Block 5

AP plays 4-4-2 : people moan. AP plays 4-5-1 : people moan. Solution? Stop moaning and let the manager do his job? PS. The formation and shape of the team will change, according to who we are playing.

This is it.

FFS! I'll have to switch the radio on.

Cool.

I think a fair few of the more infrequent visitors to this forum, who have been away from Blighty for a while have forgotten all about the unique British sense of humour.

Whoever said that the web was free and unregulated was clearly full of ****.

As Charlie said...... we'll have to let history decide. It's not our call to make. That decision will be made by current and future directors of major art galleries and private collectors around the globe (who are buying pieces by Banksy, not just Hirst, Perry et al). You say that plenty of older works continue to represent 'the now', that is certainly true on some levels. However, from a stylistic and technical viewpoint, they are rooted firmly in the past. Sorry for engaging you in serious discussion; I'll try not to make the same mistake twice. By the way, what is a head mental?

Do you have to register afterwards for your vote to count? I get enough junk email already without the PFA and their 'corporate partners' (anyone they sell my details to) sending me more. Can you cast multiple votes (by deleting your cookies) or is registration meant to prevent that?

Yes.

Danns was interviewed on TalkSport yesterday. Apparently he fancies himself as a bit of a producer (of music).

Unlikely. The game isn't being screened on Sky.

I love this quote...... "This was not unusual as the news was already being widely discussed on fans' forums, who had, like us, seen the plans on the council's website." I ran the above quote through Babelfish and it came out as: "We get all our Saints news from the Saintweb Forum."

Seems a bit extreme...... but what the hell......

No need to ask...... he's a smooth operator......smooooooooth operator....

Were Palarse fans sympathetic towards us when we went into admin?

Just swallow it and pretend it's sperm.

UNKLE - 'The Time Has Come'.

This looks much better than the commercial offering that Simon Cowell is apparently putting together. The cynic in me thinks that Cowell will be promoting his own p1sspoor stable of talentless celeb-whores, although I hope I am proved wrong. Whereas this looks like the real deal. Real musicians, who really care, making real music. I'm in. My own twisted suggestion....... I think that we could raise £millions for Haiti if we boiled Simon Cowell in oil, live on pay-per-view TV.

Agreed. Their football league show was ghastly.

The Southern Daily Echo Newspaper House Test Lane Redbridge Southampton SO16 9JX

I think we should get on down to Redbridge before the poopey game and pelt the Echo office with eggs and bog roll.

This thread has turned into a pretty good debate about the nature of art, which I hoped it would. Kadeem and Charlie, I agree with both of you. I have not said that old art (I don't like that term either) is less valid because it was primarily commissioned by the wealthy, just that it was less accessible at the time of it's commissioning. All art is subjective, and arguments about what actually constitutes art have been rolling on for years. Kadeem, I am not a reverse snob when it comes to classical art. I have spent many happy hours in the National Gallery, enjoying our Nation's greatest treasures. My personal favourites are 'The Execution of Lady Jane Grey' by Delaroche (which is one of the most emotive paintings I have ever seen) and Monet's breathtaking 'The Water-Lily Pond' (this is devastating - every photograph of this painting in every coffee table art book should be destroyed - this work should only be seen 'in the flesh'.) The National wasn't opened until the 19th century. Before that time, the idea that the poor could 'appreciate' art wasn't widely held. Thankfully we live in more enlightened times. As for my own personal opinions. I think that art, like music, reached it's zenith in the 17th, 18th and to a certain extent, 19th centuries. I feel that the great composers of that time will NEVER be bettered. In the same vein, the work of the great artists of that time (my own personal favourite being Velazquez) represent the pinnacle of artistic achievement. That said, art should always represent the NOW. It should be evocative. We wander the National and it evokes the past; we see the past through the eyes of the artist. All art can be a doorway to the time that it was created; Constable's Haywain, for example, evokes pastoral scenes from our rural past. Which brings me on to Charlie's point about today's modern art having no real value. In my opinion, you are way off the mark. In 200 years time, our descendants will wander the rooms of the Tate or the National and will view our world through the eyes of Francis Bacon, Andy Warhol, Grayson Perry, the Chapman brothers and yes.... even Banksy! Art is all about the now! (All in my humble opinion, of course).

Is our last boycott of the Echo over? If it is, then surely another one is long overdue. BOYCOTT THE ECHO!

No reason why he couldn't perform both roles. Plenty of business people sit on the boards of multiple companies. And as other posters have already said, this could work in our favour in the transfer / loan market.

I'm sure that Lord Yatesbury has much better taste.