Matthew Le God

That is not how 451 is played by Pardew. Wotton sits in front of the centre back and Schneiderlin and Hammond play in front.

You can never tell whether someone is on the wind up or is just stupid on these forums. It is full of people doing both.

No logic to that at all! That would be like making a comment on a high court judge giving a harsh 15 year prison sentence without you actually knowing the crime committed.

Are you not reading what people are saying? Ashton has been told that if he plays again it may prevent him ever walking on that leg for the rest of his life. Would you risk your mobility for the next 60 years just to play football?

No, out of principle!!! Use my link I have already provided

The second website on the link I gave is the most popular Leeds forum and has at least two Southampton related threads.

Click here

again... You are taking what the Echo said in the editorial for the reason for the ban as FACT. If the club were upset about details going out before the press conference then it would ban all the press. They however did not and only banned the Echo. That begs the question "What did the Echo do differently?" On the face of it the only thing the Echo did differently to the other media that ran the story before the press conference was to show pictures of the development. In printing these pictures it make the Echo stand out as it stole the impact of any following press conference the next day. Yes, these pictures are available on the NFDC website, however this doesn't mean that the Echo has the right to print them without the clubs agreement. Saints fixture list for example is unable to be published or copied and pasted into a thread on this forum as it would break laws, yet it is able to be viewed by the public. As for your comment about researching for computer games...don't be so petty and grow up and learn to debate like an adult

He means this...

For him to score from his body position there, would actually be very tricky! The keeper was right on top of him and he was facing the wrong way and quickly turned and had to get his leg right up. A good chance but hardly a bad miss.

Any crawling will be by the Echo not the club. The Echo needs the club for sales of papers far more than the club need a local paper when football is covered by hundreds of media outlets. If the images of the development were protected then the Echo would have no right in doing what they did and printing them. No other media outlet(Sky, BBC etc) printed/showed images of the training ground before the press conference. In printing the images against the wishes of the club it took the thunder from the press conference. If protected by law the Echo could be in some serious trouble. The Echo has "possibly" done something it was asked not to do. If it agreed not to do it then why can't you see that the club would be upset about it "if" the Echo went against its word?

So because Cortese hasn't issued a statement that makes it ok to read an editorial in the Echo and decide it must be Cortese that is pompous? Maybe Cortese hasn't issued a statement yet because the Echo may be having legal proceedings for using copyrighted pictures of the development without permission(Sky and the BBC didn't use pictures) or maybe he doesn't think he needs to respond in public and this is being dealt with behind doors. There is much more to this I feel than the version of events given in the Echo which you seem to be basing your opinion soley on. If I took your route and were to choose the side to sit with without evidence, I'd with the saviours of the club that have in a short time already had results rather than media hacks with ulterior motives of selling copies of the paper at any cost.

Ok, own up! Who is the person in the poll that voted Antonio for man of the match? He was dreadful today.

You have not heard both sides of the story, yet accuse Cortese of being pompous! We have only heard what happened from the Echo.

Well I was 2 in 1984 so all of them are really before my time. These are all the years Saints have come 1st or 2nd in the League. I'm sure we must have put a great run together in some of those seasons.

You don't need steam to play FM09 or FM10. FM10 is perfectly playable with no patches.

At a guess... 1984? 1978? 1966? 1960? 1922? 1904? 1903? 1901? 1899? 1898? 1897?

Don't ask D McDermidd

No matter what odds it is, gambling is never "like buying money". What if he injures his knee against Norwich and is out for the rest of the season?

As Alpine said, this incident may be the straw that broke the camels back. We have only heard what happened from the Echo so far.

Only a small amount of text on Sky and the BBC. The Echo showed images of the development against the wishes of the club.

Well said Alpine

I'm sure a large number on here would agree sports reporting about Saints in the Echo is poorly researched, sensationalist and on many occasions has an ulterior motive. This of course is not confined to the Daily Echo by any means and is common in a large number of regional and national papers. Based on what Saints fans have seen so far from Mr Liebherr and Mr Cortese I'm sure they are more inclined to believe them than the Echo. The new regime has delivered for Saints, the Echo is purely in it to sell papers and will do everything to shift more copies. It just happens they have got too far this time and bitten the hand that feeds them.

The info so far has only come from the Echo so you are also speculating based on one side of the argument. 1) A local newspaper with some dubious past reporting. versus 2) The man who was a key figure in saving the club and bringing a billionaire investor to Saints and has a great track record so far turning the club around and delivering real results on and off the pitch. All speculation at the moment as we have only heard from the Echo on this. But I know which side I am more likely to trust! Especially after reading the shameful editorial today.