FloridaMarlin

Probably around the same volume as they did with Suarez. Don't they ever learn? You would have thought that having got rid of Suarez - great player though he was - they would think twice before bringing another flake in through the door. This shows the size of Brenda Rogers' ego. All managers think they have the secret to controlling mavericks. Does this add weight to the theory that Rickie's signing was a mere ruse to whisper in Lallana's ear. I won't say Rickie must be wondering whether he made the right move because his wages will help salve any wounds. But how much playing time is he going to get?

Mourinho had one at St Mary's last season. Helped, of course, by £60m of talent he was able to being off the bench. But he sussed us out, made changes and won the game. It wasn't rocket science and it was plain to see to most fans with a gramme of football knowledge that he had done something differerently, even if they couldn't work out exactly what it. Good managers have a back-up plan. That plan is more than partially dictated by the players at your disposal, but Mourinho embarrassed Poch at St Marys.

When you have to fill a rolling 24/7 sports news channel, you'll use and re-cycle pretty much any old crap. Sky should get an award from Greenpeace or Friends of the Earth for their services to Green Journalism for the volume of stuff they recycle.

No doubt, comparisons will already be made with Diego Costa and Leonardo Ulloa who scored on their debuts, and Pelle, who didn't. Diego Costa cost £32m, Ulloa £8m, so you can't say you get what you pay for. Some have already weighed Pelle off as a No-shot striker, but neither did not have the sort of chance that fell to both Diego Costa and Ulloa. It's probably not Pelle's fault he did not have any chances created for him and it would have been interesting to see what would have happened had Davis's chance fallen to him. I think we'll have a better idea of what Pelle is about when the first clear-cut chance drops his way and how he deals with it.

Yep, that's it. Outside of the top five, every other Premier League club is just making up the numbers. It's a fact every other club has to live and deal with unless a) the owner wants to pump in similar amounts to Chelsea and Man City (and I don't think any of us really wants that) or b) something is done to curb and cap the financial imbalance that makes the PL a hollow mockery of a competition. As neither a) nor b) look likely to happen, we will just have to accept that we are makeweights. That's when you then start to get to get into the debate about the validity of the Pl as a competitive entity in its current state.

Yep, that's it. Outside of the top five, every other Premier League club is just making up the numbers. It's a fact every other club has to live and deal with unless a) the owner wants to pump in similar amounts to Chelsea and Man City (and I don't think any of us really wants that) or b) something is done to curb and cap the financial imbalance that makes the PL a hollow mockery of a competition. As neither a) nor b) look likely to happen, we will just have to accept that we are makeweights. That's when you then start to get to get into the debate about the validity of the Pl as a competitive entity in its current state.

So what did we learn from today,even allowing for the fact there is still a long way to go this season? I think we learned that we still have the best pairing of young English full-backs in the Premier League. The best tribute you can pay Bertrand is that we didn't appear to overly miss Shaw. We already knew what we have in Clyne. We learned that Yoshida is not the disaster waiting to happen most people think he is. He would not be first choice, but after an iffy start, he played quite well. we learned the JWP can cut it at PL level. He has his doubters on here, but let's not forget the kid is still only 19. Other than Ross Barkley, how many other England midfielders are PL starters? There were times today when he seemed more confident in running with the ball and holding it to wait for support. There are those who say he is a Sidney Sideways but as we are constantly being told by all and sundry that possession is king, he doesn't give the ball away that often. You could count the number of times he does it in a game on the fingers of one hand. Steven Davis committed an error at each end which cost us the game - but doesn't make him a bad player. Had he scored to put Saints in front, Liverpool would have folded. And it was he who let the poor man's Prince Sterling win the header to set Sturridge up. We learned that Tadic looks like a gem. He got caught in possession leading to the first goal, but will learn from that. His backheel to set up Clyne was sublime. We learned that Lambert might have made a mistake in going to Liverpool. Today was the template for his season. He's going to be a bit-part player, slung on when Liverpool needs bailing out of a hole. I think we learned that we might have just got the better end of that deal. I think we might have sold him at just the right time. Is Pelle an adequate replacement? We'll have a better view when the first chance lands at his feet in the box and how he takes it. Certainly, he's more mobile than Lambert and will work defenders a bit more. We didn't learn any more about Big Vic and Schneiderlin that we didn't already know, unless it's that Wanyama seems to be more comfortable on the ball. Koeman has obviously worked on him and told him to keep it simple and not do anything he's not capable of. We already knew Wanyama was a beast but today confirmed it. Even allowing for Davie Provan's love-in for a former SPL player, he was full of praise for Big Vic. We learned that Gerrard is living on borrowed time, and is probably only in the team because the insufferable cock Rogers is scared to drop him. Shurlock's description of Gerrard as a "**** poor Pirlo parody" was spot on and the reason he plays back there is to hide. Wanyama shook his bones with an early rattler and after that, Gerrard shat himself and dropped deeper and deeper until he was almost treasing on Mignolet's toes. I think we learned that for all their outlay, Liverpool fans probably more concerns than we have. They still have defensive frailties that will cost them any chance of the title. Forget Sterling, their best player today was Lovren - and he was undressed by Tadic. I don't think we are any the wiser where Lallana will fit in, but frankly, who cares? Granted, Liverpool has a couple of players out but for all their summer expenditure, their hopes of lifting the title disappeared when Suarez went. They can give it all the talk they like about how they are a stronger team without him, but that's just blowing smoke up peoples backsides. I think we learned that this current squad have bought into Koeman's ideas and like playing for him. It's a different style than it was under El Traidor, but the way they have clearly embraced it quickly shows how Koeman has won them over, and the weight of authority he carries. We learned that with a couple more additions, we will be a decent side, with a not-too-shabby undercard. Isgrove certainly didn't look overawed when he came on. I think we learned that despite a traumatic summer, we can have a decent season under a manager who knows his stuff and will himself learn a lot from today.

So what did we learn from today,even allowing for the fact there is still a long way to go this season? I think we learned that we still have the best pairing of young English full-backs in the Premier League. The best tribute you can pay Bertrand is that we didn't appear to overly miss Shaw. We already knew what we have in Clyne. We learned that Yoshida is not the disaster waiting to happen most people think he is. He would not be first choice, but after an iffy start, he played quite well. we learned the JWP can cut it at PL level. He has his doubters on here, but let's not forget the kid is still only 19. Other than Ross Barkley, how many other England midfielders are PL starters? There were times today when he seemed more confident in running with the ball and holding it to wait for support. There are those who say he is a Sidney Sideways but as we are constantly being told by all and sundry that possession is king, he doesn't give the ball away that often. You could count the number of times he does it in a game on the fingers of one hand. Steven Davis committed an error at each end which cost us the game - but doesn't make him a bad player. Had he scored to put Saints in front, Liverpool would have folded. And it was he who let the poor man's Prince Sterling win the header to set Sturridge up. We learned that Tadic looks like a gem. He got caught in possession leading to the first goal, but will learn from that. His backheel to set up Clyne was sublime. We learned that Lambert might have made a mistake in going to Liverpool. Today was the template for his season. He's going to be a bit-part player, slung on when Liverpool needs bailing out of a hole. I think we learned that we might have just got the better end of that deal. I think we might have sold him at just the right time. Is Pelle an adequate replacement? We'll have a better view when the first chance lands at his feet in the box and how he takes it. Certainly, he's more mobile than Lambert and will work defenders a bit more. We didn't learn any more about Big Vic and Schneiderlin that we didn't already know, unless it's that Wanyama seems to be more comfortable on the ball. Koeman has obviously worked on him and told him to keep it simple and not do anything he's not capable of. We already knew Wanyama was a beast but today confirmed it. Even allowing for Davie Provan's love-in for a former SPL player, he was full of praise for Big Vic. We learned that Gerrard is living on borrowed time, and is probably only in the team because the insufferable cock Rogers is scared to drop him. Shurlock's description of Gerrard as a "**** poor Pirlo parody" was spot on and the reason he plays back there is to hide. Wanyama shook his bones with an early rattler and after that, Gerrard shat himself and dropped deeper and deeper until he was almost treasing on Mignolet's toes. I think we learned that for all their outlay, Liverpool fans probably more concerns than we have. They still have defensive frailties that will cost them any chance of the title. Forget Sterling, their best player today was Lovren - and he was undressed by Tadic. I don't think we are any the wiser where Lallana will fit in, but frankly, who cares? Granted, Liverpool has a couple of players out but for all their summer expenditure, their hopes of lifting the title disappeared when Suarez went. They can give it all the talk they like about how they are a stronger team without him, but that's just blowing smoke up peoples backsides. I think we learned that this current squad have bought into Koeman's ideas and like playing for him. It's a different style than it was under El Traidor, but the way they have clearly embraced it quickly shows how Koeman has won them over, and the weight of authority he carries. We learned that with a couple more additions, we will be a decent side, with a not-too-shabby undercard. Isgrove certainly didn't look overawed when he came on. I think we learned that despite a traumatic summer, we can have a decent season under a manager who knows his stuff and will himself learn a lot from today.

Losing Pulis will be a huge blow for Palace. I can understand why a lot of people don't rate pulis, but he is a very good manager if you want a particular job done. He is derided a long-ball dinosaur but he is more than that. He played like that at Stoke because of the players he had when he went there, and becasue that ws a successful template he improved on it. I don't think Palace were a lump-it side in the second half of last season. What Pulis is excellent at is evaluating the players he has and organising them. Far from being a dinosaur he is a deep thinker and student of the game. Most summers he goes off quietly and attaches himself to a top European club and absorbs what the coaches have to say. I'm donning my tin hat here as I say this, but I've got quite a lot of time for Pulis. He'll be back in work halfway through the season to answer an emergency call.

Somebody has been on a media charm offensive. Martin Samuel wrote a similar piece in his Daily Mail column yesterday, slagging Saints off for breaking a verbal agreement. Somebody (probably his agent, or somebody within the Spurs camp) has obviously 'let it be known' that Schneiderlin had this gentlemen's agreement and is trying to change the agenda, garner some sympathy, and rack up the pressure on Saints. Up to now, the main thrust of the stories have been 'disloyal, ungrateful footballer looking to walk out on a four-year contract he signed last year', but now it's subtly being changed to 'downtrodden footballer, unfortunate victim of a club who broke all their promises to him and threaten to commit him to a life of slavery.' There is a little knot of Spurs fans at The Mail.

I don't think I have ever been so ambivalent about football. I don't think complete disillusionment has set in yet, but it may not be long. It's got nothing to do with the fact that we look like missing out on Rojo to Manure, but the way that players now conduct themselves and their business since all the power was handed to them on a great big silver platter. We've been victims of it ourselves this season and we obviously feel it more when it affects us, but this is symptomatic of the malaise that has crept in. It's been a long journey from the days when we managed to keep the likes of Ron Davies, and we were able to sign players like Keegan and, to be honest, some of the changes had to be made to provide players with some degree of control over their own fate. But the pendulum has now swung completely the other way. Where they were once players who served the game, football is now there to suit their purposes, and the game is subservient to them. I'm not given to knee-jerk reactions and always try to take a balanced look from the other person's viewpoint. I've always accepted that professional sport is a precarious way of earning a living, which could be ended prematurely by injury, and which in any event only has a working life of 15 years, 20 max. To that end, sportsmen have always had to maximise their earning potential and I've never been too quick to condemn somebody for moving to better himself. However, the money top players earn now tends to negate that argument. At any PL club, a player will earn more than a week than most of their fans trouser in a year; and earn in a year what most would not be able to earn in a lifetime. A four-year contract with a PL club probably means a player will never have to work again when he retires in his mid-30s. So while money is still a powerful driving force (yes, I would go somewhere else if somebody offered to double my salary) I don't think it's entirely down to wonga that players have become dummy-spitting, toy-chucking, tantrum throwing arsewipes. It's all about inflated egos and a warped sense of entitlement. It just grate with me that not only do players now demand that they want to rip up the four-year deal they signed only months previously, but dictate where they want to go. What sort of bargaining position are Sporting Lisbon in when Rojo demands to go to Manure? Rojo hasn't given an ounce of thought to the club that have employed him for the past few years, and as Saints fans, we certainly know what that feeling is like. Will we soon reach the situation where the pool of the world's top few hundred players end up at nine or 10 clubs (Five in PL, PSG, Barca and Real, Bayern Munich) and those clubs have over-inflated squads of 40 players? What happens then when players aren't getting a regular game? You only have to look at Real Madrid's squad to see that in accruing the world's best players they are laying down a mess of trouble. Why should we still hail these people as heroes? Heroes were once people you had contact with. They lived not far from you. They used the same shops, services and pubs as you. They signed autographs when you collared them at the pictures and shoved a scrap of paper and carpenter's pencil at them. They posed for pics and had time for a chat (providing you weren't a stalking pest) when you spoke to them at the bar, or passed their table in a restuarant. They didn't coccoon themselves away from the rest of the world in gated communities. They didn't rope themselves off in VIP areas. Even when players first began to ease themselves away from fans, they were still accessible vicariously. They were happy to make themselves available for interviews for newspapers, magazines and radio/TV. Granted, they are now buffered by press officers, who have a duty to fulfil to their club's website and subscription TV platform, but the nature of players (and most professional sportsmen) is that if they don't have to do something, they won't. So unless they're forced to be this week's token player put up at pre-match media day, which is strictly controlled, they don't talk to the media and thus another few yards of distance is put between them and those that pay their wages. And by those who pay their wages, I don't entirely mean those who buy tickets for matches. Those who subscribe to Sky and BT also contribute to their salaries - probably even more so. A prime example of that is Paul Scholes, who was mute during his playing days and hated dealing with the media and conducting interviews. But now it suits his purpose, you can't shut the little ginger t**t up as a pundit. I love football. It's provided me with a living for many years and it is still a great game. But - and I never thought I would say this - I am approaching the stage where I can take it or leave it. And that's almost entirely down to the players. Or perhaps it's our fault. Our fault for investing too much emotion, support, faith, and even love into something they clearly don't reciprocate. Perhaps football support should be like attending a circus. Enjoy the spectacle and admire the skills, but at the end of the performance, just go home.

As Trout Tickler alluded to earlier, Long smacks of being a Les Reed signing. You can imagine him despatching the scouting network to all four corners of the earth and them returning with their notebooks full of names, only to have them crossed out one-by-one. Suddenly, Les grins and says: "Here's one I've got tucked up my sleeve," and produces the name Shane Long. I don't doubt that Koeman would have heard of him, as all top managers have an encyclopaedic knowledge of players, and Long is an Irish international who has been plying his trade in the PL for some years. But I wouldn't think he is the type of player that Koeman would have actively gone out to recruit. While not being a disaster, Long's signing is safe and a little unimaginative. It has Reed's thumbprints all over it.

I wouldn't be surprised if the fee is not £12m. Sky do love to talk up and inflate prices as part of their campaign to big up the PL, make it appear more exciting and help in the branding of the self-styled "best league in the world." Jim White would not be able to work himself up into an orgasmic state over a £6m signing. Also, Sky's Sports News' policy of being firstest and loudest with breaking stories means other media outlets will not bother to check out its veracity, go along with it, and thus the figure becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, cast in stone.

The question which will determine where we finish is: "How much have the teams below us improved in quality form last season, in relation to our squad." It might well that in terms of like-for-like replacement, our first 14-15 might arguably be stronger than last season. But what have those around us added? Newcastle have been quite busy in the market and after struggling without Cabaye last season, and losing Debuchy, they look stronger and have made some decent signings. Hull have also made some good signings, but are they of top quality? Will they enhance the squad, or merely underpin it? Elsewhere, I'm not seeing vast improvements on the other squads outside the top six in what looks, to be honest, a pretty average-to-poor Premier League. Of course, no team is too good to go down and Saints biggest enemy may not be lack of quality, but complacency, although I can't see Koeman letting this creep in. I'm not as downcast as I was a couple of weeks ago when I feared for our chances. Not because Saints have suddenly signed a couple of players, but because when I look at the rest of the PL, I don't see too many teams who have improved enough to overhaul us. Our ambition again, will be to finish as high as we can in the Premier League's 'second division' outside of the top five (six if you want to include Spuds, seven if you want to throw Neverton in the mix) and I'm confident we can take enough points off the other clubs in the mini-division to survive comfortably.

Maybe not. Like it or not, it's the big clubs who sell newspapers/provide traffic to their websites so their agenda is naturally to attract fans and readers of those clubs. They're not that interested in writing the true story, which would be one of sympathy towards Saints. Their stories will be angled more on how he is 'forced' to go on strike to get his dream move and how Spurs can land him. I'll be interested to see the by-lines on the stories. I wouldn't be at all surprised if they are written by Spurs fans who work on the nationals.

Most of these offences are technicalities as clubs clearly don't do this intentionally in the hope they can clip him in without anybody noticing it. You may be able to do it in the Southampton Junior League Division 3 on a Saturday where you can slide him in as a ringer, but probably not in a Champion League game. It does seem a harsh punishment for somebody who came on for a few minutes at the end of a dead tie, but they have broken the rule. The rules have to be black and white because the moment you allow exceptions, then other clubs will attempt to drive a coach and horse through them.

Fielding a player under suspension is always viewed as a worse crime than fielding an ineligible player, whether that's Uefa applying the ruling or Hampshire FA.

If it doesn't work out, though, he will be Les Miserables. "Manteau, s'il vous plait."

Experts say the two most potent triggers of memory are smells and music. Whenever I smell freshly cut grass it takes me back to playing football as a kid on a recently mown rec. Shoe polish reminds me of my first pair of football boots. Other smells (perfumes, etc) trigger other memories we need not go into. Same with music. These are probably my five favourite albums because at the time they were released it coincided with a significant event, or time in my life and hearing them immediately takes me back to those happy times. Moot - Mott The Hoople Kimono My House - Sparks Holland - Beach Boys Discovery - Daft Punk American IV, The Man Comes Around - Johnny Cash

Football agents normally have a background in either the law or accountancy. Lots of agents were operating for years in the showbiz world before footballers became their gravy train. I think we would all like to wish HMRC all the luck in the world, but I feel these guys are a little too fly and know the tax avoidance rules too well to be caught.

He does not have Lallana's number, take it from me.

There's nothing intrinsically wrong with the piece and I can tell you BBC Sport are certainly not biased against Saints (you'd be surprised at the number of Saints fans who work there). It's just not a very good piece of original journalism. As I said in my previous post on this, what damns it is its lack of relevant quotes. The only quotes used are those already in the public domain. Any piece like this which purports to tell the inside story should carry quotes to give it justification. If it has none, then it runs the risk of being derided as speculation. It might well be informed, but if it contains no quotes it is reduced to speculation. There's no doubt on this forum there are some well-informed people who have good contacts inside the club, but don't quote their contacts for fear of exposure. It's why they take stick, but then, this forum does not parade itself as a font of responsible, rigourous journalism. As for the club banning anybody, that smacks of censorship and by banning a reporter, you give a credibility to his work. It's probably best ignoring it and rising above it. And as somebody else pointed out, once you go down the road of banning the media or certain journalists you are inviting big trouble as the media does get itchy and stand on its principals at times like that.

The article is missing one important element - relevant quotes. The only quotes used are those already in the public domain, and from Nick Illingsworth. Otherwise, there is nothing to legitimise it or - as somebody earlier pointed out - to give it veracity. It is a typical piece of Ben Smith journalism. On the surface it looks authoritative and based on inside knowledge but when examined closely, it is mainly supposition and clever re-working of the known facts. No doubt, he is trying to convince the reader that he has contacts deep inside the club who have provided his information but the lack of attributed quotes completely undermines this. And while some of this might be new to the wider public, there is nothing in this piece that any competent member of this forum could not have written based on the whispers and gossip they have heard. Ben Smith is not liked by many of his BBC colleagues who dislike his style of tabloidese, hit-and-run, ambush journalism. Despite what one or two think on here, the BBC does pride itself on the rigour of its journalism and it's inculcated into BBC journos to take pride in the fact that people trust the BBC more than any other organisation, and his colleagues don't like the way Smith threatens to undermine that. The true story of Saints great summer sell-off needs to be told, and one day it will be. But this is certainly not it.

Didn't do Cabaye any harm when he was at Newcastle.

A standard clause in most players' contracts. An increase on first international cap, and increases based on a subsequent number of appearances will be in pretty much every player's contract.