Matthew Le God

Celtic are also a club in a two horse League where no one cares about the opposition. If Saints made it to the Prem and were playing Man Utd at St MAry's that is a little different from Celtic vs St Mirren. ALso Celtic have a shirt sponsor who would put pressure on them to end the measures as their brand isn't getting exposure. Saints don't have a shirt sponsor to do this.

Dune ignoring post 57. Not going to retract that Dune? Hardly a scathing attack was it?

Dune Have you forgotten what was actually said? How is this a scathing attack? Quote taken from here - http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/page/NewsDetail/0,,10280~2051138,00.html Mr Dune, care to answer? tbh Le Tissier shouldn't have responded to the questions he was asked as they were based on unfounded speculation.

Only if you were a little bit racist... Benjani is 11 years older with a completely different skin tone and they don't look alike.

You have only heard one side of the story so far.

If Cortese sticks to his guns I don't think many in the press will persist with this. They will soon get bored or forget due to Saints being a 3rd tier team and they will move onto something else. Especially when Saints start playing bigger teams. I bet they are more willing to pay for photos if Saints play a big team in one of the cups or progress up through the leagues.

I don't think this is the best way to persuade someone reverse a decision...

I don't see why it will turn fans away from the club. Pictures and video are available of the the game for fans to see in a variety of other places. The Sun also forgets Saints don't have a shirt sponsor. I doubt Cortese cares and is probably annoyed with the way the media makes up rubbish like the whole unsubstantiated rumours about him and Pardew in the summer.

Will the BBC, Sky etc stop showing Saints? No. Will pictures of Saints League One games not be available anywhere? No. Fans may not be able to see them in some media sources, but will if they look elsewhere. It is just those that don't like it that are kicking up a fuss, I'm sure they know it means fans will just look elsewhere and cost them in revenue. Sponsorship deals in League One don't make the club much money, nor do they in the Championship relative to the amount of money Liebherr has put in. If Saints get back to the Premiership and are playing Man Utd, Arsenal, Liverpool do you really think a media ban will still see papers refusing to buy pictures of St Mary's games? I don't. Will Saints in League One, the press doesn't care if it doesn't get pictures of Rochdale at St Mary's, not does it when Celtic play St Mirren. But when Saints play Man Utd, Arsenal and Chelsea they will. Cortese is just preparing the club for what he hopes the investment of Liebherr will bring in the future.

And any new sponsor Saints have in 2011/12 will be fully aware of the situation before they agree to sign the deal with Saints. So will be happy with it or they wouldn't sign. With Celtic and every other club that has tried this in the past the situation happened to an existing sponsor who agreed to sponsor the club before the ban on press.

Celtic and other clubs that have tried press bans, have kit sponsors. When the press put a ban on them the clubs would come under pressure from their sponsors who wouldn't be getting the exposure of the companies name on the shirt. Saints don't have a shirt sponsor.

I agree with you, it doesn't matter. These papers make it sound like it will be impossible to see images of the game. Which is simply wrong because it is free local/national TV and the internet in many places including the Saints website which has match photos.

As long as the ban remains it will keep coming back. In two weeks time Saints play Leyton Orient at St Mary's, it will all come back then when their local papers are stopped from taking photos at St Mary's. This will continue for each and every home game this season.

I beg to differ... http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=1&storycode=45815&c=1 http://www.sportsjournalists.co.uk/blog/?p=2695 http://northstandchat.com/showthread.php?t=180706 http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/aug/06/southampton-fc-bans-press-photographers http://www.pafc.co.uk/page/InTheSpotlight/0,,10364~2114230,00.html http://www.pasoti.co.uk/talk/viewtopic.php?t=45130 http://www.sportsjournalists.co.uk/blog/?p=2696 http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=249635 This will continue throughout the season as each away team at St Mary's discuss it. Alot of them don't seem to realise that "photoshopping out of images Southampton's kit sponsor" won't work, as the team doesn't have a shirt sponsor.

Scott Steedman doesn't start work at St Mary's until 30th August 2010.

I've lived in Plymouth for 13 years in total. Between 1990 and 2006. Not that years in Plymouth matter. I do know however that the club are using a lot of the Universities sports facilities/academic staff and that you don't get them at parks.

Would be an interesting question to hear the answer for at the Saints BBC Radio Solent fans forum in early September.

Sorry, its just I know Plymouth well and to describe what they are using at Marjons as a park is just wrong. They are also using the sports department of the University. Of course I agree with you that it isn't as good as having your own training ground but certainly far more advanced than a park.

You make it sound like they train on the Hoe!

Well you said "similar to Southampton Common". As far as I'm aware Southampton Common isn't home to a Sports University College and the facilities it has.

Marjons isn't a public park, it is a Sports University College.

Surely it doesn't take this long to find new contractors (if that indeed was the problem). Liebherr takeover - 8/7/09 Staplewood plans made public - 8/12/09 Planning permission granted - 13/1/10 It is now 7 months since planning permission, 8 months later from when the plans went public and 13 since the takeover - 8/8/10

Papa Waigo started for Fiorentina against Tottenham on Saturday and set up their first goal.

http://www.sportsjournalists.co.uk/blog/?p=2695 I think they don't realise Saints don't have a shirt sponsor, so doesn't matter in that sense so strange to use that in an argument.

http://www.sportsjournalists.co.uk/blog/?p=2696 Agency deny agreeing to deal.