanity who ever lie. And the fundamental problem is people on here utterly incapable of actually reading press reports. That Guardian article is written entirely from a Man U perspective and is about how "convinced" they are about landing Shaw. It doesn't say Saints have accepted a fee, and the only Shaw reference is about him wanting to resolve things before the WC. Nothing Les said makes any of that article untrue, it's highly possible there is some truth in it. And lastly, Shaw staying with Saints, or ultimately signing for Chelsea doesn't make the article untrue either. It's an article sourced from people connected to Man U saying they think they've got him. That's it. Get over it.

Ay, ay, ay, ah, ah, ah Ay, ay, ay, ah, ah, ah.