Chin Strain

He wanted to buy 10 tickets. He reduced his request to 3.

She's an ace lady. She told me how she was on holiday in Thailand and the waiter was a POmpey fan. She told him about Michael, and called the waiter a skate.

He probably cost us £20k a year for 3 years.

Bonkers. Then again you can spend as much or as little as you like.

4 games in 3 years for Stoke? Didn't they pay us £1m for him? Blimey, that's a cracking bit of business Tone......

You're either being deliberately thick or actually are thick? I think it's almost certainly the latter You had an issue with me saying 'whatever investing in an academy means'. I explained it. Do you understand that there's a massive difference in saying 'we're investing in the academy' and actually providing some detail. If they actually meant it, they'd have provided some detail as to what they were going to do. Some examples: 'We're going to buy a training ground, build first class facilities, set up a network of scouts, employ the best development coaches to oversee it.....'. Instead 'we'll invest in an academy'. Interesting that the interviewer didn't ask the next obvious questions then....do you think that might have been because they were not allowed to ask more detailed questions? That grubby little bank. Yes, that's the one. Even with Europe's broken banking system, nobody, but nobody, will allow them do business. International Bank of Lithuania. Do you know how many have a license for commercial banking in Lithuania? 9. So that makes them ok, and the FSA and all other larger countries have got it wrong? Yeah? Really? Dunce.

1. I guess it depends how the deals are structured as to exactly how much they have actually spent. £4m is a headline figure, but they might be in for a lot less than that at the moment. 1. They want to buy the land. Without it they need to look elsewhere if they want to develop the ground. If. 1. The Academy. Are you being deliberately thick? If they said 'we're going to invest in the team', what would (or should) your questions be? How much? When" Who? Would be good for a starter. It's easy to say 'we're going to invest in an academy', but that could be sending a couple of blokes down the local parks every weekend, or building a proper facility to attract, coach, house and teach the best players from around the country and the world, whilst having a global scouting network centrally co-ordinated. Do you understand the difference? The first costs £50 a week + petrol. The second costs 7 figures a year to run even once you get your facilities in place (which cost several million in teh first place.....which, of course, you don't currently have). I would imagine you'd be looking at a minimum of £10m to start with plus the annual expenditure. So, back to the question then.....No details, so what exactly does this mean? 2. The grubby little bank (Snoras) that nobody in a developed economy will allow to operate. That would seem to be a bit of an issue and raise a few concerns. Saab seems to be connected to them - they're doing well. 2. Every football club will be for sale. Bournemouth didn't want them. Rangers didn't want them (although their potential tax bill - remember them? - may have put them off). Reading were £50m were they? OK, Reading seem to have a decent ground, recent PL history, and I suspect they have a decent training facility. I also would imagine they have a reasonable scouting network and some sort of academy on the basis that they've brought in a number of decent players over the years. They would also seem to be stable having been owned by one man for many years. All this for £50m. How much would you imagine it would cost these days to build a ground and training ground? Ours was £32m 10 years ago. Steel prices and building materials have risen dramatically since then and, as an example, BHA have just spent £90m on 22k. On that basis, why would they choose Pompey? It's tied up in all sorts of knots but, has one advantage. It's cheap. If you were someone who hasn't got their head stuck in the sand, you'd wonder if they actually were interested in investing anything. It could be just a complete punt for next to nothing in the vain hope that the clown you have as manager might get you promoted, and then they could syphon off all the PL cash. Maybe it's just a low risk gamble.

1. They don't seem to be willing to spend any money on the playing staff according to their tv interview. 1 (again). They don't seem to want to spend any money on the ground (apart from new bogs and bog paper) 1 (again). They want to buy the land from Gaydamak (I think we'll need to wait and see what happens with that) 1 (again). They seem to want to invest in the Academy (no details though so what does this exactly mean?) The answer to question 1 seems to be 'if they have got cash they don't seem to be willing to spend it'. 2. I have no idea if they want to launder money. I have no idea why two Russians who seem to have issues with their other businesses decide to buy a NPC club with no facilities, a big wage bill, no obvious chance of promotion and a CVA to boot. Take off your blinkers for just a moment and ask yourself the question; why do you think they wanted to buy Pompey? What's in it for them? Please don't trot out that you're a sleeping giant, bestest fans in the world, they love the club etc etc. Like I said, take off your blinkers and try an honest answer. If it was my club, I'd be very suspicious.

Brilliant:lol:

Behind Bompey. Blimey.

Fake....and not even a very clever person doing it. Last weekend 'I'm in Southampton now'.....er, but you were playing for Halmstad the same day. Also, telling Claus that he was coaching in Sweden now. No sh!t Sherlock, he's one of your best mates. Think he doesn't know that already?

I didn't mean 'none' literally - clearly that would be ridiculous. You said it seemed to be trendy to have Irish names, which is a bit of a sweeping generalisation that everyone wants to be trend when naming their kids. I wasn't being touchy, just pointing out that we didn't pick the name to be trendy. We liked the name, liked the way it couldn't be shortened, and liked the fact there every other kid wouldn't have the same name. It was very much a personal decision for us, which is what it should be for everyone.

It looked onside from where I sat (Chapel) - the centre half was playing him on

Agreed - great goal. Just waiting for the highlights to appear on the BBC website for a proper look.

Even though your location is Northern Ireland?

I can assure you that we didn't choose Niamh because it's 'trendy'. There may be a few more 'Niamh's' around now, but 8 years ago there were none, and we liked the name. It's also not particularly difficult to pronounce. Those that can't pronounce it are very much in the minority.

Vinnie Jones was a mincer too. Jimmy Case was a proper hard man - dished it out but, when he got it back, he didn't complain, got up and got on with it. I remember Jones giving it the big I am at the Dell in the early 90's, until Jimmy stuck a heavy, fair, challenge on him and he was rolling around like a girl. When he eventually got a chance of revenge, Jimmy just got up, shook his hand and got on with it. Barton is a very good payer, but does roll around too much to be considered in any way a hard man - if he went down like that in a pub he'd be laughed out of town.

You do get the odd one, but she soon pipes up and puts them right! Some of the spellings of it though......

Our 8 yr old is called Niamh, also with this spelling. We liked it because you can't shorten it, amongst other reasons. We also considered Caitlin and Carys for no. 2, but went for Bronwyn. We had a mare with boys names, but with 2 girls and no more kids to come it doesn't really matter now.

It does seem a ridiculous question, but Radio Solents job is to get across the facts of the game to those that weren't there. They're trying to make a point to the bestest fans in the world that their team is crap, and illicit a response from that clown to try and excuse it.

I'd have thought that was different, but I'm not the one with hundreds of pairs of Adidas trainers!!

******....who are you trying to kid?!

Is he unusual in this? Aren't all managers paid to get results? Some get them playing attractive football, some get them by playing percentage, route 1 football. Ian Branfoot was one of the most successful managers that Reading had (up to that point). They hated him.

Progressive in terms of using available technology, analysing opponents / performances and, maybe, player diet. He still lumps it up the park most of the time though....hardly progressive in the way his sides generally play.

I'm concerned about your obsession with Adidas. Have you never been tempted by another manufacturer? Would you ever consider it? Would it make you feel dirty?