Turkish

Ahh of course, an autobiography. We should trust this implicitly because no one has ever written an autobiography and painted themselves in a positive light, justifying things they have done, have they.

Isn't it great to see a team like Man City saying a point at st Mary's is a good result.

Steve Davis was another one. I always thought he looked really good. Only played a few times for the first team but was always impressed with him, had a good career at Burnley and considered a bit of legend up there.

Yep, there was nothing really apart from the two you mention after that lot until Walcott, Baird, bale and co in the mid 00s.

Err, Shearer, Le Tiss and rod Wallace all came through at the same time. shearer became the worlds most expensive player at the time and won numerous England caps, Le Tiss became arguably our greatest ever player and Wallace won the league title with Leeds. Those 3 also played in the first team at the same time, along with Ray Wallace and Francis Benali. Danny Wallace also played in the squad with those 3 before he left for Man United in 1989 and also played for England. So 3 England internationals there, all of which played for England whilst at Saints. The 1989/90 team contained 5 players who were apprentices as well as Tim Flowers and Jason Dodd who were signed at a young age from other clubs. So not quite sporadically is it. Its not quite the first time we've produced players who have England's recognition whilst at saints like you're making out. Our line up when we destroyed Liverpool, then league champions 4-1 at Dell contained Flowers, Benali, Dodd, Le Tissier, Shearer and rod Wallace.

Let's also remember that the players currently breaking into the first team, with the exception of Gallagher who was signed from Plymouth, were here when Lowe was here. So whilst they might benefit from the coaching and development from the team in place now, they were actually discovered and signed by the previous regime.

Some great posts from Bletch, Ohio and CEC which makes a refreshing change to the fingers in ear, feet stamping and yelling 'he's a racist' from the usual crowd. The predictable reaction that has gone for pretty much the entire rest of the thread because it's been dared to suggest that the saint like imagine, as Ohio puts it very well, isn't quite what the truth and that this sits uncomfortably with some people who sadly resort to insults rather than discussion.

10 out of 10 Obsessed

Quite mental logic. I incorrectly assumed he would already know this, then it occurred to me that he was banging on about it being a black man killing white people etc and desperate to use the racist card, he probably, as usual, doesn't have a clue what he is talking about.

You do know the ANC killed and tortured Black people as well, don't you numbnuts?

So he wasn't all the time then like you made out. Ive asked plenty of questions myself which no one has answered. I've not sneered at their views, called them names and been abusive. Why should I answer questions when no one has answered mine and I've been abused for my opinion. Why did Mandela refuse to renounce violence in 1985 when he was offered this in exchange for release from prison? No one can answer this, the just keep trotting out the racist line, as I see you are again. As I've said, he's a great man and did a lot of good post 1994. But no one seems to want to talk about what happened before then.

Laughable.

Ultimately and if its inspire of or because of, he realised at some point to unite the nation he needed to make his enemy his friend, which is what he did. He realised that violence wasn't the answer. Which makes Aintforvers comments that the murders and tortures were justified absolutely laughable.

Quite how I'm 'getting a kicking' when you won't even discuss any of the points I've raised and ignore them with sneering comments and scream 'racist' when it's mentioned is anyone's guess, nice try though.

No, I said two wrong don't make a right and I described apartheid as a crime against humanity. This isn't about apartheid, it's about if Mandela was the man the media are making him out to be or not. You won't even enter into a discussion about it, instead you put on sneering posts about going to speakers corner. Won't even talk discuss it and as you've done again say if you mention it you're racist.

Exactly mate, won't even discuss it and anyone that mentions it is racist apparently.

Not at all pal. Just continue to claim killing innocent people is fine, like you did earlier.

Why won't you talk about any of the points I've raised? The bombings. By his people The tortures by his people The refusal to renounce ANC violence in 1985 Th video of hi singing about killing whites?

You're too thick to get it aren't you pal as you've proven time and time again. He was a great man for what he achieved after 1994, I've never said he wasn't. But I'm not quite sure why anyone who mentions what he did pre this is called a racist. Seems to me the thick tw*ts like yourself who won't even enter the conversation are the ones with the issue. They went it air brushing from history, or the few that do mention it all claim killing and torture of innocent people is fully justified if you're got a political point to make, which is even more worrying.

Why won't you talk about any of the things I've mentioned? you've been on holiday in South Africa, you would know all about them.

Yeah I've got David Copelands poster on my wall. You thick c*nt.

Now what were you saying about intelligent replies? why won't you talk about why Mandela refused to renounce ANC violence in 1985 in exchange for release from Prison? Why won't you task about the video of him singing about killing whites? why won't you talk about the Mandela football team and their tortures? You only want to talk about what suits you and scream racism at anyone that mentions it.

Yet again race gets mentioned. Seems its impossible to say he's done anything wrong without being called a racist Its hard for me to comprehend and call me a liberal, but I don't agree with killing and torturing innocent people and being branded a hero for it, that why. What he did post 1994 should be lauded, I'm not disputing that. I'm also say why won't anyone talk about what he did before that and if you do you're called all sorts of names and accused of being racist.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 8 out 8

Except of course he wasn't in solitary confinement in the 80s, but don't let that stop you making things up you loon.