Dangermouth

Actually not a bad idea: the Fox/Shaw thing.

I seem to remember the first interview/piece I read on NC went like this. "NC arrived at SFC and looked at the trophy cabinet. 'Where are they?', he asked. 'That's it.' said someone pointing to a plastic replica cup. 'We'll have to change that' said NC" Ofc he's interested in 'yo-yoing', just as in his career as a Swiss Banker he was interested in losing money and hugging trees.... Is it now the case that people simply can't read any more? I know there is a huge amount of people picking on 3 words of someone's argument and trying to make a clever point, and that's not the WUMs, but actually having a bit of a clue when there actually is information out there or 'listening' properly to someone on what is called a 'mong spazzboard' might actually mean this forum is less mong and spazz and more like TSF (as was, unless I've forgotten the name of it now). As to the kit; if they paid for it let em suffer in it while we go back to the proper kit.

No. Every player who talks about the club says he's good and they aren't likely to be on the same wage as Rooney (who they probably also think is good), even thought they'd like the paypacket. He was not so good partly on Monday because WBA double or triple-tagged him and as MS and the short, not very-good bloke from Northern Ireland didn't show for him very much he essentially got crowded out while looking for the (non-existant) pass. The forwards also didn't do much as everyone either ball-watched or ran away from the ball like they were 8 or 9 year olds. To effect (vb) - to bring into effect or make happen: To affect (vb) to alter, change or modify in some fashion. Now almost obsolete due to the preponderence of the wholly-inappropriate 'impact' (because all people can do is copy off wot they saw even if they don't know what it was, but everybody's doing it, right?). Over to whoever for the next lesson ... .

We actually do have some good players on paper. Just wish the f-rs would show it though. 3rd rant tonight - Hell, the team played better under Portaloo - maybe bring him back as a coach? If we had had say RL and JF in that team (instead of Mcgoaldrought and Lancashire) we'd have stayed up.

I agree. If he put himself about a bit more he could have fashioned a couple of good chances in the first half. I wanted to get on there to show him how to shoulder-barge defenders, he was so ineffectual (i.e. "Kill the f-g bastard"). Basically he should drop the nice guy bit and get a bit of arrogance and attitude like Fat Face Rooney has - a few bookings would do him good (4 a season only).

Agree: Fox is being shafted by AL. I don't care if he's responsible for 4 assists when his inability to do his job means he's responsible for far more going in the other end. He's very slow, not just chasing a player, but in his running speed. His speed of thought isn't always quick enough, he's weak in the tackle, he doesn't know when to go to the man and fannies about, he knows full well that DF has to defend the middle and so he should look to cover the wings but doesn't and anyone who blathers on about 'learning to be captain' as it's his full season just shows that he's not a leader. He should have just fouled Odemwinge/whoever the WB dross was that got the pass away in the middle and be done with it, not back off. Get a yellow card, FFS. I think we should sell him to a championship team and play Mayuka on the right and Ramirez on the left. I've now seen enough of him to know he flatters to deceive but can't deliver. As for Davis, he did 2 poor balls when not under pressure but that did put us under pressure, he should grow a pair and Spiderman (who I do rate) was just being a coward and too f-g scared to get involved. WB were ****e and I could only watch the first half as I was in danger of getting thrown out of the pub for assaulting the tv .... As for this ****e about NA having lost the dressing room, wtf. So men now play football so that the manager can say nice things about them? I know they're a bit poncy now, but if that really were the case then we'd have far more women managers as were they 'fit' the players would be trying to impress. ****ty night, ****ty performance, it's the f-g midfield that's a disgrace. Mind you, Yoshida shouldn't have just waved his leg at the ball - at least try a decent swing to try to get maximum deflection or leave it and know your keeper will get it, cause Gazza would have otherwise. And for those who keep talking about the good things that players do. So what? It's not about what good things they do at that level, unless it's in attack, it's about the mistakes that they make. The ones who don't make mistakes are invaluable when coupled with good, intelligent, quick in the last third forward play.

That was probably jumping speed. And did it take him 3 hours to get up to speed? Just another example of how meaningful 'statistics' is. Statistics now means quoting a number and treating that as a 'fact', apparently. The Mark Noble figure has more meaning. Newham = a shthole in East London, for those lucky enough not to have been / lived around there.

Think how you'd feel if every day someone came and asked you if you were going to be sacked today. Doubt any of us wouldn't think "STFU". If it happens, it happens. All this drivel is just boll- cks and as he says - get a few wins and forget all this crap journalism. They don't know sh ! t, they're paid too much and all they do is try to make stories out of speculation and gossip cause there are too many of them and nothing that's real to write / speak about - even if they were capable, which they're not.

SDR, Jos, Fox, Guly, Chaplow, Butterfield, Puncheon (if he keeps fannying about and doesn't track back and tackle/take up the correct positions), Davies, Lee, Seabourne, Lallana if he keeps slowing things down and/or can't pass right and doesn't track back, SRL if he doesn't perform (heresy, but thar ya go),. At least 10, anyway. Barnard, Hammond, Forte and Sharp too (even though they're on loan). Let's face it, most of them didn't get long-term contracts last season because the club thought they were PL quality (unless people at the club really don't have a clue) so it's plain they were hedging their bets in case we didn't go up.

You were being a total WUM this morning, but I do agree with you on this. It seems LR has a lot to say about what goes on at SFC, which would be expected given how NC would have worked in his banking days, and from articles I've read he definitely thinks he can bring the success he helped bring to the England set-up to Saints although from the sound of it he can just repeat theory and knows and can do jack-sht himself.

I had heard that a number of Spurs fans had tickets in the Saints' areas. Perhaps they were involved? That applies to the fighting that apparently broke out too.

Sometimes I wonder if the intelligent life in Southampton has left and the remainder should be castrated because otherwise the city will attract the reputation of being exactly like such luminous areas as Portsea, Paulsgrove, etc. Did anyone think to question the OP or wait for official confirmation? No. Did anyone actually think, or was capable of, actually reading the post? Let's put a couple of obvious things out there. Send a player out on loan because SFC have said they wanted 3 keepers available for the first team, like most teams do - including BC who, incidentally, have no injuries noted to any of their keepers (one of whom is much more likely to take the place of the first choice if required than someone who is 2nd/3rd choice at another club) according to their web site. Send him to a club that are 2nd from bottom in the league below because the logic is that he shouldn't be played behind a defence that is struggling and in a team that is struggling. Presumably that 'logic' applies only in one division and not the other. Quite why anyone doesn't simply put the OP to the test (or ignore, even) I would have to wonder. Then I read the posts from the majority on here and wonder no more.

Didn't realise there was such high turnover everywhere. http://www.leaguemanagers.com/managers/longest-current.html

Steve Claridge, at St Mary's for BBC Radio 5 live sports extra "I've never seen two more contrasting performances from one team. Incredible. We went from Southampton not having a shot or even barely a touch, to all of a sudden playing some decent stuff, having a go, creating some chances and eventually running out of time. But Southampton will be kicking themselves, because they left them 30 minutes of a 90 minute game to get something. But there is something there to build on for Southampton, because towards the end that was up there with the best football I've seen from the Saints. The first half was one of the worst I have ever seen from a team in the Premier League."

As I can't edit and obviously didn't proof-read; there's an unnecessary comma in the 4th line. HTH.

In time-honoured fashion (as deserved) and moving left to right along the front and then r-l along the back: Maybe, unless she really is a dwarf in which case I think she'd split; No: too shiny; Maybe, but I wonder why she's smirking. Is the fella behind her, goosing? No, looks like she needs a punch in the face: far too smiley and happy-clappy; No, needs her eyes straightening; No, looks 12 (IQ - wise) and epitomises the word 'nondescript', as I'm feeling kind; We have men dressed as women now? And to the back: Boris Johnson's love-child with a labrador; I presume it's a male, so no further comment. Possibly, although the face looks painted-on; No, looks like has walked into a wall (and then kept on walking); Numpty bloke; Numpty bloke. As someone's said: a lot of 'kerfuffle' to try to appeal to the older man and the corporates (who, from memory, don't seem to be filling their boxes).

Class. I wonder when, or if, people will get how much he takes the ****** in interviews?

Disharmony? Where, when, how? Or just more idle drivel. To think, someone invented the internet for a good reason ....

Wigan? How did he do then? I agree with the idea of having different players to come in and challenge the oppo defence. Some might be good on the deck, poor in the air and vice versa. If we have different types of players to bring in we should be able to play to our strengths and against their weaknesses. Mind you, we do like to give away penalties as well as OGs and soft goals, so that tends to negate and other plans.

Ah. You see. When NA was interviewed post-Fulham, you could see he was livid with how 'open' Saints were (I agree: they are far too open at times) so that most certainly is not his choice: it's the failure of the players to be consistent throughout the whole game. If they were/could be consistent then we'd have won far more points and games.

Was a clear push. Saw it first time I saw the game highlights. It seemed Carroll was told to fall over every time he was challenged, as well.

Oh, and yeah, Boruc is class when he's fit and motivated. Keep him in: no-brainer.

Just looked at the match thread. If the game had finished at 45 mins, most would have been content, if not quite happy. In fact, some even said Saints did some things well, even if they didn't score. Unless someone is suggesting NA told them to give away two stupid goals in 2 minutes (and I wouldn't be surprised with some on here), then really the thing that cost us the game is the stupid defensive mistakes which probably account for 20 of the goals we've let in. 4th goal summed up the poor defending: they dropped too deep and with 3 of them back there, the closest player should have gone to close him down earlier. That indicates that the personnel aren't 'good enough', although they have been good enough for much of the game, only going to pieces in short spells here and there. As others have said - it's all between their ears. That may be sufficient for them to be considered inadequate and shipped out, but for now we're stuck with them. If the team is over-reliant on one source/person then even if they play if they're marked out of the game (as MLT often was by the likes of Keown) then the team has to be good enough to adapt on its own - this isn't american football, it's a bit more spontaneous than that so dropping a player isn't necessarily a bad thing, especially when/if the team are likely to go long with him playing and him being up a defender who is very good in the air, not so much on the deck (Collins). It's nice to see so many owners/managers of SFC ready to wield the axe and yet gripe about the 'right way' to treat people - pots and kettles? As for formation. To repeat what others have said elsewhere when stating the obvious to those who don't/can't get it: if the player who is meant to do a job doesn't do it, then that leaves the team open regardless of whether it's 10-0 or 1-1-1-1-1-5. Keep NA , but get a damn good defensive coach in (or Glenn Hoddle - cough - and his faith healer woman friend) to assist.

Except, of course, smarter teams do things to stretch the play so you don't end up trying to play in 3 cms of space. I think he'd have done ok if he'd have found a little bit of space. Thought Shelvey didn't do anything special, Carrick is a crab, Cleverley doesn't know where to run or how (applies to pretty much all of them, however), and Carroll on the one occasion he got the ball to feet showed he isn't very comfortable at all with that and then doesn't know where to go. Mind you, it was only once and you'd have to see him over several games to know if he's a carthorse with lead wellies on the deck or can play a good holding role.

Family club. One that's safe for the family to go to (and they do). I.e. not one full of chavs and hooligans like many clubs were perceived to be (or actually were).