trousers

No, that couldn't possibly happen....not after we've had the "ITYS" (I Told You So's) telling us this morning that they are staying.

Another 6,807 just gone for a snip at 16.50p.....

I don't think the pitch is the issue though

Met Office severe weather warning issued an hour ago: London & South East England: Brighton + Hove Hampshire Portsmouth Southampton W Sussex Heavy Snow 0851 Tue 3 1400 Tue 3 Further outbreaks of snow are expected in some areas giving accumulations of 2 to 5 centimetres on lower ground near coasts, but up to 10 centimetres inland and over higher ground. The public are advised to take extra care and refer to the Highways Agency for further advice on traffic disruption on motorways and trunk roads. Issued at: 0853 Tue 3 Feb http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/weather/uk/se/se_forecast_warnings.html

More fool the person who sold 10,000 shares at a poultry 17.25 pence yesterday. If only they'd waited for the price to leap this morning on news that we're now out of the woods.

Anything from the Sundance Film Festival http://festival.sundance.org/2009/

Question: Was it cheaper to buy a showroom wardrobe from MFI before or after they went bust?

Madness

Anyone know (or can estimate) how much it would cost the club to call off the game at short notice? I'm guessing it would be nearer a 6 figure sum than 5?

No idea to be honest. Depends how many straws there are and how strong the camel is I guess...?

Isn't it still possible that all the players that people said were as good as gone could still go in the secondary loan window? (when does that close? end of Feb?)

Hallelujah. Post of the week Wes. I know I'm world famous for jumping to (often wrong) conclusions but for people to be assuming that 'no sales' = 'club safe' are being too optimistic. It could just as logically mean the opposite. Not that there's anything wrong with optimism of course!

Indeed. Something must have changed. But what? Internal investment? External investment? No investment and 'administrators elect' not happy with derisory bids for players? Barclays have relaxed their stance on overdraft? Tie-in with Ujpest offers financial security somehow? Lord Marland has convinced Suggs to buy us out?

Is he still going to double his efforts too?

Erm....as per the bit of your post I quoted, I was latching onto your observation that signing 15 players this season isn't a sign of a club going into admin, and suggested this isn't necessarily the case. I'd have quoted something about the Hungarian defender if I was latching solely onto the Hungarian defender bit. cheers

Or, a bank manger that turned round and said: "even if you sell your best players it won't be enough to keep you afloat I'm afraid" In that scenario, why would we bust a gut to sell anyone if it didn't change things enough financially? So, there is a train of thought that says not selling our best players could be a bad sign financially. Of course, the flip side could indeed be true.

Aye. And said Googlers are only proved right 87% of the time. Madness.

There's a fine line between maintaining a company's "going concern" status and going into admin. Or, as Gordon Brown keeps telling us..."doing nothing is not an option". Going through the motions (e.g. signing players) keeps the wolves at bay longer than would be the case if the club had done nothing in the transfer market this season. (IMHO) "The deck of a ship before it sinks is a busy place."

We're all too exhaust-ed

Come on people...beehive will you? (hark...is that the sound of a grown man fetching his coat I can hear?) P.s. Like the analogy by the way. Eerily accurate!

Saturday; 23:59; Slavia Prague

How come the Echo don't have any reports about the march on their online 'back page'? Are they under instruction not to by either the police or the club? http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/saints/news/

If only HelpMeRhonda was still around....

I agree that criticising someone for both 'being there' and 'not being there' can on the surface seem somewhat hypocritical and/or inconsistent but this can be logically justified if each scenario is put into context. For example, if someone believes Lowe shouldn't be "interferring" with shop floor level team affairs then they would be entitled to say "I wish he would stay in the background more". Conversely, if the same person believes that Lowe should have attended a press conference to introduce our new manager then they would be entitled to say "I wish he wouldn't stay in the back ground so much". There you have two seemingly opposing views from the one person, yet, in context they are completely viable opinions about the same person because they related to different aspects of his role in the club. I'm on the cusp of explaining this very well....