Matthew Le God

- Open Steam - Click "account" then "go offline".

He went to Bitterne Park school.

All you need to be online for is to activate it, once it has been activated you can play it whenever you want without needing to be connected to the internet.

His club AGF have a story about him being with Saints for a week's trial in article from 10th October... http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=da&u=http://www.agffodbold.dk/news.asp%3Fid%3D9470&ei=sJChTvKmMJTs8QP9kcDVBQ&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CCcQ7gEwAQ&prev=/search%3Fq%3DSebastian%2BGregersen%2Bagf%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dsafari%26rls%3Den%26prmd%3Dimvnso

The head of Danish research did that.

Damn you Clarky!

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/football/3884760/Saints-bid-to-land-Maynard-on-cheap.html

The game is now live...!

I think that is harsh on Aldershot.

An interesting interview with the academy director at Nottingham Forest. Use your Saints player login if you have one to watch... http://www.nottinghamforest.co.uk/articles/20111020/nick-marshall-talks-eppp_2264248_2488530/0,,10308~2488530~1,00.html

Wolves knocked down the Stan Cullis Stand in May 2011 when the season finished and started using the partially built new stand on 10th September 2011 vs Tottenham. They continue to work on the second tier and roof whilst using the lower tier for games. As of 10 minutes ago it looks like this... You can see it is a long way from being finished, but is still safe for supporters to use for games. A significant amount of the work on another tier at St Mary's could be added during the summer months I reckon, with work continuing whilst using the lower tier for games.

In the supporter dinners and in press interviews Cortese has spoken of his/Markus' desire to see Saints competing towards the top of the Premier League. That will require a degree of financial support even with the new UEFA regulations coming in. No, but there are a lot of temporary buildings currently on site. Why do you think that might be? Are you suggesting they went to the trouble and expense of getting AFL Architects to design the development with no intention of seeing it through? That is an elaborate bluff!

So you think Cortese is lying then when he says nothing has changed? Is this view based on anything in particular? If the investment had dried up, why would they bother submitting new plans for Staplewood after Liebherr's death at three times the cost of the original development.

I actually said... Especially if the club had a backer investing in the club like it now has.

Are Arsenal or Chelsea currently stealing players from Saints aged 8 to 16? No Is there anything really stopping them in most cases? No What makes you think this will change? What is stopping it happening at the moment is that the kids/parents know they will get just as good tuition staying closer to home with Saints and more likely chance of breaking into the 1st team. In the past the Saints academy has been used to sustain the club, but that was only due to poor management leading to financial problems and relegation. Meaning players like Walcott, Bale and Chamberlain leaving "early". You can also add the numerous other academy products playing for other Premier League and Championship clubs to that. I'm not saying Saints could have kept them indefinitely (of course they couldn't), but had the club not left the Premier League in 2005, all I think would have stayed longer than they did. Should Saints return to the Premier League in the near future it will be a lot easier to keep hold of youth products for at least a few years longer than in the 2nd or 3rd tier.

And Saints can do the same to other teams all over the country. Only category one academies can have players under 12, and every child will also get far more coaching time at Saints compared to other academies that aren't category one thus making it even more attractive to send your kid to Saints. There won't be many category one academies and even if Saints were bottom of a list of 7 category one academies, that still puts them ahead of 85 other English league clubs. That still allows Saints to pick from a lot of players. In any case, not every parent of an 8 year old from Hampshire/Dorset etc wants to relocate their family to Manchester so that their child can goto Man City's academy. When there is an academy as good as Saints' on your doorstep you may as well stay.

So Saints, Chelsea and Man City will have the pick of the nations youth. Man Utd, Liverpool and Arsenal will soon join them, as will probably Spurs.

It passed 46 votes to 22, with 1 abstentions and three no-shows.

Sky are also using the 125 year anniversary badge for Saints! ffs

It is not quite as bad for the lower league clubs as some media sources are making out. As the BBC's Paul Fletcher states... The Premier League has proposed a framework that involves lower up-front payments but significant add-on fees if a player goes on to fulfil his potential. This could involve a youngster progressing to become a first-team player or an international, with each new achievement triggering another payment. The idea is that it will help facilitate a situation where the best young players end up at the finest facilities at an early age, thus improving their chances of succeeding, but the smaller selling club also wins because it will end up handsomely recompensed if a player becomes a success.

I don't know for sure, but seems likely they'll have to leave. If they then aren't good enough for a category one or two academy they will have to find a normal club side. Which is why this whole idea seems stupid.

As a category one, Saints will be able to train players under 12, those in the lower two categories won't anymore. Chelsea and Arsenal aren't currently taking players from Saints aged 8 to 16, I don't see why this will change matters.

- Saints currently play 23 league games a season on the St Mary's pitch. - By the time 2015 comes there is a good chance Saints will be in the Premier League and playing 19 games a season. - Unlikely St Mary's will get more than 3 or 4 games at the World Cup in the group stages. So no real difference.

Yes it does. The 2011 Rugby World Cup in New Zealand was held in stadiums of under 20,000. Gloucester's stadium is potentially being used for the 2015 World Cup and is tiny compared to St Mary's. Saints will be hosting minor fixtures in the group stage only. Togo vs Georgia at a Rugby World Cup doesn't exactly need a huge stadium. In any case, there simply isn't any money to be made from Rugby World Cup's to justify large stadium expansions or new stadiums like there is for FIFA and UEFA competitions in football. St Mary's will be increased as an when Cortese decides it is the time, given the progress at the moment I think that will be relatively soon.