saint si

United had the better chances, whereas despite our possession we barely tested De Gea. The highlights always tend to show chances and other moments of excitement (red cards, controversies etc).

Got any evidence for that?

http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/showthread.php?46965-Post-Match-Reaction-amp-MotM-SAINTS-2-0-Crystal-Palace&p=1790298#post1790298

They are acting for the creditors of the last club, not the current club. The words we have been waiting for. Finally, The Mouthpiece of Poopey has spoken. They are now following a different club to the one that won the cup. PFC has a glorious history of about 1/5 of a season, and has spent its entire lifetime languishing in league 2.

Listening to radio 5 this morning - lots of coverage of the match. But not one mention of Mr Boruc being between the sticks for the Poles. You'd think that given the prominence of the keeper in the 1973 match everyone has been going on about that they might have at least mentioned him... Surely there's an interesting discussion to be had when England have to win and the opposition keeper has kept 5 clean sheets in 7 premiership games already this season!? Perhaps it's just my red-tinted specs, but I found it utterly irritating!

England win through a penalty conceded by a defender. Scored by Lambert, why not. Other than that Boruc produces a string of world class saves from Rooney and Welbeck to ensure his confidence is high going in to the Old Trafford game.

Agree the Januzaj debate is ridiculous. He's scored a couple of goals against Sunderland. Big f'ing deal. And it's not like he's been here for years already... He wouldn't qualify for England until 2018! But apparently the reason he hasn't got an official football nationality yet is because his parents are Kosovan and Kosovo is not recognised by FIFA due to not being recognised by the UN due to Russia's veto due to Serbia being an ally of Russia. So it's all a bit ridiculous and just makes England look a bit desperate.

Except Adkins brought Luke Shaw in to the team several months earlier, and the Lambert/Jay-Rod partnership has hardly been a feature this season...

33 points versus 22 is a big difference. When you consider MP has faced Chelsea, Liverpool (twice), United, City, Arsenal and Everton in his games in charge, it's not fair to say it's all down to quality of opposition.

Who knows where we will finish but the prem this season is more open than it has ever been. Combination of the big clubs getting weaker (united in particular) and the smaller clubs getting stronger. Plus chuck in a liberal sprinkling of new managers just to shake things up a bit. Add to that there seem to be half a dozen sides who could all win the league (plus us!) and they will take points off each other all season long. Any one of Liverpool, arsenal, city, utd, Chelsea or spurs could come out on top. For now just enjoying us being in amongst that lot!

Whilst this is true, this is also because players know they won't get legitimate fouls awarded to them if they do try and stay on their feet. You'll hear commentators say things like "oh, he's been too honest there". Or even if there's no contact, and an attacking player has to hurdle a defender's leg... but that causes him to lose half a yard and so another defender can clear. Is that a foul? (paging Whitey Grandad) I doubt it would be given in most cases, so what incentive does the attacking player have to evade the challenge in the first place?

Figures in the article are from end of June. Loan was repaid in August.

Good performance, if unspectacular. Turned up the heat second half... and we're racking up the clean sheets. So when was the last time we played Man United in the league and we were above them? Because it's happening in a couple of weeks time...

I hear Aston Villa fans do a minute's applause for him every game.

For one person, who has already proved themselves to be of dubious character.

To attempt to mask their identity during the trial process. Not to commit the crime, as you are implying. In fact the daily mail article you linked to says she didn't wear the veil before the court appearances. So therefore what we have is: - someone committed a crime (through abuse of a position of trust, not through wearing a disguise that somehow magically enables credit card fraud) - and who then wanted to wear a veil to try and give them some anonymity from the press or whatever during the trial process Thus proving... er, nothing at all.

Proves what? That people sometimes commit crimes?

Which are already illegal irrespective of what the person is wearing...

That's league apps

Surely the fratton faithful are their biggest asset? Getting behind the team and never ever booing their own? On the logic presented they should stay away in droves in order to improve results. Perhaps they're just getting their excuses in early... Nah, I don't go mate, helps the team perform innit

Pass of the night

Played his part in the amazing 2010 to 2012 ride up the leagues. Hero, along with the rest of them.

Agree 100% - loans between clubs in the same division should be banned. Distorts the competition.

How does this compare to his FM stats?