The Kraken

I don't see a reason why we can't have both. The Saints Foundation is an excellent and worthy organisation. The Ex-Saints have also done some great work down the years. the two are not and never have been in competition with each other, there is room for both (Aston Villa are a perfect example, on their website you will find promotion of Acorns, "Villa in the Community" and their former players' association). It can be done; it has been done in the past. I find it a shame it isn't now, especially given that the Ex-Saints have also extensively supported the club in the past. We'll agree to disagree, I guess.

The ex-Saints charity pre-dates MLT and Benali being on its committee. It has, for a long number of years, enjoyed the support of the club and received help with promotion of many of its events down the years. And as a charity that raises money for former players such as Kevin Moore, there is obviously the footballing link with the past and the current club setup, so there's clearly a natural synergy between the two. Many other clubs see fit to support their former players' associations, whether it be by allowing programme space, promotional pages on their official websites, and allowing use of the club crest to promote their events. If you don't think it's a shame that we used to do all these things but have now seemingly decided to cease all of that, then we have vastly differing views of the situation.

Yes, good analogy, that's entirely the same thing.

I think you do the Ambassador's Lounge a complete disservice to describe as just being filled by p*ssed up legends. I had the fortune of going in just once when it was hosted by Lawrie Mac and can comfortably say it was the most enjoyable day I've ever had at St. Mary's. I've also done the coporate boxes and Channon Suite and they didn't come close in comparison. And if, like you say, there are other ways to drive corporate sales then I'm surprised they're not already being done, as we must be missing out on significant revenues with the amount of empty seats waiting to be filled by the simple implementation of a sales strategy. You're right that no-one knows the actual ins and outs of the situation; I certainly don't. I guess that's why I've resisted going too far into any accusations or anything, just registering my disappointment that the two entities cannot work together. You're right, history is made as you go; but I prefer to go along with the notion of "You've got to know where you've been to know where you're going."

Why the need for another new thread? You even posted this in the Stelling thread itself.

If former club legends are being publicly disenfranchised with the club then, in an indirect way it could hurt the club, in particular with corporate/hospitality sales. Corporate sales such as the Ambassador's Lounge previously relied upon former club legends being in attendance to boost sales; the high number of empty corporate seats at the moment suggest this is already a problem.

I've not ever said it's news. What I have said is that I find it very disappointing that the club and the charity are not working together. If you read the website of the Ex-Saints, their opening line is: "The Ex Saints enjoy a close relationship with Southampton FC and have an affiliation agreement with the club." That clearly isn't the case any longer, but it used to be. It's an excellent charity, and as I've said, the spat that is driving a wedge between the two will only harm both parties in the long run.

From this very thread, post 91. And it hardly constitutes much effort on the club's behalf to promote upcoming ex-Saints events on the website or in the matchday programme, as they've previously been more than happy to oblige with.

If it's true then yes, I would be surprised to hear that the club chairman has completely cut ties with a charity who the club have supported for many years, simply because of a personal spat with two of that charity's members. If it were all true, I would suggest that it smacked of abject pettiness, considering the history of that charity.

There was clearly some space behind the West Stand to allow for an extension; I'll be honest though, I can't remember seeing any design for it or anything,

In theory this thread is valid enough, as it's about the ex-saints (although the thread title is needlessly provocative). I do think it's sad that there seems to be a widening chasm opening between the club and the ex-Saints. They are a great organisation and in the past have received great support from within the club, and vice-versa. I'd suggest it's possible that the ex-Saints board consisting of MLT and Franny isn't going to engender good relationships between the two, which is a thorough shame as it will only mean both parties losing out.

Merson was a guest appearance for the game yesterday. No doubt cajoled into playing by MLT from their Soccer Saturday association. Also, from the ex-Saints website: Should have heard of some of those.

Why have you put the word "charity" in inverted commas? Are you suggesting that they are not one?

Well that's a bit far-fetched; otherwise why do newspapers get sued for libel? There are laws in place to stop newspapers printing any rubbish they want, especially when it comes to direct quotes from individuals. Like it or not, the article in the Sun contained a number of direct quotes from Nicola Cortese. As others have previously said, if Mr Cortese believes that the quotes in writing are not an accurate representation of what he said and do not match what he actually said, then he has a cause for libel. That he hasn't made a subsequent public statement denying the quotes used would suggest that the quotes are an accurate representation of what he actually said.

And you'll find I have never advocated him being so; indeed I've been critical of him for some of his previous actions, and will continue to do so as I think the only healthy way to judge him is to evaluate each and every decision on it's own particular merits. Some people (I guess you included) were indeed thoroughly in favour of Adkins to start with. A hell of a lot were also rather non-plussed with his appointment. I'm pretty sure all Saints fans were willing for him to succeed, but to say he was the only obvious candidate for the job, the fans' favourite and only logical choice, is just total nonsense.

If anything I'd say that Adkins was one of the last names on the tips of peoples' tongues as to who we SHOULD go for; certainly the major national papers were talking up a host of other usual names that get trotted out. Adkins didn't seem to be on the radar of anyone but SFC, who clearly had him identified as the number one target. You only have to look at the amount of fans who were "underwhelmed" to form a picture of how high up the pecking order Adkins was viewed as being; to say he was the obvious shoo-in is just a blatant rewriting of history to suit a particularly bitter agenda.

Of course it isn't Docker; even the staunchest anti-Corteseite could tell you that you're talking out of your arse with that statement.

Aren't WUMs supposed to be, you know, funny? It's sort of the point. Dalek is just a bit thick, and thoroughly tedious. Annoying people by acting like a complete bellend is a bit different to being a WUM.

Mr Lallana

Being as there's so much whingeing on this board, have some happiness in your lives. From 00.30, comedy genius from our best ever manager. Gaaafferrrrrr!

Most people do that. Unfortunately there are people like DellDays mentions who can't work out for themselves that there are shades of grey in every debate and therefore have to polarise opinion into bite size chunks that they can understand. Hence completely needless sh*t threads like this one, which prove nothing at all and go nowhere. Sh*t i just got suckered into the nonsense. B*llocks.

I don't disagree, it will have very little overall effect on most games. That said, I truly believe that it's the extent of how far technology should encroach on the game. Unlike rugby, tennis and cricket, football is very much a continuous game and does not afford the natural breaks in play required to analyse video evidence to come to a particular conclusion. Were it to be introduced, then yes it would improve the accuracy of decision making in the game. But I also believe it would ruin the game as a spectacle by making it massively fragmented, and therefore it would have a massively negative influence.

Absolutely agree. I totally agree with Cortese's sentiment of clamping down on the amount of freebies that went out of the club; but there are some ex-players (not many) who, IMO, deserve a free match ticket for life. As I've said, I'm talking of the likes of MLT, Franny, Jason Dodd, Lawrie Mac, Jimmy Case; like I say, not many at all. Also, one of the best experiences I had at the club was a day in the Ambassador's Lounge. Hosted by Lawrie Mac, he invites some of his former players to join him, give a little speech, basically regale about the old times. We've now lost all that, and I can't help but feel the cutting away of that history must have an effect on the dwindling hospitality we're seeing at the club as it's all becoming a bit too sterile (and I have done the hospitality since then so I have a basis in comparison).

Yes, why on earth not? That's of course exactly the same thing. Good analogy.

Yet again; what is the point in not bringing it in if the technology is there?? The penalties and offside issue is a completely different scenario; they would require a break in play to analyse the video replay and requrie a human decision to be made. Goal line technology would be made in real time and would not require an independent reviewer to make a decision on it.