Whitey Grandad

'Friends in need'. Now I've started doing it I can't stop.

It would be cheaper to find some clapped-out failed club that's on its last legs and buy it for tuppence just before it folded. Now if only we could find one....

Harsh on Quashie I thought, we could certainly do with his sort now. January transfers are rarely a success.

At last something to make me chuckle. There's something disturbing about the one in the wedding dress. I know one or two people who would...

I came to this conclusion some time ago. 'I feel so much better now that I have given up hope' Our only chance is to change manager but it's almost probably too late for that now.

The figures seem to me to be deliberately misleading. To talk about 'wages leapt from 45% to 81%' of turnover when they have actually risen by 15% disguises the fact that the turnover (income) has plummeted. If the attendances had been at the same level as the previous year then how would the figures look? There has been too much emphasis on cutting costs and not enough on maximising the income through winning games by having the best quality of players available. And as I understand things, 81% is not high in comparison with other clubs. Why the sudden surprise at 12.5% National Insurance employer's contributions? Every employer has to pay it. If the Great British Public knew what their gross salary was before all these deductions then they would see just how much income tax they were paying and we'd have rioting in the streets, and not before time too! (before somebody locks me up for inciting public unrest)

But we wouldn't have the 'current team'.

No, our gates and other income would fall significantly and the overhead of the stadium and academy would become a much bigger proportion of our turnover. Perhaps players would have to pay for representing Saints? Straight through the league and out the bottom with 27 points of penalties, unless we can take 10 of them this season.

It depends on the fee. How much should we pay them?

... or 1300 more bums on seats at every home game.

In any other business it would be called constructive dismissal.

I think he genuinely believes that he knows what is best for the club and himself, but he knows nothing about man-management, motivation, or what it takes to run a successful football club in the lower divisions where the income is almost entirely dependent on the supporters.

Notts County? We are desperately short of forwards so unless we can swap him for 2 or 3 others, perhaps not. He certainly needs a kick up the backside and like most of them, he's nowhere near fit enough.

But this ignores the matter of getting bums on seats. Any fool can cut costs but the real skill is in maximising revenue from the assets that you do have. If having players of Rudi's quality leads to increased gates through better performances then the extra cost is more than compensated. Manchester United don't buy the best players just because they can afford them, they realise that they are in the entertainment business and they have a big ground to fill.

It's indicative of what many of us have always suspected about Lowe and his lack of man-management skills.

It must be deliberate to be a penalty. The referee must take into account "movement of the hand towards the ball (not the ball towards the hand)". Of course the decision of the referee is always right, even when it's wrong, and on appeal you will always be supported. I assume that you sent him off for his language and not just dissent? The upper arm at the junction with the shoulder is not normally considered for handball - the clue is in the name. In this case that we are discussing the ball does not touch any part of McGoldrick's arm, just the top corner of his back and his head. A big clue comes from the reaction of the players on both sides. An experienced ref told me once when I started that if you're not sure then just look at the reactions of the players.

Then it's not a penalty....

I was paraphrasing Dermot Gallagher but that was some time ago. There are 'decisions of the international board' that keep re-defining interpretations. It used to be a case of the ball having to be 'propelled by the arm' which is normally quoted as 'ball to hand' or 'intent'. In any case, it didn't hit his arm, it hit his shoulder the other side of the ball-joint and certainly not where Riley was indicating.

He was offside at the moment that the corner was headed towards the goal and standing in the goalmouth so definitely gaining an advantage.

I was wondering about the loan window. I remember going on holiday on the evening of the 31st January last year and then finding out later that Rasiak and Skacel had been shipped out at the last minute.

I've just found this today: http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/4019102.Post_mortem_due_on_fan_who_died_outside_St_Mary_s_stadium/ and amongst the messages at the bottom: cmh, says... 10:41pm Mon 5 Jan 09 he was my dad and a very loyal Saints fan all his life. Thank you to whoever helped him. My condolences to cmh and all his family. I would like to think that we could all take a few moments at the next home game to recognise their loss.

What do you mean, 'why haven't we sacked him yet', it's not our decision I'm afraid. He doesn't have the best resources to work with but we should be doing a lot better than we are. At the very least we should be organised, disciplined and fit.

and fitness! They aren't fit enough to last 90 minutes so then they get tired mentally and make mistakes.

er, I'm afraid it doesn't. The generally accepted part of the arm is from the fingertips to where a short-sleeved shirt would start. Anyway, it hit him on his back at the top corner of his shoulder. And it wasn't a free-kick in the first place, you can't just run across the front of somebody in the hope that you can trip over them and get a free-kick, unless you're Manchester United, that is.