Depressed of Shirley

2 hours ago, egg said:

Isn't it? I've seen a proper mixed bag. I've seen possession with no end product, possession with goals, possession with the ball given away needlessly, being picked off when we're committing when forward without proper cover, players not running back, embarrassing defeats to Gillingham and Sunderland.  Not sure what you're seeing mate. 

What I am seeing "mate", is a new manager faced with massive upheaval in playing squad, trying to instil some sort of football style to try and win games. He has players who are either new or beaten into submission by being part of the worst squad in the club's history and used to losing every week. It might not work, he might turn out to be terrible, although he would have to go some to beat some of the recent managers we have had to endure to be the worst.

However, what I have seen, from two home games and three televised away games, is a possession based style of football that has won three games, drawn one and lost one. Sunderland was awful, but still not as bad as the endless home defeats last season, and at least it looks like the players are trying to do something as opposed to going through the motions and being resigned to defeat after defeat.

I hope it works, because having recruited this season for this style of football, I don't think we will survive with a change to "get it forward" that a few people that sit near me at St. Mary's keep demanding.

41 minutes ago, egg said:

I take your point, but I understand the thrust of Whitey's point.

Citing shots on goal as evidence of exciting play proves nowt. 40 passes in no man's land that results in a shot from 25 yards that lands in row Z is less exciting than a ball from the full back into the channel to a forward which ends up testing the keeper. 

But that isnt what we have seen is it?

Its a really good if slightly wordy article, and just about sums up my view of my SFC season ticket for next year.

Following the pathetic display at home to Wolves, I got to thinking exactly how bad we are at home.

Since Claude Puel took over in 2016, we have won just 31 home Premier League games. With 10 of these happening with no fans in attendance, I agree that fans are unlikely to feel confident we can win enough between now and the end of the season to avoid relegation.

11 hours ago, sandwichsaint said:

Somebody, don't know who (FIFA/refs/managers/clubs?) proposed that football moves to 60 minutes with the ball in play, 'Somebody else' turned this down.

Apparently the PL averages 55 mins with the ball in play, some leagues average 45 mins.

Central timing and 60 minutes of action is something I could get behind.

It was the Players Union who rejected it, which is a shame, seems like FIFA are determined they play for something like the time they are paid for.

21 minutes ago, Pip said:

As a matter of interest, has anyone received an email from the club about this or is it just information from the website?

I had an email this week, with prices and the renewal info.

6'9" apparently

4 hours ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Leicester win.  1-3 or 0-2.  We are crap, simple as that.  They have better players and manager.

And stadium, and toliets, and corner flags and everything, we are the worst at everything ever, and should ask for relegation to the conference, and that all the players should be sent to jail.

Christ on a bike! 

On 16/11/2021 at 23:12, JRM said:

It doesn't really. 

My daughter is at UNI in Brighton, and whilst it has more to offer a student, I'm not sure a millionaire footballer would find much of a difference between the two.

On 06/11/2021 at 17:03, Charlie Wayman said:

We are quite used to Saints becoming a one half team, how weird is that? They look like the same players turning out after half time but not in the way they play. Good win 'though but why did we need to go into "panic stations" mode after the break when clearly we were the better team on the day. We need more self belief and that starts with you Herr Ralph.

Two points to take from yesterday. Livramento was poor and needs a rest, the kid is knackered. Too much football, too soon. Good to see you are nurturing our youngsters Herr Ralph!

Sky team said there were 30k at SMS yesterday. There were not! Clear gaps could be seen by everyone all over the stadium, 20/22k tops is my estimate. Yep! I know all about ST seats being counted come what may and so on.

Just catching up on the match thread, and can say I cannot agree with anything you posted, and think you might be trying to be a bit racist with the Herr Ralph rubbish. I would say I am surprised, but you nearly always spout rubbish so I'm not

On 04/09/2021 at 21:05, JRM said:

That's how I see it, you'd imagine they'll be testing Perraud in training and he may well improve, I watched pre season and first two league games and he just seems to be lacking something. 

Theirry Small - doubt we'll see him for a while if he refused to train with Everton (is that correct?) 

He didn't refuse to train at Everton. He refused their contract offer, and therefore wasn't employed by Everton when they went back for pre-season training.

Just now, CB Fry said:

Congratulations on getting upset by comparing two completely unrelated things. Bravo.

I'm not upset, its just that we always are trying to our best fro every one else, when no one seems to do us a favour. Anyway. I couldn't care less if we sign Williams as I've seen nothing to make him stand out above what we have. Perhaps if we just said he can train once we have received the cash it would just seem a bit more normal.

6 minutes ago, TWar said:

Plus helping them get Vest in for game 1 makes him a more appealing prospect than someone from abroad who may have to isolate/not play for a week or two, thus making them more likely to buy him instead. Not letting him do it would not really benefit us at all.

But if it was the other way round, it would be "he cant play on Saturday because he hasn't trained and we've not completed the transfer yet." I just think we are too nice in a game involving a lot of bastards.

4 minutes ago, derry said:

Reported as signed subject to medical but with Saints permission already training with Leicester so he can be available for saturday.

I love the way we bend over backwards to help other Prem clubs, whilst Man Utd want a huge loan fee and payment of the full wage for us to develop one of their young players. I wonder makes them more successful than us.

1 hour ago, Wurzel said:

I agree with some of the comments above, there are far worse potential owners out there than Gao. As above, he hasn't put a penny in but hasn't taken a penny out, which is really how it should be. And he hasn't interferred in the day to day running of the club.

The one thing I don't get is the apparent total failure to cash in on the Chinese market. Ignoring the dodgy non-existent sponsor (wonder if we'll ever hear the true story about that) there doesn't seem to be a queue of Chinese companies trying to get themselves linked with us, and I've not seen any reports of, for instance, increased shirts sales in China. It would have cost  Gao millions to get us to the level where results won the pitch would start bringing in extra millions (i.e CL qualification) but I'd have thought it would have been relatively easy - and free - to increase our prescense in China with a bit of Gao inspired publicity/promotion, and with it extra commercial income and/or retail sails. Obviously not to the same income levels CL qualification would bring but it could have been enough to make a difference. I wonder if the average Chinese football fan is even aware that "one of their own" actually owns this EPL club.

Wasn't that part of the reason for pre-season tours to China? I think the issue is the Chinese government doesn't seem keen to allow Premier League football to be promoted at all, hence the ending of the TV contract.

1 hour ago, SaintLondon said:

The Derby takeover is now off... It seems perhaps the fit and proper person test is finally becoming more stringent? Or did he just have no cash? 

Hopefully though it'll mean that whilst it might take longer for us to get taken over, when we do, it might not be to a skinflint - or is that wishful thinking? Probably. 

No Cash

22 hours ago, JustinSFC said:

I don't think this will drag either, it's not an administration takeover, it should be straightforward.

If it drags, it'll be because of Gao, somehow I don't think this is going to be entirely up to Gao, I'm still not convinced it was entirely his money that bought the club in the first place.

We'll never know the truth.

 

 

If it drags it might also be that the prospective buyers dont have the money. Takeovers from wealthy individuals happen quickly, takeovers from consortiums borrowing to finance the deal take ages and are terrible for the club they are taking over as no decisions get made between the current and future owners.

3 minutes ago, tajjuk said:

Also saying Liverpool have a 20% sell on clause......

So if that is true, we could end up struggling to even get £15 million and would need double that to replace him at least. 

If that's the case, then don't sell him as the replacement will be more than £15m anyway. He's still under contract for another year, make him earn it.

6 minutes ago, Avenue_Saint said:

Sod anymore yanks or Chinese.

Give me Middle Eastern please.

Have you seen how the Derby County takeover is going?

1 hour ago, VectisSaint said:

This would be the rules announced on 1 December, which were presented to the Government by the governing bodies in November. 

I dont think anyone thought the rules would be easier post Brexit.

I think it is entirely reasonable that we knew he would play little or no part this year, and that what we were buying was potential. We also knew that if we waited until 1 January 2021, there is no way we could have signed him under the new rules.

This seems to be behind a lot of transfers in the last12 months, Saliba, the 16 year old Liverpool have bought etc.

Less TV money due to no fans in stadiums and until September broadcasting all the games. Less TV money from abroad as the Chinese TV deal was ended. 

The Semmens interview was done with the club assuming that fans would be partially back in in October. Since last week, that has changed to the strong possibility that no fans will be in at all this season. That means all season ticket money is to be refunded, no week to week ticket income, fall in TV income due to revised game schedule, reduction in overseas TV rights, reduction in last years TV payment due to failure to complete fixtures on time, reduction in overseas income for failure to complete fixtures last season, failure of Chinese TV deal, and in Saints case reduction in sponsorship income and replacing the shirts. Add to this the list of shit players we cant sell and yeah Id say we don't have much money.

The whole transfer window is going to come down to a game of poker in the next two weeks. With no fans in stadiums until at least March, reduced TV income from overseas, reduced income from UK broadcasters and no guarantee that any of these will return to pre Covid levels, clubs like Everton, with that list of midfielders not getting a game, will have to reduce their wage bills. They will have to loan players, or try and sell in a depressed market.

This doesn't make our position any better, but I think there are some clubs in a worse situation than us. Its ok to make losses if you have a rich owner who will subsidise the cost, but in the current environment, even multi billionaires might be getting slightly worried about their future income stream from football.

45 minutes ago, Charlie Wayman said:

It's not a level playing field 'though, is it. Somebody like Ward Prowse who was always the club's favourite poster boy (one of our own crap) when loads of fans were tearing their hair out with frustration over his ineptitude and lack of basic abilities was persisted with week after week when he didn't deserve his place in the team. On the other hand many naturally gifted and talented players like Boufal have never been given more than a few starts at a time before they were judged negatively and seemingly permanently. 

Redmond's another who has been persisted with and in the eyes of the club and fans has now become a 'great' player for us, but we all lived that agonising journey as well.

Funny too that no other clubs are in for our stars.

Just saying.

The only thing I would say about JWP and Redmond, is that even when playing poorly, they were always trying to do what their manager at the time wanted them to, just not very well. Boufal just annoys managers because he doesn't do what he's told, just what he wants. This is fine when scoring great goals, less use when the man your supposed to be marking scores against you, or you give the ball away when everyone has pushed up in attack waiting for a pass or cross.