There when Franny scored

I agree with the observations in the OP. The recent Tim Vickery Blog contains a quote from a player who played under Sampaoli the Chilean manager who models his teams on Bielsa, the same as MP. I think this is what MP was trying to achieve which is why he does not want traditional wingers who are generally quite restricted in terms of their positional play: '"We are not allowed to be afraid of playing," said Rodriguez. "We always attack with six players and defend with four. The six rotate, keep the ball moving, occupy and create space, and the four wait and close down space to win the ball back. The order of these four is fundamental, as is the disorder of the six." It is straight out of the Bielsa handbook.' Interestingly, this ties in with the recent quote from one of the coaching staff "We don't play in positions. We play from positions." I also think we have departed from the original mantra and certainly against Norwich without Shaw and Clyne (who would normally make up the six attacking players along with the front four) we appeared instead to attack with four and defend with six which is why we were so limited and produced no crosses at all from the by-line. Predictably, our defence has improved greatly while our attacking threat has suffered. I think MP is working towards a more fluid front four (with support from attacking full-backs) that are able to create spaces amongst the opposition without necessarily having to outnumber them thus creating chances and remaining tight defensively. This hasn't really worked as yet from an attacking perspective, but it may take more time (and possibly additional personnel). A couple of further observations / questions: - I'm not sure if Lambert fits into this system although I think he's more adaptable than people give him credit for, just not that mobile. - I think this is why he really likes JWP as I believe he is quoted as saying something like he feels JWP's technical ability allows him to play in any of the midfield or attacking positions (bar the central striker presumably) which I don't agree with as against Sunderland and Norwich he did not look comfortable in the wide role. He was much better when he moved to a central position against Sunderland. It has certainly been an interesting tactical journey so far with MP and at least he has a clear idea that he is trying to implement rather than the sort of trial and error approach we have seen from several previous managers.

Fonte man of the match on the widely regarded as instructive "Whoscored" website - http://www.whoscored.com/Matches/719871/Live Went about his business in a efficient, understated fashion befitting of a seasoned premier league performer IMHO.

This summary seems quite realistic at least http://www.goal.com/en/news/596/exclusive/2013/08/16/4190486/-

The French site for AS Roma fans is saying that we bid 20m euros yesterday in the hope of getting him in before Saturday. No idea as to the reliability, but it's not an attention seeking false transfer rumour site at least. As Roma Francophone ‏@AsRomaFrancopho 18m Hier #southampton est passer d'une offre de 20millions a 9poir #osvaldo et selon les bruits ils l'auraient demander pour Samedi !

http://hereisthecity.com/2013/07/18/mn-how-a-qatari-club-could-affect-tottenham-arsenal-and-southamp/

Emil Hallfredsson http://www.sportsmole.co.uk/football/southampton/transfer-talk/news/saints-favourites-to-sign-hallfredsson_94021.html

Thanks for these. I just "liked" the Thailand group. They have 1069 likes now!

This is a question, asked by many fans, that derives directly from the continual persecution of agents in the media, the constant need for a "hero and villain narrative" in football coverage. While some of the criticism is warranted there are a lot of agents out there who play an invaluable role in the development of a player's career as explained in detail in the chapter on agents in the book "The Secret Footballer". As it points out in the chapter, all players and clubs use agents and there are some very good reasons why.

http://sporton.co.ke/latest-headlines/southampton-on-the-verge-of-signing-wanyama/

Thanks for that. Very interesting reading and would no doubt spice things up on the South Coast!

If true, it is quite something that we offered 20 million euros for one player. http://www.vocegiallorossa.it/?action=read&idnotizia=55077 "Osvaldo: Sabatini in touch with Southampton, but the player wants another 20.06.2013 08:45 by Emanuele Melfi Twitter: @ EmanueleMelfi article read 1297 times Source: Time - Serafini © photo by Federico Gaetano The Giallorossi ds Walter Sabatini, as reported in the newspaper Il Tempo, he would find an agreement with Southampton for the transfer of Oswald. The English club would be ready to pay about 20 million, but the player appears to have blocked the deal. The Italo-Argentine would like a club level and Southampton would not guarantee to Osvaldo international visibility."

Can anyone work out if the journalist is on Twitter? Might be worth asking him directly for more information. We might get an idea of how confident he is in his sources.

http://www.calciomercato.com/mercato/southampton-obiettivo-hiroshi-kiyotake-360153 "Southampton goal Hiroshi Kiyotake - June 12 at 21:44 As he writes in the British press, Southampton, after Yoshida, looking for a new Japanese: it is the attacking midfielder born in 1989 in the Nuremberg Hiroshi Kiyotake"

Sums it up nicely - http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2013/jun/10/spain-european-under-21-championship-england Agree with the above, it is probably detrimental to Clyne to be involved with the under 21s at present.

Played very well first half, very classy. Unfortunately, just taken off injured. Doesn't look too serious.

Still interested in the Danish CB Sorensen apparently: http://www.tuttojuve.com/?action=read&idnotizia=141760

An interesting and succinct summary Saintbobby and I agree that it is a fascinating microcosm into the minds of Saints fans and internet forum users, more so internet forum users perhaps. It is almost a written rule that after a certain number of pages some sort of antagonism will develop between the two "camps" and the really interesting aspect of this from an anthropological perspective is as follows: Most of the users are perfectly content to absorb an element of mockery, but you are absolutely correct that things tend to escalate and sour when people are rebuked for being overly positive ("happy clapper") or irrationally negative ("bed wetter"). The general point at which jovial banter becomes something that people take exception to is when it is aimed at something that that person considers part of their identity. To put in another way, most people won't be offended when engaging in banter that is tangential to what they consider to be their core personality traits. However, if it attacks something they consider to be a fundamental part of their persona (an obvious one is religion) then they will react to defend their "identity". Now, the way in which some posters react to an affront aimed at their positivity or negativity is consistent with what they perceive to be an attack on their identity. The really fascinating aspect of this dialogical analysis is that in almost all cases nobody knows who these people actually are. This poses the question, how can it be that a poster feels his identity is being attacked when he is anonymous? That is too complex a question for me, but it does indeed display an intriguing contradiction of human nature. To address the better question for practical, quotidian purposes posed at the end of your post, i.e. what should we do about this or do we want to? From my perspective, now and again I don’t mind observing as the drama unfolds and sometimes it’s quite funny as you have some forum users who are genuinely just on a wind-up interspersed with the “identity based” posters (e.g. Dalek). However, when you actually want to find out something it can be tedious to scroll through hundreds of posts regurgitating the same arguments ad nauseam. For example, I am pretty concerned that NC will leave, but it’s difficult to get much sense out of the post on that topic anymore.

I tend to agree with the below posted on "not606": "It appears that Ben Smith, who interviewed Cortese a week or two ago is leading the story. Says it will be up on BBC sport website soon. In which case, Cortese said it to Smith in that interview and both held back releasing it until after yesterdays' result. BRINKMANSHIP" Question is, what is he playing for? More cash or something bigger?

I very much like our current squad of players and the endeavour displayed by almost all has been excellent this season (both our managers this term should take credit for this). However, if we are to eventually progress to the top 6 or even 4, as we understand is NC's intention, then I find myself wondering who, if any, of the current squad are already good enough or have the potential to be good enough for a team of that ilk. For me, trying to be brutally honest, but perhaps still on the generous side: Good enough now Morgan Clyne Potential to be good enough Shaw Cork Rodriguez Ramirez

As CTH have secured the Prem TV rights for the next 3 seasons does anyone have any information about the packages they will be offering and if they will show all games as True have done? Obviously with the bias towards the "big 4/5" if they are not showing all games the coverage for Saints fans will be not be anything like as good as it has been under True. There doesn't seem to be much info out there so if anyone has any, specifically on what CTH will be offering and how to switch over from True I would be grateful. Cheers

http://www.forbes.com/sites/zachslaton/2013/04/08/projected-epl-table-with-6-5-matches-to-go/

This article apparently shows the referees that are good and bad for us although there are some major flaws in the conclusions drawn. http://blog.emiratesstadium.info/archives/27818

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1584771-southampton-are-the-saints-finally-above-the-relegation-fray

http://www.thefa.com/video/England/Mens-Under-21s/2012-13/nathaniel-clyne-twitter-chat

By definition an internet fans forum should be a place where fans can express any opinion they like. Ideally, even fans with the most divergent opinions could respect each other's view and respond in a considered manner thus generating meaningful debate. Unfortunately, this forum seems to be a place where so many of the threads are now initiated with the sole purpose of provoking a reaction under the guise of the sacred "free speech" mantra. It's almost paradoxical that the forum posters who engage in this sort of behaviour are in fact the ones that have stymied the insightful views of others who are either too tired to read and respond to many of the threads that turn into thinly veiled, agenda driven, point-scoring nonsense (or were started for that purpose in the first place) or have simply given up on the forum altogether. I appreciate the mods are in an extremely difficult position because such posts are now so frequent that it would mean closing nearly every thread. A suggestion may be to limit members' posts to 3 or 5 per day. Perhaps there could be a function where if your post is recommended by 5 people you "gain" an extra post? Obviously, this is a fairly draconian step, but it is the only way I can see to encourage considered responses. In my experience, most of the more enjoyable posts to read are from those that don't post with a greater frequency than that in any event. Just out of interest, do the forums of other clubs experience similar problems? I occasionally visit an opposition forum to gauge their reaction to our performance and I must say I haven't noticed such hostility or continual provocation.