aintforever

I'm sorry but that's complete nonsense, I work hard and get paid an above average salary but to say I work harder than a nurse, policeman or soldier getting shot at in Afganistan is complete b*ll*cks. Maybe I have a skill that is deemed to be worth more money in today's f*cked up world, but work harder? you're having a laff. Wealth creator - that's a nonsense term, nothing is created it's just taken from someone else. There is only a finite amount of money.

Of course they don't just stash their money but just because 1 person earns billions doesn't mean there is more money in the economy, it just means the money is more unevenly distributed. 500 people earning 20,000 will spend more on goods, services etc than one person earning 1000,000.

Burying the money in the ground is not actually that far off because most of the money they have taken (not created, taken) will just sit in their bank accounts earning them more, so yes might as well just be buried. Of course a low tax economy will attract more business, but that is just playing along with a system that is ****ed because some other country just loses out on tax revenue whilst the big corporations keep taking.

He's done nothing wrong IMO, merely responded to petty actions by Cortese. These spats don't look great in the press but if Matt is ****ed off I don't see why he should have to keep quiet about it. Like with the ticket thing, being refused the chance to BUY (yes that's put £500 of his hard earned cash into the club) 10 tickets for a game that didn't even come close to selling out - can someone explain how that benefits SFC?

How exactly does SFC benefit from having spats with former greats and high profile media personalities? MLT and Lawrie Mac are respected by all the club's supporters (or company's customers), they have contacts throughout the industry and links to the press. MLT is on national TV every Saturday in a position to give good publicity for SFC - why does it make sense to **** him off/airbrush him out? The whole thing smacks of petty personal vendetta, nothing to do with the good of the club.

Spot on.

I disagree, it was the bank who called in the administrators and they would have got nothing if it had folded. It was all a game of cat and mouse, the bank wanted as much as possible, the buyer wants it as cheap as possible - that's why it always goes to the edge. At the end of the day a deal would have been done with someone even if it was a leveraged buyout by Lifelong Saint with the bank owning the ground.

The administrators said what they had to to get people to chuck money in buckets and to try and force a sale - do you seriously think SFC would have folded when you see how many lives that shower of sh!te down the road have had? Compare SFC's assets and size of debt - no way would they have folded. If someone of Marcus' business acumen thought it was a bargain there would have been loads of others waiting to step in. MLT was a bit critical when Pardew was sacked but so was everyone, Cortese just has issues with him over the Pinnacle thing so is just being spiteful IMO.

Matt le Tiss has more than earned the right to have an opinion about Southampton FC. Saints were never going to be liquidated, look at the debts of pompey and other clubs, SFC didn't even miss a tax payment. You have to be pretty thick to think the club was going to fold when even a billionare like Marcus said the opportunity was "too good to turn down". The administrators would have had a que of people lined up, that's why they could afford to let pinnacle have a pop.

I doubt many people remember who owned the club in 1976, let alone who the Chief Exec was.

Matt le Tissier will always be a massive part of Southampton FC, wether Cortese likes that fact or not is irrelevant.

Lifelongskate LOL, what a fitting end if he ends up putting the final nail in their coffin.

Or they approached the club the right way, Cortese saw that MLT was involved, and toys went out the pram.

Or any reason to believe it's all made up.

I said Cortese wouldn't be bullied by other clubs, good stuff.

The fact that this is going on without the club's blessing and support is pathetic.

Kids can grow up fine with just a single male or female parent, or with gay parents or whatever. I expect there have been some serial killers who have brought kids up OK. Surely adoption though is about minimizing the risks of the kid having a bad upbringing, and that must mean a stable, as "normal" as possible family would be best suited? Can single straight men adopt kids? I see no difference in that than a gay couple.

I've got nothing against gays but this doesn't seem right, if you choose to go down the sausage sword fight route you should not expect to play happy families with kids etc. I thought these adoption rules were really strict, how can they ignore the possible negative effects of being brought up in such an odd environment.

Surely no one would cause trouble at a charity match in aid of cancer research!

Will be interesting to see how a smallish Championship club with no parachute money can accommodate an extra player on 37K a week wages!

There is no quotes or sources in that article so it could be just made up, but as Hypo says it could be true. I know it's not what we want to hear but that doesn't mean it is automatically b@ll@cks. I am not that bothered either way, we have no control over what the Leibherrs want to do. We could end up with a pompey style arab, or it could be a Man City style, it's pointless worrying.

I think you will find there are plenty of corrupt business people in Switzerland, even Gaydamak had a Swiss bank account.

We are still in the hunt for 2nd place, no chance of catching Brighton now though.

1st goal looked like it got past him too easy, 2nd he should have come out an caught it. Made a couple of good saves but I would be tempted to play Bart, every time a cross comes in I sh!t myself, the defence look nervous and the opposition look like they know he's not gonna come and get it as well.

The main gripe with the installments was that there was no notice given, then we were told it was "admin costs" Romseysaint got slated for proving this was b@ll@x and it turned out it was because of people not paying them. To say everyone agreed was nonsense. Cortese admited the handling wasnt OK when he said later there were problems. I remember loads of people backing the idiotic photographers ban. I'm not saying we should slate Cortese at every decision, just saying people should be honest and say when they think it is wrong. If Lowe had made ANY of those decisions he would have got a right kicking on here.