The Kraken

You could probably add to that and say that it is the duty of the press to question an organisation when they consider an injustice has occured, and bring them to a higher account. I still find it so surprising that many people still expect the local paper to pander to the football's club every whim despite having been completely ostracised by them and treated with utter contempt.

More worried than what, exactly? Than writing an opinion piece which a few precious souls are going to get upset about? If you can find a quote from the manager that suggest we play 4231 then fair play; Nigel Adkins has called it 433 all season long, despite the fact it has indeed been more like a 4231 (except when we played 442). First game of the season against Man City we had Ward-Prowse and Schneiderlin playing as the 2, Lallana as the other more advanced central midfielder. If you can point out the glaring difference between that formation and Saturday's, I guess I'd appreciate it. About the only time we've started with a true 4-3-3 was against Man United and Arsenal.

This new ticket manager is (another) new one, but he does seem to know what he's doing and this isn't the first instance that has come about where his customer service skills have come to the fore. Not before time, perhaps, but good to see something of a change.

Indeed; the whole of Block 43 is now available (845 seats still on sale). Surprising, I always thought the Toon Army travelled really well, I remember them having the whole of the Archers quite a few years back.

He would be throughly decent in League 1. I'd maintain that given a good run in the team he'd also be a decent option for an upper Championship side.

He probably also can't wait to get back on the field and needlessly thump the ball in the face of another unsuspecting female fan. Classy fella, that Ricky Rocker.

I'm fully aware of manji's Lowe-idolotry; in fact I always find it particularly hilarious when he rants on and accuses others of having an intolerable agenda. So lacking in self-awareness, bless him.

Since the Swansea game he has, actually. Prior to that we predominantly (bar a couple of exceptions) either went with 442 with Rodriguez up front with Lambert, or 433 with Rodriguez on the wing. Not all the time, but predominantly. Rodriguez has since made way for Ramirez returning into a proper 433 with Puncheon playing at RM. Also the frequency and number of substitutes being introduced. Again, prior to Swansea we had typically introduced all 3 subs by around the 75 - 80 minute mark at latest. Against Swansea it was just Shaw replaced, the first time all season we've only used just one sub. Added to that, NA has had the fortune of having Jack Cork back, of introducing a new left back into the mix, and also being able to select a more settled back 5 unit rather than having to chop and change from game to game. It may not be one major change that he's made on its own; but he's done quite a few little things together which have made a pretty big difference (not least in the fact that we've "only" conceded 2 goals in 2 games and generally looked altogether more solid).

I'm still unconvinced by Puncheon. Too hit and miss, and too predictable in being extremely left footed and cutting inside 99% of the time. Plus his inclusion with Lallana on the other side of midfield sees us with very little natural pace in the side, which means we can't stretch play as much as we could and have the option of the ball over the top or our striker/winger getting in behind the defence, which limits our attacking options. I'd still prefer Mayuka to be developed there and given some decent game time (for lack of a better alternative option). Can't argue with his performance on Saturday, though.

:lol: Is there anyone you don't hate?!

I think the blog answers that one itself, Eric. "If you couldn’t put food on your table because Saints hadn’t paid their bill, I don’t think any amount of Rickie Lambert goals would gloss over it. Perhaps the club would do well to consider that."

I think its reasonable to start a thread whenever you want, Diggers. I just wasn't sure who it was aimed at, or how many people. I've criticised NA this season, and justifiably so IMO. I've also said that I hope he's the man to turn us around as I think he's brilliant; and thankfully that seems to be a common view. i don't even know what point I'm trying to make. I'm a bit confused; maybe I'll go and have some lunch.

I think the Echo should only be allowed to report on positive news stories. Negative stories such as this one should rightly only receive complete condemnation.

I'm still not sure who its aimed at, other than Delldays and DPS. I've read a couple of previous threads of a similar subject and failed to find any other concerted "Adkins Out" movement. Most other views acknowledge that the manager (amongst others) has made mistakes ( and quite a few of them) but hope that he can be the man to turn us around. Most odd.

I think you're missing the big shades of gray in between that sort of black and white statement, you cheeky little scamp. But you know what; I'm going to go have a quick read of such threads and see if I can enlighten myself.

Ah I see. In that case, I'm not really sure who this thread is actually aimed at.

Whoa there; really Diggers??!! How many is plenty?

I don't think we've had too many players who have been great for us. Lambert has shown he's up to it, but not many others have shown over a significant stretch that they're a must have for any other Premier League team (let alone one from the top ten or twelve who presumably would have the funds to tempt them away). And January is noted as the time when you have to spend over the odds to get players. Take Wolves as an example; they were quite easily able to keep Jarvis and Fletcher at the club for the whole season, and then cash in when relegated. Likewise, for us to attract players in Jan is not going to be simple, and we may have to pay a lot more than we would perhaps have had to do in the summer.

The strange thing is this. We need to pick up points over the next 7 games until the transfer window opens so that we have a realistic chance of signing decent players to keep us in the division; not many players of genuine PL quality are going to want to join a side that look destined for relegation. That said, it'll be pretty harsh on the players if they do push up the performance levels to get us further up the table, only to see the reward for that being the arrival of new players in their place. It's the harshness of football, I guess. And I think we're still at least one or two players away from a decent crack at survival.

Rather importantly; we have 7 games until new year, and (currently at least) all of those are against teams in the bottom half of the table except for Fulham, who are ninth. All to play for.

Of course it is. I was responding to direct comments within this thread at people expressing surprise that work had actually re-started.

Good lord

I think you must have misread what I was saying, Dave. I'm pretty sure I wasn't advocating leaving Rodriguez on the bench indefinitely. It was why I suggested he be introduced gradually, and perhaps also play in the cup games, with the intention that that he may eventually be ready to challenge RL for a starting role (or even play alongside him in a 442). Throwing him in at RM and LM smacked of desperation at trying to shoehorn a really expensive signing into a new 4-3-3 formation. That seems to have been stopped in the past couple of games, and with Puncheon having played really well against QPR (and Mayuka challenging for that RM spot) it looks as if Rodriguez will now be looked at only to play down the middle and may have to wait for his chance. I'm not sure which "other day" we may have won the Man City game, other than an extremely lucky one. I could flip that and say that on another day we could have conceded 8 goals, such was their dominance. And we didn't score until your man Rodriguez was taken off, so I'm not really following you with that one. If you want to stick to your Beattie analogy, then surely you must also take that rationale with Rodriguez. Take out the huge price tag; he's still a younger player who has to earn his way into the team. Isn't he?

I've not previously had the opportunity of providing direct feedback, other than finding and using a generic email address from the OS. But no, I've not done that.

Having experienced corporate myself and spoken to friends who use it for entertaining clients themselves, its a common feeling that the product is wrong. Exec boxes are supposed to be the one of the most luxurious options available, but you're made to pay extra for your drinks. And the Mike Channon suite has tried to go all trendy but just ended up being a pay bar and cheap cafe food type option (which you have to pay around £20 - £30 extra per game for the privilege of). It would be very naive to suggest that the financial situtation has had no effect; it surely will have done. I certainly thnk we're charging too much for the standard of product being offered though; I know from previous other threads on here and on the UI that other previous corporate clients have decided they've had enough of such a shoddy service and instead head to Oxford Street or other So'ton restaurants pre-game and go to the game just with regular season tickets. Plus others who went for Club Lounge membership this year but won't be renewing next year as its not worth the extra cost for little extra benefit. We've obviously, for one reason or another, lost a lot of our previous support from local companies such as Cedar Press and other suppliers who have been cast off in the past 2 or 3 years. There's been a lot of changes in the Corporate areas lately; and they're clearly not working. Its not that club aren't doing anything about it; the renovation costs for the Channon refurb (the one that ended in court) was over £300K just for that one supplier. You ask some good questions about corporate at other clubs, and I definitely feel we have a lot to learn from similar clubs who, from away games seen, don't seem to be facing the same problems that we are.