The Kraken

I think we agree on that point! I just don't agree with the notion that young players can only learn from playing first team games. Of course it helps, but at that age in particular they also need lots of coaching, and a more gentle introduction to first team games so they're not playing week in week out. That can (and previously has) led to player burn-out, and it's why many top managers are so sensitive and aware of the need not to rush young players. You say it's fair to say that Theo and Bale could have benefitted from more first team football. I assume you mean with us. Yes, they could well have played more games with us (although lets be clear here, it's not as if they didn't get a look in at Arsenal and Spurs, they still played a fair amount of games for them). But you have to offset that with the fact they are making a massive step-up in levels from Championship to top-level premier League. You also have to offset that with how much Walcott learned about playing right-wing while training alongside Thierry Henry compared to staying with us and instead learning from the likes of Jhon Viafara. That's the intangible things that you don't see but which very much make a difference to the development and improvement of a young player.

I think what you've done there is highlight what "stalling" actually is. Torres is already a proven top level striker, at international and club level. He's proved that over a number of seasons. What he is doing now is having a lull in performances; he's not getting any better, in fact he's struggling to find his previous form at virtually the same level of football. What Bale and Walcott had to do when moving clubs was completely different. They had to massively improve their games so that they were capable of playing consistently for one of the best sides in the country. As I've previously stated a few times, a lot of the time that just doesn't happen straight away, it takes some time for young players to keep developing so that they can become that player. Just because after a player signs for a large club and he doesn't immediately start every single game, it doesn't mean he's stalled. At 16, 17, even 18 or 19, he is still very much learning the game and improving every day from working with top coaches and top international players.

You mean in the same way the ref did with Brighton when they came to visit? And that was pretty much the extent of it, it made little or no difference.

Exactly my point, and well put.

If he had been sold for £3M you might have a point. He wasn't sold. He didn't even go out on loan. So it's irrelevant what offer came in for him. As I said above, bale struggled to get to grips with Tottenham at first. But again, he was stepping up from one season at Championship level to one of the best teams in the country. Spurs paid £5M up front, with another £5M based on appearances. That, to me, suggests that they saw him a a player for the future. which means a lot of coaching and not expecting him to play 38 fantastic league games every season from the get-go. Are you suggesting he learnt nothing at all in his first year or two with Spurs and then just suddenly remembered how to play football? Because that would be stalling, in my view.

Seen it. See post #902 for why I disagree.

You're saying as fact what is only your opinion. But to say they stalled just isn't the case as far as I'm concerned. They bided their time, Bale struggled at first more than Theo, but to say they stalled is just wrong IMO. You're judging them on performances in the Championship (for a team that finished no higher than 6th) compared to how they got on for teams in the higher reaches of the Premier League. A huge step up in class. Just because they weren't regulars straight away, I simply do not agree that they didn't learn something every day in training in order to improve their overall games to the levels they are at today. Their career now is testament to the work they did on the training ground as well as on the pitch for a long time; they gradually improved from when we sold them. And I never said they didn't get games, did I? What I did say is that the majority of teenagers at 16 and 17 are not physically or mentally prepared to come into one of the best Premier League teams and churn out top performances week after week after week. They are often served better by having more limited game time, as they are more likely to have ups and downs in performance levels. Its part of the learning process to come in and out of the team.

I think I agree with you, it really did slow the game right down. I think the referee was partly at fault though, he made no effort to speed up the play. There were a few instances where KD seemed to have the ball in his hands for about ten seconds or so before he did his customary roll out and whack it, or drop-kick. The ref just let him get on with it, but would have been well within his rights to call him up on it at least once or twice.

You don't necessarily need 40 odd first team games to progress. Particularly in the cases Bale and Walcott, they were still very young. Had they been through Arsenal's or tottenham's youth teams from 12, for instance, they perhaps still wouldn't have broken through until when they did. Purely because young talent has to be nurtured through at the highest level.. Not every player is like Wayne Rooney and capable of putting in consistently top performances at the highest level from 16 or 17 years of age. yes, they both looked very good at championship level, but stepping up to Arsenal or Tottenham is huge. Development comes from games, yes, but mostly from coaching. Having a top coach like Wenger and being surrounded every day by top class, international players, will have a massive impact on a young player still learning the game. Playing every week (especially at a lower league level) really isn't the be all and end all.

Fair enough. I don't agree though, especially if you're saying he's at the same ability now as he was when with us.

If you think that Theo's career stalled by going there then you must be mad. He instantly got called up for the full England side, and went to a world cup. He's since gone on to become a player that has scared the life out of the best footballing club-side there has perhaps ever been, earning massive plaudits from their manager and players. He's also scored a hat-trick at international level and produced a number of excellent league and Champions League performances. But yes, his career has stalled since he left us.

Neither does judging him on one poor away game, as you seem to have done.

If you're suggesting that Arsenal aren't good at developing players, then I'm just going to have to disagree. Whether they've brought players through from their youth system or brought them in at a fairly young age, they have proven over many years how good they are at developing players into top international players. Ashley Cole, Cesc Fabregas, Gael Clichy up to the likes of Wilshere, Gibbs and Ramsay now. Even young players like Diaby, Sagna and Song have been brought in, developed and improved. Even Thierry Henry credits Wenger with massively changing and improving the way he played the game. So yes, I really do believe Arsenal are very good developing young players, whether it be from a very young age in their academy, through to young professionals with more to learn who have then gone on to perform well at Champions League level.

That's all very well, but it's only your opinion. Take a look at what Chamberlain actually said in the two press articles he did earlier in the summer. He accepts that he won't be first team regular. He even stated that moving to Arsenal would almost be like starting again. But he said he wants to go there to work with a manager like Wenger and be around the top class players Arsenal have in their ranks, and work hard in practise, then take his chance when (finally) given it and show what he can do. So he already knows he won't be first choice for some time if he does move. Yes, I'm sure there are financial considerations for moving. But he's still very young in terms of his footballing education; why shouldn't he choose to go to one of the best places for the development of young players we've seen in a long time?

I'm aware of that; but with only 5 subs on the bench (one a goalkeeper) there's not the possibility to have all options. De Ridder is primarily a winger but can also play up front, hence why he came on there against Leeds. Guly has played a number of games at right wing but it's largely accepted its not really his natural position. I fully expect to see De Ridder given the opportunity at right wing, particularly if Chambo does go.

So you're writing off Steve de Ridder already?!

I'm pretty sure Vince isn't saying it never worked when we went long. In fact, Ricky seems to be back to his first-season level of sharpness, whereby he's almost unplayable in the air for the defenders, so when Davis got his kicking right it was a very productive method of attack. But Vince is right; particularly in the first half Davis' kicking out was fantastically wayward, on a few occasions it was at least 15 or 20 yards away from where he was aiming. connolly in particular was quite animated in his reaction to the poor distribution. It did get better as the game went on though, but Kelvin's first half kicking was poor.

If only you'd feel the same....

Their fans were superb. Even when getting a tonking on the pitch they didn't shut up, and the "we all love Leeds" chorus outsung the Northam end for quite some time. Fair play to Leeds, their team were totally outplayed but they've got proper, noisy fans.

I'm still not sure. My first view of it (albeit from the other end of the pitch) was that it was definitely a penalty. Watching it on tv it's clear that it strikes Martin's chest first. I just think the ball then goes on to rebound off his arm; unintentionally I'm sure, but his arm is raised right up so, if it did indeed hit the arm, it gave the linesman/referee no option but to award the pen.

One of the sets of turnstiles was completely closed; the queues were ridiculous to get in there, glad I wasn't in there. I was in the chapel for the game, and the half time queue for beer was equally disgraceful. Why, when there is only one bar supposed to serve up to 4000 customers, are there only 2 tills, and 2 staff members taking orders? Dreadful service, unless you go down and miss 5 minutes of the first half you don't stand any chance of getting a drink any time quickly. Simple solution, install as many tills as possible and put more staff on.

Don't see why, to be honest. He needs to prove himself at this level before Prem teams will come calling IMO; at least with the type of cash offer that we'd take to let him go. And I just can't see him leaving us for another Championship team unless we're struggling in the division, which I don't think we will. Transfer window slams shut at the end of the month too. If we're challenging at or around the playoffs I do believe he'll give us at least one season, maybe more.

Watching it again, the thing that strikes me is just how hard the players work for each other. They're obviously very fit, but the desire to close down and pressure Leeds when they had the ball was very good to see. To be a success in this league, the first thing we have to do is make ourselves very difficult to play against, and we're definitely on the way with that.

This was my fear about the new bookies. I first heard it was going to be BetFred, which would have been decent enough. Finding out it was some nomark outfit based in pompey set alarm bells ringing; you can't bet online with them, only in the shop or over the phone. The queues to pick up cash are predictable and will likely put me and many others from betting with them, particularly if the odds are as bad you suggest. Much easier to just bet online or pop into a bookies in town.

A strange statement, given that to move on to "bigger and better things" Poyet will surely have to prove himself a success at Brighton? I think we'll finish above BHA, but I think both teams will be inside the top ten.