Saint_clark

Why is the dinner on the 13th of feb anyway? We were formed on the 21st of november.

I'm getting bored of this now tbh. I love Le Tisser, McMenemy etc. but it's clear they're not going to be involved like they were before. Perhaps if they didn't whinge about the big bad foreign chairman every fortnight they'd be as involved as other club legends were on the day of the United game.

And if you go further back, keeping them out would appear to be even easier. Ignore the Posh game - they're a mental team that will provide some of the most freak results you'll ever see.

If we're counting covers as well;

So what's the plan then? We can't exactly send everyone packing.

"Saints too quick to dismiss bids from top clubs". Or; "Chamberlain furious that Cortese didn't even consider a bid from his dream club".

I can't be arsed to go searching for it, but i'm pretty sure he never said anything for definite.

It was more along the lines of "we are looking to get one sorted", but even so that is still not a good enough reason.

Indeed...and yet no-one has been able to give a good enough reason as to why we shouldn't trust him.

Brilliant. Looking forward to the interview, looks like he's keeping his word about speaking publicly more often. I also wonder what number it is that clubs ring when they want to make an offer - surely it's not just the front desk?

"Southampton are refusing to make an official comment on the speculation." Because we shouldn't f*cking have to. Cortese has made it perfectly clear.

:lol: F*ck me, that makes the news? They might as well report that we haven't commented on our stance on North Korea.

They were never designated penalty takers though, and we had Rasiak then who was also quite good.

This. I may be wrong but i'm pretty sure Adkins never used the words "more good news to come" anyway, that was just the writer of the article referring to Lallana and Hammond.

Not meaning to be rude, but, who are half those names in that list?? I don't know, but i'd suggest ex-saints is a very loose term here, in the same way in 15-20 years time Andrew McNeil might be included in an ex-saints 11.

Why would getting rid of the goalkeeper allow us to have a larger team?

There's the answer, and this thread hurts my head too much for me to leave it open.

Watch it again, not once did he have the ball under his control.

Might have meant Dickson who gave the ball away, or Bart who got a touch to the ball. If it's not one of them than I haven't the faintest what he's on about.

There are all of two people who are taking this article seriously, so I wouldn't say the fans have reacted too badly.

Sorry, what? How does it confirm anything?

Seaborne was not at fault for the first goal - he never had it in reach so couldn't have just booted it out, and Mackail-smith was simply quicker. Davis should have done much, much better. All he had to do was stick his foot out to the right a bit. I noticed for the second Harding was going nuts at everyone but it was HIS man that had a completely free header. I think Hardings quality, but i'd probably put Dickson in for the next game.

Rubbish, our defence has been the most consistently strong part of the team. Peterborough have the best attack in the league, THAT is why we drew. It's disappointing to throw away a two goal lead twice, but a point is good enough - it's not as if we did it against Walsall or something.

Yes, because Rupert Lowe f*cked our club over and made many a stupid decision. Cortese has actually brought us a chance of success and, so far, has corrected all the mistakes he's made.

Just checked back, and you're right - there were a few people who thought the photographer thing would work, and a few "sarcastic" comments from Deppo etc, but the vast, vast majority of people knew at the time what a silly idea it was. And same with regards to instalments plans. You may well be able to find the odd nutter that thought it was a good idea, but to make out that everyone was turning a blind eye and applauding Cortese for it is ridiculous.