DellBlockH

So what? It's only against the rules within 72 hours of a game. I expect many clubs look at their opponents in training if there is public access, it's part of preparation. We've noted on here before how Eckert prepares the team differently depending on who is the opposition. Most of the information about the other team will have come from watching their previous games but if some comes from (legally) watching training that doesn’t bother me. Far from showing that "TE isn't as good as we thought", this attention to detail shows that he is.

I would guess that the club has responded to the EFL (the charge makes it look like we've admitted to enough to, at least, warrant a charge). There's no point in conducting our defence (whatever that may be) in the press. Or we may not have responded - I thought we had 14 days - and the EFL have decided to charge anyway to expedite the process.

I can foresee a club statement along these lines: As part of our normal logistical preparations for an away game, a junior member of Saints staff was sent to Middlesbrough. He walked near to the Middlesbrough training ground on land open to the general public but, at no time, entered it. This was on his own initiative and he was not instructed by the club to make any recordings of training. The club has not seen any of the videos that it is alleged he recorded. Southampton FC is aware that this incident has caused controversy and apologises to Middlesbrough FC for any distress caused. The staff member has been given words of advice.

Back end of a pantomime horse.

I had thought it was worse than that. Last night I got the impression that Boro officials had got an admission from the camera person that he was from Southampton FC. But, no. They've confronted him. He's gone indoors and "changed his appearance". Presumably, he's taken off his Southampton tracksuit. Or maybe just put on a jumper for the drive back to wherever he came from. It may come out that he actually does work for Saints (which would be embarrassing and possibly financially costly for the club) or he may be some sort of freelancer hoping to pass intel on. Or he may be some random fan who gets his kicks from filming training sessions. We used to have one of those.

Do you think that players (on either side) could be any more motivated than they already should be? I'm also not sure that watching a training session could tell you much more than watching videos of their previous 46 matches.

He's not to blame for our plight and, as you say is still our top scorer. But how many did he blaze wide or over the bar when passing to another player or better control would have meant a goal? I don't doubt his dedication or ability but we've looked much better without him.

Did the wind change when Kieran McKenna was trying out that weird lip twist one day?

It's a very odd feeling to want Leeds to win, but Spurs going down would be hilarious. And would highlight the huge financial gulf between the Premier League and the rest.

Lots of people saying we were in the Premier League when they took over. We were. But were we going to stay there? People back then were complaining about the lack of investment and general ambition under Gao. Obviously, we went down under SR. But who's to say things might have been even worse if we hadn't had an owner prepared to risk losing big money in an effort to get us back up and staying there? There was no sign that Gao had either the means or the inclination to invest any more. Imponderables, of course. We may have stayed up and gone from strength to strength without SR being involved.

Keir Starmer, Matt Lucas, Jeremy Corbyn, Alan Davies, Colin Firth, your boys took a hell of a beating!

People sitting at home criticising people at the game for being too quiet. OK. Although I haven't heard St Mary's thismloudnsince the WBA play off game a couple of years ago.

Interview with Daniel Peretz in the Buardian. https://www.theguardian.com/football/2026/apr/04/southamptons-daniel-peretz-we-have-a-lot-of-respect-for-arsenal-but-we-are-not-afraid?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

I guess we're supporting Coventry this evening.

There was a free kick routine where a Norwich player stood briefly on the ball (without moving it) as he ran across and then the player taking the kick dribbled it for a few steps. I thought the ball had to rotate at least once before another player could kick it. Or have I got that wrong?

Ah, sorted.

Does this split-screen thing go away at kick-off?

Fulham.

His vocabulary needs expanding. He only seems to know one adjective (and I expect he has very little direct experience of it).

I remember the Leeds fans singing "We're going to win 4-3" after they went 3-0 down. I thought their gallows humour was quite funny. I didn’t expect them to bloody do it.

Never in doubt.

You forgotten Lallana, in his first spell, already?

Wouldn't bet on it. I was overcharged for a can of IPA because the correct button on the server's screen wasn't working and the supervisor had told him to put all beer in as the more expensive lager. I eventually got an apology from the hospitality manager but I wonder how many people didn’t notice they'd been overcharged at about £1.25 a go.

Whelmed.

This is what I don't understand (among many things I don't understand). SR presumably want a successful football club either for its own sake or because it's worth more the more successful it is. If they want to sell, they will want the highest possible return and this will depend largely on which league the club is in and the assets it has in terms of playing staff. Other assets, like the ground and training ground, won't vary in value according to league. If they want to hang on to the club it (and they) will make more money if it's back in the EPL. So I'm not clear why people seem to think that SR are deliberately sabotaging the club or making wilfully wrong decisions. Yes, you or I may think they are wrong decisions but they must have a reason for making them. They've brought in good players and a few poor ones. I think we can see this happens to most clubs. Some things work, some don't (except West Ham who only seem to bring in poor players). I know nothing about this Larin bloke. The consensus on here is that he is not going to improve our team. The consensus could be right. But why would SR and our scouts want to bring in someone who will make us worse? Does AA want out or do the management team feel, on balance, that the team will survive (or the team mentality will improve) without him? Is it just chasing a few million quid while we have the chance? (Isn't it easy to discard a few million when it's not your money?) I see the argument that SR has a purely player-trading model. But, to keep that going, you need to develop young players to sell on. Larin doesn’t fit that model and I'm not sure our transfer trading balance shows that is happening anyway.