Whitey Grandad

We certainly didn't start with our best, most experienced team, as usual. In fact, the whole pattern of the game was just like a normal home league game, only more so if you get my drift.

... and soon to be third tier

The Norwich game is the evening of the 27th so if we are going to give him 3 games to turn things around the earliest that Poortvliet could be dumped is the 28th. That would only give his replacement a couple of days to get in any new faces so I'm afraid that we are what is technically known as buggered.

It was a very poor decision from one of our 'better' referees, but I'd much rather have had the handball decision go in our favour against Reading.

yeah, he'd done what he had to do by then, no need for any more. I think what disappointed me most of all was Nani and his antics. The other players just put in a solid professional performance, no unnecessary showboating.

Watch the replay again. Perry (I think it is) knocks the ball away with his thigh.

To have any chance of staying up we have to certainly beat Doncaster and either of the other two, preferably Norwich. I can't see that happening and soon we shall be running out of games.

I'm saying that the point of contact was diametrically on the other side to Kelvin's position. Riley probably had the best view and yet the ball couldn't possibly have hit anywhere near where he was indicating. He saw what he wanted to see.

He couldn't possibly see from his position, he probably had the worst view in the ground. Top corner of the shoulder blade and back of the head for me.

I agree completely. That's exactly how I saw it at the time and that's how I see it now after several looks at the replays. I still think that we would have lost comfortably, but that's not the point. It's always the same when a 'Premiership' referee handles a game between a 'top' team and one from the lower divisions. They are on first-name terms with the famous players whereas with our lot it's 'oi you, come 'ere'.

It looks far worse on television in slo-mo than it did when I saw it yesterday live and in real-time. I've watched it again and I stand by my original opinion that it was a yellow card at worst. Patterson turned his foot and lower leg away at the last moment and his lunge ended at the moment he made contact with Vidic after clearly playing the ball first. It was 'reckless' but not 'reckless with excessive force'. I agree with you about Riley and he clearly needs to get his eyes tested if he thought that he saw McGoldrick hit the ball with this arm and not the back of his shoulder and head. Ask yourself these questions: Would Vidic have been sent off if the roles were reversed? - probably not. Would Patterson have been sent of if it hadn't been Riley? - possibly.

Watch the replay again and see Lancashire's movement. Rooney runs right past him, he's slow turning and then ambles towards the goal. He had plenty of time to look around and see who was umarked. it was amateurish defending, and I've done enough of that myself to know it when I see it!

You mean Lancashire, surely?

Agreed, it's a ridiculous idea. How can he influence the play - or the referee - when he's stuck between the sticks?

I would agree with that. They were the only ones that didn't look completely out of place.

We came round that corner at about 10 mins to kick-off. The gentleman was lying on the ground on his right side and there were 5 yellow jackets attending to him. One of them, a lady, was rubbing his ears and talking to him telling him to 'hang in there' and that the ambulance was on its way. He looked barely conscious, if at all. I think that she was calling him 'Arthur'. It's very sad to lose a fellow supporter, especially in such circumstances. May you rest in peace, sir, and we'll all be thinking of you at the next game.

That seems a fair summary to me. Poor team selection, we should have started with BWP and Euell. With two United centre backs cautioned we should have been in their faces all the second half. I was expecting 4-0 but I would have liked a goal. United could see that the game was won after the second goal and did no more than they had to.

With Riley in charge I would only expect a yellow for Vidic but I stand by my assertion that there was not enough momentum in his challenge to do any serious damage, and Vidic had a clear view of what was coming so it was not as dangerous as a tackle from behind or from the side. Nobody in our part of the stand thought that it warranted a red card.

I agree that it was a lunge, but viewed in real time and not slow-motion I don't think that there was enough momentum in his motion to carry through and do any serious harm to the other player, and there was a ball between them that Patterson certainly got to first. Studs showing, one footed, slightly reckless at the time I considered it a yellow at worst. Maybe it looked worse in slow-motion? I'll have another look at it tonight.

It was right beneath me and it was a yellow card at the worst. One footed, studs showing, reckless? - maybe. Reckless with excessive force? - not in a month of Sundays. And it was played through the ball first and his foot then glanced off. I didn't see any contact with the United player but that might have been on the other side of the ball from me. It was a very harsh decision.

Exactly! If the club really wanted him to play then they could have made sure that his clearance was released in good time. He's an expensive asset and we should be using him.

****-up or conspiracy, it's one or the other. Either way it's poor management again.

If he had a go at McGoldrick then in my view his should be the first name on the teamsheet.

Actually........ it never quite reached New York and the loss of life was a tragedy for many families in Southampton.

Doesn't he want them back? Seriously though, give them all away and see the light! You know that you want to . Then you can look forward to watching Saints for many years to come .... ...oh.