Frank's cousin

Dune - you mentioned before that you find Positive discrimination wrong.... Of course positive discrimination is 'wrong' - because in an enlightened and civilized society there would be no need for it. However, as the number of under educated bigots amongst our society proves time and again, there is a necessity for it to avoid the discrimination in the first place. That is why in some cases these HR rules apply. Simple solution is get rid of bigotry in our society and there will be no need for these policies and we would all be happy. Dune, if you want to be given 'respect' and have adult debate, then at the very least you need to respect those that you are 'debating'. That means coming clean on your agenda and politic. Even Oswald Moseley at least stood behind his fascist banner (with the support of the Daily Mail no less)... you frequent denials of your obvious xenophobia and extreme political views is so obviously characteristic of the 'new' far right, with its futile and frankly pathetic attempts to present an intellectual debate and the 'sunny' and 'intelugent' side of fascism... would make me laugh if it was not so dangerous, because sadly it works well as a recruitment tool with teh under educated whofail to see the truth beyond te fake mask of respectibilty - Thankfully recruiting efforts for your right wing paranoid groups on here will hopefully bear no fruit as there are at leats some who see through it and will happily expose it for what it is.

OK, as some of you feel that you need ‘FACTS’ here are a few. People who are against this are prejudiced against homosexuals – ‘nothing against them as long as….’ Recognize that? The result our your deep seated insecurities and ignorance Ignorance and lack of education is the reason for prejudice – this is fair enough if you have not had the luxury of education – understandable even, because fear of the unknown is fuelled by ignorance, but read these lines, learn something, see it as an education and your prejudice will be gone. Not wanting to change when you have had the opportunity to learn, is good old fashioned bigotry – so take your pick. Learn something or at least admit you are a bigot. Fear of homosexuality is not new – it’s been around for about 2000 years as organized religions influence on society began to take hold – they wanted to create what they believed were values that would make a stable society – and the influence on societies of religious teachings are clear to see. We may say that we are ‘non-religious’ and don’t believe, but yet some still consider certain things ‘wrong’ and ‘unnatural’ – the source of these ‘teachings’ is nothing more than religious views. Fear of Homosexuality is driven by lack of understanding, ignorance and a fear that the individual themselves may ‘turn out gay’ - and the fear is there because of the way society is so prejudiced against gay people – sadly the society we live in is structured into cliquey groups as many never grow beyond that teenage sub culture of rules, where anybody who does not ‘fit in’ is victimized, bullied and generally not welcome … and this is in turn is not discouraged by those with bampot religious views… Most bigots don’t get the irony – the insults aimed at gay men for example such as ‘****sucker’ and a**ebandit, are meant to be threatening, yet these sexual acts are often expected from wives, girlfriends and one night stands… Nature/Nuture - is no longer used as a scientific term. There is a deeper understanding that our behavior, characters and personalities are driven by genetic and environmental components. However, THERE IS NO SCIENTIFIC evidence to suggest that homosexuals are ‘brought up that way’ so there is no more chance of a child growing up gay because they have gay parents, than if they have straight parents. Just looking at the data, would lead you to these conclusions. Even if there was a perceived slight bias towards higher numbers of gay folk from gay couples, it would be most likely a result of the children not suppressing their natural feelings as having been brought up in a more enlightened way. The only control measure that would be scientifically accurate would be to know the exact numbers of people in heterosexual marriages who are actually gay… and getting an honest and accurate answer on that is impossible. Please note to all the non-scientists – data , facts figures are ONLY valid if you have a robust control group and both sets of data are subjected to appropriate statistical analysis to determine if there is any statistical significant difference. Turkish you are embarrassing yourself with your complete of knowledge on what constitutes scientific data, scientific protocol and importantly the term ‘significant difference’ - I recommend you investigate this further before presenting lamentable right wing religious propaganda as scientific data or as you seem fond of doing, mentioning ‘scientific facts’ without any source or validity. Homosexuality is not ‘unnatural’ or ‘immoral’ (see above about religion) – the fact that humans can be gay, straight or both (bi) is a direct result of the evolution of our species – NOT a ‘genetic mistake’ but a consequence of anisogamy – which is also the reason behind the evolution of all our secondary sexual characteristics. It is complex so go read up on it – but the up shot is that we have evolved emotional love and also the trait to have sex for pleasure rather than just reproduction – it explains a lot of things… So will this adopted child be happy? Have a decent upbringing? I don’t know, I don’t know Elton John as a person. Can’t stand his awful MOR crap he records or that wailing over Diana… but apart from that I can’t comment. Will the child be bullied? Yup guaranteed as most adopted kids are bullied… and it’s all those nicely brought up children from heterosexual couples that will be doing it… If these kids had been brought up well and taught compassion and reason, there would not be the playground bullying that we see… my evidence for this? Not all children are bullies so blame the parents of those that are! (see we can all play the ‘FACT’ game… but this is at least based on a logical hypothesis, rather than ‘made up’ to support an uneducated view) So as some of you are so keen to have a go based on ‘it’s PC gone mad’ … thought I’d finish with this: Those against this, or uncomfortable with this are either ignorant or bigots… the ignorant simply need education, the bigots are just moronic f*ckwits who can go feck themselves – ‘unPC’ enough for you? PS. Love the satire Deppo LOL and Joenssu your posts +++++

Its worth pointing out that the only part of the history of the club/legends etc that are being in some folks eyes 'badly treated' are those who were involved in the politics of the past - we saw plenty of ex playing legends at SMS a couple of weeks ago - and the club is doing 125th anniversary things, the shirt etc + other things to come... so what is all this crap about legends being ignored? Nope its those who have had their nose put out of joint because the new ownership wanted to wipe the slate clean of anything to do with the previous political infighting... and thus are no longer heavily associated (financially or otherwise) with the club – it’s the politics that’s all, so over emotive ******** that NC is forgetting the clubs history is juvenile histrionics.... Quick question - would those angered by NC be as quick to defend Lowe, Wilde or Crouch if it was them sniping in the press? Yes Lawrie and Matt are entitled to their opinions, but by making them public at every opportunity they are simply making themselves look selfish and bitter In response to CBFry - heros? well nobody with any sense would deny what Matt has contributed on the pitch and the memories of his heroics will not be forgotten as you say - but everyone is fallable and there is a real danger that this memory will become tainted simply by the chipping away with these very public remarks - Look at it this way, at what point will he stop? And at what point will even you lose patiance? By that I mean should we be as successful as Markus dreamed of and NC is determined to deliver, wont continued digs really not look selfish and infantile in the end? Or would you prefer that we are not successful, and therefore Matt and Lawries digs could be considered prescient? Surely if taht is the case eventually we become as sad as those lot down the road spouting on about their victories in the 50s as its the only thing to hold onto when everything else is crumbling? I would rather NC succeed in the manner he is going about business than have a future where 'history' and heros are the only things we are able to be proud of.

FFS - this has nothing to do with 'dimissing his findings as bigotry, because he does not present any Findings - there is no data, no statisticak analysis, not peer review of scientific method... it is simpy NOT science so to call it science is WRONG. The second fact that he is associated with a right wing religeous nutter group in teh US is secondary but highly enlightening dont you think?

DO NOT PRESENT THIS AS SCIENCE - Narth is a quazy religeous bonkers group that aim and present 'cures' for homsexulaity - that paper has no scientific basis whatsoever and is simpley NARTH propoganda... pls check the validity of any 'scientific paper' before you present it as science... Peer reviewed, high citation index quality journals, fine... Religeous fruitcakes in the US spouting this ****** is NOT science.

... ahr...'political correctness'... usually followed (certainly in the Daily Hate/Nazi) by 'gone mad' - trotted out usually in total ignorance. Its about time the term is consigned to the bin, because whatever its original centiments have been lost through media coruption of the term... remember 'Bah Bah Green sheep'... that story was actually made up, totally and utterly by the press at a time when they wanted to stick teh boot into Red Ken and his GLC... FFS, Gay couples adopting is a non issue.. What soem some of the more intelligent posters have stated already is the welfare of a child - how well it will be cared for, and looked after, loved and cherished and given values. Most kids get role models of both Male and female, either at home, in school, relations etc. And there is no guarrantee that a 'traditional model' of male/female brings up children in a stable and and solid way - you only have to look at those that grow up thugs, racists, bigots, criminals, who lack compassion, intelligence and any values/virtues to see that, or the numbers that are placed in care or for adoption because the traditional model sees parents not giving a flying feck, abuse their kids and neglect them to see that the 'natural' way has nothing to do with teh quality of the upbringing. This has feck all to do with 'PC' - its simply about a society being mature enough to recognise we are all individuals, who have the capacity or lack or it to be good parents regardless of sexual orientation. From an evolutionary biology perspective, its 'natural' anyway (and I happen to be a biologist) because homosexuality has evolved simply as a bi-product of humans highly evolved emotions, the abilty to love, pair bond etc... That comment that 'as long as they dont fiddle with them' is equally worrying - Firstly, becaue the overwhelming majority of abuse of children happens in the 'natural' setting, and secondly their is NO evidence anywhere that suggests homosexuals are more or less likley to be paedophiles than heterosexuals... Is Elton and his partner's world a good environment in which to bring up a child? Sure thats a fair question, and one that will be asked and followed up by social services under far more scrutiny than the 'natural' couples - often too young, too stupid and too ignorant to have given having a child and its consequences any thought whatsoever. The questions should refer to the media attention, the stabilty, education and standards of care and nothing else. Yes, its a free world and everyone is entitled to their opinion, but frankly if you dont come to the same conclusion, that IS bigotry based on ignorance of science, evolution, and importantly parenting, or plain old fashioned prejudice which is based on ignorance anyway...

No that would be if we had lost against Ipswich surely? ;-)

This.

+1 Great to watch, edge of seat stuff, 19 to go , and down to the wire - dont we want excitement? Why the doom and gloom from some I dont know...... we went away from home against an inform side who are promotion rivals and get a decent draw - without Lallana and Morgan and sure there were mistakes but these things happen. Peterboro go away to Charlton next and Huddersfield v Oldham so we win against Carlise and a things will look a little different... still a lot of wierd results to come for all involved in the promotion push

... Part of teh problem, the interset and the length of this thread seems to me to be because there are MORE than one question that this incident raises... Yes there are points of principle, questions or rights, and so on but as some (sour mash) has gone and got all emotional and accused me of being a shallow glory hunter (OK not in those words but teh implications were there) thought i'd best explain.... The questions raised seem to be: 1. What did Nick do (if anything) and does it warrant being denied a ST (which seems an odd 'punishment' - given he is not banned from the club)? 2. Should the club be able to do this without an explanation? 3. Should the club in general be far more communicative with Fans about all their decsions? 4. Should the club be open to criticism in public and why does it react to negative criticism in what appears to be quite a draconian fashion? 5. Is the 'lack of media explanation' and a general 'secretive' style, justified in any way? 6. Why does Nick always (and not seemingly correct) get presented as the voice of the fans? So more than one issue being discussed so not surprised its gone on so long.... but so that I am not misinterpreted again, IMHO, my take etc is as follows: 1. I dont know what Nick has or has not done that has made the club act in this way - none of us do as the club is remaining silent on the matter. There has been speculation that its possibly to do with the negative reporting/comment Nick has made in public, especially if you read his response to the ST installment plan withdrawal. If you read it, it is quite damning of NC and the club and is made under the 'Trust's banner. This would explain the 'punishment' - as we have seen that the club does not tolerate these things (right or wrong) and thus if dissatisfied with this issue, as many were on here, would it not have been best to approach the club out side the media spotlight, considering at the time everything was new and exciting? - not an issue for us mere mortals on here, but certainly one to consider if you are a known in teh media for 'saints voice soundbites'? As to the punishment - well i do think its a little odd/trivial etc and apart from denying him a discount not really that harsh... there are as others have pointed out ways round it, but I can undersatnd NIck's perspective. 2. (and 3) Without and explanation? Well tricky one as in an ideal world, the club would be to each of us what we want it to be. Some demand minute levels of detail on all aspects of the strategic and tactical direction and explanations for everything, and at the other end of the spectrum you have fans who feeel that as long as we see good results on the pitch, are entertained etc, its a sign that the club is well managed and is getting most things right so we are happy. What we have is style of direction and management built on professional and confidential approaches - for some this is too secretive, for others its great (which is my stance) , because at last we have a chairman and management team, that is going quietly about their business, not in the media every five minutes and confident enough that they dont need to suck up to fans every five minutes in an effort to generate support against another clique - in effect the removeal of the 'political' use of the media. Fair enough perhaps its swung too far in that direction, but is this not also a reaction to the years of negative rubbish and political infighting that was seen before Markus arrived? When all dirty laundry was washed in public, with 'legends' wheeled out to support a PR battle that if you looked really carefully was usually spin and there to support decisons that were ultimately not in the clubs best interest? Spending money we simply could not afford springs to mind - supported by theboard at the board at the time and 'football figures' form the past - which menat most were happy with it, despit it being a huge risk that eventually led to our administration? So to me its no surprise that the new regime said 'enough is enough' no more of this - we dwill do business in silence - and release information quitely and in a controlled fashion as we have seen in the NC interviews. Yes this does need to rlax a bit, and I am sure it will as NC learns, the club learns and we become more acustomed to the approach - in effect as TRUST is developed between all parties. 4. Open to criticism - YES of course and despite Sour Mash's response to my last post, I was not saying it should not be. As I have pointed out time and again IMHO, things taht are good are good because they STAND up to criticism. What I was referring to is that I have lost patience with the constant little digs, the IMPRESSION' created by some that they almost welcome the opportunity to criticise, having for some reason not either come to terms with the new owenership and its style, or never will for a variety of unexplained reasons - hense my comment about those that still wish football was run by old school gents/'football people' and was 'community and fan' focussed first and foremost - YES clubs need that community and fan focus, but the nature of the modern game is that it cant be at the expense of a solid business foundation - if we as a fan base want to see the club develop and return to the top flight. A practical realism is needed that WILL OFTEN be at odds with the traditional values many hold dear... That is the reality, right or wrong and my point was that given its the reality, after years of a downward spiral in sporting terms, cant we just for once stop the sniping and go with the flow? Because whilst there are issues that are valid and oopen to debate, there is also alot of rubbish that seems to be spouted in public that can only be based on spite and bitterness. If you have issues, take them up with the club in private and I am sure you will get a response, but using the media, is only going to antagonise the club and its not going to win you many friends who might otherwise have listened and taken on board what is perhaps a valid comment. Its not teh validity or otherwise of a critism that is the issue, but methods used to express it. 5. Yes it is, IMHO - because I am happy at this time to see how things develop - thjose with a paranoia that 'if its not nipped in the bud..it could evolve into some kind of evil masterplan' - need to chill out a bit. I am confident that as we progress and its clear the approach is working, NC and the club will relax a little and we will see more openess - But at this time its about pushing through cange and contriolling what you can so that the focus is on getting it right on the pitch. For me that is fine.. OK so others find it worrying, but ask yourselves why? Are you REALLY worried that its part of a nasty plan, or just pished off that you are starved of information and thus its fuelling either a deep seated paranoia (perhaps after the previous 5 years its understandable), or your ego is bruised? 6. Finally, poor old Nick. He is one of the good guys really, passionate, and loves the club. I have not always agreed with his campaigns, but I have respect for his beliefs even if not always the methods. I dont actually believe he craves the media spotlight, nor does he position himself as some self styled voice of fans... but he also maybe needs to correct that in the media - trouble is, they probably wont listen as it makes a better story for the press if they get a quote that 'carry's the weight of opinion of the fan base' than if its just an ordinary fans view - he just needs to stop talking to them and it woudl be sorted.

If we were struggling mid table, had poor attendances and no future, but had the most communicative chairman in the world, wh=ould we be happy? FFS, why the need for some sort of constant hand holding? Are soem of you not able to survive day in day out without knowing everything about the club and its business? NOt got anything else in your lives to keep you busy... Jeez... I just cant believ some people - its as if some of you are actually getting a boner every time you hear something negative and have a little bit of ammo to have a go at the club? FFS, at least be feckin honest about it - state catagorically teh reasons why you seem to enjoy being able to have a verbal go at NC - stop pretending and let us hear you reasons - not some **** about you not the ST installment plan or lack of communication - that is feckin trivial and unimportant compared to what is happening on the pitch - FWIW I think some fans have a problem with any style of club ownership and chairmanship that is not old school gentlemen and has the fanbase dictating policy - in effect they will never be happy even if we do win teh feckin CL one day - because we were not told in the right way that we get promoted and have success... .., its no surprize that most of those complaining every five minutes and crying about how badly fans are 'being treated' are the same names who were so convinced that Wilde and Crouch and tehir fan friendly bulsheidt was the way forward for a secure future, that then saw pinnacle as the best option because Matt was involved .... ... NIck is a decent bloke, who cares about the club, but he shoots from the hip in the public eye... we know that club dont like that, so why did he do it? Naive I'm affraid.... as for bashing everything NC does at the slightest opportunity? Those who do that, as said at least be honest and admit that your egos are just brusied because the club does not suck up to you at every turn... and listen to your 'demands' We get promoted, have success, have a future, play good football... what is not to feckin like?

... the old ST installment plan withdrawal... hard on some who needed it, fecked up by those who abused it... With the club saying it woudl be reintroduced when the swipe card system is installed... so the bad guys here are those fans that abuse the system and cancelled the DDs not the club or really Nick, becuase I suspect he was looking at it purely from the point of view of those fans that really needed it not the abusers... but he should have done this in private first, would be my call...

Ok... am I the only one who is fed up with these issues? - Just when we have things more or less sorted out, the league position looks good, the sqaud is fine, the prospects good, the future bright etc... we keep having these niggly stories appear... from Lawrie, MLT, Benali, now NI.... and fans get pulled in different directions. On the one hand we can perhaps understand some of the reasons for a gripe, but on teh other we see how teh club is placed, recognise the job being done and find it hard to be critical of a regime that is doing the IMPORTANT things right? Is it possible that the reason WHY we are doing well, have a stable club, planning for the league with teh best chance of promotion is because the CLUB is focussed on these things and does not want to distracted by petty gripes and media speculation? The Swiss business culture is one of going about things in a professional and confidential manner - we should all know that this means that they will not be in the media explaining everything every five minutes. Yes, because the club has given no explanation to Nick, we find this wrong - and on teh surface I would agree. BUt has anyone stopped a moment and thought there may be a reason for this? If a reason is given it will be in the public domain within 1 second -could it be that the club wish to avoid highlighting something that Nick did, or that might not show teh club in a great light by association? We have seen that NC does NOT want the club to be in the media every five minutes, they want a measured and controlled release of information so that everyone is focussed on teh job at hand which is promotion - no distractions (or as few as possible) - - sure we are not used to it, and some dont like it, but if it works and gets the job done? Its why I am so ****ed off with teh whole ex-player, personalities griping in public - I woudl have thought everyone would be pleased with teh obvious progress we have made in the last 15 months or so... Yes, NIck on an individual basis gets a raw deal, there must be something he has done for the club not to be happy with him... but maybe we should avoid taking sides because we simply dont know the full story. Personally If I was NIck, I would have tried to keep this OUT of the media and deal with it in private until a resolution was no longer possible - I dont think the continued media presence of these stories helps his case, but I can understand his frustration. Its possible that he is being bumdled in with all the others that have spoken negatively about teh club in public and as we see the club is not going to tolerate this. We all have different views on this. I stated before that good things are good because they stand up to criticism - and so in an ideal world i woudl welcome a more open and communicative approach from the club... BUT, this is football, sport etc and its about doing what is necessary to achieve the success we all desire. If that is achieved through a rigorously focussed and avoidance of media distraction, then should we really be complaining? I suspect that only when we have achieved the aims and ambitions over teh next 4 years will we see maybe a relaxation of this - afterall if we end up in a CL final, it would be hard to avoid a media frenzy;-) Nick, time to close the Trust and go pass the olive branch and keep stum in the media.

... your wish is my.... I think its natural to get irate but that tag when he is expressing an opinion that differs from your own, giving the media/world the impression that it is the opinion of ALL fans and not merely a few... naturally those that share the same opinion are less concerned. Naturally this was at its peak during teh whole Lowe/Wilde/CRouch/Wilde/Lowe/ debacle.... Must admit got a bit ****ed off with iTV and BBC when reporting on teh issues when they used to ask 'fans' in th streets - usually it was grannies or kids who seemed to have no clue and 'jumped on whichever bandwagon happened to be passing' Nick is a passionate bloke, loves footie, cares enough to stand up for what he believes - I respect that, even if I dont agree with all his campaigns - especially any criticism publically of the new regime, because whether we agree with the approach or not, it seems to be working for now - it needs to be given a chance and if you are in a position where the media are interested, there is a greater responsibilty to present more than just your own opinion in the interests of balance.

Dear Mr Cortese Firstly, I have no idea as to the reasons the club has for denying the right of purchase of a Season Ticket to Nick Illingsworth. I understand that it is the clubs right to refuse purchase/admission on many grounds, so I am sure that the club does have a rational reason for Nick's exclusion. Firstly, I would like to say that following the euphoria that surrounded Markus's purchase and rescue of the club and your arrival as Executive chairman, eventually, some fans did begin to ask questions about how the new regime would effect the culture we have at the club. As you yourself, pointed out, we do have a very negative outlook - this is really a legacy of so many false dawns, hope shattered through ineffective leadership in the past, and if we are being really honest, often a lack of understanding of the commercial realities versus footballing dreams of fans, and how there are often times when teh two apprea poles apart. However, slowly, most fans are coming round to the ideas that the approach that the directors and managemnet have been taking in the last 15 months is beginning to pay off. The position in the table, the quality of players and manager, the work ethic and the style are great to see and as fans we need to really acknowledge that its working. However, I do believe that anything that is good and successful is so because it can stand up to criticism, acknowledges when things can improve, and responds appropriately to misunderstandings - we do have fans that are still suspicious, perhaps struggle with seeing seeing what has always been a traditional football culture being 'modernised' with a strong business and commercial drive as we have seen with Saints. Yes, the success we have will win them over, but surely but by actions such as this ST row with NIck, it merely fels the suspicions of thsoe that are still not on board. NIck has always worn his Saints heart on his sleeve, perhaps he is old fashioned in respect to what he sees as the true football culture and thus is perhaps more critical than some. Maybe, and I am speculating, the fact that he does make these feelings public is the problem? I would put it to you ( and I am sure you know) the best way to answer critics is with success. Be they the slightly bitter 'dark forces' for whom the regime change in itself was never going to sit well, or simple passionate fans whose engrained football culture was always going to take some convincing - I think I can safely say that NIck will be more than happy to sing the clubs praises and that of the management if the approaches taken work and we see on the field success. The vast majority of us fans are fully supportive and behind what you and your staff are doing and are positive and excited by possibilties of the future, but we want to be inclusive and want ALL fans to be brought along for the ride! If we see what looks on the surface as possibly an injustice (and I admit we do not know all the facts), we believ its right to ask the questions of the club. I suspect that this ban is a legacy form the past, and even Nick might not be so critical now the benefits of the approach the club is taking are clear for all to see? I also believe in the decency of Markus Liebherr - And by that nature, those of his friends and business partners - Therefore, the benefits of reaching out to fans like NIck and resolving the issues, and removing the last hints of negativity would be beneficial to all. I would also show everyone that the club culture is one that is truely exceptional, which we know it wants to be. Thanks again for what you are doing for this great club. Best Frank's cousin

I considered this a few years back after 15 years in a medical/clinical marketing environment -got as far spending a week in a school, and had been accepted on a PGCE course at Warwick... was a few quid saved to get through the PGCE year and probationary year - but then we were lucky enough to finally have our daughter on the way so it scuppered the plans as there was simply no way we could afford the mortgage If my wife gave up work and I knew she would want to, at least for a few years. So back to the industry grindstone. I am probably too much an old fart now to do this, but that week in the school was great. I would say to anyone who really wants to teach to go for it - yes the money is crap, yes the hours will be long, but the rewards of educating kids and getting the best out of them must be great. I have several firends who teach, they are knackered , stressed, whinge about Government policy, whinge about crap pay... but always have good stories about successes and none of them would swap it for anything else... especially private sector industry despite the earning shed loads more.

I think in some respects you are right about expectations - especially given the investment and the quality we have at our disposal, but if you consider we only had 1 win in the first 4 games + plus 3 defeats when managerless -(had we won 2 of those 6 or 7 games we would be top now... despite the odd hick up) the fact that we are 4th with agmes in hand does at least suggest we are on track at this time - yes we have played more home games and have some tough aways to come, but these were always going to be tough away games and if we are serious about getting promoted we will need to get something from them. Everyone has the odd slip up, but if you look at the table, top and second are about 10 points off what we saw last year - the whole division is tighter and I woudl suggest that we would be far harder done by this season whad we had -10 points as there are more sides in the top 10 that can cause problems. I never expected an easy ride as we have seen with Chelsea and Man City, spending big and having the resource is NO guarrantee for success - it can get you thereabouts but you need that extra spark, togetherness, fitness and a huge slice of luck to be able to 'walk away with it'. I know that we probably have a side now that would give many championship sides a run for their money - possibly mid table, but that is a different set of circumstances to getting out of this one - its not an excuse if we dont make it, but we should be realistic about the importance of so many variables - if anything was guarranteed in sport, it would have no interest at all. Dont mean to sound like a patronizing tw*t, but you do often make valid points that get jumped on because you tend to use such dramtic words to describe them - 'catastrophic' - sorry even two or three defeats in a row is not catastrophic with 20 games to go - alot can and will happen yet and it is sure to be nail biting towards the end, but is that not how it should be?

Now I HAVE met Nic,and spoken to him on a couple of occasions - Sure its annoying when the media add the 'voice of fans tag' - ****es me off no end, but It does not stem from Nick. He obviously cares deeply about Saints and has in the past been prepared to get involved when others have not... not saying i agree with everything he says, or believes, but I do think he is a decent bloke with his heart very much in the right place. However, we do not know the reasons for the ST ban. iIs it just vindictiveness on part of the club because of negative things said on his web site UI? Did he break the ST rules in some way? Has he infringed copyright on his site? I dont know and untilo I do, I wont pass judgement on either. Was this ban not put in place by previous owners? dont recall.

LOL at Dune and his ignorance - do you think he realizes that his avatar Alf Garnet and his 'little englander, bigotry' was the butt of the joke? I suspect not if he is comfortable in the company of such racist ignorant small brained morons... or perhaps Rallyboy is spot on with his fetish line? (LOL by the way Rallyboy, top post!) I am glad Baj/Admins kept this thread open as it has allowed us to (sadly) see the true character of some of our posters

What Sergei fails to grasp is that this whole thing has feck all to do with 'recording' or not, or what he classes as banter.... Banter of any sort is perfectly acceptable betwen men and women who agree its a laungh, knmow each other very well and undertsnd the humouros context in which things are placed - the key is KNOWING that it has NOT over stepped the mark into offensive or intimidating or even making folk feel uncomfortable - the laws are NOT there to ban banter and humour (as all those Daily Hate readers seem to think with their last battle cry of the ignorant and ill-informed 'its PC gone mad') the laws are there to protect those that ARE made uncomfortable, intimidated or harrassed by others actions and its not for you me or anyone to judge what someone else should or should not find offensive... There are also plenty of people in the work environment who are simply not able to make a 'scene' for fear of recriminations if they dont simply tow the line... next time you are some 'risky' banter at work, ask yourself if everyone who can hear genuinely thinks its funny, or are there people who are just going along with it to avoid being bullied? The recording bit in all this is pretty standard in TV/Radio. The only contribution that makes is that it highlights how stupid they were...

Again the recording/non recording thing is completely irrelevant - Why Sergei cant see this I dont know, now why he is so keen to defend these chumps. The only thing of interest about the recording is that it highlights how stupid they were not to assume that its actually easy to capture.... You seem to feel that your lads right to banter is being threatened somehow? Which is total ******. You only need to feel threatened if your 'banter' is actually sexist and makes colleagues feel uncomfortable or harrassed (best look up the defination if you dont agree) - anything that goes on between good friends in humour be it sexual banter or just laughs provided all parties are honestly happy with it is no problem. The laws are there because in many circumstances new or junior colleagues may 'go along' with the banter because of a 'culture' that if you upset means no chance of advancement - so many people, probably even some you know will pretend to 'have a laugh' whiclt really thinking you are a complete sexist arse... I have good mates male and female with whom I can get close to the mark, because tehy know 100% there is no threat in it and I certainly dont make female colleagues uncomfortable - but as I said the law is there to protect everyone, but especially those who feel they have no voice... that is why its what they said and did that is teh issue, not the recording of it - that just made them look like fools to the masses, rather than just amongst their colleagues.

... dont you think its a huge insult to cortese with the comments about 'contract cleaners' and unpaid rentpretty damning to me. he really should just have said something on the lines of 'just a few issues which are in the process of being resolved' - sure he might we fecked off with Cortese about the deal, but why sling the insults in public? I just dont understand what they hope to gain by demonstrating their obvious dislike for NC in public... seems a real shame that all this cant be reslved amicably, when to me it looks like a simple contract dispute?

I dont think there was anything wrong with MLT fronting pinnacle - he obviously genuinely thought it was the best way , or only way for the club to survive and I am sure it flattered his ego to be asked to be chairman -however, a genius on he pitch YES, but it did show some naivetyon his part. He did obviously not do his due diligence on tepinncal e bid which if you recall had to rely on Mr Crouch to stump up the half £mil to get exclusivity.... None of us knew what teh swiss bid was all about as they remaind stum about it - a leeson to all of us really that any REAL business is conducted in that way and all the speculation, gossip and rumour, is only there to test the water with fans and try and get them onside. What I dont understand is why Matt is so bitter about it? Because it looks like he is just cheased off he is not chairman because he backed the wrong horse - thing is Matty, most of us saw that the pinnacle bid was a 3 legged donkey at the time, sure we did not know that the Liebherr bid was a thoroughbred stallion in comparison with Tony Mackoy in the saddle... but why not admit that that saints got the best deal with NC and Markus? There would be feck all shame in that - we know you where trying to help when approached, but no shame in walking away when you can see a far better solution - surely that is REAL support of the club? As it is his sniping just makes him look jealous and as if his ego is bruised... The Franny thing... well it sounds like a contact dispute between club/NC and Franny, which will be resolved one day either out of or in court about his house - rental contracts... so what the feck is that doing in the public domain? There are posters on this thread who still live in the 'ex players can never do any wrong and should be given whatever they ask for world'... its gone, finished etc.... and I bet Rodrigues, Channon et al on the pitch did not have to pay for tickets? Had Lawrie not been so vocally bitter he would probably have been there to. Maybe I have got it all wrong, but can someone please explain WHY messrs Le Tiss, Lawrie et al, did not even give the new regime 5 minutes before publically going on the offensive? When Wilde and Crouch took over we wer urged to 'give them time' so what happened to that mantra? All sounds like sour grapes to me...

And I would say fair play, well done and good luck... afterall ups and downs is what this game is and should be all about (sadly cash has changed all that).... but for the fact that your recent 'good times' came at the expense of writing off 80 mil of debt... and any club could do teh same if they had similar moral standards, so however much you enjoyed it, its all coated in that unpleasent stench...

Was just going to say the same thing - was proud today - first time in ages we have shown what we can do on TV! But it shows how we still need to be careful and avoid getting complacent. Our passing game is good to watch and its the way I like to see football played, but as we have seen over teh last couple of years we always do better when playing the better sides - because we are up against sides that try and play that way too - we still strugle against sides that either park a bus or get in our faces and play with a very direct approach - and thats clear from our 'blips' this season - its also why its so hard to get out of this division even if the qaulity of play and players is second to none, being able to grind out results against sides with a more negative approach is key and we still struggle a little in that department - That said, I am confident we will go up, but it will be down to the wire if you ask me - so nervouse nail biting time ahead - but great performance today and Chaplow was immense, harding and butterfield also great... the team should be proud tonight.