Matthew Le God

I'm sure Saint Charlie didn't use to be this negative. In the last 6 months you have been jumping to a large number of very negative conclusions with very little evidence to support it.

I still don't fully know your position as all you've done so far is throw petty insults. Can you explain why you think a nation of 60 million people should have a national anthem about the Christian God and a monarch? The U.S. constitution separates church and state (despite what the Bible belt may think), it would be good if the British did the same.

Nope. Never owned a pair of dungarees and I think competitive sport in schools is a very good thing. What I object to is a sweeping generalisation that in order to be patriotic you have to support the monarchy and believe in the Christian God. Something which isn't the case for a very high % of the population of this country, so it isn't a representative anthem at all. Rather than follow along like sheep just because it is "tradition", how about have a national anthem that doesn't alienate people from being patroitic? The sign of someone without a strong point is resorting to petty personal insults. Something that applies to a number of people in this thread who have been supporting the monarchy and the Christian God inclusion in the national anthem. They don't have a rational argument, so start making irrational insults.

I'd say that applies more to someone who makes petty insults and doesn't explain why they disagree with a point.

Like this...?

We need a song about England that has no references to... - monarchy - religion - Empire building Any serious suggestions?

So would you sing the national anthem regardless of its lyrical content? Do you draw no lines? You are right, people should be proud to represent the country. But why does singing about a God there is no evidence for and an unelected head of state make you proud? Is it really representative of England to have a song about a deity not everyone believes in and a monarchy not everyone supports at the song's core.

"Land of hope and glory" is a song about a Christian God and Empire building. I think we should stay clear of it representing the views of a country as a whole.

Why should it even be used in those circumstances? Even if you do support a British royal family, why does the Christian God need to be involved?

Wouldn't you like to live in a true democracy? At the moment the UK isn't one, as the role of head of state is only available by fluke of birth. To compare not wanting the Queen as head of state to the views of ISIS is ridiculous.

Anderton was born in Southampton and went to Bitterne Park School.

Perhaps they are all republican atheists. I don't like the national anthem for that very reason. Its about a God I don't believe in "saving" (whatever that is meant to mean) a head of state I don't think should be head of state as they are unelected and by fluke of birth born into the position. I don't sing it, but that doesn't mean I don't like our country. Its just a very poor choice of song.

On what is any of that based? Because Les Reed has said on a number of occasions all money from player sales would be reinvested in the team. That is ontop of money they would spend if no-one was sold. That suggests will be spending big money this summer.

No he wasn't.

Erwin Koeman played in the final as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joop_Hiele

Two days ago...

How to troll a rival East Anglia style... Ipswich Town FC @Official_ITFC · 43m Welcome back & see you very soon! #itfc #ncfc

Samsung 95" Windows 8 touchscreen...

[video=youtube;0i-tDKusryc]

As Saints want centre backs to play out from the back, his confidence and ability on the ball is exactly what we need so I don't think it would be a waste of his talents.

Yep, its not the be all and end all as the likes of Wenger, Mourinho and Rodgers have shown. But Lovren for example is more likely to take positional advice in analysis sessions more seriously from Ronald Koeman who has played very well at the highest level than he would from Nigel Adkins and Andy Crosby for example.

Because he is good in the air, positionally astute and comfortable on the ball. The club even used him as a centre back in under 21 games towards the end of last season.

Yep, he could easily convert to a centre back in a three. Allows us to get both Clyne and Chambers into the starting line-up.