Colinjb

A 36m bid has been rejected apparently. Regardless of money the rest of the footballing world has them over a barrel. The curse of being high profile is that clubs know they can pay..... without the carrot of Champions League football their bargaining position is weakened. A £250m pound war chest widely reported, and they are trying to pay 30m in stages!? They're having a laugh. Many plastic Mancs laughed at Manchester City when they started spending stupid money on players to break into the top four. Well, now that is exactly the position they find themselves in now. The only problem is that their resources are nowhere near the levels of the middle eastern benefactors.

Seems to be opinion based on the media.

They know what they like.

As always, it's the extremes that are the evil.

A more superior Sharapova.

Well, as indicated above i'm not the only one. I do not support a kit, I support my team, my club. Part of that club's identity however is it's kit. It has been changed to something different that I do not accept or like. Time hasn't changed that.... I want my team to play in the traditional colours I associate them with. The colours that I have nailed to the mast for the last two decades. As for a new identity? No, merely corrupted. It's the same badge, same stadium, same city in the part of the country I call home and same fan base.... utterly unrepresentative shirt. Success and an all red kit are not, and never have needed to be mutually exclusive. It is a massive shame that our most successful league season in the modern era will be associated with a kit that is no representation of our club's proud tradition and historic identity.

I gave an honest opinion and you are being sensationalist and derogatory. To answer the more legitimate questions though: I enjoyed the Sash kit, it was a nice throwback to our far history. I grew bored of the Sash (a shirt I still wear casually) and wanted the stripes back that season by around mid-October. I do not remember the mid 80's kits as I was only 2 years old at the time, however I do not like them. At least they maintained the black shorts and white socks from our more traditional kit patterns though. I have enjoyed all of our last four seasons, there was however no reason why our identity had to be in any way compromised to achieve what we have.

Would make sense. Equally someone on here posted to expect something akin to the 1995 home shirt, so, we'll see.

Quite. And as for playing poorly and losing in this tournament. At least we played better then the last two. That was my only expectation, we were clearly never going to win it.

So he hasn't seen it, just hear'say.

Indeed, the quality of the opposition was lower. Had Sir Bobby not had that wonderful 1990 tournament (when we only actually played well for about a game and a half, we laboured into the semi final) he would not have been remembered as fondly. Is consistency in management going to ensure we succeed again? Of course not. But history has shown England managers to be vilified, criticised and entirely humiliated yet just a couple of good games can make them into Heroes.... oddly enough with no regard for the actual team performances that took them as far as they could. I'm not going to call for dismissals, or call Roy an idiot, mainly because better and worse men then him have been in the roll before and created wildly differing results. All I know for a fact is that this England team did play better then Capello's side in 2010 and Roy's first defensive and pragmatic tournament eleven in 2012. Better finishing would have seen us looking forward to last 16 game v Greece.

No, absolutely not.

Now that the England squad have arrived back in blighty, surely any movement would now be rather swift. Where's Guan when you need him?

Or could there be a contractual stipulation with our new sponsor?

The stripes are the wrong way up..... A few pints could sort that however....

Was the enjoyment of our football at all diminished by the colours? No. But instinctively, and emotionally I did feel disconnected from the team as an entity. In quieter games and lull moments it didn't feel like watching Saints, I didn't identify their colours, their identity as the club I love. Had it not been for the company I was with and the location in Southampton I wouldn't have identified them as my team.

I would also remove competitive and league football for under 12's. It puts too big a focus on winning rather then development of talent. As players develop at different rates the tall, strong, quick lads displace the slighter kids who may have more potential. The competitive nature of coaches (often enthusiastic Dads, who mean well but are not always the right ones to educate) can take over and disadvantage the lad's longer term development.

Why would they need to be seperate things? Ramirez showed his best for us under Nigel Adkins when we played a more open attacking system. With more space to work in and more time on the ball he looked a better player. Koeman preaches attacking football and it may be in a way that again would give Ramirez the space and freedom to show the ability he has on occasion done. (Even under Pochettino he had moments, the high through ball to Lallana v West Brom, the long range strike v Everton.) It is naturally Ronald Koeman's call, but to call for a clearly talented man to be thrown away on the basis of the previous manager's set up would be a complete folly.

Please stop quoting Alpine guys, it's as bad as when Barry Sanchez was stirring.

As was Sir Bobby Robson after Euro 88'. The headline after a friendly draw with Saudi Arabia: "In the name of Allah, Go!"

God his work is so painful to read. One sentence paragraphs ensure that the target market doesn't lose interest. Yet this seems at odd with the melodramatic tone. Or perhaps not. Cater for your audience.

Absolutely. I would love nothing more then to see that player from that game return, it was the most exciting 45 minutes i've seen from any player in Saints colours. I hope the change in manager allows him to shine as he clearly was not happy under Pochettino.

Yes, they took their chances and played very well. All credit to them. It was a tough group made even tougher by an outsider showing their worth.

As the one who actually said that in the match day thread. Yes, I believe so. Firstly, we are actually looking like a team now, we have been able to pass the ball and create chances. Secondly, The team is now shedding the vestiges of the alleged 'Golden Generation' and has younger talent coming in to provide a platform for the future, rather then a reliance on the same old/same old. Thirdly, The stability in management has seen us progress from a highly defensive pragmatic outfit in 2012 to one that does look to have some kind of attacking plan. Had our strikers actually remembered what planet they are on (Sturridge could have had at least three goals, Rooney's miss v Italy was astonishing) then we would be looking forward to the second round. The big negative is our defence. Cahill and Jagielka simply are not an international pairing. It is disappointing but I do see positives and a clear improvement over prior tournaments. In 2010 we were dreadful and scrapped out of a straightforward group. Had we played with a more clinical edge would have performed respectably, as it was to be though our defensive frailties and a genius madman did the damage.

And yet still light years ahead of four years ago.