The Kraken

View from the home end for it. The language is, er, industrial!

Connolly's movement leading up to that, and Lallana's skill before playing him in were absolutely superb.

I don't agree that it would. Cork has slotted in seamlessly. I get the idea that NA has concerns about the defensive side of de Ridder's game, and also maybe his fitness, which is why he's not starting yet. I do expect him to push in front of Guly in the next few games though. And we'll see with Fox, but he was involved tonight and £1.8M is a lot to spend on a reserve LB with Dickson, Reeves, Mills already behind Harding in the pecking order. As others have said there seems to be a real vetting process to new signings, and I just couldn't envisage the arrival of an ego that would upset the equilibrium.

This exactly. There was a thread on here a few days ago suggesting he might get found out, we should be looking for someone quicker etc. For me, Ricky defines the way the whole team play, we mould our game around him. In the air he's the best we've had since Beattie was here. In fact he's perhaps even more dominant at times. On the ground he has great awareness, and what he does lack in flat out speed he more than makes up for in technique. I'm really happy with him leading the line, and only hope it furthers adds to his confidence that he can completely boss it at this level as he has done in League 1.

That's all very well, but Jack Cork has come in and been a stand out performer for us right from the get-go. Yes, your point about a settled side is a valid one, and the cohesion within the squad seems very good. But I still think the club has designs on bringing in a defender and striker before the window closes, and I don't think it would be a mistake to do so.

Dalek might even tone down his comments if this continues.

What a ball from Schneiderlin for Lallana's first goal! Five really good goals actually; quick passing and great movement that their defence just couldn't deal with. Ipswich's first goal was a decent strike, the second was not a great one to concede.

I really don't think I would. If it was offered at the start of the season then I'm sure I would have said yes. But I have never heard opposition commentators and opposition fans speak in awe about the footballing credentials of our side. Last year I think we were a bit functional at times; efficient I think is probably the best word, our results were amazing but I don't think we blew anyone away with our style and the whole "Southampton way" seemed like just rhetoric. This year seems different, and I know its early days so I'm conscious of not getting carried away just yet. But hearing other fans and pundits purr over our players' movement and the way we play the games suggests that NA may really be on his way to creating something special here. We finished 6th in this league with Burley and i was witness to some shocking performances in that season amongst the good stuff. This year just seems like it might hold something different to that.

That is a real marker put down. Ipswich will, IMO, be a very good team this year and we've just over-run them in all departments. Dominated posession, too, which is a real something away from home. It's still almost unbelievable to watch a Saints start a season in such impressive fashion. I'm loving it the team ethos NA has created in the squad.

I assume you mean no MORE new signings, being as we've brought in 3 already? I still believe the club want to bring in two more; a striker and a CB. Whether it will happen in this transfer window, we'll see, but I do think that is the intent. But so long as the team/squad keep performing on the pitch any clamour for new players will only diminish. Personally, I'd still like to see a younger Jaidi-type player as a first choice alongside Fonte. And with Barney injured it's clear to see that we're a little short of options up front.

It would seem that the team and this server are at complete opposite ends of the performance scale. A shameful effort. And I've only logged on for half time, christ knows how bad this is when everyone is refreshing during the game!

Today's Echo thinks it would be £6M that would get him. http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/9196639.Burnley_holding_out_for___6m_for_Rodriguez/

Yes, nicely done. The news is there is no new news.

I don't mind NI being on the radio per se; he seems to love the publicity but I have no major issue with that at all. It was when he was peddling the myth of still being "Chairman of the Saints Trust" when that organisation had pretty much imploded that I took issue with his actions; declaring that previous members did not need to re-new their annual memberships, that had now changed so that they were "life-members", just to keep up appearances of having enough numbers to still be considered a worthwhile organisiation. It's exactly the same reason I take issue with SISA when they are labelled as a "Fans Chief" or whatever in the Echo, trying to dictate their own version of fans opinions. The Solent interview with NI was clearly stated as being with "Nick Illingsworth, editor of the Ugly Inside web fanzine", so I have no bother with that.

No they won't. A big football club in this country will never go out of business in the current footballing climate. They damn well should, and lots of people predict it will happen but it just won't, for a number of reasons. The Premier League is far too awash with potentially enormous revenues to put off investors looking for a short to medium term investment opportunity, no matter how bad the starting point seems to be. Get to the Premier League, sell the club, you've made a fortune. It's why you'll consistently see the likes of Leicester, West Ham and in previous years Pompey, Cardiff etc etc all completely ignore good business practise and gamble on promotion by paying wages and fees they simply can't afford in the short term. The penalties for clubs incurring massive amounts of debt and then falling into administration are just a joke, an absolute joke. They are no deterrent to owners in the slightest. Pompey completely abused the system and ripped off the Revenue and local companies to tens of millions of pounds, we even got away with it to some extent. And if it all goes t*ts up for one set of owners there are absolutely plenty out there williing to take a shot at lining up for a chance on English football's gravy train. Clubs will make deals like Pompey's 4% payback per annum (a scandal in itself) yet all the while go and spend millions on transfers fees. It is no deterrent at all, and while deals like Pompey's in particular will be accepted by creditors (and they always will), then no club will see itself go completely out of business. It is a sh*t system of ownership we have here. But while the rewards are so great and the punishments so ineffective, no big football club will go to the wall.

Potentially it does, but if you have a look back at a few of the sqauds from last season, we rarely had more than 1 or 2 of the youth teamers on the bench. Often we had none and it was full with squad members. Pompey massively struggled last year, and still are for squad numbers, yet Clotterill still has empty spaces in the bench rather than name youth team players. Football is (supposedly) trying to get its house in order and get costs under control. We're looking at this from a Saints perspective alone, where we're more financially secure perhaps than ever before. And we have the type of squad where we could quite easily name 11 subs without hitting into the youth team, so the youth team argument doesn't quite work for us. Personally I don't believe this rule will make any difference at all in the long run, aside from perhaps giving managers more of a headache as to who to leave out from a matchday squad. However, it could have the effect that it (ever so slightly) marginalises the impact that the richer clubs can have by naming a hugely strong squad's bench, which could enrich competition in the league, in theory. But as I said, I don't really think it will cause much significant difference at all.

The logo needs updating.

No, you are not. This is a law for alll football-supporters official travel, so not just a Saints thing. A ridiculous law, at that.

Is that the type of player he is? From what (limited info) I've seen, he doesn't seem to be an out and out striker. Given that he'd likely cost close to a couple of million, and thus would be assumed to be a first choice, where exactly would we be looking for him to fit in? I'm struggling to see what role he would play.

I didn't say it did, but it is a newspaper report on a supposed bid from us for a player. You asked why he had come to the impression he did in the OP.; s it's not exactly a shock that someone might read that article and form a conclusion about it.

a and b can probably be covered by the Lancashire Telegraph article. http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/football/9194043.Burnley_reject_Southampton___s___4_5m_bid_for_Rodriguez/

He certainly had a fine moustache.

Baird did well for us, but I never thought he was the real deal at CB. His comparitive lack of height meant he wasn't dominant in the air, and while his positional sense was very good I thought on occasions he could get bullied by a larger centre forward. Fonte isn't hugely tall, but is IMO stronger than Baird and much less likely to get dominated by a big striker. Also the combination of playing alongside someone like Jaidi, who is a complete rock and will win almost everything in the air, is the way I'd prefer us to go.

Of course he's a better player, he's still playing in the Premier League for a start. Not a hope in hell we could get him this year, or any other Championship club for that matter.

“I don’t particularly like that,” said Connolly, who gestured at fans to stop the song at Oakwell.