Saint Charlie

Anyone saying Benitez isnt good enough is a fool, but equally saying that it would be pointless sacking NA now is a fair opinion.

Probably not, no - as only Arsenal (a far better side than Villa) have comprehensively outplayed and walloped us - the other three games we created chances and could have got something from. Wigan - we lost (that was a funny game as it seemed like we all just expected to win easily) and you said yourself in the other thread that your neutral mate said we hit the bar twice and their keeper was MOTM. Plus we have strengthened since then. On the flip side to your scenario - if we win 3-0 vs Villa will all those suggesting radical team changes and saying how poor we are change their mind? IMO yes - they will probably swing week to week through the season. As NA says, "don't get too high when you win, or too low when you lose". There are signs that we have the basis of a good team, now we have a good little period of fixtures where we need to show that, or the flak is going to be justified. But at this stage, some of it is quite frankly, ludicrous.

Again - one match. If its the same after we have played Villa, Everton, Fulham, West ham then fair enough. But too early to panic now - its fine lines.

He won't because he has already made his mind up on Morgan. Doesn't see that when he plays well the whole team does.

Of course NC makes a judgement call on Adkins. But he also knows we had a very tough start and Im sure wouldn't have expected a whole lot more than we got (probably as we all know, 3 points would have been very good). Hence, he will give NA at least the next few matches to show he can do it at this level - and no reason to doubt that based largely on a thrashing by a very good Arsenal team.

On Scholes - fair point we could have man marked him - but doesnt mean our setup for the other 70mins wasn't good. He has done that to far better teams than us and thats a learning curve. The fact they had to do that shows that we played well and were on top. its those small differences in class like Scholes has that we need to get used to - not rip out what our strengths of the game were. Re MS comment....we can agree to diasgree. I don't know what bids we have had for players so will bow to your superior ITK situation.

But largely you have decided this after one poor match, and two others against the top 4. Would you have suggested this after the Man Utd game? Would you not feel it better to see how we do in the next 3 or 4 games - ones we can realistically get points from? Personally - I am not questioning Adkins a great deal - results will come. But if he started playing Fonte in midfield or moving to back 5 I would be worried - in the games we have played well our midfield fluidity has been very good.

NA judged them in every match and training session they played in for Saints. Do any fans think that Hammond or Sharp will ever be a good Premier League player? Pretty sure we were all in agreement that they won't, certainly in Hammond's case. Adkins however, has us playing some great football and could well be a success in the Prem - in the four games so far we have showed promise, and its pretty clear to most sensible people that we should judge once he has been able to embed his signings and has been able to play some of the type of teams we have a genuine chance of getting points from.

Well against Man Utd's midfield of England players we dominated for the most part - bet you didn't slag them after that game? Plus - kind of laughable saying it was lightweight and then suggesting Lallana and Ramirez as the central 2 ahead of Fonte. Fonte or Schneiderlin as the holding midfielder? Not even worth debating. Although seeing as you are one of the guys who questions what MS adds to the team then Im not suprised I disagree with you on most football matters. As tajjuk said above: We just need to play like we did against Utd, get Ramirez in and cut out the mistakes. Rather than playing Fonte in CM and messing around with bizarre selections and formations - there isnt a lot wrong apart from the basics of defending.

This. Plus this suggestion would never have been made after the Utd game. We had a bad result at the weekend but until then had showed lots of positive signs. Playing a host of players out of position after 4 games (three aginst top 4 teams) is a major knee jerk and clearly won't happen. We need to sharpen up at the back, not a lot else is wrong - we are just up against far better players.

This, plus what Adam Blackmore said should make threads like this pointless. Hopefully we get some points on the board at the weekend so next week we won't get this of trash.

Adam Blackmore from Solent said he spoke to someone at Saints last week who said the club support Adkins and are building for the long term. More credence to believe this rather than the Daily Star (who last weeks aid we are in talks with Redknapp which was/is also rubbish). Of course things may change but Im sure the club wouldn't be thinking about replacing NA now - fair enough if we have 0 points from 8 games it might be different, but thats unlikely.

He is on loan at Palace, started the first couple of games thenw as dropped and not in the squad at all. Made the bench last night but then they have signed Gabbidon today so he pretty much won't get a game. Wonder if we are able to bring him back and then loan him out again as it does nobody any good him not getting games. He could come back and play in our Dev squad but IMO he just needs proper games which was the idea loaning him out. He has probably only played about 15 professional matches in his career. Maybe we aimed too high sending him to Palace, perhaps should have gone somewhere like Bournemouth or Swindon and played every week. (Before anyone says he could play in our team - he isn't good enough).

I bet there will end up being about 50 unsold seats - located right behind the goal - making it seem like the ground is half full on TV.

Out of interest why do you think this? Adkins said said Wilkins does great work with the likes of Lallana and Chamberlain and Crosby used to be a CH so would be logical he focused more on the defensive side of things. Coaching worked last season - its the step up in class and illumination of making basic errors that is costing us at the moment.

Clue is in the publiation name.

To be fair I didn't think Rodgers would last long. He isn't coming to Saints - you only have to read this interview with him to see that he doesnt fit with our 'vision': http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2203307/Harry-Redknapp-First-interview-leaving-Tottenham-heart-surgery-England-job-tax-court-case.html Besides, the club already denied this.

Neville said, and clearly demonstrated that the midfield setup was fine, actually, good. Defensive shape and individual errors were costly with some poor keeping added to the mix. Off the top of my head I can only really think of Di Santo's goal for Wigan that realistically was a 'good' goal - all of the others we have condeded are down to defensive errors - mostly basic individual mistakes in positioning and marking.

Neither would I really, but if Davis isn't up to it then admitting we were wrong is better than continuing with a player who is out of his depth. Davis doesn't exactly have happy memories of the Prem either... Rumour came from Alex Crook a Journalist on Twitter who covers Saints and has been at all Adkins Press Conferences. Simon Peach said last night he had put some feelers out on it.

There is a few rumours about us being interested in him, but doesnt seem anything concrete so far. Would certainly be good for Davis to have some competition and if fit, there is no doubting Gordon's ability. He must be wanting to sign somewhere soon...

4-4-1-1 was how we played second half vs Arsenal. That works well with Ramirez in the 10 position.

On Saturday we get to see a home debut for our record signing who looks a class act. A few seasons ago we signed Ryan Smith instead.

Unless we sign another keeper this week I would be astonished if NA brought in Gazzaniga for the Villa game.

Nor me, and the key difference between Fox and Clyne is that Clyne has the energy to get forward and back but Fox doesn't so he is often in no man's land near the halfway line. He neither gets forward far enough when we attack, nor gets back enough to defend sufficiently - especially for someone with no pace he leaves way too much space in behind. Re tracking abck the issue is that Lallana and Puncheon are needing to be the main supports for Lambert - they can't be expected to do this and then also be on the edge of our box. IMO we would be best playing 4-4-1-1 with Ramirez off Lambert and for Lallana and Puncheon to play how the wide players did last year - ie get forward but also get into good defensive positions.

Totally agree re studs - crazy that a player can get that wrong. I think Richardson is a bit hyped up on here - he was solid for us but wasn't good enough for the Prem when he was younger and isn't now. He would be ripped apart by some of the attackers we have faced so far. The (great) tackle where Clyne injured Aguero for example, against Richardson Aguero would have run through on goal. He is the only quick player in the back four and as Dig Dig says has the attributes to be great - of course a work in progress but he is doing ok IMO.