Lazlo78

Coys!

Phew...

Defend now Saints!

Let's grab a late winner! (read: please let's just not screw up now... just get that point...)

you

Fine fine, but I lost track of the formation way before that!

Could anyone outline the formation now after Hammond coming on?

Had me wondering too

Smirking Saint wins it with that little inspirational gem... ta muchly, mate!

Yeeeeeeeees!

Coys!

Coys!

If WHam manages to win two home games in a row with 10 players, I'd think it would galvanise them enough to see them hold on to top spot. On the other hand, our season does not end with a defeat today. Victory for us today and WHam is back in the mixer...

Ok thanks, I'm off then. Was great fun while it lasted. See ya next week!

We really need to start moving the ball around and stretch them... we'll work them for 70 minutes and get goals when they are tired... And get Carlton Bloody Cole out of the game - sounds like he's a bit too busy for my liking

Hmmm interesting scenario.... WHam showed against Millwall that they can play with 10 men for longer periods, so nothing is certain here. Good thing is that it should allow us to get our passing game going.... COYS!!!

Come on SuperKelv!

Taylor off!!!

With the depth of the squad it's one big puzzle to set up the starting XI, but since the team Saturday looked eerily like the team that started the season with confidence I'm all for a repeat of the lineup... COYS!!!

If he manages to stay fit he should have a big impact in League 2! Getting regular footy would do wonders for his fitness and confidence - and maybe give a stronger hint on what his real level is... I'd love to hear regular updates on this one!

That's very creative. Do you think I'm suggesting this or just avoiding to comment on the real issue? Basically the situation is a moral one and it has nothing to do with Pompeys demise (even though you keep turning it that way to portray Harry as a hero in unfortunate circumstances). Is it ok for a football manager to receive money for selling players or does it constitue a conflict of interests? Theoretically you could have a manager whose primary goal wasn't to win games, wasn't to build a strong squad, wasn't to invest in the future, wasn't to strengthen the infrastructure of the club - his primary goal was to increase net transfer profits! As stated above my view is that it was a playground for Harry to maximise his profit at the expense of the club. At least an arrangement such as Pompey's opens up for this sort of criticism which could be an argument for steering well clear of it. As an analogy: I usually ask salesmen if they get a fixed wage or are on a commission. If their income is dependent on each sale I find their arguments less credible as they have an economical incentive to sell me goods regardless of what's best for me. So please relate to the question about conflict of interests not on what some idiot with a Yakuza tattoo on his forehead did to you poor souls... Edit: or seemingly, do not relate to the question as others are bored with this particular strand of the discussion. Sorry, let's get back to something about Pompey away attendance figures

Ken Tone's argument still stands - he is not arguing that you penalise managers for buying players, he argues that you do not reward them for selling players. This creates a situation where the manager is primarily interested in seeing a lot of players pass through club which is incidentally where the wage issue come in - with the absurd wages given to players it's no shock that you have been able to tap up players at the end of their contracts and later sell them for a handy profit. Consequences? Harry earns dough, player gets silly wages that no other club could compete with, and poor old Pompey is f*cked over again. Yet you defend him and say that you applaud when he has made a profit on the player. Take a look at what it cost your club for Harry to make a buck in the transfer market...

I edited my above post as I totally misread yours. I agree with Ken Tone's argument that pfc123's calculations are useless as HR obviously was not charged money every time he sold a player...

Edit: totally misread you there. Previous quite was: "His contract includes commission on net transfer profits of 10%"

Have you taken absurd player wages into account in your calculations?