Matthew Le God

We don't need 5 defenders and 3 defensive midfielders vs Bournemouth We are likely to be on the front foot, like we were vs. Everton. When we played in a 4-2-3-1 system... which has 3 attacking midfielder and 1 striker... 4 attacking players plus 2 attacking fullbacks = 6 You are suggesting we only have Gabbiadini & Boufal as attacking players & 2 attacking wing backs = 4 We are playing Bournemouth tomorrow... not Man City again!

Amy Winehouse covered it... it was written by The Zutons...

It is a derby, there is no point denying it. There are degrees of derby and rivalry, of course it isn't remotely at the level of a Saints vs Pompey game. But there is still more spice to a Saints vs Bournemouth game than there is when we play Swansea or Burnley etc etc. It is also more from the Bournemouth side than Southampton, but again that doesn't make it not a derby it just makes it a minor derby/rivalry.

1) I remain puzzled with some fans obsession with 2 upfront. Playing 4-2-3-1 can be very attacking, it was how we beat Everton last week. 2) Tadic and Davis in central midfield is a very strange combination 3) Using Lemina on the right is an odd choice 4) Hoedt & van Dijk is the best partnership, if it were to be Yoshida & van Dijk then van Dijk would be on the left

He joined Saints in the Championship... not League 1.

Now that is a daft approach stuck in the 1970s or 1980s! So if we had Messi and he was suspended for a game vs Swansea we won, then we faced Arsenal next match you wouldn't put him back in the team because it would be "changing a winning side"?

One summer of season ticket sales wouldn't effect a takeover happening or not. As a % of revenue any drop in numbers due to Puel would have ben tiny in comparison with TV money and other revenue streams. It is a red herring to think this had anything to do with the decision.

That is a managers job. Not sure why you don't think that is in his remit. Why have you decided the likes of recent buys like... Lemina, Hoedt, Hojbjerg, Gabbiadini & Boufal aren't good buys?

Did you say we had "no chance" the last time we played Pep Guardiola's team away...? It is not a 2 horse race... you've just listed 3 possible outcomes!

Puzzled why you'd pick Stephens in midfield and not Romeu?

So should we follow this to it's natural conclusion... should we appointing Les Reed as manager if he knows how to get us winning and scoring at home? (or more likely... your claim is bull**** and no such meeting happened)

That isn't particularly relevant, as it was his job to win the ball off them when they had the ball.

Heisenberg A - "Stop selling players it shows no ambition!" Heisenberg B "He deserved his move, I wish him well"

Wrong Batman! I'm getting very close to wanting him out (not winning today will probably tip me into the out camp). He should be doing better with this squad of players.

Why Saints more than Stoke, Everton, West Brom? All currently below us. Plus I wouldn't swap the Saints squad for Newcastle, Bournemouth, Huddersfield or Brighton's.

??? Have you not looked at the league table recently? Burnley are level on points with Arsenal, Watford only 1 point behind.

No... "insane" would be to claim we were relegated on 24th November when after only 12 games we are 14th in the league.

What an utterly bizarre statement! Is this supposed to be a "joke" of some kind?

Utterly bizarre how you've convinced yourself I've said things I didn't.

"Equally valid"... really? It is meaningless dribble to say "Our ambition was always, first and foremost to stay up". Of course we want to stay up, every team in the league doesn't want to be relegated. Man Utd and Chelsea don't want to be relegated. To say a team's ambition is to stay up is meaningless... as it is blindingly obvious every team wants to stay up so means little when you say it endlessly on this forum for the last 11 years! As ALWAYS_SFC says... do you not bore yourself Dalek2003? Pretty much all of your posts for the last 11 years are nonsense like this.

Relegation battles happen because you are losing a lot of games. How is that exciting? "Boring" mid table seasons happen because you are winning more games than the teams in a relegation battle. That is what I'd prefer to see for entertainment!

Would he? He was sacked by WBA because it looked like he was taking the down. Pulis football is horrific to watch and not remotely matching what Saints will want in a manager. He is all about results, if he isn't getting results and the football is dreadful then he wasn't going to have a good excuse to remain in a job.

This is just insane :mcinnes: 1) "Get our core support back " Back? Where have they gone? If they are core support then surely they are going to every Premier League game already and haven't gone anywhere 2) "Lower season ticket price" The price is lower because the standard of football is lower. If we went down it would be a disaster in terms of the quality of player we get to watch. 3) "More competitive league" What on earth is that meant to mean? You want Saints in a lower league which is competitive so they can get promoted to a league you want them out of? Your logic is just flawed 4) "Saturday 3pm KO" Does it really matter if it is Saturday at 3pm or Sunday at 4pm? It is just "tradition" for tradition sake. New things that become tradtions have to start somewhere, just as 3pm football in winter did (due to the advent of floodlights) 5) "What was your most enjoyable time as a fan these last few years? Rising up the football league? Or chasing the 40 point mark in the premiership?" Odd you missed out four top 8 finishes in one of the world's best leagues. Finishes 6th in the Premier League is signicantly more of an achievement than 2nd in the Championship.

"Good enough"... for what?