Matthew Le God

Part 2 - November, December, January http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qAcMx_IvOcI&feature=bf_next&list=ULINFCh7TaVZI

Part 1 - August, September, October http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INFCh7TaVZI&feature=bf_next&list=ULTtHNghHEHFc

I know Steve, but it is an indication of what they are planning to do if allowed. Seems they never learn, and whilst not learning it is at the detriment to sporting intregity of League One and fellow teams like Doncaster. Had Pompey not made such an offer to Gillett, he may well have been with Doncaster this pre-season. Instead Gillett and his agent have been taken in by the £'s "offered" by Pompey. Same with Dumbaya.

Pompey whilst in administration are offering deals to players that were at fellow relegated Championship clubs that are "way out of their price range". Doncaster Rovers don't have a CVA to pay and nor have they written off £140m+ worth of debt. Doncaster Rovers manager Dean Saunders... “I wanted to sort something out with Gilly but we’ve spoken to his agent and another club has been in. What they’re offering him is way out of our price range so he won’t be coming back to us I’m afraid." http://www.southyorkshiretimes.co.uk/sport/football/doncaster-rovers/saunders-confirms-attempts-to-bring-gillett-back-to-doncaster-rovers-are-over-1-4735038

Yeah, we don't want 21 year old full Argentina internationals at Saints!

Looks like it.

Cortese should pay to get a view like that shipped to Staplewood.

Doncaster manager Dean Saunders... “I wanted to sort something out with Gilly but we’ve spoken to his agent and another club has been in. What they’re offering him is way out of our price range so he won’t be coming back to us I’m afraid." http://www.southyorkshiretimes.co.uk/sport/football/doncaster-rovers/saunders-confirms-attempts-to-bring-gillett-back-to-doncaster-rovers-are-over-1-4735038 If he ends up at Pompey, it is ridiculous! They should be using youth team players, not outbidding fellow relegated clubs with bids "way out of their price range".

Can anyone think of a good way we can get some exposure in the media to these questions? The Football League need to explain the thought process behind their seemingly inconsistent sporting sanctions.

He is unlikely to stay, he is a long way down the pecking order behind Lambert, Tadanari Lee, Sharp, Rodriguez, Guly Do Prado and Saints can only name a squad of 25 over 21 year old players.

Ummm...yes it is... League One record 2007/08 27 games - 12 goals 2008/09 35 games - 11 goals 2009/10 45 games - 24 goals 2010/11 36 games - 14 goals So for those four League One seasons he played 143 games and scored 61 goals. And that "isn't much cop" to you?

Neither of them said that.

They are claiming it is all being paid for by sponsors/host team etc. BUT... they said the same on previous tours whilst in financial problems and their accounts showed the club were billed some of the money. If that is the case again, I don't see how a club in admin can justify to its creditors a trip to Spain for a week.

Putting that aside, it raises an interesting point doesn't it? Why are two similar offences being punished differently?

69 minutes of game time, spread out over 3 games in 2005/06.

The response to this e-mail to the Football League should be interesting... Dear Sir/Madam, It was good to see the Football League have taken action against Portsmouth for diluting their failed 2010 CVA with a 2012 CVA. I agree with the need for a points penalty and also the other conditions laid out before any takeover is accepted by the Football League. However... diluting a failed CVA with a new CVA amounts to exactly the same as not agreeing a CVA in the first place. When teams in the past have failed to exit administration with a CVA they have received heavier points deductions than the recent -10 for Portsmouth. For example... Rotherham -17 points Bournemouth -17 points Leeds -15 points Rotherham and Bournemouth had -2 points more due to multiple adminitstrations. Portsmouth have now had 3 administrations! 1998, 2010 and 2012! Even leading members of the Portsmouth Supporters Trust (one of the groups that may attempt a takeover) thought it would be more than -10 points. Colin Farmery admitted today that he and Mick Williams thought "it would be -15 or more". Can someone from the Football League please explain this inconsistent approach to sporting sanctions for two offences which amount to the same thing? Regards, ........................... If you want to ask the same. Email them here... enquiries@football-league.co.uk

Jack Stephens was number 6 and played centre back alongside Seaborne in the second match. Number 8 was James Ward-Prowse and he was playing in central midfield in the second match.

*Chuckles to himself*

A number of clubs don't bother having them where the main broadcast cameras can't see them. With the TV camera gantry in the Kingsland Stand, they don't really need the electronic advertising boards for that stand.

Phone them and find out.

Home Away

When did I claim to have been there in the morning? It is a photo taken by the groundsman yesterday morning.

What makes you think they don't?

Where do you draw the line? If sectarian chants about killing Catholics are acceptable to you, would a song supporting the holocaust and killing Jews be okay? Sectarian songs about killing Catholics are illegal under British law. Stop digging a hole for yourself!

It is sung in "jest". I'd rather it wasn't sung to be honest. HOWEVER... it doesn't come with a history attached going back hundreds of years with Saints fans actually killing Pompey fans. I'm amazed you think sectarian songs should be tolerated at St Mary's, or indeed anywhere. I've argued with you both numerous times about other subjects, however these two quotes are by far the daftest things either of you have ever said!!!