lambtiss

Somebody who had managed before would be another

I would prefer to see a back 4 given a chance, as a back 5 has been given over half a season and given the quality in some of our squad has clearly failed and led to some of the dullest football imaginable. 1) A back 4 would give the CBs clear responsibilities and hopefully stop a lot of the "to me, to you" nonsense that we see with 3 CBs. 2) A back 4 should release Fellows from his role as a wing back and allow him to play as a natural right winger, which he is. 3) The priority of the full backs would be to defend. This should mean that Manning is dropped immediately as he is incapable of defending 4) The loss of a player at the back means that we can employ another player to bolster our midfield which has been overrun too easily. Secondly, the two central midfielders have often had to cover too much ground and have tired in the 2nd halves of matches. 5) Alternatively, the loss of the 5th defender would allow us to play Stewart upfront alongside Armstrong when we are chasing games or the opposition are weak. 6) We can revert to 3 CBs if we are defending a lead towards the end of a match. By the way, if we are playing 4 at the back, I would like THB and Quarshie given a go,as I feel he is improving and has a much higher ceiling than the hapless Wood. THB should be told it is his role to organise and lead the defence.

Simple, you would sack the press officer who came up with such a ridiculous statement.

Nobody is suggesting that he would get into the team ahead of Armstrong. But he would have been a much better option than Downes off the bench and possibly Archer.

Back from the match and that was a hideous performance against an injury ravaged Hull side that still looked better organised, fitter and more passionate than us. I then look at some of the talent we have in Fellows, Azaz and Scienza and the way, for example, they destroyed a Charlton side and pondered as to how we could look so utterly mediocre. Some thoughts 1) Bad, inflexible tactics. 2) Three CBs, none of whom can seemingly tackle, head the ball or mark anyone and retreat when anyone runs at them 3) Shit full backs with no defensive ability or wing backs who then can't attack as they should 4) Two good wingers, yet no number 9 who they can cross to (even when Stewart came on, he was inexplicably playing behind Armstrong). 5) A generally, light weight, feeble, non physical side that consistently get bullied off the ball. 6) A manager, who's highest level of experience was as U21 manager for 3 months. Why can't SR not see any of this.

Wrong to brand it as all hindsight. At the time, most Saints fans I knew were sad to see him go and were disappointed to see potential like Ballard’s squandered for less then £1m at a time when we were clearly short of attacking options and dropping a division to the Championship. To then see us spunk 7-10 times the fee we received for one of our own for on an unknown from the German 2nd tier just rubs salt into the wound, particularly when he turned out to be useless. it’s just another example of SRs transfer incompetency.

He should have put him in earlier/ from the start

His passing isn't great either

Ankerson must be pronounced with a silent W ...

Good comment SOG, I am under 6' but was always coached to compete in the air and make sure a taller player couldn't get a clean header. How many times have we seen attackers head the ball under no challenge whatsoever.

He was a very poor defender for us.

We won't know until we find out the identity of the next owners. Although, it is difficult to imagine owners with worse judgement than this lot.

Mara didn't, Downes didn't, Archer doesn't ..

Get ready for the unveiling of Graziano Pelle as the replacement striker, and then 6 weeks of videos of him in training getting up to full fitness. Followed by a horrific, 10 minute appearance as a substitute where he displays bad touch, lack of speed and inability to jump into the air. We willl then get a post match interview with Tonda where he explains that Pelle has only been playing 5 a side and can now only play that format and explains that this is why he has lost his ability to head the ball.

Onuachu's record as a player is 400 games played and 196 goals scored, which translates to almost a goal every other game and nearly always at a high level;FC Midtjylland, Genk, and Trabzonspor. The only time his goal output fell was for Southampton in the PL, when he was often used as a sub off the bench, played in a clusterfuck of a team in a league above their ability and which was never set up to take advantage of his abilities. I think he would have been a big threat in the Championship, certainly compared to Downes and Archer.

But, other than that?

I didn't know that, well beyond our price range, and he wouldn't be interested in us with higher suitors chasing him.

I am a Saints fan, disappointment is my default expectation

He has scored 6 goals in 62 matches across the last 2 seasons in the Championship. That's pretty poor.

What about Troy Parrot, still only 23 and doing well now in the Eredivisie and a good scoring record for Ireland

Very low bar that though

It seems he is a winger rather than the big number 9 that we are lacking. Also, his scoring stats over the last 2 season are woeful. So, probably got mileage in it.

The difference with Ballard is that he is still only 20 and his career is on the ascendant, that isn’t the case with Archer. I would like to have seen Ballard given another year to prove himself, especially as we had been relegated to the Championship. I still think we might regret this one.

I would like to see 2 CBs at the back but I can't believe Tonda won't tow the company line and go with 3 as he has in every League game. I would also have Arma over Archer