Matthew Le God

The club (and most other clubs) have shown no previous indication of signing 25 year olds and instantly loaning them out before to not benefit the club in the upcoming season. He isn't a player who looks to be considered in high regard or of high potential, so I struggle to see the purpose of signing him. Perhaps Sport Republic are buying Le Harve and this is all to benefit them! 🤔😁

Life

£10m polishing a turd...

And is a great ape (like every other human)

Semi

Let's stick to ducks and blasphemy! It is what this thread does best!

12 out of 27 isn't particularly rare.

Harry Lewis did not need replacing. You don't need 4 senior keepers, he was surplus to requirements. I'm not convinced this rumour is true.

Why judge new owners based on the experience of old owners? 🤔 Judging them on their own merits is fairer. Let's wait and see what they do.

What makes it in any way a 'concrete rumour'?

Johnny Depp now plays the winner of Coleen Rooney vs Rebekah Vardy in the final

FFP allows clubs to make a loss, which is made up by wealthy owners, of £105m over three years. Gao didn't really do this, we don't yet know if Sport Republic can or will.

Owners investing money into the club. A novelty for Saints after Gao was prevented from doing so by his government.

Don't believe everything you read

There was no rumour linking Pope to Saints. An article about odds shortening is not the same thing. I also wouldn't take as gospel the article about the Polish keeper from Altay.

We put a toaster in the duck pond one day. Sadly we don't have any ducks any more.

Private sector vs Public sector This thread is supposed to be about ducks and toasters!

There were no reports of Southampton interest in signing him. An article about fans shortening betting odds is not the same as a rumour linking him to Saints.

Have you considered that the rumour of him signing could be bullshit?

Because he made some good ones, so there is no need for me to also use them. Give it a try and actually answer his points, as he completely unpicked your nonsense.

Please respond to all the excellent points @Sheaf Saint made to counter your nonsense.

Don't confuse @Turkish for someone able to take on board any of of those very good points and form any kind of coherent rebuttal.

There is no fail, apart from your failure with comprehension of your native language. - The character as described in the Bible is a 'he'. - The character of Harry Potter in the Harry Potter book series is a 'he'. Two fictional characters, both are characters in a book described as being a 'he'.