Fowllyd

I think Delia will go for somebody who'll put some beef into their puff pastry defence - a Wellington type, perhaps...

Thank you kindly. However, my birthday's on Saturday as I was born an awkward git. So three points would be a welcome present! Hmm, wonder what the chances are of that...

No, he's quite right. On Friday it will indeed be Friday. Nothing will happen, of course, but it will most definitely be Friday. This particular Friday will be my twin sister's birthday, but that's far too certain to post on a takeover thread!

In fairness, Um, back in '88 the bit about Shearer missing one on ones was quite true. I remember seeing him through on Lukic at Highbury around that time and knowing he'd f*ck it up. However, one of the things that really mark him out as a quality player was the fact that he recognised that weakness in his game and worked at it like hell. A few years later when he was through on the keeper it was a foregone conclusion - and in the right way. Sadly, by then he wasn't doing it for us.

I haven't checked out all the links cited on this thread, but for me Lowe's coining (well, invention really) of the term "re-promotion" stands out. Class, pure class...

Cork was on loan here; he's now on loan at Watford. As far as I know, loan players are paid what they would be paid by their parent club if they weren't on loan. After all, their contract is with their parent club; the loan is simply an arrangement between the two clubs. If this is the case, then Cork will be earning exactly the same at Watford as he was here, and as he would be if he were at Chelsea and not on loan. The only potential monetary difference would be what proportion of his wages Watford are paying, compared to what we were paying. I'm quite prepared to believe that the presence of a man he'd worked with before (and clearly has a good deal of respect for) at Watford was a major part of his decision. But I can't see how money comes into it. On the original topic - yes, it does matter. He's a very good young player, and I'd love to see him playing in the centre of our midfield. It's notable I think that in the Guardian's write-up of last night's match, he was the only Watford player mentioned as being a regular threat to Reading. And he was playing in central midfield in that match.

I think you're right in that Aviva have no reason to call in their loan at present - as far as I'm aware the payments on it are being kept up to date. And it's certainly in their interests that we keep going and keep paying, rather than default on the loan. Should we go into administration though, I think it far more likely that they will retain the stadium and rent it back to whatever emerges as Southampton FC. From their point of view that would make much better sense. One point you've missed though - I believe that the interest rate on the stadium loan is fixed, therefore current interest rates will have no effect on our payments. And, should we get relegated, it will make life that bit more difficult - unless the whole loan then gets renegotiated.

Given our love of playing one up front, I really think we should consider Lonesome George, the world's most famous tortoise, for this role - always assuming we can afford his wages that is. And he'd bring 150 years or so of experience to the team, which can't be a bad thing...

I think that people focus on the negatives because they can see few, if indeed any positives right now. I am by nature an optimist (in life generally, that is) but I find it difficult to the point of impossible to feel optimistic about Saints at the moment.

Excellent post. Succinct, pithy and spot on.

Truth told, there's no likely alternative which looks anything other than gloomy at the moment. But a look at clubs who've gone into administration recently doesn't indicate happy outcomes for them. I'm not pretending to know the answers, it's just that the prospect of administration scares the sh!t out of me.

You've lost me here. Why was there a picture of Lowe at the Dell when Lawrie arrived there?

They should be printed onto toilet paper and put in the bogs at SMS, as you rightly say. But as proper rolls, and far more than a mere thousand of them. Furthermore, each cubicle should be fitted for a limited period with a coin-operated lock - let's say a pound a time - and the whole scheme well publicised as a part of the whole matchday experience. "Wipe your arse on Rupert's face for a pound!" would be a fine headline on the OS. I think it could be a nice little earner... Oh, and extra rolls could be sold in the Megastore.

You cling to the second point in particular and have done in many posts, but surely you must realise that there are no guarantees that we will be rid of Lowe. We might, we might not. We simply don't know. But I do find it astonishing that anybody can regard the process of administration as something slightly unpleasant and best got out of the way quickly, rather like having a filling. From what I know I'd say it's something best avoided if remotely possible - rather like root canal surgery without anaesthetic.

Not quite. Plenty of people have discussed administration as a possibility, for the simple reason that it is one. I can't say I've seen anybody discussing administration being abused, but then I haven't read every post on every thread. It's certainly true that those people who seem to view administration as something to be welcomed have come in for a fair bit of stick though. Rightly so, in my view.

If he stays, he'll maintain his current devastating form. If he goes, especially to one of our relegation rivals, he'll score for fun. Tough one to call then...

What??? You mean that bloke I've known for years who has a first class degree from Smugness College, Oxford has been lying all the time? I can't believe it! What a bar steward! PS - have you ever heard the term 'gallows humour'? PPS - did you look up the college on the internet, just to be sure?

I agree with your first point, but it'd be interesting to know what's changed to make them do so. On your second point, there's no mention of money in the piece quoted elsewhere - Cork simply states that Watford seemed keener to get him than we were to keep him.

It does seem that the early-season love-in between the Echo and the club has soured. Back in August, and for several months afterwards, the Echo was looking like an extension of the OS. Then an article a few weeks back carried a lengthy and critical analysis of the whole Poortvliet/Wotte experiment; then there was the one about how this month would be the most important period for the club in living memory - and this time few punches were pulled. And now this one on Cork. It's hard to imagine any of those being published early in the season - so I can only assume that some kind of falling-out has happened. And if what's reported here is true, then I can only echo Um's cry above!

There's a lot of it about, I fear! The club's medics must be mighty busy...

Good post. Another way of putting his desire to be seen as "right all along" is messiah complex (I'm starting to make a habit of posting that). In other words, he truly believes he's right and has been all along, and now wants everybody else to know it. The problem is that this belief and reality are growing further apart by the day.

When they were appointed, the OS made great play of the fact that both Poortvliet and Wotte had remuneration packages which were based on a relatively low basic rate, with large performance bonuses. There was no mention, of course, of what the basic rates might be; in fact, there wasn't even a hint at it. However, do you really believe that Poortvliet left Helmond to take a lower-paid job? Or that he paid a year's worth of the higher salary (gross, at that) in order to take it? Would he really have felt so confident of success here that he'd have done all that? None of it adds up as far as I'm concerned. So I reckon that either (a) the club paid him for the compensation to Helmond; or (b) his basic salary's high enough to make it worth his while moving here and paying off Helmond.

Liver is delicious, but I do draw the line at kidney.

Yes, looks very much that way. I guess that being constantly out-muscled and bullied out of games - and I've seen a few matches when that's been very much the case - takes its toll.

I think a lot of us felt rather that way. I certainly did. A temporary triumph of hope over expectation I guess.