angelman

That rather depends if King is going to be there next season. Reports of Spurs sniffing around, although today....https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/3933171/tottenham-transfer-news-josh-king-harry-kane-bournemouth-everton/ but then he might well be 2nd fiddle at B'mouth.

I know that (or presumed it was not least because of the 30 goal bit), but I was tapping away on my mobile while having a bath, so am too old to be able to write longish posts. The radio commentators (yes, I ask why I bother listening to talkSport) were going on about him guaranteeing goals, and that was what I was eluding to.

While he may well score a few, I do love this guarantee that seems to be in place.

Can I ask when you think the club have ever made a good decision as you come across as doing nothing but criticise the board/management.

And if he hadn't done his knee, he would most likely not have been here after the last World Cup.

Would be surprised if he stays at B'mouth, and if he goes, think that he will be a big loss for them.

Seems it is.

I believe that he was on £86,000 a week at Sunderland. So he has taken a drop of £21k a week, which if you extend over 3 years, would be about £3.276m. I think that I heard somewhere, maybe it is my imagination, that there was something like a £3m signing on fee.

If we get more points than 8th, we'll be at least 7th.

Money might keep VVD happy for a while. He already gets paid more than the others, and supposedly the others are OK with that given that they know and accept the situation. If we get JayRod off the wage bill, then I would be happy enough if we did not replace him, used what we have and gave what he was being paid to Virgil.

Do City have any Home Grown players what so ever, apart from Stones and Sterling?

Who?

SKD, taking form your post..... Pelle - Lambert replacement - successful Bertrand - Shaw replacement - Successful Romeu - Wanyama replacement - Not as good, but I would consider a successful replacement - Wanyama wasn't going to renew his contract so sold when he got to the last year to recoup something. Lovren - replaced by Toby - replaced by VVD - Successful Clyne - Cedric - Not as good, but I would consider a successful replacement - Clyne wasn't going to renew his contract so sold when he got to the last year to recoup something. Boufal - replaced Mane - yet to be seen, I still believe he has the ability to be a success in the PL. Lallana - Tadic - Not as good, but solid enough, even if the jury is still out. Austin - Pelle replacement Austin is probably quite similar to Pelle so would be a success. People obviously go on about him being injury prone, but he isn't as that is based on a dodgy knee and past seasons, he has played 30+ games. A dislocated shoulder is something that happens and can hardly be considered to be something he is prone to. If it reoccurs, then yes, it could be. So, if he can get a full season, he is likely to score the same number of goals as Pelle. Romeu replacing Wanyama. That might be so, but maybe Hojbjerg is the replacement? I have no idea what happened to him. His first game or two, showed so much promise and intelligence that I was truly excited. But it all went a bit wrong. Could that be down to the manager?? So Mané is possibly the one that stands out the most. Boufal is exciting, and has wonderful "feet". He is skillful. He does need to learn the PL a bit more, so hopefully this coming season. Apart from that, its the manager. By the very fact that we sacked CP, he has not been a successful successor to Koeman.

Sky say that Chelsea want to have a buy back clause. Seems that this is the way they are going but does come across as having their cake and eating it too. Chelsea have something like 28 players out on loan. They are taking the p1ss big time, and TBH this sort of nonsense should be stopped. Maybe UEFA should say that they cannot loan to any club in the top league of any country.

But improving year on year shows that Reed was correct, and Samuels wrong, that is unless you consider that we should be in the top 4 or winning it like LCFC. However, Samuels considers last season a success for us, and does contradict himself quite often about the sales. Personally, I feel last season was not a success. The club did not adequately replace those that left, in particular Mané as well as the manager. But as I have said before, we do not know what the owner's instructions have been and maybe Reed was told to make the sales. He is not stupid in wanting to sell our best players, although I suspect that big offers and replacing with good players is part of the remit he has been given by the owner. He gets the blame in the sell, sell, sell but the ultimate decision for this, is the owner. She never gets brought into this, Reed never tells what remit he has, save for this year where the Chairman has said things slightly differently. Didn't he say that this year was different to others in that we didn't have to sell. That to me sounds like something from the owner. And the Southampton Way tosh sounds like it is a Kreuger thing. Maybe it did well in selling us to USA and elsewhere, but domestically, we don't really go in for that.

oh sssh. I like to get myself all exercised over the fat oik, but in truth, the indignation is faux as I enjoy the fact that he is getting wound up and hopefully his triteness will carry on. However, I will say that I am fascinated by his writings about us and the reasons behind it. Of course there is the court case, but,,,,,,, Now if you read an old piece of his about us, then there is a very different outlook. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2609004/MARTIN-SAMUEL-Why-Southampton-sign-stars-like-Christian-Benteke-Robin-van-Persie-John-Terry-instead-sell-sell-sell.html in particular.... Yet suppose Southampton wanted to take advantage of this ‘Class of 92’ windfall? Suppose owner Katharina Liebherr was minded, or persuaded, that her football club were on the cusp of something unique. That, by keeping the young players, keeping the good older players and adding a layer of expensively acquired talent on top, Southampton could have a proper tilt at muscling their way into the top four. Then a man in a suit from UEFA would say no. Southampton would be spending beyond their given para-meters and that isn’t financially fair, apparently. UEFA have no problem with Southampton being plundered by the elite. Yet if a very rich woman wanted to use her money to further her club, and make the most of their resources, that would not be allowed. Bit different from his vitriol these days, so I wonder what Les has done to him. However, later in the article, he touches on the very important point that I 100% agree with. UEFA have a duty to keep the sport fluid and engaging, to maintain an element of surprise. Instead, they are cementing clubs in place, leaving Southampton without a business plan beyond upmarket feeder club. But he, and all other journalists seem to have totally forgotten about this and are enamoured with the top 6. But here in this article from April 2014, he acknowledges our position of being a feeder club and why, but now, he goes on about us "sell, sell, sell, the Southampton Way". If you are going to be a ccok, then so much better to be consistent.

I think that I read that Arsenal can only increase their wage bill by £7m over this year. As Ozil and Sanchez are looking for increases of about £8m each (!!!!) that is where their problems come.

Rather than close it down, time to adopt some practices around the world that other leagues employ. USA - wage cap. No idea about the draft system, as I don't understand it but there is a desire for a level playing field which gives the competition more integrity. But wage caps that, say, all in the PL can afford would be something that would be most welcome, even if it means we would be more likely to be relegated.

What will fatty Samuels write about if we don't sell???

I feel quite touched that Martin Samuels spends so much time worrying about little old Southampton. His latest little insight into us is another cheery positive piece, although quite what the point of it is, is a little lost on me like so many of his pieces are. One final point about new Southampton manager Mauricio Pellegrino. In summer 2012 he was appointed manager of Valencia, who had come third the previous season; he left on December 1 that year, Valencia 12th in the table, having won 10 of 21 matches. He returned to Argentina and rebuilt his career with Estudiantes and Independiente. Gary Neville also went to Valencia, in more difficult circumstances, did poorly and got the sack in his first season, too. There is no chance of him being allowed to put his career back together at any Premier League club in England — and certainly not two of equivalent size to Estudiantes and Independiente. Why do you think Les Reed, vice-chairman of Southampton, wants to appoint managers, rather than be one? Now while the bit about poor old Gary might well be true - I am not quite sure whether he is suggesting that we employ him - old Martin seems to have rather ignored MPs season at Alaves, while not mentioning the teams GN (has not) managed since leaving Valencia. But it is the final bit, the question about Les Reed that I find interesting. I guess the simple answer is that Les Reed is now upstairs helping run the club, so abrogates responsibility for the team to the manager. Having helped us from the depths of L1 to the 8th, 7th, 6th, 8th of the past 4 seasons, I guess he has done a fine job. But that surely can't be the answer as it is too simple. Anyone got any other ideas? I do feel a bit saddened though, that this is the final point about the new manager, although I suspect that he is telling a porky about that. I am sure that if things don't go too well, he will be back quite happily crowing about it. Or maybe he will go on about player sales.

Better than Redmond

Quite a penalty by JWP!! Ballsy.

so do we

Or Albert, leading on from your link....http://www.standard.co.uk/sport/football/chelsea-transfer-news-should-antonio-conte-try-to-sign-liverpool-s-mamadou-sakho-instead-of-virgil-a3574321.html

chocolate ice cream?