SaintBobby

On the basis of those highlights, I agree. He's a bit of a forgotten man. I don't know if he really is injury prone or whether he's just had a couple of shocking pieces of bad luck. He does look like a useful squad player though, especially as I'd say we have a lack of overall pace in our starting XI.

I'm conflicted on this. It does seem that we'd be better off getting Puncheon off the books, even at a discount price. However, I think clubs need to do more to stand up to "want away" players. We are sending a clear message to all current and future Saints players that if they don't play by our rules, they risk a frustrating time in the reserves and a dwindling of their career. That has a lot of wider value, even if Puncheon isn't worth his wages to us on an individual basis.

Great save by "the young Portguese keeper" according to Solent - that's Bialkowski by the way.

Who is skipper? Butterfield?

Not obvious to me that it being undisclosed helps us in transfer negotiations. That would only be the case if the undisclosed fee is higher than the fee reported in the media. E.g. if we got £20m for him, but most people believe it's about £15m. However, we are better to disclsoe the fee if reports are higher than the actual amount.

The OS seems to think he didn't play after the Charlton game last season. But I distinctly remember him scoring against Walsall....

I remember watching his debut in some pre-season friendly against some European side. He was awful and substituted out of pity at half time. I said he'd never make it as a first team player. Shows how little I know about football, I suppose...

Can I just say you should NEVER "pay over the odds" for a player. Just pay the odds.

@hypo....I don't think the problem is whether you're wrong or not (I think you've over-reacted, but aren't a million miles off the mark FWIW) I think the problem/issue is the level of salience you're attaching to this issue. If you have posted 25 times about a programme cover, this is a bit obsessive TBH.

Can we have 25,000 different threads for every fan who was there please? I like to read each person's views individually rather than all lumped together.

repeat to fade...

http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/page/MatchReport/0,,10280~58439,00.html According to the official site, we won 3-0. Outrageous propaganda. The case against Cortese just keeps growing...;-)

welcome back.. sighhhhhh....

Leeds to win at 2-0 wld have been about 28/1 I guess. Or Saints NOT to win at 3-0?

According to the BBC http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/eng_div_1/14351913.stm we only had 49% possesion. Felt like a lot more than that to me. I wish they'd measure "territory" rather than possesion. A ball going out for a goal kick and a pause in play presumably gives nearly a minute of possession to the defensive team?

Is that like Terry's All Gold?

That can't be right. Saints were 6/4 to win from the outset.

The answer to your question is NO. I hope this helps. I cannot think of a single alleged Cortese mistake that has been "overlooked". Most of his supposed crimes have been gone through on here in forensic, methodical (and, indeed, tedious) detail. But, in any event, success forgives a lot. Even if you think he's a ***t for putting himself on the programme, so what? In my business, if we have someone performing well, we cut them some slack. If they're late for work one morning, they don't get fired. But in anye event, none of the thigns you list have been overlooked. They've been done to death on here. The fact that you think charging for parking deserves an exclamation mark says it all really.

Really good performance. Very gritty and strong. If I had to find a negative, it would a be lack of pace and occasional lack of creativity. The second of these sounds mad though when you look at our three goals. All of which were exquisite. MOTM: Lallana with a very honourable mention to Hammond.

It does seem a bit preposterous. I hope it's tongue in cheek by NC. To my mind, it's a little embarrassing rather than "legendary". But it is a pretty trivial matter.

I certainly wasn't trying to throw any abuse around - just trying to put forward a robust argument. Reasons to be cheerful, in addition to the L1 stats: 1. Martin is a season older and a fair few games better. Not a great starting option IMHO yet, but better as back up than a year ago. 2. Jaidi surprised us last season by being able to play so many games so well, with only a handful of errors (I can only remember one massive gaffe - Brighton away). Yes, he's a year older but we weren't relying on his pace last season anyway. 3. Hard to imagine Richardson will be as disappointing as last season. At least he doesn't start crocked. 4. Even if Cork starts in centre midfield, he provides quality cover at centre back or right back. 5. I remain unconvinced about Seaborne, but at least he now has some experience at covering left back. 6. A reasonably settled back four now has another season under their belt of playing together. 7. Perhaps most importantly, we are very likely to sign a new quality centre back. Yes, I'd have preferred this to be done in June - but the world doesn't work like that. Even if we don't finalise a deal with Jemal or that QPR bloke, I'd expect the no. 5 shirt to be assigned by August 31st. The more I think about it, the more I'm increasingly concerned about lack of firepower up front rather than solidity at the back.

I also think Saints are a bit overated on those spreads. I'd say the value is to buy Hull and definitely Ipswich and sell Reading.

7th or 8th is a guess, of course. But if your stats are as glitteringly fantastic as ours were in L1 and given that the leap from L1 to to NPC is not totally and utterly enormous, I think you can fairly assume we'd be "fine". Maybe 10th. Maybe 12th. Be a pessimist and say 14th if you like. Still doesn't constitute a "worry" in my view. If you think we're 20th or worse, then that's a worry. But what actual evidence is there for such a proposition? And how brilliant wld we have to be in L1 before you accepted those stats had "carry over"? (if we had kept 46 clean sheets in L1, would you still say "bah, these are just stats...the NPC is a totally different level"?) When tested last season against Premiership opponents, our defence also performed well (Bolton, Blackpool, Man Utd). Of course, this is no grounds for laziness or complacency. We should seek to improve every area of the team if we possibly can. But you're the one putting forward the hypothesis that we need to be concerned or worried, so I think the onus is on you to provide the evidence. I might as well say "I am deeply worried about our ability to score from the penalty spot next year, goalkeepers in the NPC are better than those in League One." Someone might then point out that we haven't missed a penalty in "open play" for more than two years (and have, I think, only missed one in a penalty shoot out). I can just reply "meh...that's just a bunch stats...they don't count...I'm still worried and I hope the coaches who work on penalties aren't just putting their feet up and being lazy". The argument just becomes circular. In fact, it's not even an argument. It's an irrebuttable presumption. It seems impossible to even conceive of the evidence you might want to stop worrying about our defence. There is nothing that exists in the real world that would be good enough for you. Of course, you may just turn out to be right. But not on the basis of any rational evidence that presently exists.

They are so f***ed, that for £125 I'm surprised you can't secure a slot in the starting XI.... Only a matter of time...

A 3.5 for me. I'd say 10th-14th. The "independent" surveys I've seen have us to finish 10th (FourFourTwo magazine) and 16th (The Times). Despite the perceived wisdom that this forum is full of pessimists, I still think polls/surveys of fans tend to overstate Saints. If fans are saying we will finish nth, i reckon we'll finish (n+6)th. The bookmakers, however, do have us in the top 6-8 teams...and that's where the money is.