trousers

At the game. Dreadful. That is all.

It depends....

We're hurtling through the universe at c.823,193 MPH on a path to certain oblivion. Not sure if that helps put things into perspective?

Textbook

Available to watch on iPlayer catch-up here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b099127s/motd-the-premier-league-show-behind-the-scenes-at-southampton

...

Long is training normally today it would seem...

Cheers Guys - all makes sense.

I get the underlying principles, but that's not why I raised the thread. I was simply curious as to why the old charge needed replacing with a new one, given the company name under which the charge is raised has remained the same, i.e. 'Southampton Football Club Ltd', despite the change in ownership. Maybe it's a simple case of corporate bureaucracy whereby a charge has to be renewed if the ownership of a company changes, or perhaps there's more to it than that? Hence my curiosity.

No, it's the definition of a Pompey fan

Well, here's an open goal quote.... "When I passed through the Fratton Park turnstiles I felt like I did when I stepped through the doors at Disney".... .... something to do with being taken for a ride perhaps...?

It's ok... he's denied it.... And everyone on that twitter thread believes him.....

Recall Gallagher. Sorted.

Textbook

Take £100 for cash me ol' mucker?

I'd rather we paid them for the entertainment value to be honest. I'd pay good money to bring back the toy-cum-LED salesman clown, for example

VvD in highlighting how thick the average footballer is shocker. #shootingselfinfoot

Surprised one or two more of the fringe first team squad aren't included (assuming the rules for over aged players is the same as league games).

Not sure how significant this is, but just spotted that the existing charge on the club was satisfied on 31st August and a new one registered on 21st September. I've not checked through the docs yet so might just be a shuffling around of existing finances rather than anything new per se. Over to our corporate finance gurus.... Old charge doc: https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/00053301/filing-history/MzE4NTQ1Njc2OWFkaXF6a2N4/document?format=pdf&download=0 New charge doc: https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/00053301/filing-history/MzE4NjM4MDU3M2FkaXF6a2N4/document?format=pdf&download=0

Doubtful

Almost. I'd recall both Seager and Gallagher immediately and go 4-1-5.....Long, Austin, Gabbi, Gallagher and Seager up top. Goals, goals, goals... mark my words

My worry-ometer has gone up from "not overly concerned" to "slightly worried". My knee-jerk monitor hasn't registered any movement yet though. I've said this before but Boufal needs a run of games. He's the one player in our squad that has the skills to unlock defences, but he's never going to reach peak performance levels with 30 minute cameo roles. Good to have VvD back. Despite the defeat, his presence adds another dimension to the team. Whilst our play in the attacking 3rd isn't good enough, that's the 2nd game on the trot where a draw wouldn't have been an unfair result, so I'm still a fair distance away from reaching "very concerned" on my worry-ometer. For me, this should be the default starting 11 from next game onwards.... Forster Bertrand VvD Hoedt or Yoshida Cedric Romeu Lemina Davis Boufal Tadic Long or Gabbiadini Redmond needs a stint on the bench. I'm in two minds as to whether to stick with Davis in midfield or bench him so that we can play Long and Gabbi at the same time. Not sure.

Cock 2-1

I give up. What's the answer?