SaintBobby

I think it's true that Papa and AP didn't get on, but though window was closed now anyway.

That's ludicrous. "Delusional" is a far stronger term than, say, "over-optimistic" or showing "slightly misplaced confidence". "Delusional" suggests a complete departure from reality. Southampton have been seen as favourites to win the league by bookmakers and pundits alike. Even you were predicting we'd make the play-offs! It really is a great shame that some of your genuine insights are easy to totally disregard because of your tendency to monumentally overstate your case.

No, they need to be aware they cant possibly have as good an analysis of the Saints performances and players as those who actually watch the matches No need to be meek or grovelling - just to recognise this fact. And that most definitely goes for you, sunshine. You seem to think the opposite!

another couple of weeks....September 22nd at 11am

I think the chance of MOn saying no is 90%...that still leaves 10% chance...if he's offered the role.

This thread really is nonsense.....

whn did you hear and from who?

+2 So, claim your £100....

Don't think you Pmed me about that either...

Only one. If you're ITK you don't need to guess....

I'm happy to offer £100 to anyone who can name the new manager at least 24 hours before the appointment being reported by SKY Sports News. And £50 if you can do it 12 hours before. However, in order to avoid wild guesswork leading to a profit, you need to say when you heard and from who (you don't need to name them..."a steward" will do) PM me to enter. In the event of more than one eprson getting it right, the money goes to who got it right first.

My post from a few minutes ago on this thread is a 100% accurate summary of a one-on-one meeting I had with a senior individual at the club. Ignore it or not, I dont mind.

In all seriousness (and accepting that I've been as guilty as some on the p1ss take PM posts), I do know that the powers-that-be thought that AP was too old fashioned a manager. The implication was "too English". This was just before the season started and I was left with the strong impression that there were problems with AP. Certainly, regarding transfers, I was told that AP had procrastinated a lot. The money was available. Initial meetings with players/agents would appear to go well, but then AP would find some reason or other afterwards about why he didnt want to sign them. I was even told there was some doubt about whether AP's heart was really in the whole project, whether he really wanted to succeed. I think this was meant as a comment about lethargy etc., rather than suggesting deliberate espionage. AP was unconvinced that Antonio was any more than an impact player and was worth having on loan but not as a permanent fixture. There were also big problems between Waigo and AP. The latter seeing the former as an NC signing and the former being uninterested in a permanent move if the latter was still in charge. I have no idea what specifically triggered the AP sacking, but I was therefore unsurprised when it came. It was also this meeting that gives rise to my view taht they will probably go for a foreign manager.

This is a curious argument. Obviously, people at matches will often hold very different views. But to suggest that this means the views of people who barely go to a single game are as valid as those of those who go to loads of matches is loopy. The absentee may be right and the attendee wrong, of course. But I'm afraid that the fact that you hardly ever watch Saints play does mean your views on the playing side should be given much less weight. I imagine what irritates some people is your lack of acknowledgement of this and the implication that your pronouncements - which are usually expressed in very trenchant and unequivocal terms - are in no way qualified by the fact that you only see a tiny % of the matches. It's not as if you usually (ever?) start a comment with "Obviously, I go to very few matches - and so the many of you that do will probably have a better idea than me - but from what I can gather from Saintsplayer and the OS match report....." Of course, people who don't go to games are entitled to an opinion. But it grates when they are expressed in such an immodest fashion.

Thanks for the PM...wow! I totally agree

Anyonebutwilkins

Look at me...

Thanks for the PM, patred. It all makes perfect sense now...

He does a very good impression of being clueless. He was static on the touchline. Bizarre substitutions. The two results under him have been dreadful. And the performances even worse. Cortese's implication that it might take a long time to find a new manager is loopy. We are nowhere near promotion form.

Terrible. No redeeming features at all really. Wilkins seems utterly clueless too.

The team need sorting out. And fast. The lack of activity in the transfer Market, taking an age to find a manager...it's incompetent

This is a total utter shambles. A disgrace in fact. Possibly Saints worst result the league in 30 years

Adkins would be an excellent appointment. Not a huge name, but a really exciting prospect. Why on Earth do people think he plays hoof ball? He's made the Iron a decent footballing team.

More than likely...

I've worked in media at a fairly senior level for over a decade, so would say I have at least some idea what I'm talking about. I can assure you that press conference information (a calling notice or ops note as its called) is made public in 99.999% of cases. This is entirely different to the accreditation you need to get into the press conference. Even in the 0.00001% of exceptions, press officers simply do not tell bare faced lies to callers about rudimentary operational information. they may stonewall, but even that would be exceedingly unusual, and very risky for the press officer's reputation. It is, by the way, almost impossible to make a "rudimentary check" on who calls in (once you've got through to the press office itself.) Furthermore, once you have issued the calling notice to any media organisation it's essentially public domain material. It is virtually impossible to tell SKY Sports that there is a press conference on Monday at 10am and assume that this information is kept secret. The only security issue is who you let into the press conference itself. You'd often want to exclude members of the public or potential troublemakers and, on occasion, space considerations might mean excluding minor media outlets. Usually though, the challenge for a press officer is the otehr way round (trying to boost attendance - not to cap it). It is virtually inconceivable - so close to a 0% chance as to make no difference - that a forum member on here would receive a text message from a friend about a press coference taking place on Monday and minutes later the press office themselves would lie completely about the existence of such a press conference to a caller who could be from any media outlet at all. I can confirm that there has NOT been a press conference called for 10am on Monday (although I suppose it's possible that by an incredible coincidence they will decide to convene a press conference on this day and at this time at a later stage) I'm happy to receive the benefits of your extensive media management wisdom if you disagree with any of the above, or to clarify any points you didn't understand.