angelman

On a personal note rather than business one, I would be happy to let him go for the reasonable rate being discussed (a rate that some think too low), so that he might be able to revive his career. The human side of transfers often gets lost in the pursuit of extra millions.

Its getting a little trite now, this Saints player and Liverpool. As ^ states, clickbait. Easy for anyone to use and probably pretty effective getting in both Liverpool and non Liverpool fans clicking.

Don't rise AR10.

A little tough maybe. But they should certainly forfeit home advantage - ie they would play us twice at SMS - and they would have to pay for us hosting the first one.

Does he speak English?

The self-loathing is a little OTT. I know that supporters can often be pessimists but this sort of thing takes the biscuit. [Me, I'm sometimes an optimistic pessimist but mainly I am a pessimistic optimist].

Not sure it is great that West Ham can't provide a ground for playing footie.

If you say so sweat pea, if you say so.

I think you understate his importance to us. When you aren't as a team scoring goals, someone who in the past has scored plenty should be pretty important and you might think to try and get him match fit ASAP. Never really seemed that he was ever match fit, although more than happy to be corrected.

Wasn't it reported that they want €6m?

I really am not in a huff in the slightest. Its an anonymous forum - why would anyone get in a huff?? I did read the article and what you said, which is about selling players (or partially so) which is easy to criticise, yet you and him haven't come up with a bit about how to prevent them being sold. Replacing them - well look at the difference from last year to this one just gone. We sold a winger, a forward and a defensive midfielder, one who spent large parts of last season banned. We know who their replacements were. As for academy graduates, none were used out of necessity and none really featured that much.

Go on then Sour, pray tell what you think his point was.

Oh I get his point Sour..... Then again, to admit that this is the reason Southampton no longer play as they used to would mean taking responsibility for a drop in standards that was conveniently shifted on to Puel. He puts it down to player sales for the reason we played badly, and that Puel caught the flak from that. At least there is tacit acknowledgement that we were boring as hell even if contradicts what he said earlier in his piece. But tell me (asking again) how do you get the likes of Wanyama and Clyne to sign extensions? If they don't, the perceived course of action is to sell them rather than let the contract run out - are you against that? Pelle had huge wages on the table from China. As for me holding a grudge against Samuels, I think you might have used the wrong word. unlike his relationship with the Club, and the Club suing him, I have never met nor interacted with him.

He absolutely isn't. Maybe he could tell us how we keep hold of Wanyama and Clyne especially, when they are in the last year of their contracts and have made it clear that they are not going to sign a new one. It seems he is not criticising Everton for not getting Barkley to sign a new contract. Same really for Pelle. Morgan and Mane threw strops. Lallana had his head up someones harris. Funny he doesn't mention Lovren. But anyway Sour, if Samuels isn't going to, can you tell us all how we are supposed to keep the likes of Wanyama and Clyne here? I really would be interested to know anyone's thoughts on this. And let's face it. Samuels is a bitter little man. Just because our ex chairman took him to the cleaners, he holds a rather childish grudge.

Hahahahhahahahha Mick Quinn talking utter utter ******** on talkSport (now there's a change). Saying its soulless that clubs are buying the league and having a go at ManU about their spending while thinking that Liverpool don't do exactly the same thing. While I agree it is soulless, his somewhat blinkered view of Liverpool ruin that radio station.

It is strange that some seem to think that Everton are the same sized club as us.

Maybe its a good thing that those running the club do then, although reading these boards you might be forgiven in thinking that they are clueless.

I'll drink to that. He might well turn out to be brilliant, but why he is not looking at the lower leagues is anyone's guess. Maybe the 4 games in charge post LVG has got him thinking he can do it at the top and that clubs will be willing to give him the job. Then again, maybe it is only the papers pushing this angle. Who knows? But if he is serious about management, surely he must get the message soon that PL clubs aren't going to take the chance at this stage of his career.

Well, some good news (if true, which I think we all hope it is)....http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-4614178/Southampton-not-want-Ryan-Giggs-new-manager.html CB ^ this was very much in evidence at Sunderland, new manager bringing in a new squad every 2 seconds, and is one of the reasons that they failed so badly.

Yes, post 64 says exactly that (esp the bit about Saints fans not knowing about that clause in his contract where RK was supposedly having full control). That is based on hearsay and actually is stating that a member of the board is having some control on signings. Not sure how that can be construed to be a bad thing. Whether he had too much control on things is a matter of opinion, and if what is in #64 is correct, then it seems that Koeman had a different opinion to Reed. But also, if it is all correct, then Reed has done a pretty good job seeing as his recruits (players and managers) in the past have finished 8/7/6th, wouldn't you say? As for the rest, no idea what you are on about saying I have changed my tune, and the accusations of sanctimony is nothing but straw man.

Would be amusing if Barkley said no to being sold (which is perfectly within his rights) and no one wanted to buy either at Everton's valuations.

Nope, all I see in post 64 is the "executive director of football" and one of the four board members having a say in recruitment. Added to that is the hearsay. If anyone is stupid enough to seriously think managers have 100% say on transfers then they better get a reality check. Obviously I am having difficulty with the demands, rules and regs bit, so maybe you could just list them again?

St Billy, can you humour me and list what these "demands, rules and regs of Reed" actually are? To make the statement that you have that no decent manager is going to sign up to them, I am sort of presuming you know what they are. Or is that hoping for too much?

I'm afraid that I am the complete opposite. I look at them and think, yup, another club that just spends spends spends. Ambition seems to mean how much you can spend. Is that really what football has come to? (Yes) Is that really what you want Saints to do? Do you want all 11 players to have no connection with the club what so ever? I very much enjoy bringing players through, and the blend of bought in players that we have seems to be about OK. It was better under Poch, but times change. I recall when City came to play us. Not one English player started, and Sterling got 5 minutes at the end. I thought that that would be something I would really hate to happen to Saints.

CB, you have to admit, we need a manager in place so that he can make some signings to replace all those players that we have sold so far. However are we going to compete otherwise?