Sidney Fudpucker the 3rd

This pretty much sums up life in the premier****e. Fixtures getting moved all the time. It's a joke. Football should be played on a Saturday afternoon at 3pm. 4pm on a Sunday is not ideal when you've got young kids to get ready for school the following day. It makes taking them to away games almost impossible and makes me think twice about taking them to home games as I don't get back until gone 8pm.

Any game where we've been leading with 10 minutes to go and then lost. That accounts for quite a lot of Saints games. Tranmere away when we led 3-0 at half time and lost 4-3 was particularly disappointing.

It just doesn't look like Saints. Every time I watch us I'm reminded of Liverpool in the early 80's... Although, not in the way we play. It wouldn't be as bad if we kept the lack shorts & white socks but the all red just isn't Saints.

And now to answer the OP: 1. I am amazed that any Saints fan could have felt 'annoyed' over the signing of such a highly rated player. Why? Everybody is entitled to an opinion. It's annoying as I believe that we could've signed other 'players' who would have added more depth than adding one player. 2. Yes, there were, and still are, other areas that needed attention. In particular goalkeeper and defence. However, we did sign two goalkeepers (admittedly one was for the development squad), an England U21 international RB and a full Japanese international CB. So we didn't exactly ignore those areas. No, fair comment. But do you feel that either of those are capable of stepping up should Davies get injured? Now, I'm not saying that they're not good enough, just that it's the Premier league and it's a tough place for a young, inexperienced goalkeeper. Look at teams like Villa, Spurs and even QPR. They've all got 2 keepers fighting for the No.1 shirt. I don't believe we have. 3. You state we ignored those areas in favour of 'unknown' strikers and attacking midfielders. I presume you mean 'unknown to you' as I had certainly heard of all our signings before they were recruited. In fact, I am sure the majority of posters on here had heard of Ramirez (the prime 'annoyance' of yours) and Mayuka before they were linked with us. I'd never heard of Mayuka. I'd seen Yoshida & Ramierez play. I wonder just how many people can hand on heart say that they had heard of Ramirez prior to him being linked with Saints? You say that the majority of forum users would have been familiar with him. I have to disagree. My guess is that less than 50% would have known who he was. I say this because I work with a huge number of Liverpool supporters and when they we're linked with him only 1 or 2 knew who he was. You'd have thought he'd be better known to Liverpool supporters as they've been playing european football more than saints? The reality is that we'll never know as I doubt anybody is going to admit it now. 4. Why do people still think that the signing of any and all new players at football clubs, and particularly at Saints, is all down to the manager? That sort of thing went out of the window many years ago at most clubs. It has been widely stated that Saints have a committee for the recruitment of new players. I am sure Adkins does have a high degree of say in that committee but it is not all down to him to identify players, negotiate with them and their agents and hen to get them to sign on the dotted line. This does not mean anyone is a Cortese signing either; it is a group effort. And, in any case, Adkins clearly admitted, on a number of occasions, that he wanted to bring in 2 CBs; it is also pretty clear that he would have also liked to bring in a new LB, so any criticism of him 'not buying enough defenders' is well off IMO. 4. Sadly, I don't think all signings are down to the manager. Personally I believe they should be as he's the one who is in direct contact with the players and knows the team better than anyone else. I don't recall saying that we hadn't signed 'enough defenders' as you put it. I'm disappointed that we've not strengthened in those areas and I think that the performances and results show that we do have an issue. 5. I have kept the most pertinent answer to your post until last......... Where has anybody said that Ramirez was signed at the expense of signing other possible options, especially in other positions (i.e. CB and LB). How do you collate, and justify, our signing of a fantastic young creative attacking player as being the reason we didn't sign any other defenders apart from the full international CB and the U21 international RB? Please find me a statement from Adkins or Cortese that says this is so. Also, please give me a list of all the players we asked about or negotiated with and the reasons as to why these deals didn't come off, particularly indicating those that were scratched solely because of the funds being used to purchase Gaston! I don't believe that his signing was at the expense of other possible options (CB & LB). I also don't recall saying that it was the signing of GR for £12m that led to us not signing defenders - That is how people have chosen to interpret what I asked. I asked if the £12m could've been better spent elsewhere. For example, Phillips & Ince maybe? £12m on one player in a squad like ours is a lot and if he can't settle or gets injured then we're back to square one. Had we signed 2 or 3 players then maybe we'd be in a better position to cover this kind of event should it occur.

No. Read what I said. This talk of it preventing the potential signing of a CB has been generated as the thread has progressed. I asked if the money could've been better spent elsewhere. ie, on the signing of 2 or maybe 3 players rather than 1. As I said, it could've added more depth to the squad. I admit that I think the defence is an area that could've been improved but the point I'm trying to make is that would we have been better signing the likes of Phillips and Ince with that mone? And before people start, I'm using Phillips and Ince purely as an example.

I did try and send you a PM but I got a message saying that my message could not be sent. FYI I've had a death in the family so I'm sure you can understand that I've got more important things to be dealing with at this moment in time.

That could work. I Thought Richardson did a good job at RB last season so if Clyne can play at LB and things with Fox don't improve then I see no harm in switching Clyne to the left. That said, he's done a great job at RB, far better than I expected, so I don't think I'd want him to be over on the left as a long term solution.

Well if there's no point to this thread why have you and plenty of other replied to it? I think I'll reply to Minsk via a PM. That way I won't have to endure anymore of this nonsense. :-)

When exactly did you become the spokesperson for 'many others'? I don't see a list of people demanding a response. This isn't a court room where users are put on some kind of trial. It's a Internet forum for discussing topics relating to Saints. The purpose of this thread was to get people talking, which unless I'm mistaken, it has. Amongst all the petty name calling there are some good view points. Minsk's post is excellent - Well written, concise and raises some valid points. I don't have to respond to every post on here just to satisfy you and your 'ner ner, ner ner ner, told you so' attitude. My original post asked the question, 'could the money spent on GR have been better spent elsewhere?' my opinion (and it would appear the opinion of some others) is that it could. I gave my view on why I felt this was the case. I accept that may not be everybody's opinion but that's no reason to start ridiculing people. Minsk obviously feels differently and has given his reasons why. He's gone about it in a sensible and well reasoned manner without trying to hang people out to dry.

You know when I referred to people on this forum who don't like it when people say things that are of a different opinion? Well you fit the mould perfectly. I started this topic as a point for discussion, not to get into tit-for-tat arguments but seeing as that's the way you seem to operate I've duly obliged. FWIW. I apologise for my error with regard to the Jose thread. Unlike your perfect self I don't have a photographic memory for everything I've posted. I don't believe that Yoshida is the answer at this level and I think he's a huge gamble. I hope he proves me wrong, I really do, but he played for a team with one of the worst defensive records in the league and that is a fact.

Not at all. I just don't see how the signing of GR & EM will benefit a team that clearly can't defend at this level.

Why not? Do you honestly believe that if they'd started yesterday our defence wouldn't have still leaked 3 goals?

I said 'let's face facts, we have a real problem' which I believe we do. Did you not see the game yesterday? We are defensively inept and signing GR for £12m is not the answer to that! It doesn't matter how good he turns out to be. If we don't stop leaking goals were doomed. I hope that makes it a bit clearer for you.

Not a veiled criticism at all. Just concerned at our apparent failure to address the problems at an important time in the clubs history.

True, but we also played a very average Wigan side and didn't even look like we were at the races. :-/

Thanks man. There's too many people on here who are very quick to ridicule you for not having the same opinion as them. I like Internet forums as they offer fans the space to discuss any number of topics. However, what I don't like is the bullying mentality that some people adopt simply because your view is not the same as theirs.

Yep.

Do you know, that's a very good point. With all the attention focused on GR, I'd completely forgotten about J-Rod.

Why is it a stupid thread, Because you don't agree with it? So you're honestly happy that we've failed to address the most problematic areas of the team and are paying the price for doing so? All I've said is that I'd have rather seen that £12m spent elsewhere.

You have a point. But after seeing what happened yesterday you have to agree that money should've been spent elsewhere?

Why? Because I've had the ******** to be be honest and face facts. Because I don't have a rose tinted view of what's going on? It's a forum. It's all about opinions. Not being lambasted for not having the same blinkered opinion as everybody else.

Spot on mate. I realise this is a taboo subject, but that's why I asked the question. Why have a forum if you're not going to be honest and discuss the tricky subjects?

He's not the answer. Let's face facts. We have a real problem. A problem that should've been addressed before we started spunking £12m on a player who is largely unknown and may not even be cut out for life in the premiership.

Personally I was annoyed by the signing as there were other areas that desperately needed attention and £12m would have gone a long way to solving our problems. If the fans could see the areas that needed addressing then why were they ignored in favour of signing unknown strikers and attacking midfielders? £12m would've added depth and quality to the squad. It's great that the club are trying to make a statement of intent but how about doing it after you've got the bread and butter of the team sorted? I've just read a thread about which out of contract players we should be looking to sign for the problem areas. A list of goalkeepers, left backs and centre backs. The very areas that we all knew were a problem at the start of the season... You have to laugh. I like Adkins, he's done a fantastic job, but this has raised my first doubts about him. How could he get it so wrong? If this was an episode of The Apprentice his failure to address the problem would have him staring at Lord Sugar's pointed finger and hearing the words, 'your fired'.

This makes laugh. We all knew where the weak areas in the team were yet our manager ignored it and spent the majority of transfer budget on 1 player and brought in a bunch of players who are largely unknown.