CB Fry

...that's its not as good as a full page report plus pictures of our next thumping home victory in Britains biggest daily paper? ....that pointless bad publicity about a childish ban is not as good as good publicity about us storming up the league? ....that it's not as good as allowing the local paper to print pictures for their readers, thousands of saints fans, to see? No clearly, being in the papers for an arcane argument about photographic rights is far better publicity for our football club to have. Far better.

Why are you asking me - I don't. But plenty of people on this thread clearly do, you can read it yourself. And why on earth do you think this is Saints v The Sun? Why keep going on about the Sun? I can attack Cortese for his pathetic, childish and pointless action without being a cheerleader for the Sun. And no-one can "only get their Saints news via the Sun". Grow up.

The only person whining about "don't take piccy wiccys" is Cortese acting like a selfish infant wahhhhh I'm bigger than Man United and a picture of Dan Harding taking a throw in is worth more than gold wahhh wahhh wahhh. Pointless, infantile, pathetic. The Sun aren't whining, just mocking the utter stupidity of this pointless action. You people making out this photo ban is the greatest business decision since the invention of powered flight are the foolish ones.

I thought my thread about spoonfeeders was narrow and unintelligible but you've knocked it into a c o cked hat with that masterpiece.

Why, what's your take? If we do appoint this idiot you'll be first on this forum bleating on about how we must give him three full seasons before anyone is allowed to judge his performance and he must not be sacked under any circumstances even if we get relegated because that's what happened with Lawrie Mac and after all Sir Alex Ferguson went through much the same and look at them now and anyway blah blah blah etc etc blah blah. In your dopey world we're locked in until 2014 whoever we appoint next regardless of whether they win any games whatsoever.

So you bend over backwards to make out how awfully difficult Zola's "impossible" job was but write of Jewell at a stroke. Glad to see you are consistent. And, err, Mowbray and co make my point, not yours. You're saying that average managers at Prem level would definitely be good lower down - like Zola and Pearce. Mowbray and co earnt their shot at the top division, your heros Zola and Pearce were just parachuted in. Rubbish managers at Prem level does not equate to success lower down. Mowbray and co are proven managers lower down and struggled with small clubs in the top flight. That is a completely different career path than Pearce or Zola. You seem to think that just having a job fall in your lap at a Prem club makes you a cert to be a success at any club. It simply isn't the case. You're wrong.

True - this happened with Waigo last year which got announced the following lunchtime out of nowhere. I think there is a player in the pipeline.

The spoonfeeder in chief speaks out

The only response to this is Eh? Mowbray, Davies and Jewell got jobs in the top flight by being promoted to it, ie earning the right to be there. They weren't just parachuted in like a Zola. And Jewell's record is actually very good in the top flight. Better than Pearce who you seem to be salivating over, and far better than Zola. And don't bring Curbs or McLaren into it, again managers with excellent records everywhere they've been. Stuart Pearce is, and always will be, a sh*t manager. Zola is unproven and I will not accept your premise that he will definitely do well at L1 because he was average at Prem level. It doesn't work like that. Ask Luca Vialli.

Anytime. Happy to take the odd bullet. I just had a look back at that thread, and to be fair to me, I did open up the "outside parties" can of worms. Funnily enough those outside parties included the Echo and MLT for daring to suggest Pardew's job was under threat. The three pages of bile came from my favourite spoonfeeders telling me that because Nicola had released a statement and everything that there was no way Pardew would be sacked because the OS said so and that's that. No other information source should be required or trusted because the chairman would never lie to us and is a man with no agenda whatsoever. Which brings us nicely up to date. (takes cover).

You really are mental. Saying a successful manager at Prem Level would be successful at L1 is not the same as what you are saying, which is a rubbish manager at Prem level would definitely be good at L1 because it's lower down. Bryan Robson took his sparkling ability to be average-bad at Prem level and turned it into a sparkling ability to be average-bad at L1 level. It's the Eric Djemba-Djemba rule. So nice try in making up opinions for me - I didn't say successful Prem managers wouldn't be successful at L1, neither did I say successful L1/Champ managers would definitely be sucessful at Prem level. Just look at the singular point you are making - lack of success at Prem equates to lots of success lower down - and think again. You're wrong.

You seem to live in a universe where not very good at Prem level = definitely very good at L1. That's seriously deluded. And don't bundle all the managers in together to make your lame point. Curbishley is not comparable to Stuart Pearce.

What is "gutter journalism" about some verbatim quotes from MLT? I think when you see the quotes on the sun website, I don't think MLT is "loathe" to slate Cortese at all. Just because Le Tiss doesn't share the view that Cortese is beyond criticism doesn't make it gutter journalism when quotes from MLT are used reporting the opposite. "I do feel for Pards but in a way I think he will be quite relieved that he doesn't have to work with him anymore. "He told me he was exasperated at some of the decisions that were made and some of the things he was made to do. "What we could find now is that we'll end up with a manager who will only take the job because he is desperate. "That's because some managers may not fancy working for a regime with such an iron fist." "This sacking beggars belief after the 4-0 win at Bristol Rovers and the day before the transfer deadline. "I have worried about my club for a long time and I have made my feelings clear. "I know the fans have quite a high opinion of the chairman, but this will probably bring into the open just what kind of man we have running the club." The only spinning going on here is people making out the newspapers (boo hiss) are making up MLT's opinion for him. Maybe, just maybe, these quotes are precisely what he thinks.

I like the way in your world everyone seems to be "having a pop" at something. The Echo have reported some fairly stardard quotes from MLT. No one is "having a pop" at anything. Calm down dear.

Stuart Pearce has a pitiful record. He can't cut it at League one because he is a dreadful football manager. And anyway it's far more true that managers who did "okay" with the plentiful resources in the top flight then proceeded to be god-awful lower down the scale - Vialli, Ray Wilkins, Bryan Robson. It's the Djemba-Djemba theory - just because someone wasn't good enough for Man U, that doesn't automatically make him good enough for a club lower down. He just wasn't good enough for anyone.

So basically the Echo have ased Matty a couple of questions, mainly about "Was their player unrest" and MLT has replied to the tune of "well it didn't look like it, they won 4-0". And then someone like Jonnylove reads this pretty tame article and works himself into a fury about the Echo making out MLT is having a pop at the club when there is not a word in that article of anyone "having a pop at the club". Well done again JonnyLove. Reading stuff that just aint there.

Zola was only passable at WHU because he had one of the best regarded asssistants in British football with him. God help us with a Clarke-less Zola.

Errr - yes, I am perplexed and didn't want Pardew to go. So despite me putting "before anyone has kittens" and saying Pardew has delivered that instant success I described, someone immediately replies and has said kittens bleating on about why Pardew shouldn't have been sacked. Christ, this forum is berr-rilliant. Why do so many read what I write about this subject as "every manager must be sacked after 18 months"? Pardew had delivered the instant success that is common - the same as Moyes, Wenger, Davies, Ian Holloway etc etc - and had earnt the stability. The fact he didn't get it is Cortese's lookout. Pardew has fallen the same fate as, say, Martin Jol at Spurs - brilliantly successful, but sacked anyway.

MLT can say whatever the hell he likes about Saints. He's earnt that right. To be fair his quotes are pretty anodyne really, and nothing in them says "feud" with Cortese, even the Echo article has no feud angle. I think people have to accept that sacking Pardew is a pretty strange decision. You can't expect commentators to just parrot the party line of "Cortese did it, so it must be correct". He's saying what most of us think - what the hell is going on?

Err, no they're not. The Media - Solent, and the BBC nationally - both made reference to Pardew nearly being let go at the end of the season, and in the summer. No media outlet I have seen has made any explicit reference to any "things that have happened after [FF] posted [his] prediction". What are these "things" that have happened since FF's prediction because I've heard or read nothing from any "media" apparently "reporting" it.

Absolutely. It's also true that in the modern era if a manager is going to be successful he will be within a full season/eighteen months. That is long enough. It was long enough for Moyes, Wenger, O Neil, Mourinho, Hodgson at Fulham, Mark Hughes at Blackburn, Strachan with us, in fact any successful manager you can mention, with Alex Ferguson being the tedious exception. And, before anyone has kittens, it was true for Pardew - he had delivered success within a season, just like all the rest. Pardew didn't need three years to build a team like the bores on here make out is required. He'd done it in a season, easy. Stability after that, fine. Earnt stability. Moyes. Wenger. But not a three year licence to be a failure "because that's how Lawrie Mac did it". It won't stop people bleating on about "every manager needs three years of being unsackable look at fergie/Lawrie blah blah blah etc etc" but it's the truth. Deliver in eighteen months/first full season or on your bike. And lord knows that will be the case for the next Saints boss.

I've just had a look on reliable old Wiki for some more info on Pearce, and I was reminded that under Pearce City scored 10 goals at home all season in his second woeful season there, and not a single goal at home after new years day. So much for his fire and passion and all that other guff that gets attributed to him. City weren't billionaires but they had comparable resources to Wigan, Charlton, Fulham, Bolton , Blackburn and West Ham who all finished above them. I remember what division we are in. League One. Stuart Pearce has never managed at this level, and has had zero success at club level for any club he has worked for. It's not about "we're too big for Pearce" as you seem to be implying. Stuart Pearce is simply not very good at club management and we could do a hell of a lot better.

When were these decent seasons at City then? They were absolutely dreadful under him and lurched towards relegation - I think they went more than half a season without a home win in his last season. Pearce as a manager is very comparable to Bryan Robson and David Platt. Bloody awful. Pearce would be a shocking appointment.

Well, if you go back to the beginning of this flipping thread, you'll see very little evidence for your idea that "we all knew". If "we all knew" how come pretty much every single contributor to this thread called FF a liar/attention seeker/bullshiner etc etc. "We all knew" jack sh i t.

Stuck your neck out there FF and you were bang on. Hats off. A "Told you so" that is richly deserved.