RinNY

Coming back from a goal down, putting the game away at the end with an extra time goal: these are the signs of a good team! fantastic result!

Why? Why does he require sympathy? He thought he was too good for this league, but found that no-one was williung to take his contrsact off our hands, and rather than going out and showing that he's too good for this league so as to make the best case for a new club to come get him, he's gone out and not played well enough for this league. He's still making the good money regardless, mind you. I have no sympathy for him whatsoever. If he is indeed in a predicament, he pretty much has himself to blame for it: if he'd played up to his reputation & abilities on the field, he probably wouldn't be here any more: so why sympathize?

I think the best thing Pardew can do at present, given the goal scoring form of Waigo and Lallana and Connolly's injury history, is keep the team as is and use Connolly as a super-sub, the way ManU used to use Solskjaer. I think it'll be fantastic to have a guy on the bench who can come on for 15 or 20 minutes when we're chasing the game, or trying to put the win to bed, and get us a crucial goal. How long has it been since we had someone like that on the bench? I fear that making Connolly a starter could put too much strain on him & lead to new injury problems, and in any case why change the team just when we're winning?

The sceptics are being won over. That's how it works. When the team is losing games, or getting bad draws from games that should be won, and looking disorganised and demoralised, people are going to be sceptical about the manager and the team's direction. Go figure! And when the team starts to win, things come together on the pitch, the defense looks solid & well organised, the midfield starts to control the game, the strikers score goals, people who were sceptical start to believe that things are going well and the manager knows what he's doing. Again: go figure! So what's your problem? Things are going well for Saints at last: enjoy it!

This is a totally pointless thread: Lowe is gone and we can all be thankful for it. But, since you have brought it up, what a f*cking selective memory you have!! Does SMS mean anything to you? A state of the art training complex? One of the most successful academies in English football? Some good years under Hoddle and Strachan, including out highest ever Prem finish and the FA Cup final? Because all of that came about under Lowe's chairmanship: if your memory is not functuioning, you could look it up. I don't mean to defend Lowe: I'm glad he's gone too. But I really don't see why people have to forget the good because of the bad, and fail to give credit where credit is due, along with the blame where blame is due!

Banks made it look easy: he had flawless positioning, great command of his area, faultless handling. You seldom saw him make the kind of brilliant saves Pat Jennings or Peter Bonetti became famous for, because he rarely needed to! But as that fantastic save against Pele showed, he could do that too if needed. I've never seen a goalkeeper who was so seldom caught out of position, who looked so comfortable and focused all the time. There've been great goalkeepers who were nearly as good, but for sheer consistency of excellence Banks beat them all. I really think England would have gotten to the World Cup final a second time in 1970 if Banks hadn't have gotten injured; and maybe have won it too! Shilts was a great goalie too, right up there in the next group after Banks.

Has to be Seaman, unless you include the Division One days, which is the same as the Prem after all, just a different name. If you do that, the answer is obvious: Gordon Banks, the greatest goalie of all time, anywhere.

Finally we seem on the right track: two good league wins in a row, a solid defence, goal scoring forwards, strong midfield: Pardew is winning me over, especially with his signings: Waigo, Jaidi, and now Connolly ... it keeps getting better!

Having finally found someone -- Lloyd James -- who can take a decent corner that gets past the 1st defender & into the box has helped!

I think what that ex-Saints team really shows is how unnecessary relegation really was! When you consider that at that time Niemi, Lundekvam, and Dodd were still playing, there's no obvious reason why we shouldn't have been able to compete. Baird, Higgy, Delap, Qhashie, Crouch, Beattie, Philips have all shown they're Prem quality players, and with Jones and Walcott up and coming and Oakley recovering from injury, we had a squad that should have been quite capable of keeping us in the Prem, and I still don't see why they didn't, other than crap managers after WGS left, and poor morale.

Far from it: I always thought Rasiak did a good job for us with his goals, & didn't deserve the stick he got for all the things he didn't do when he DID do the one thing he was being paid to do: score! Any player who scores frequently, no matter how "soft" or crappy his goals, is a player who deserves praise and to be played regularly. It is THE most difficult and important skill in the game.

If he keeps scoring goals, may he get many more motm votes: never underestimate the value of having players with the knack of being Johnny-on-the-spot when the ball needs to be forced over the opposing goal line. You can't win games without scoring goals.

Did we play "most of our first choice players"? I didn't think so. AP very rightly rested Jaidi and Trotman and gave Thomas and Perry a run at CB: it may have contributed to a certain defensive frailty, but it's important to keep those guys match fit and ready. Wotton is hardly first choice, nor is Saga, nor I'd suggest is Mills ... not securely anyway. None of those three have actually played much in recent games, or in Wotton's case only because Schneiderlin was injured. It was clearly a case of heeping a few key players as the core (Davis, Harding, Hammond, Lambert, arguably James), and putting some marginal players around them to keep them fit and see how they do; or in the case of Waigo helping him continue to adjust to English football. After being very sceptical of AP through the Bristol match, I'm beginning to see some hope he may be getting it right. The first Torquay goal was a fluke, after all, without which we'd have won 2-1. We weren't at our best, but still ground out a result. And the players were really well prepared for the penalty shoot out and executed efficiently and well. All promising signs, on top of the Gillingham game. Let's just hope the team continue to build on these performances/results, rather than dropping back into old bad habits.

If, in terms of the players available, they really are our worst team in decades -- which is debatable given last year's team -- that is entirely understandable and appropriate, since we are in third division for the first time in decades. Rather than comparing this team to the teams we had in past decades, when we were in the Prem or at worst the 2nd division, we might want to compare it with the other 3rd division teams, against whom they actually have to play. If on that basis you still think it's an awful team (I think it should be an excellent team in this division, on paper), then all the more reason to critique Pardew since at this point he has signed most of them. Strewth!

Stupid response, truly stupid. So stupid, I can't believe I'm bothering to reply to it, but ... A decent new manager shouldn't need to buy lots of players: there are good players here, and good managers win games with good players: that's why many are disappointed with Pardew so far, he has good players but can't get them to win. No I don't have someone else lined up: how could I? I guess your position will be to just watch us turning possible wins into draws, and possible draws into defeats, as we have been doing for 5 years now and are STILL doing under Pardew, until we're playing Eastleigh home & away each season, eh? I haven't called for Pardew out. I'm simply pointing out that his results have been abysmal so far: forget the -10 points, we're playing relegation football regardless. He has had plenty of time by now to instill his methods and a winning mentality. If results don't improve over the next month, how much longer after that can we watch ourselves sink deeper and deeper into another relegation hole? Got an answer to that, or will you just refer to Pompey again?

Football is about results, and what results have we achieved under Pardew?? 1 win in 10?? OK, I know all the excuses, but at some point the excuses lose their power, and responsibility has to be taken. It's just a question of when that point comes. Tbf, I was never in favour of Pardew. I've always thought he was overrated as a manager. I hated the way he forced his way out at Reading to go to West Ham: disloyal in the extreme. I thought he underachieved at West Ham: with superior resources to any other club in the CCC he just barely backed into promotion via the playoffs. And West Ham did nothing impressive under him in the Prem, until he was forced out. His period at Charlton was obviously disastrous. I was not at all in favor of him being appointed here. That said, since he's here, I support him. He's made some very good signings, without question. The problem is, with those good signings, and an excellent squad -- arguably one of the best 2 or 3 squads, on paper, in L1 at this point -- why are we still drawing or losing games? Why can we not win? Why can we not score more goals? Why can we not put together a complete game, of 95 minutes of focused, sound football? At what point do we say that it just is not working, that Pardew isn't the right man, that it's time to change while we still have enough games for a new man to turn things around? I'll say, we aren't at that point yet. I'm still backing Pardew to get it done. But I'll also say we are not far from that point. If we don't start winning winnable games within the next few weeks, and showing real progress (progress in terms of results and points that is; not progress of the "well, we played quite well in the first half" variety to excuse another dreary loss or snore draw) -- well, it'll be time for Pardew to go for sure. I'd say end of October is the limit ...

Hell, meant to say the single goal we conceded was by no means his fault, but obviously got what I was saying confused. Main point still stands though: we have three players who can do a decent job at RB, plenty good enough for this division, and our defence is not the area of concern this season ... for a change! Actually, just going on defensive record, we're one of the better teams in the division. Now if we could just score a few goals ... and there James actually helps, because he IS, as some have acknowledged, one of the very few decent crossers of the ball we have.

He wasn't awful last season: he had some poor games, some very good games, and quite a few mixed games. That's hardly unusual for a young player getting accustomed to first team football in a position he hadn't played a lot before. Now he has played a lot at RB, and he does a decent job there. It isn't true that he has "no pace": what you mean is that he isn't as fast as one would ideally like a full back to be. But then, neither is Thomas. Thomas is a more experienced defender, which means that he can make up for his relative lack of pace by his positioning and reading of the game. James doesn't have that , but he certainly offers more going forward. It isn't true to say that he "can't tackle"; if it was, he certainly wouldn't get a look in at the holding miodfielder role, which many consider to be his best position. Yes, he gets beaten by pacy wingers now & then, but there isn't a full back alive who doesn't. Yes, he gets caught out of position at times, but that's something you get with young players. I know, when he played at RB on Saturday he just caused us all sorts of problems and we shipped goals as a result, didn't we? Errrr ... no: we had a clean sheet. Obviously James must have been terrible. Errr ... no: he did ok. Sheesh! We don't need another RB at present, we have good cover & Murty will be back before long. We need someone who can score goals, besides Lambert!

As some have pointed out, it depends on how you play it and what players you have. Ideally the 4-5-1 should mean you have 6 defensive-minded players, and 4 attack minded players. Two of your five midfielders do the defensive, ball winning, link up part of the midfield play. One midfielder plays up the field, off the striker, making runs into the box and such, in the Lampard/Gerrard style. And two wide men support the striker, and should be able to break into the box and score goals themselves. Problem is, not many teams, especially in lower divisions, have the personnel to play 4-5-1 effectively: it tends to become very defensive, packing the midfield and offering little going forward. I reckon outside the Prem, you're definitely better off going with the traditional 4-4-2.

In the first place, Lloyd James does get forward and put in crosses: there have even been occasions when a cross by James has led to a goal. You could look it up. In the second place, what determines what a player's "natural position" is? I'd like to know. Are future football players born with a sign on their bodies somewhere, a kind of birth mark, saying "centre forward" or "left back" or "right winger"? Where a player lines up is determined by a long process of learning the game, assessment of skills by trainers and coaches, and determination based in part on that and in part on the team's needs, as to where a given player can make the best contribution. Like all other football clubs, SFC employs professional trainers, coaches, and a manager to make those determinations. They have decided that Lloyd James is a capable right back or central midfielder, though he can also do a job as right winger if needed. Based on what I have seen and read of his performances last season and this, there's no reason to doubt that judgement. The fact that Murty is a more experienced and better all round right back than James, doesn't mean James can't do a good job for us in that position. I realise as fans it's necessary to find something to have a good whinge about; but I'd have thought there were more important things to be concerned about at SFC (like only 1 win in 9), than James' play as our 3rd choice right back!

So far I've only been able to watch one match -- against Millwall -- but when he came on in that match gillett was not good. Plenty of short players (the likes of Maradona and Dennis Wise come to mind) have been able to succeed and make their short stature work for them. Gillett isn't doing that so far it seems. In the Millwall match whenever he got the ball he was either quickly hustled off it, or made a bad pass when pressured, usually giving away possession. That isn't going to cut it. Successful short players use their low centre of gravity to their advantage: by developing core and lower body strength they have the power, added to the leverage being shorter gives them, to stand their ground & hold the ball, or ride tackles & stay upright with the ball. Until Gillett is strong enough & determined enough to keep the ball when hustled, and cool enough & a good enough passer to move the ball to an open team mate when under pressure, he won't be a first team fixture. He seemed able to do that often last season; he seems to have gone backwards this season. And btw, Pardew said nothing managers don't frequently say about players to the press: it was the usual platitudes.

Atually, what he has is two yerars to prepare for and achieve qualification for Euro 2012; if that fails he'll likely be out ... pretty certainly in fact. But it still won't necessarily be his fault. Any Scoland manager is going to struggle to get results with the current dearth of talent. Scotland is a small country; it has no reason to expect to get to major championships ahead of countries like Norway, Switzerland, Belarus, and so on : the list of small European countries with footballing traditions is a long one. Even more than having a good manager, it's about having four or five very good players who can carry the team, and Scotland just don't have that now. Compare Ireland, which in the likes of Given, Dunne, Keane, and two or three others (especially if they can get Stephen Ireland back in the fold) does have the talent to do well and -- surprise, surprise -- is pretty certain to qualify for SA. Football is a team game, and if your team doesn't have talented players, it's never likely to go far no matter who is managing/coaching it.

You're right that that stuff is irrelevant. But others are also right to point out that if teams like Colchester, Huddersfield, Millwall, and Brentford are going to be considered "too tough to beat", then we are doomed! I certainly expected to see Saints beat all those teams, and IU'm damned disapppointed and disheartened that we didn't! Talk about low expectations. We should be doing what Chartlton and Leeds are doing. There is no valid reason why we could not.

That's not a bad idea, but the outcome at present is hardly inspiring. Because if you add ten points, that would put us on 5 points, level with Wycombe Wanderers, and still firmly in a relegation position. To put it another way, we started the season 10 points behind the other teams in the League. Now we are 11 points behind the teams in 17th through 21st positions, all of whom have 6 points to our -5. To rise securely out of the relegation positions, we need to be 1 point (at least) ahead of those teams, meaning we are now 12 points from safety, as opposed to 10 at season's start. So, relative to being safe in League !, we have actually gone backwards by 2 points so far this season. Nice! Now I'm in general an optimistic, the-glass-is-half-full kind of person. But, in my optimism, I had dared to suppose that by now we might have two or three wins under our belt, having beaten the likes of Swindon and Stockport. Far from it, we have no wins and continue to display the same dismaying goal-shyness and inability to build on a lead that has gotten us relegated twice. I remain optimistic enough to believe that be season's end we will still be comfortably in League 1, and will have won more games than we lost. But I am at the same time getting fearful that past bad patterns are being repeated and will really hurt us if they aren't turned around soon. And by soon, I mean in the next few matches. Because sports teams are very much affected by momentum, and all our momentum at present is going in the wrong direction, and the more that continues and builds, the harder it's going to be to change!

Is anyone calling for heads to roll? I haven't seen it, but I might easily have missed it. But don't mistake analysis of certain clear problems that have appeared in our performances so far this year, problems that alas we are all too familiar with from recent years -- inability to score more than once a game, inability to hold leads in the second half, inability to defend set pieces -- for a premature call for heads to roll! Because I suspect that's what is happening. I suppose everyone must agree that we have not been scoring enough, have given up leads to often, too often surrender goals to set pieces. If you don't agree with that, you must be living in an alternative version of reality, quite frankly. And we will not progress up the table unless and until those problems are solved. The club now has the strength and depth in defence and in midfield, and some good enough players up front, that it should be possible to start building on leads, rather than surrendering them tamely, and turning draws into wins, and potential defeats into draws. If that happens between now and, let's say, Christmas, no-one will get around to calling for heads to roll. But if another 5 or 6 games go by with the same sorts of results and problems we have had so far, inevitably there really will be calls for heads to roll, and understandably so!