angelman

I agree that that should be appealed. The reaction of Payet wouldn't have helped.

I went over and had a quick peek at KUMB and TBH they are by and larger refreshingly pragmatic. However the one thing that they do, like many others do including "professional" pundits, is say that their toothless performance was down to an off day. I would disagree and say that the back 5 was responsible for that. I watched them quite closely and the seamless way that they covered each other and moved back/forward depending which side the ball was, was both fascinating and impressive.

Often it is attackers that get praised as they get goals, but our back 5....well done. Another great performance and even when playing deep with ten men, didn't buckle.

Palace not having much fun at the moment. Pardew apparently said he might be concerned of a relegation scrap if they lose today. Can't believe that they would go down, but stranger things have happened.

What did he say? But agree, and given the amount they have spent, even more so.

Would be good if Bournemouth could win (or even draw) tomorrow.

God I hope they can carry on and win the title.

I really am not back tracking. In the first half they were being battered. There is no backtracking in that at all. They now look far more likely to score than City. Anyway, I am finding this "conversation" very tedious.

If I might say, you are being a bit of a cock. I said that they were battered from 15-45 minutes. This is the 2nd half.

Keep trying what?

So are you saying that in the last 2/3s of the first half, they weren't being battered? Strange if you don't. Have only just come back to see they are now 2 up, so we'll see how ManC react. But I guess you do know that you can batter someone without scoring, don't you?

Ethiad seems to be quite empty.

I would disagree and say battered. 71:29 possession and most of that is around the Leicester penalty area. BUT....LCFC seem to be preventing them from taking too many shots and of course have the most important stat in their favour of being 1 up.

Well the game I have been looking at for the last 20 minutes show them being absolutely battered by City, save for a cross into the box from Vardy.

Interesting..... 7 clubs voted against the cap, and the rest might do it with reciprocal schemes with the clubs doing the £30 cap. The 7 greedy ****ers..... Arsenal, Man U/C, Spurs, Chelsea, Liverpool and West Ham. The worst offender by far (if you can rank one greed as being worse than another) is West Ham given their subsidised stadium. But having said that, the others are hardly better given the amount of money they make. Just listening to talksport and they just said not hard to endear yourself to your fans, like Swansea and West Ham with their season ticket prices. Clear that with West Ham they have no idea what they are talking about and WHU being one of the 7, nor the reason for some cheap season tickets.

Ok, there are the figures. Still it doesn't make what I posted any less valid if you have 19 home league games and take £10 a ticket off. The match day revenue is a little irrelevant in this discussion save for if it would lower it by £5m odd (for us if you were to lower all tickets by £10) and that it would take it down from £18.3m to say £13.3m. But I think that the discussion, at least with most of us, is that the massive increase in TV revenue that is to come in next season would off set this very easily. But anyway. I am not in favour of capping away tickets at £30. While I realise that there is more travelling involved, I don't see why away supporters should receive favourable terms. If you are going to cap tickets at £30, cap them all for home and away supporters.

1. Are there? Can't see them, maybe you could point them out? 2. So what? If you think I'm being repetitive, is it really worth saying? 3. An awful lot has changed since 2014, so much so that those figures (where ever they may be) are a little irrelevant don't you think?

I guess clubs, look it like this....take Saints for example. 19 league games, say 30,000 per game - if you were to knock off £10 per ticket (which would be nice), then that comes to £5.7m. Man Utd do it with their 75k, and that would be £14.25m. It's not insubstantial, but really, I agree with others that it is nothing short of greed. I think most/all fans feel that they are used and abused. Whether it is clubs and ticket prices, or TV schedules, we really are only there to give a bit of atmosphere to the cameras and paying handsomely for that. I also don't buy Wenger's argument that increased cost of players and wages. FFS, there really is no need for them all to earn £5m a year.

Southampton sit in 7th position, one position and five points behind West ham. Where do you think you will realistically finish this season? Probably 7th or 8th (hopefully) Which three teams do you tip for relegation this season? Villa Sunderland Norwich. Before the season started, I had Leicester struggling, so that shows how much I know! How do you rate Slaven Bilic first season as a manager in the Premier league? Haven't focused on him, but the table doesn't lie West Ham sit in sixth place after 24 games having briefly occupied the third spot but what league position can West Ham realistically achieve this season under Bilic? Max of 6th If you could have any current West Ham player in your team who would you choose? I don't really covert players of other teams, but I guess the obvious one is Payet Do you understand what the 'West Ham way is' and what it means to Hammers fans? Not really. Isn't it some sort of feeling that you have to play attractive attacking football like from a bygone era before most of WHU's supporters were born and the rest have long since forgotten what it was like? In fact it's absolutely no different from what all fans want their team to play, so no idea why WHU seem to think that it is something unique, or do I have that wrong? Which Saints player should we include in our Fantasy dream team? Since his return, Forster. Which Saints player should West Ham players fear on Saturday 2nd Jan? Forster and Austin if he plays. especially as he no doubt will want to put one over your chairman 14 Supporters' Trusts came together to petition the Government for a public inquiry about West Ham's occupancy of the Olympic Stadium. Does the fact that West Ham got a good deal bother you personally as a football fan? Ah, politics. In order to avoid a huge white elephant (or rather one that is even larger than the Olympics already is), the jewel in the crown (the stadium) had to be filled. WHU have a good deal - pay not very much, cash in the Boleyn for £70m, increase capacity, have dirct cheap season tickets etc etc. I feel sorry for Orient, who I imagine won't exist for much longer. It does though seem a little strange that one club has been given a massive financial advantage over their rivals, but then I guess that the PL has never been about universal fairness. But all in all, I look at it and think whether I would be whinging if it had happened to Saints. The answer is no, so while I might whinge, that is only because a rival is getting one over us and it is only a small whinge. I also feel sorry maybe for the long term Hammer. Is the Olympic Stadium going to be a nice place to watch football? With retractable seats in place, I believe the the front row will be 20m from the pitch at the half way line and 18m behind the goals. Not quite the old Stamford Bridge, but too far for my liking. I sometimes look at old footage of the Dell and think how much more atmospheric it was and do hanker back for that. How do you rate Ronald Koeman's season? OK, not helped by certain players agitating for moves, or rather, being distracted at vital times. And then the slump we had was really bad How do you expect the Saints to set-up against West Ham on Saturday Team/formation prediction? 3-5-2 although one of the 5 is injured, so could be 4-2-3-1, but then could depend if Austin and Long both play. We seem to have quite a few options with the squad we have What is your score prediction for the Saturday? 2-0

I think Whinging Wenger came out and said that there wouldn't be price drop as the money would go to spend on players as quoted below..... “We are a company who, on one side [the fans], want you to buy more players. What will happen is the prices of the players will go up and you will need this supplement of money coming in to buy new players. I believe that the pressure on spending the money will become bigger and you cannot necessarily distribute the money to other people. What we do, we stabilise our prices to give access to other players and we have stabilised now for many years.” So I guess if the clubs said, hang on, let's all lower prices rather than spend on players, then everyone would be in the same boat. As a supporter of many years (ie pre Sky/PL) to me it is not important to have all the world's best players here earning £300k+ a week. Far more important to me is to have a good level where EVERYONE can compete with each other.

Can I ask roughly how much? For a middle aged codger like me, the idea of paying someone to play computer games, is a strange concept (Google helped me with what League of Legends was! For those that don't know: ). Truly bizarre.

Fair point Wes. Interesting to see points now and how many more needed to reach the prediction. 1 ManC - 80 = +33 2 Arse - 79 = +34 3 Leic - 69 = +19 4 Spurs - 67 = +22 5 ManU - 66 = +26 6 Chels - 66 = +37 7 Liver - 66 = +32 8 Ever - 57 = +25 9 WHU - 55 = +16 10 Palace - 50 = +19 11 Stoke - 49 = +16 12 Watf - 46 = +13 13 Saints - 45 = +11 14 WBA - 45 = +16 15 Swan - 42 = +16 16 Newc - 41 = +20 17 Norw - 36 = +13 18 B'mouth - 31 = +3 19 Sund - 31 = +12 20 Villa - 24 = +11 One might think that it was written by someone with a grudge against the South Coast. As mentioned I think it was written before the last round, so Bournemouth would have been expected to only get 6 more points, which they now have half of. Looks to me to be a complete loaf of rubbish.

Speak for yourself. I'd rather be Palace or maybe Watford at a push.

I think it was based after 23 games, as it states Chelsea have 15 to do. It seems to be based on the inherent bias (which I guess is understandable) towards the bigger teams. Having said that, after 23 games, they thought WHU would gain another 19 from the 15 remaining, as opposed to our 12. Time will tell - it will be interesting to see how it ends up. In case they remove the link etc... 1 ManC - 80 2 Arse - 79 3 Leic - 69 4 Spurs - 67 5 ManU - 66 6 Chels - 66 7 Liver - 66 8 Ever - 57 9 WHU - 55 10 Palace - 50 11 Stoke - 49 12 Watf - 46 13 Saints - 45 14 WBA - 45 15 Swan - 42 16 Newc - 41 17 Norw - 36 18 B'mouth - 31 19 Sund - 31 20 Villa - 24 Interesting that they think that Arsenal, who are 5 points behind, are going to finish 10 points ahead of Leicester. To make up more than 1 point a game is pretty tough. In fact I look at things and think it a complete load of rubbish.

Well, according to this: http://www.express.co.uk/pictures/galleries/4605/Football-Manager-predicts-Premier-League-tabel-sportgalleries/Football-Manager-2016-predicts-the-Premier-League-table-103280 we aren't going to be anywhere near Europa League, but finish 13th on 45 points. Only another 11 to get from 14 games (or when it was written, that would have been 12 from 15, although I suspect that they didn't expect us to get a point at Arsenal). Liverpool on the other hand need to get 32 more points from their remaining 14, which is just about double what they have so far got from their 24 games so far.