VectisSaint

Is there a problem at Staplewood as well?

Think Ralph is spot on. Clearly the Club were not best pleased when he moved away, but are more than happy to have him back.

Depends on the tactics. Nowadays it is no longer the case that we start our best XI. With 5 subs it seems to be Ralph's plan to keep it tight for 45-60 and then bring on our better midfield attackers to have a go at tiring defenders. To me Moi is more solid defensively than Stu or Jo, while still providing some offensive threat. But maybe Ralph will see Brentford more of a team that we can have a go at early doors. I'm not a fan of 5 subs, but it is fascinating how it has seemingly changed tactical thinking for many teams.

and it had no material effect on the result and clearly wasn't big club biased. All referees make honest mistakes (but not all referees are honest), prefer to allow such mistakes to happen than to have a system in place that compound mistakes by making further ones. The problem is not VAR per se, but the useless idiots thatnuse it, along with the current laws of the game (e.g. offside) which have been tweeted to suit VAR rather than changed to reflect the original intent (stopping attackers gaining an unfair advantage) such that VAR is not required.

I imagine Chelsea understand these things better than most. Having a new owner probably makes little difference to the day to day operations, at least in the short term. Buy back clauses are not really intrinsically complex and have been around for a few years and are regulated by the governing bodies AFAIK. Think that if there is any truth in this story (an assumption in itself) Chelsea were just chancing their arm. If you don't ask you don't get.

It isn't being reported on BBC Sport, it is a line in their Gossip page, directly quoted from the Daily Echo/Alfie House (I'm beginning to sound like MLG)

Buy-back clauses cannot be activated before a set term that forms part of the contract. The term is based on "transfer windows", and is commonly set to 2 years (4 transfer windows). There are apparently examples of 18 months. So to allay your fears unless Saints have agreed to a ridiculously short clause (1 transfer window) there is no way City could do what you suggest. I would suggest the earliest they could do what you fear is during the Summer transfer window of 2024.

Unless he was on a moped he wouldn't have been driving.

Don't think the compo is an issue, it often takes months or even years for that to be resolved unless the teams agree it up front which they seldom do. I would imagine as he is only 16 and not yet on a prom interact that transfer rules do not apply and that it is relatively easy for him to switch back. Will be interesting to see when he reappears in the Saints squads.

Think Ralph said DCC won't be eligible, but I doubt he would have started anyway.

He also did OK in SPL for Ross, you'd think L1 or L2 would have been his level..Woking aren't even a top NL team, must be some tie up on a personal level.

From Saints perspective this is a bad day and big mistake. Wish Oriol all the best, he has been a great servant to the club. So now we have no Champions League winners in the squad.

He played as striker for Rangers for much of last season, he is an attacking player, albeit not an out and out striker.

PSV have signed El Gazhi, so Gakpo is on his way somewhere.

I wasn't watching the game last night, can someone clarify whether Perraud went off injured as the commentary I was following suggested (not Adam). Haven't seen this mentioned on here, but difficult to see why we would have taken him off otherwise.

So bring on Oriol. Oh wait a minute. There, back to the same problem we had last season, insufficient CMs. No Smallbone either. We better have someone lined up to replace Oriol.

It's not about 11 any more though is it. It's now about 16, 5 subs has brought a new dynamic, they are not there for injury cover, 3 or 4 are there for purely tactical reasons. I'm not a fan of 5 subs, but it is clear that the game has changed and you need a squad that has 15 'first choice' players. Starting your best 11 is not even a given now.

Perhaps they will move some of them out before the transfer window shuts. Does anyone know where they stand with the 25 man squad, I haven't kept a close eye on these transfers but don't feel like many of them are u21s.

Think you'll find that all came from a fake Twitter account (but I could be wrong).

We definitely need some attacking options, yesterday we only had 2 attackers on the bench, Armstrong and Mara. How can we go on like that, a couple of injuries and we have nothing, not even Long. This is assuming Redmond and Walcott are leaving of course. Not sure loaning out Tella was the greatest idea, though he seems to have discovered how to score at Burnley.

Wouldn't be surprised if Adams doesn't start, or Stu, seems that with the 5 subs rule, starting your strongest team is not the preferred tactic, but I don't know yet whether that is the same regardless of who and where you are playing. Against Leicester it certainly seemed to be bring your best players (those who can impact the game) on after half-time. It does seem that this rule change has created a new dynamic and different thinking.

Whoosh. Keyboard warrior, best laugh I've had in days.

Whoosh. Sense of humour failure hey Old Nick.

Pity the Southampton Page twitter couldn't be arsed to provide the link. Think that twitter account will definitely go on my blocked list. They didn't post any of the other stuff on there. Quite honestly the bit on the Sky page sounds complete made up to me. Nothing in Lyall Thomas' "article" to suggest there is any source for this, which seems to be a throwaway at the end of the Southampton section which is full of insights such as "Oriol Romeu: Questions over his future, especially if Southampton bring in James Garner.", not heard the Girona stories then Lyall? I'll treat this story with the contempt it deserves.

"Southampton Page" state that they always source the information they tweet. But there is no real source for this tweet, they say "Sky Sports", but there is nothing on any Sky Sports platform (that I can find) that supports this. Just putting "Sky Sports" in a tweet is not sourcing a news item. I have to say this sounds like bollocks to me (I certainly hope it is) or something made up by Alex Crook (maybe that's the same thing).