Fan The Flames

You would think it would be that simple but this lot all love to peacock their angry muscle. Proper lads.

VAR is operated by referees, the biggest ****s in football, so its no surprise.

Because he is paid £6m per year to agree with his bosses. It's not difficult to understand.

You would be wrong.

We have proven time and time again that we don't spend good money, we don't buy early or buy well established players, that we don't buy 10% of the players we are linked to, we say untruths, change our minds, sell early and cheap. We have done this window after window, yet there are people on here who expect it to be different and get angry when it's not, have they not be paying attention.

Then would you campaign to rejoin?

Hardly, stopping chatting ****.

Everything that is wrong with modern football. Because you don't think we can't win it you are not bothered in trying. That attitude didn't win the World Cup and two world wars.

Easy solution, drink out of the cup like you do in the pub.

It would be great if they go down, not bothered about being the team that puts them down. They have had their little moment in the big league now it's time they went back to where they came from. I would swap them for Leeds. You can still like them in League 1.

No, MP in his time here never managed to string together set of results like Ralph had prior to the Leicester thrashing, MPs best run was three draws and a win and prior to his sacking he had won 1 in 17. MP was a lone isolated figure at the end that had little chance of getting the boys back on side. Ralph was never that bad, he tailed off last season as many 'safe' clubs do, he started this season with two losses, similar to hundreds of starts to Saints seasons. We then shown promise against Man U and Liverpool, eeked out a couple of wins against teams on our level, so there was promise. Ralphs style of football was much better than MPs.and with out sitting down with a spreadsheet I reckon Ralphs win percentage never really dipped below that of MPs. So no, no one is saying that. There is an argument that we could have kept with MP until the end of that season so we didnt get lumbered with Hughes going forward. Hughes points haul wasn't much better than MPs and arguably it all came down to that game against Swansea. But by so e degree of calculation and some good fortune the decisions Saints have made have come off.

Those people weren't staying that Stephens wasn't ****, they were saying he had some good attributes but was mistake prone and young. A back four suits him better, he has developed an understanding with Bednarek and he is benifitting from better protection. Anyway even if everyone agreed in him being **** the fact he has turned it around it still a lesson in patience, as is sticking with Ralph. Adams contribution yesterday was good, set up the second goal and out of nothing created the opportunity for the Remond Ings 2 on 1 at the the end. Like you I'm happy to wait and see.

I remember this and we all laughed at you, who the **** is laughing now.

Like you I'm on a football message board expressing my opinion, which is you are whinging about ********. I don't care if it was streamed or not or that you had to apply for tickets and on learning those two little facts my thoughts were meh, whereas you go straight to conspiracies about the club making it hard on purpose, avoiding transparency whaa, whaa, it's not fair I wanted to go whaa whaa whaa. I'm sure that if there is anything we don't know or anything interesting it will get posted somewhere.

No he wasn't, he was watered down Labour. New Labour's record was very good, minimum wage, investmest in hospitals, new start scheme, working tax credits, lifting thousands out of poverty. Up until the Iraq war it was a successful third way left of centre government. One of Corbyns mistakes was to not talk about the Blair government's successes, the left of the party never liked the fact that New Labour changed clause 4 and didn't look to re-nationalise the railways or BT straight away. I thought every one knew that Murdoch backed Blair prior to the 97 election, Blair was conscious of limiting the hostility of the press that had savaged the labour party under Foot and Kinnock. He courted News Corp and instead of just damage limitations he managed to get them to back him, you could say on this he played a blinder.

You still ****ing whinging.

Mate you're always one of the first to write players off, I don't think I've ever seen you back a player going through a rough patch. That's your reputation, own it. Like many others I'm prepared to wait and see with a supporters hope that he will make it.

He needs more time, his confidence is shot, shooting directly at the keeper is a symptom of this. Wasn't Stephens written off by many and he is now central to our revival.

I don't think that is entirely true; I was happy with the situation pre VAR and happy with the situation now. Some people are happy to let the authorities set the rules and just get on with it and some people like to moan. I couldn't stand the pundits moaning pre VAR and can't stand it now. You could have made your point with out calling out MLG, maybe your new years resolution should be to be less of a ****.

To decrease the level of subjectivity in refereeing, because there was a problem with this, the law makers have chosen that incidents like offside, goal lines and handball (in some cases only) are binary; they are either one or the other. To include 'the degree of consequence' to the situation is going back to subjectivity. I'm not arguing it one way or another just stating the position and trying to understand why one rule is accepted and another isn't. There was a problem with refereeing before VAR; managers and players were all calling for consistency, pundits were over analysing every decision and slowing down to video and looking at it from every angle to prove that the ref got it wrong again. What we have to take on board is that any set of rules and method of implementation has its problems. By the way offside was never devised to stop goal hanging, it was always an intrinsic part of the game. Yes there were areas and periods that experimented with no offsides, but these were the exceptions. If you look at the history of offside it was part of the origin of the game and over time each change has been in favour of the attacker. The implementation of VAR is the first time the rules have been in favour of the defender, as it affords closer scrutiny of offsides. Maybe this is the answer to my original question, maybe we see this as a retrograde step and an attack on goals. We all love goals (unless they are against us).

Its the marginal offside decisions that seem to really wind people up, people can accept marginal goal line decisions but not offside, why is that?

It's weird that you care so much about this.

If there are aliens on another planet, distant from our cultural heritage yet telling the same stories then maybe this points towards there being an omniscient supreme being.

I do wonder what Armstrong would have done if Kante hadn't nicked it, would he have slipped Adams in or would he have made that pass to Redman or was he setting himself up for a pop, because we know he can hit them from distance. At the time I thought he should have passed to Adams before he looped the ball over the defenders head.

To all the lefties and righties have a cracking Christmas. Here's hoping there are three boxing day points wrapped up under the tree.