CB Fry

Hmmm. Looks a bit thin on first read. Nice try from the Telegraph but Brown and Cameron can't use it tomorrow night because they'll just be throwing stones in their own glass house. Anything like this falls into the "they're all as bad as each other" white noise. Can't see this being a game changer.

Topline answer to the three questions posed. Football Players and Football Agents, Redknapp, Storrie. Redknapp and Storrie's contacts, the "how" is anyone's guess and would make you weep I'm sure. Because Storrie was the chief exec. The owners ins/outs is one thing, but the answer to the question who has actually made any money is pretty clear. Footballers and their agents.

This is a fair point and a reasonable fear. Hence why getting the job done this season was so critical, but alas not to be. Another season in L1 may be a lot to stomach for a couple of promising AMs and a 28 year old striker who has proven all he has to prove at this level. But despite all this I think we will be top 2 next season. Winning is in our bones now and some ins/outs won't change it.

Stick the kids out for the JPT, shouldn't be on the radar next season. We should be champions, but top two and automatic is the expectation. We will have every single resource we could wish for and now is the time. We can't play the unlucky underdog card that some are still trying to play for us even now.

He is but is desperate to demonstrate his knowledge which, in interviews, results in him taking five minutes to ask one question.

That's completely what it sounded like in the first half, especially, and then it snowballed in the second. But in the last minutes then it was (bad) luck as it was rattling around like a pinball. At the end of the day we couldn't have done much more last night, or this season.

Not sure it was luck or bad luck. Just the weight of the challenge of us winning, what, eight games in a row to the end of the season. Just a bit too much to do in a short amount of time and the pressure told.

In your opinion. You might try and lord it, but you aint Arsene Wenger my old son. You're not even Lew Chatterley. Asking a sensible question - why sub a sub - was a perfectly normal thing to do. What freaking "agenda" is Solent working to now? And what "grievances" have they got? Is "Paranoia" a key part of the Pro Licence course you did? I think you need a bit of real life experience mush. You don't know it all from sewing a fabric badge on your tracksuit. Maybe, maybe not. The list of reasons for taking him off sound like quite good reasons to not put him on a whole twenty minutes earlier. But I'm not bothered about the decision, just the reporters right to ask about it. I never question any decision any manager makes during a match. People probably think I do but I don't. For your info, Radio Solent is not "Football Expert Only FM" for people writing a thesis on the catenaccio system. It is, hilariously enough, mainly for people not at the game. You know, radio isn't really a visual medium. Didn't they teach you anything at Ball-bag college?

Yeah, because I've not said anything like what 70s Mike has said on this thread.... Look at me Pardew bashing Just read what you want to read you bunch of planks.

Which is absolutely no-one, at all. Not one person. You're just churning out the same garbage regardless. This is a forum nervous breakdown by a loon troll desperate for a reaction. "Stick by the manager" when we are in automatic promotion form but for the ten points. "Stick by the manager" when he has delivered instant success in less than a season from the ruins of a train wreck. "Stick by the manager" when his results and his passion are there for all to see. What a brave thing to say Yeah, you're really going against the grain here, looooooony Oh yes. Maybe you're mad because the instant success he has delivered is what you said couldn't be done and only existed in the minds of immature impatient unreasonable fans. But you were wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong. Utterly, utterly, utterly wrong. My assumption from August/September/Octonber/January was that Pardew would succeed instantly this season. Your assumption was that he would fail this season because it fitted your 1977 narrative of "three seasons of failure before anything can be achieved" routine. And you were wrong, wrong, wrong. You were wrong, wrong, wrong. Welcome to Sadoldgit's slow, painful nervous breakdown

Yes, and the line of questioning was why not someone else being that James was on the field for twenty minutes and was a sub himself. It wasn't a "stupid ass" question it was the question any reporter or any fan would ask. Pardew's reaction was arsey but fine - you can tell he was gutted and it's great he feels so much for the job he is doing. But enough reporter bashing already.

I think we might be witnessing our first forum related nervous breakdown. Me and Wes Tender had an entertaining debate on another thread the other day (let me spell it out. We. were. on. opposing. sides.) And lord knows me and Alpine have had plenty of ding dongs about some sh ite or other on this forum going way back. You, on the other hand, are rapidly descending into utter madness. Looooooony.

You freakin' obsessed wierdo.

Certain experts on this forum have assured me that Fonte dropped down a division because he has always admired Alan Pardew, fancied the exciting challenge of league one football, loves living in Hampshire and about a billion other reasons absolutely none of which revolve around us blowing any other club out of the water with a transfer fee that CP couldn't turn down and clubs in the CCC couldn't match. Fonte is not here because of money. Absolutely no way. So zero chance of him leaving in the summer. Phew.

What would you have asked him, then being that you've ruled out a) any questioning of significant and unusual decisions taken and b) general vague platitudes around being positive going forward type questions as "stupid". What would you have asked him?

Pard's reaction was a human reaction, but let's not pretend he was asked a "stupid question". It was a perfectly sensible question. And it is part of Pardew's job to speak to the fans after a match and even in the heat of the moment he'd be anticipating being asked that question. Which probably explained his reaction as well. He tried something that didn't come off and is probably furious with himself as well.

Got arsey when asked about the James on-off substitutions. To be fair the journalist wouldn't be doing his job if he didn't ask about it. And then gave a sharp answer to the closing harmless question about being positive for the final three games. Pardew is clearly gutted, so fair enough, but I'm sure there will be plenty of brainless journalist bashing on here anyway. It's not easy on either party - the manager or the reporter - when both are expected to talk to each other seconds after a match like that.

I quite like the idea of winning these two crucial games 1-0. That's how you get promoted, not with flashy fancy dan 5-1s but with ground out 1-0s. We'll grind it out tonight.

It's hypocrisy because you've decided that after less than a year in the job, Roy Keane is unsuccessful. What happened to the "it took Lawrie Mac five years relegated in first season blah blah blah". If it was one of your favourites on here judging a manager after less than a year and a single season you'd be apoplectic. But hey, just make it up as you go along and sod consistency, eh? As for your "tell me the amount" masterstroke, what a pathetic idiotic comment from Mr "no such thing as a black and white answer". Utterly, utterly idiotic. But so very you, darling. So jolly, awfully clever Spending money is as close as you can get in football to guaranteed success. Have a look at the top of the football tree, and have a look at the bottom. Let me know when Cheltenham Town are in the Champion's League and then tell me I'm wrong.

Wrong, as above. There was far more anti war dissent on the Labour side than the Tory side. If you are looking for a flowers-in-their-hair Woodstock anti-war CND party I really don't think the Conservative party of the 80s, 90s, 2000s and 2010s is the party for you. Sorry to shatter an illusion for you.

It's not your points don't have relevence, it's just they are boringly obvious. I think in response to an utterly patronising and arse achingly dull lecture about "it's all about team spirit you know" I am allowed to be glib in return. I don't need to hear it. Pardew has achieved instant success - anything in season one is instant success. Those were the terms of reference I used in August, in September, in January and I got shouted at for being short term. So no, I am not giving that up for bores now trying to claim nine months as "long term success" and proof that "sticking with the manager works". It is nothing of the sort. It's the instant success I was talking about in August, September, October, Janaury. And it happened. First season is instant success. And sorry, we are spending like Chelsea and Man City. If ML wasn't here we couldn't afford to buy a player from the league above. Christ, Fonte was up for sale from a club in administration and no one from the CCC could afford to prise him away from us. Our outlay would no way be covered by gate receipts and prize money. No way on earth. It being "small change for ML" is not the real measure of our spending - it is massively disproportionate for the league we are in and is the dictionary definition of spending money like it is going out of fashion. Measuring what we spend against what we think our benevolent owner can afford is an utterly shameful way to look at the finances of our football club. So you can keep your comment about it being "small change" because that's a disgraceful way to think and can only lead to thoughts of greed and entitlement. So, along side Pardew and his team spirit (cheers for that) and ability to buy good players (and that) and spending the money wisely (the hat-trick! Have a banana) it is the fact we have spent money like it is going out of fashion that is the reason we have seen this seasons instant success.

Correct. The tories were up for it, Blair was up for it. It would have happened regardless of who was PM and we would have been there regardless. Like it or not the Brits love a bit of a war and we love being side by side with the Yanks.

....

Oh give over. If you think a Tory administration would have said no to a Republican president about a war on Saddam you're out of your mind. Don't remember seeing Thatch and Tebbit on many CND rallies in the eighties. The tories were peace-loving hippies hoodwinked into a war by bloodthirsty Blair were they? Diddums. There was far more anti-war dissent on the labour ranks than on the tory side.

And how do you know they won't do that? There are more options than a straightforward coalition. And you can't throw Iraq hypocrisy at the Liberals as Labour and Tories all voted for it, with the Conservatives easily as "up for it" as Labour. So the Liberals have to work with a pro-war party because they both were, it's hardly hypocrisy when there is no choice. And I think a stance of "vote for us, not anyone else" is a reasonable thing to say in an election campaign. You can't attack them for using "electoral judgement" by saying "vote for us". What kind of "principle" would be being upheld by a party saying "a vote for us actually means a vote for x party"? You're seeing some conspiracy when the Liberals doing what you're suggesting would be completely absurd.