SaintBobby

This is dire by the sounds of it. But a good (or even reasonable) 45 mins now can kick start our season.

We need to coach our present players to acquire some pace, I fear. That might be tricky.

If we lose tonight, I think a modicum of panic is probably justified

I think...but was only half listening...the Saintsplayer commentator just said something like "and we are waiting on news as to whether Southampton are going to sign Nicky Butt or Robert Koren" Any otehr listeners confirm? Apols if he was just reading out a (speculative) text.

Id love to see a photo of that. Oh.

I haven't heard Wotton or Hammond mentioned in the commentary at all really. Merrington: Pardew must shake up, AFCB have bossed midfield, Saints def not a threat up front and not getting the ball wide

sounds like they are all over us TBH Saints "absolutely rocking" at the back

AOC had best chance of the half. Bournemouth break and hit crossbar...still Saints cant clear.....

38 minutes and..according to Merrington..."we haven't been any threat at all" Great run from Lallana and Puncheon screws up...his first touch described as "woeful" and "abysmal"

Dickson caught in possession (again?) Seems to be having a mare.

Bournemouth on top now...."all Eddie Howe's side at the moment" Saints defence "under the cosh"

It is certainly reaching high levels of farce...I guess that is amusing in a way. One interesting thing in that BBC website piece is the fact that calls from the Beeb were not returned. That's not an encouraging sign and is pretty much breaking rule 1 of media relations.

Saints grip on the game weakening. Possesion is now at 45% Saints 55% AFCB

Bournemouth fire in a shot, just misses near post.

Lets let in a few goals then right away...that way we can only improve...

Puncheon makes space and fires in an on target shot from edge of the box, smothered by AFCB keeper.

According to the Saintsplayer commentary, its 442 with AOC up front.

Good start from Saints...mainly in Cherries half. Lallana everywhere. Lots of corners leading to nought....like on Saturday

Davis Butterfield-Fonte-Seaborne-Dickson Puncheon-Wotton-Hammond-Lallana Chamberlain-Barnard Lambert is on the bench

I really hope this is irony....

We are not, I'm afraid, ever going to see Saints in Hello magazine territory. Every attempt to control photographic imagery from matches has been a failure - that includes efforts by Man Utd, Celtic and Bristol Rovers. There is no reason to believe Southampton will succeed and early indications - such as the photo agency we appointed now refusing to sign the contract and various media organisations boycotting the imagery - are that the plan ahs probably failed already.

I'm usually a status quo sort of bloke. I was even a defender of Burley to the last FFS! I'd like to see Pardew given the season to get us promoted. And I think that he will/would. However, it does seem the vibes are not great in terms of board/manager relations. I think the pressure is really on after the defeat against Plymouth. It's not just that we lost that bothered me, it's that we were poor, particularly in the second half. I thought there was a lack of belief and fitness about the team. Sure, it's unfortunate that Lambert and Lallana were unfit to start, but even so... I doubt that Pardew has even 10 games to prove himself. If we were (God help us) to lose our next three league games, I doubt that Cortese will say "let's see if he can win the next six on the spin". There are three ways this can pan out, I think: 1. Give Pardew until Xmas. If we're not in the top 2 or 3, get rid. Bring in a new manager who can make some changes in the transfer window and hopefully secure promotion. 2. Give him until October, if we're not doing well and moving in the right direction, then replace him. 3. Make a decision to remove him in the next ten days or so - if, say, we fail to beat MK Dons. I very much hope we go for option 1. And I hope we're clear at the top of the League by then and AP leads us to the league title by March. But, if only given a choice between options 2 and 3, I'd probably go for option 3.

I'm not sure there's any dispute about the facts is there? So, I don't think this needs to come down to who you believe. I believe every word of the statement about the club's media policy on the official website. I just happen to think the policy is extremely stupid.

I have a lot of sympathy with the press reaction to the club's media policy. There is a legitimate issue about "press freedom" - and let me try and explain that without implying that the ban on photographers is in any way the moral equivalent of South African Apartheid or North Korea's national press. If there is a single club source for imagery, this has a potentially enormous impact on editorial matters because the club can choose which images to make available. Reputable newspapers are clear that they are covering a public event. They therefore want to have access to "Lambert head in hands" or "Schneiderlin sees red" or "Pardew kicks water bottle" pictures as much as goal celebrations etc. You will see from pictures used in the programme and on the official website that they are very pro-Saints. For example, the big pull out picture in the Plymouth programme is of Hammond's headed goal against Reading. No imagery of Antonio notching Reading's fourth goal. Or Butterfield's futile protest against the Reading penalty. Or people booing and laughing when Pulis took to the pitch. There's nothing wrong with that. Southampton's website and programme are marketing materials - propaganda even. And that's fine. (For example, in the "guide to the next away game section", have you ever seen the prediction be of a Saints's defeat?) This isn't - and cannot be expected to be - remotely acceptable to a sports editor. Any more than the club asking to, say, check written copy for "accuracy" before a journalist files it with their newsdesk. If I was the sports editor of a national newspaper, I would certainly boycott all imagery of Saints' home matches and would explain to my readers why. Cortese will have the last laugh if he is right that the commercial imagery rights he's protecting really do have substantial financial value. But I really doubt that they do. And I'm pretty certain that whatever minimal value such imagery might have has already been out-trumped by the ill will and negative publicity that has been secured in the last 24 hours. The interesting question now is whether the club will back down in the face of such an obvious error or whether they will dig their heels in. Given that even the accredited agency is now making it plain they will not abide by the exclusivity deal, it would seem like pig headedness in the extreme to continue down this path http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=1&storycode=45816&c=1

There is a "where do you stop?" problem. It's easy for you or me to say that if we were the billionaire owner of the club, we might spend another £5m on, say, a winger, central midfielder and striker. There's clearly been quite a lot of cash splashed thus far - on both transfers and wages. Btw, I don't think it's at all obvious that non promotion would be a consequence of failing to make further signings. We could very well get promoted with the squad we've got. Similarly, we might not get promoted even if we spend a few million on additions to the squad. I'm as frustrated as the next Saints fan that the signings have not (yet?) matched the quality of last August or the January transfer window. But I'm also conscious that you can get in to the Jack Hayward/Wolves syndrome of forever spending a few million on "one more heave". That's not to say the club owners have got it right - just that it's a lot easier for you and I to work out how they should hypothetically spend their money and wax lyrical about it on a message board than it is for the "real people" with the real money to make hard cash decisions.