Professor

To those who think this is a good post, better keep your heads in the sand because you may not like what you find when you look up. Since when was it a twilight of a player's career when he's just played his first games for England and is called up for the World Cup? Refusing a bid because it's not high enough is not the same as stating that a player will not be sold. When will these people start to demand some competence from this board? Will it be after the 2nd sale of an international player, or the 3rd, or the 4th?

On 16th May, I began a thread saying that if we were not a selling club, the Board should have issued a statement to counter the speculation and belief amongst the top clubs that we were prepared to sell our star players. Of course they couldn't make such a statement if in fact they were open to offers. Quite a few 'head in the sand' merchants chose to be abusive over what I said. Eventually, we had Kruguer saying publicly that no key players would be leaving unless it was to Southampton's benefit. We have now lost one England international, we hear that talks are re-opened to sell another and that the bid for the third one has been increased. How can selling your key players be in the interests of the team? Obviously it can't, but it does put money in the bank, so if what Kruguer meant by being to the benefit of Southampton, was making money, then its all going very successfully. It is no surprise at all to be told that the players - other than those being sold - are as sick of this as are many of the fans. Once our club became the private plaything of one rich owner, this was always the risk, a risk that seemed unreal while Cortese was running the club for the Leibherr Trust, but it is very apparent now why he left.

Here's a promise to the Club, not that one fan, even one of more than 50 years, can have any influence on them, but my promise is that if they sell all three of our England internationals, I will stop attending any games. They will not deserve another penny of my money.

What we need if we are to increase the momentum from last year is an England international striker........Oh, we had one of those.......

The report in The Echo that the Board reluctantly 'had' to agree to the sale because otherwise it would have created an 'unhealthy division' between the club and the player makes it look like we have a bunch of amateurs running the show. They have allowed themselves to be hurried into a decision that could easily have been delayed for valid reasons. If that had caused Liverpool to withdraw the offer it would have been because the club could not be rushed whilst dealing with the manager appointment and that it was Liverpool who had refused to allow any time.

Gallagher is no Lambert and £4m won't buy a replacement. No doubt Rickie was blinded by it being Liverpool but it will be interesting to see how often he starts a game. Clearly there was no effort to persuade him otherwise, because as soon as Liverpool said take it or leave it, our lot rolled over. With The Echo suggesting the same will happen with Man U and Shaw, anyone who was encouraged by Kruguer's interview can forget it.

To think I believed that whitewash from Kruguer about the new manager being involved in transfers. Not only Rickie but Shaw as well. The man now has zero credibility.

If there is such a clause in any player's contract Kruguer would not have been able to say that decisions to transfer would be on Southampton's terms. That seems to be evidence that there is no such clause. What evidence is there to the contrary?>

If you check again on the Kruguer interview he makes the point that all the key players are on long-term contracts and that any transfers out will be on Southampton's terms. Also said he wanted the new manager involved in 'some' of the transfer decisions, a phrase that he then corrected to 'all' of the decisions. Its hard to see the chairman of a multi-million pound business, which SFC is, allowing his words to be misconstrued. That doesn't rule out letting Lambert go if they judge that he is replaceable and that the fee is more than adequate and, as many on here have said, his age suggests that we have seen his best years. But Kruguer's interview would still indicate consultation with the new manager before any deal is signed and that does mean that no deal is done unless and until it is done. If they were to go ahead with a sale before the manager is appointed, that would undermine Kruguer's position and put him in the firing line of the fans which you would expect him to want to avoid.

Just one more fabrication, along with the Lallana, Shaw, JRod, Lovren, Clyne, Fonte and Schneiderlin speculation. Steven Davis must be quite upset that no one wants him. Two things we have been told by reliable sources are (1) that players in the England squad have been told not to be involved in any club transfers while England are competing in the World Cup; and (2) that no Saints players will be transferred out without the involvement of the new manager. One other thing we know is that most of what the press write about player moves within the game is without any foundation.

I think this is absolutely right. Can you imagine the failed candidates on the shortlist willing to have their names known so that the press can say that so and so wasn't good enough for Soouthampton?

I do think we were further away from European qualification last season than 8th place suggested. If we had beaten Villa and Cardiff at home instead of losing, beaten Stoke at home instead of drawing and had drawn with Tottenham instead of losing, we would have only been 9 points better off and still below Tottenham in the table so not only must we not drop as many points against 'ordinary' sides, like losing at Norwich, but we must also have more results like the brilliant 1-0 win at Anfield. It is a way to go that does need more than just holding on to what we have but strengthening as well. Maybe a sale in order to buy would make sense but I'd hope that would be one international player sale, max.

Agree. Suggest some bright person comes up with an appropriate chant in Spanish so he doesn't mistake the meaning.

In a 20-team league no club can choose one place in the table to 'target'. Each must do the best it can to win every game but league position doesn't only depend on a club's own performance; it also depends on the performances of the other teams. As someone whose personal experience of football never rose above the Hampshire League, I'm far removed from being able to give advice about reaching European competition but an observation is that last season Saints used mainly the same 12 or 13 players to create the first 11 except for injury-forced changes. Teams that were competing in Europe had more games to play and so had a larger pool of 'first choice' players who could be swopped about more frequently.

Really shouldn't be sorry to see MP go for two reasons;. 1) Its seems we were a stepping stone and he'd decided some time ago that he would move on this close season if any club came along that he would perceive as a higher stature. He had to string SFC along as he was probably hoping for something better than THFC but in the end they were the only top 6 Prem club willing to consider him and even then he wasn't their first choice. He'll be planning to leave them for a Big Club next, although there's a fair risk that he'll be sacked first. 2) His style of play was good to watch and we had players technically good enough to carry it out but it was less effective than it should have been because he seemed incapable of finding a way of turning possession into goals. It could be that other teams had found him out but the media still loved him do he continued to get a good press. Time will tell if he's been over-rated.

Understand the sentiment but as others have said a 'vote' of no confidence is not practical and would have no impact. At the moment the Board can still recover the confidence of the fans by letting it be known that they are refusing to accept the bids for Shaw, Lallana, Lovren and any other key players. The manager was different because he was into the last year of his contract and replaceable. So far we have no evidence of strong leadership from the Board and hopeless communication with the fans, which may also mean a lack of communication with the players, but there is an opportunity now for them to show strength of purpose. Or not.

Whether you are pleased MP has gone or not, and personally I'm pleased, The Echo is quite right in saying that the Board has made itself look weak. It is still doing that over a far more important issue, which is the retention of our best players. A public statement of intent would send a message to the predator clubs, and to the squad, that the team will not be torn apart. Such a statement would not be for the benefit of the fans, but would a step towards creating stability while the new manager is appointed.

No loss in my opinion. Got the team playing possession football that was attractive to watch but seemed to have no idea about how to turn possession into goals. The much vaunted '8th place' was 23 points below the top 4, so not as good an outcome as some people think. Tim Sherwood took Spurs to 13 points above Saints, so there's no guarantee that THFC have a good deal. MP has had his eyes on moving since before the end of the season so its good he's gone quickly. A manager with only a year left on his contract can't be kept if he gets an offer, but players on contracts that still have years to run is a different matter. Krueger has said that the Board intends to continue the 'path of growth' the club has been on, into next season, and to 'move the club forwards'. If that is true, a start would be to hold onto our international players that are subject to transfer speculation. To settle the squad, it would be very easy to say now, that bids for our star players will be refused and that these players will be available to our next manager who will also be given funds to strengthen. If that wasn't a pig passing my window. I'll be very relieved.

If this is all true, Pochettino is the past and what matters is the future but its hard to have any confidence in a Board that failed to announce that THFC had been given permission to speak to our Head Coach about moving clubs and which has failed to make any statements about its intention over player bids. The silence looks like weakness to many people, including possibly the players, which could be more damaging to the club's future direction. To make this comment isn't 'illogical' or 'hysterical' but is a reasonable conclusion to draw from the absence of any evidence to the contrary. Does this board have the ability to attract a quality replacement for Pochettino? Will it allow players to leave who have 3 years left on their contracts? We will know soon enough. BTW, wonder how the season ticket renewals are going.....

What a sad attitude to adopt. Southampton are virtually unique in producing home-grown players of international standard. Even Ricky Lambert can be counted a Southampton product since he was in our L1 side. We all know the recent list which includes Walcott, Bale, Oxlade-Chamberlain, Lambert, Lallana and Shaw. Other mod-table clubs remain mid-table because they have to buy in the best they can afford which usually means players who may be good, but are short of that top quality and being mid=table means that relegation is a constant risk - see Wigan, Norwich, Fulham, Birmingham, Bolton, QPR, Reading. A club that settles for mid-table is likely to have regular spells in the Championship or, like Leeds or Wolves, struggle to get back at all. Being mid-table because you can't get good enough players is one thing, but becoming a selling club with no ambition is not what I expect of the Saints I support and if that is to be the future, my own visits to St Marys will; become much less frequent.

Right that if the manager wants to go, go he will and he is replaceable. Once a manager wants to go, a club is better off without him. But not sure about the recipe for making the squad stronger. Selling high means selling your best players and buying low means replacing them with lower quality. Isn't the better way to have your players of long-term contracts and hold them to their contracts?

As soon as MP refused to sign the contract extension it was best that he left. We must hope that Tottenham will take him as he's a lame duck here now. There are plenty of good managers out there and its open to the Board to bring in someone who the players will respect. Far more important is the need to refuse player sales as replacing players of international standard is far more difficult than replacing a manager. Now is the time for the Board to show they have the guts to act quickly on a quality replacement and turning away the predators for the stars in the squad.

My parents had the Daily Mirror delivered every day so I grew up reading it. I haven't bought a copy for years but I would if I could get it for the price my parents paid, 2d, I think, because that would be cheaper than fire-lighters.

Quite simple, a statement made before any bids were received does not deal with the new situation after those bids are received or reported. So if the Board want to make it clear that they are holding on to these players, they need to repeat that players concerned are on long contracts and are not for sale. If they are not determined to see off those bids, then of course they can't make such a statement. In these circumstances, its not surprising that the manager has failed to commit himself. Shurlock made a good assessment of the situation in post 257, although he did put the Board's inability to call Pochettino's bluff down to a lack of credibility, whereas I'd suggest that it's down to weakness and a lack of direction.

My feeling also. For a few days after the Man U game I was hoping we would hear he'd agreed the contract extension but as time's gone on, now I really don't care. If the Board gave him the push for disloyalty on the grounds that he seems to be touting himself to another club it would be understandable, although I'm not expecting that.