The Kraken

1995-96 was for Champions too. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995-96_UEFA_Champions_League

I think 1994-95 was solely for Champions as well. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994-95_UEFA_Champions_League

Looks like 1993-94 was just for Champions too. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993-94_UEFA_Champions_League

At least the first year of the "Champions League" was just the national champions too. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992%E2%80%9393_UEFA_Champions_League

Ah, that old one. Plenty. I see, thank for ckearing up who.

You seem to be making a strange point. Who has claimed that Saints could never, ever, qualify for the Champions League?

He played for Norn Ireland (in the WC finals, I believe)

I'd suggest that won't happen; UEFA will be thinking about the revenue. They have a huge Europa Cup tournament at the moment which brings them a decent deal in TV rights. Cut down on the number of games, and you cut down on UEFA's revenue. That's simply not going to happen. I don't see there's any other way they'd do this other than to double the number of groups involved, and therefore keep European football over Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays. Either that, or one set of group stages leads into another set of groups, and then the knockouts (as it was in the fairly early years).

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20523405 European football's governing body Uefa is considering ditching the Europa League in favour of extending the Champions League from 32 to 64 teams. "We're discussing it. We will make a decision in 2014. Nothing is decided yet," Uefa president Michel Platini told French newspaper Ouest-France. It means seven English clubs and five Scottish teams could qualify for European football's elite competition. Uefa are looking at changing the format of European competitions from 2015. "There is an ongoing debate to determine what form the European competitions will have between 2015 and 2018," added Platini. The former France international said he was not worried by talk of Europe's richest clubs forming a competition to rival the Champions League. "It's a question that is regularly brought up," he said. "I can't see how it could work outside the Uefa framework. Who will referee them? In what stadiums will they play?"

In that case you are no MLG; I consider you your own man.

I don't think anyone can truly say we bought terribly; there's not much to criticise in the players we brought in. What you can do is point at the amounts spent on certain areas whilst spending much less on other areas and still having deficiencies in those areas, whilst perhaps being overloaded in those where the money was really spent. It was a totally lopsided transfer summer in terms of priorities, but the players brought in have been decent.

The levels of indignation and utter refusal to accept an alternative viewpoint are startlingly similar. MLG has some competition, I feel.

Well I wouldn't, I'm not the one making the claim he could have joined a top team. Unless anyone can provide evidence to the contrary, I'm happy to suggest/believe that Saints were the only side to come in with an acceptable bid.

Which top teams came in with a bid for him that was acceptable to Bologna?

Bale is the only one I could say that for. If Theo can't develop at a top class side like Arsenal, I don't see why staying with a side like us would be monumentally better for him. Perhaps he over-achieved as a youngster and this is actually close to his natural level? In any case he has maximised his career opportunities by going to Arsenal when he did, without doubt. As I'm sure you know; footballers will naturally think less about their development as a player when moving clubs, and more about how much money they will earn, their chances of playing for a side that will win things, their chances of playing on the European stage, and their chances of getting noticed to play for their country (particularly if they're English). Shaw and JWP seem switched on, and while they're still on the fringes of the team or just breaking through they're only attracting a modicum of attention. Lets see what happens in summer; we all know that when the big boys come in with a determined offer there's very little that most clubs can do about that, let alone one of our size. We may think its better for them to stay; the power of money and all those other factors so often outweigh all that. We'll see.

Despite not playing for Arsenal's first team, Theo got picked in a world cup squad. Even if we were in the PL, would that have happened?? It was an enormous career progression that staying with us would not have achieved. You have a point with Bale; he was playing for Wales anyway and initially struggled at Spurs. Ox is similar to Theo; after his transfer he was accelerated through the U21s to the full side, with only a handful of first team appearances. Very doubtful that would have happened at Saints. JWP is a great example; he's played a few first team games and looked right at home against the top sides. Yet he's not yet knocking on the door of even the U21s, he's still amongst the England junior sides. Its sadly too often that a "big" side player will much more readily be called up for England and therefore have a quicker career path to the top than those that stay at smaller clubs.

Again, I don't disagree. I'm just replicating the terminology that NA used throughout pre-season and in the early season. He always referred to it as 433; when in actual fact it was typically a slight derivative of that. The only times I'd say we played a "true" 433 were against Man Utd and Arsenal, with a solid 3 of JWP, Morgan and Davis in the middle; and even then they were probably under a bit of instruction to hold/press forward more than others in the 3.

I'd have thought for a few reasons: firstly because the defender is running towards his own goal and often being chased by an attacker, so turning into trouble is not the best of plans and he should play the way he's facing. Secondly, because a goalkeepers long kick is perhaps more likely to be accurate than that of the defender, given that the GK practises it more. Also, if the attacker doesn't chase down the pass back and the GK has time, the defender also has time to properly get back into his defensive position and hold the team shape.

I'd say it was a 4231 against Man City on opening day though. JWP and Morgan as the two, Lallana ahead of them centrally, Puncheon and JRod out wide.

I don't disagree. 4231 even. But Nige had been calling it 433 all pre-season and early season. And as I say, apart from the personnel changes I don't see an overall change in formation. We tried a "true" 433 (JWP, Morgan and S. Davis) a couple of times, and also went with a 442 a couple of times. But the formation now is IMO pretty much exactly that to which we kicked off the season with.

Hang on a minute; when was the 4-3-3 abandoned?? As far as I can see; while we're now playing different personnel (and not playing players out of position) we're using the same formation that started the season against Man City.

That's probably why the switch is taking place as a short term measure; the training ground developments are only partway through and will probably soon start impacting upon the main pitches.

An anagram of Eastleigh is Eagle sh*t. Then again, I went to college there and my brother and his family live there, so I shouldn't be too harsh. Crikey, I even lived there for a while as a young Kraken. Scary stuff. Forza Spitfires.