Matthew Le God

It didn't really, as Saints were already winning the tie before that goal. 😉

Devil's advocate... They just beat the number 1 ranked team in the world! 😉

The failed project planned for the 9 longest serving clubs. If two clubs are joint 8th, that fills up the 9 clubs required.

Saints are joint 8th along with West Ham as we were promoted in the same season.

The criteria is for longest current spell in the Premier League. Saints are joint 8th for that and so they are above Villa and Newcastle.

What issues do you have with it? If Saints were to be part of it, as a Premier League club they would likely be the figurehead club of a group.

No they wouldn't. The current system allows Saints to have a wage bill and transfer budget that blows many large European teams out of the water for transfers. Remove the big 6 from the PL and Saints would see a huge drop in wage bill and budget.

It would be a financial disaster for Saints if the 'big 6' left. The income drop would be huge.

A glimpse at some of the new features...

You haven't factored in that the plan in the proposal sees only 2 clubs guaranteed to be relegated. The team 3rd bottom in the Premier League would face the 3rd, 4th & 5th placed Championship teams in a playoff, so if they win they stay up.

It would be like turkeys voting for Christmas if 14+ teams out of 20 voted to change the voting down to 9 teams (Man Utd, Man City, Liverpool, Everyon, Spurs, Arsenal, Chelsea, West Ham, Southampton).

As Saints would be one of the 9 decision making clubs it would give Saints more power, not less.

- £350m bailout to EFL/FA - 18 team Premier League - bottom 2 relegated, top 2 Championship promoted and 3rd bottom in PL joins playoffs with Championship clubs - end of League Cup and Community Shield, - extra £££ for EFL/grassroots, fan initiatives and more As Southampton are the joint 8th longest serving Premier League club they would form part of the 'big 9' decision making clubs if these proposals went ahead. Along with Man Utd, Man City, Arsenal, Chelsea, Spurs, Liverpool, Everton & West Ham.

🙄 Where? Where have you looked? Is it credible evidence? It is not unreasonable to ask what the evidence is! Just because this is a football forum doesn't mean we should just accept random rumours regardless of evidence. That is moronic.

1) My question was a response to the claim of asset stripping. A google doesn't find proof of that. 2) I haven't claimed he'd be good news.

Asking for evidence is not defending... it is asking for evidence. I'm puzzled why you are conflating the two. The burden of proof is on people claiming he asset stripped Bordeaux. The burden of proof is not on the person asking where the evidence is.

Has there been any credible evidence to support that claim?

That is not a like for like comparison.

It has not been publicly revealed yet what the new feature are. Shouldn't be long until it is. Each year it is accused of being a jazzed up database update. But it always comes with a huge number of added features. What do you expect to see in a football management game? Sydney opera house? Hanging gardens of Babylon? Herds of wildebeest sweeping majestically across the plain? 😉

Perhaps they intend to invest to raise the value. We simply don't know, so it is sensible to sit of the fence before writing it off as a disaster before anything has even happened.

He isn't, it is a Premier League rule for all loans.

Not sure why you think that, always comes across as quite bright.

@Turkish I'm puzzled what you think was incorrect in that post. Yet again you are reading things that aren't there. 🙄