The Kraken

I did think that, but I think we may have more than 1 year away from stripes. By all accounts the sash kit and this one have sold better than the stripes kit; I think we may get one more year of non-conventional red and white before a 1 year return to stripes. The Rank Xerox would be superb but it'll probably be something bizarre and wacky that they'll come up with like the idiotic white kit (maybe they'll try and wheel that one out as the home). Would be nice if they could sort out the cheap plastic sponsor too. I only wear footy kits for 5 a side but still won't buy a Saints one as they are as they look cheap and sh*t with a dirty looking label stuck on the front.

Alan Hansen: "It was a dive, no doubt about it". Lineker calling it a dive. Shearer too. BBC bias

With respect (and I'll leave it here as despite asking me to clarify my position, you quite clearly don't want to do the same despite being repeatedly asked); what you have done is consistently stated your opinion, but not justified it. Its your opinion and you're welcome to it; it would just have been nice to know how and why you came to that opinion. Why you felt Rodriguez came to end up on the floor (a slip? a stumble? getting out of the way? fell over?) other than a "coming together with the defender" of which there was clearly no contact. Very strange, but never mind. You don't think it was a dive, that'll do.

I think he dived to try and make it look like he'd been fouled and to win a penalty. After he touched the ball past the defender his natural instinct was not to try to carry on, to hurdle the challenge while trying to run onto the ball. It was to swing his leg back and drop theatrically to the floor (he didn't stumble or knock himself off balance, just fell to the ground), where he remained completely prostrate for a few seconds instead of trying to get up and carry on after realising he hadn't been touched.

You don't. I just thought it was a simple question to ask. If Rodriguez didn't dive, why do you think he ended up on the ground? Like I said earlier, if you don't want to answer that simple question, that's fine. You don't have to justify anything to anyone. Its just a bit easier when you do, when discussing things on an internet forum so that people can see what you do think. It kind of encourages discussion, really. But never mind.

Its called a message board, for opinions! I gave mine and asked yours, strike me down!! I asked (twice) what reason you thought it was that Rodriguez fell to the ground if it wasn't a dive. I didn't notice an answer, by the way.

Jesus, how paranoid do you have to be to think that someone who holds a different view to your own is "the forum police" or other such ludicrous terms? You don't think he dived; fine. Others do; also fine. Most odd.

Because when it happens with other players it also gets condemned. Do I really have to explain that? Diving = bad, whoever does it. This is one thread devoted to a game today where we won by a controversial penalty. I don't think there's a "get Rodriguez out of football" campaign on the back of it, if I'm honest.

Some say if you can win when you don't play well you're doing something right. I say it shows that we're still some way off being a decent squad just yet, but 3 points is 3 points and I'll happily take that with the team we put out.

Is he young and hungry? I'd hope so, because if he is he'll be bound to improve and would therefore be a great signing.

Hang on, we didn't score?

No-one is trying to crucify him, get a grip. Just pointing out that he won a penalty by diving/exaggerating a challenge; it happens all the time in football, so its a bit hypocritical to condemn others for it yet brush it under the carpet when we think one of our own players does it.

In which case I don't think the defender did either of those. He attempted (unsuccessfully) to play the ball; I don't particularly think he attempted to trip Rodriguez.

Just now?

Yep, the highlights go up really quickly too.

Just today. Fox did a defensive job, and ordinarily would have got a 5 from me, but I just thought that when he and Shaw were both on the pitch Fox played far, far too deep and invited their right side onto us. When de Ridder came on for Shaw it improved things marginally as SDR actually had something about him to make them think about defending. Fox just sat too deep IMO. Hooiveld; perhaps a bit harsh from me as he kept a clean sheet (but then I also gave Clyne 4 and that seems to have passed without comment). I just felt he did some things well, some things ok and other things still quite dodgy. He very rarely was able to play his way out of defence, relying on either a very long ball or trying to smash a clearance away (a few times which didn't go more than 20 yards). He did alright but on that showing I'd hate to think we'll have to rely on him in the next 3 games against Chelsea, Everton and United. But as you say its all about opinions, and if nothing else I like ot think mine are at least honest even if you do disagree with them.

When you say "forum thought police", do you actually mean "DellDays"?

Just the typical BBC anti-Saints bias shining through again.

Interesting. At the time I thought the pen was for that, but it seemed ok from the replay. MOTD will be worth the watch later on.

That's just for offsides, Wes.

Nigel Adkins' take on it: Not sure if I agree, but fair enough.

Indeed. MOTD2 (think it was Shearer and Savage) both said it was a foul. So enough grey area to say that it perhaps wasn't a "perfectly good goal", there was certainly enough doubt for it to not be given, as backed up by the pundits and newspaper reporters on Sunday.

Many times. There was definitely a nudge by Ramirez which caused the defender to lose balance. I can see why it was given, though I thought it was harsh at the time. One of the ones that you say "seen them given"; had it been at the other end I think I'd have considered ourselves fortunate but likely accepted that it was probably a foul.

I'm asking why you think he ended up on the floor. Was it a slip? Did he hurdle him and lose his balance? Did he half dive and half try to avoid the challenge? Its your opinion it wasn't a dive; I'm just trying to understand why you think that. fair enough if you don't want to answer it, just thought I'd ask.