derry

I would like to see that myself, but it may well be Gillett and Schneiderlin with Skacel at left back.

For sure, Man Utd is an example but they are so fluid and versatile we couldn't hope to replicate them, but we can learn the lesson of width over narrow, delay from the front and busting a gut to get back. Men on the far post and Utd do it better than anyone, rather than everybody in a melee outnumbered and blocked on the near post and nobody coming in unmarked on the far post.

I think you are missing the point, it's not the formation per se, it's the way the team play. At the moment we are narrow, that gives us a problem in attack, we can't stretch defences, and a problem in defence, space behind James especially that is exploited. It's horses for courses, we have to get results, this is a variation on our present formation but gives the thing we don't have at the moment, width and penetration in attack and cover and depth in defence.

Two up or one + one in close support provided there is two banks of four makes little difference. However it has to be natural sided players wide, Surman would always check inside with no option to go down the line, that's what needs sorting. Agree with the rest.

Any prat can be destructive, we need something better than we've got, simple enough to be successful, Man Utd keep it simple, albeit with good players, we need to keep it simple with ordinary players. I've seen about twenty matches this season and it is the same problem week in, week out. If we solve that problem and are more dynamic in delaying the opposition and getting goalside we will be a much better team.

He doesnt have to work harder FFS. He has to do the bloody job better. We are the most narrow team in the league attacking and the most wide open in defence. because of it. All the prat has to do is copy the basic Man Utd system, Two banks of four, wide men on the touchline, when on the ball wide, reinforce with the full back and striker/midfielder, the other winger doesn't get sucked in but targets the back corner of the penalty box/outside far post, outflanking the defence as it is pulled across. It's not rocket science, it's not Dutch powderpuff crap either. The other important thing when the move breaks down, the nearest front men try and block the defenders breaking and everybody else busts a gut to get goalside and cover. We do the strolling back bit well the rest we don't do at all. If we did that I guarantee we would be a pretty difficult team to beat.

No, it's past it's sell by date.

Ron, I have a big problem with JP and the alleged Dutch setup. When he came here he set out how the system worked, how it was important to have two raiding wide men on the touchlines. Then all season we have had a succession of wide men playing narrow, no crosses from the byeline, trying to batter the door down of a massed defence on a narrow front, nobody outside the far post, every bugger in the middle getting blocked off. Worse still because of this we are vulnerable to the counter attack wide and on the far post. If these idiots are such good coaches why is it they are letting our team play like imbeciles. If we would only play two proper banks of four, forget whether the strikers are two up or one/one, as long as the wingers stay wide to stretch out the defence, and the winger not on the ball doesn't allow himself to be sucked in and loiters on the corner of the penalty area to attack the far post, even now we could get out of trouble. It would also fill the gaps in our defence and make us a lot less vulnerable.

del boy, you really are going to have to get to grips with the English language. Your spelling is hopeless. bankers is spelt with a W not a B when related to SFC.

It's a bloody good job Ron wasn't voted into the B team last week, there would have been ructions on here this week if he'd been excluded.

You couldn't make it up. Could you? If true, confirms that Lowe won't sell. Imagine 6% of the shares and a total dictator, you certainly couldn't make it up. Maybe the target should be his supporters, see how well they take it.

If I was Chairman and as despised as Lowe is, I'd resign.

There wasn't enough opposition. If every non axis shareholder had turned up and voted against the board they would have lost. Lowe and Co tabled about 95% of the votes that they controlled, the more than 50% that didn't attend could have beaten Lowe. There was no point in voting in a pre ordained result.

It's not difficult we don't have any width. This makes the defence almost impossible to break down and exposes our fullbacks and the CBs because when the move breaks down, there is acres of space behind our fullbacks and midfield.

Ron's proposal should be tried irrespective, it would mean the non axis shareholders unseating Lowe if he wouldn't go. All the protests in the world from people he considers idiots won't persuade him to fall on his sword. Others will have to get rid of him. Ron's plan, the boycott and the coffin march should all go ahead and be publicised.

It's a shame we haven't got a televised game coming up. Fans could boycott and still see the game.

Well that just says it all about the viability and proactiveness of the trust, it's website is over a year out of date. Time to bin it, although I suppose it has effectvely binned itself.

So did I Nick, I couldn't believe his comment that Mike Riley was right with all the Man Utd decisions.

Saint Clark didn't support you at all, in response to your question, "When or where is he said to have said this?" He immediately replied in the next post "On Radio Hampshire after the game, I heard him say it as well." I think we got the message right.

Be as pedantic as you like, he did say that an empty stadium would bring the whole thing to a head and was the only way. That means as a listener who was at the match that he was supporting a boycott, that together with his obvious frustration and anger at the club. If he wasn't calling for a boycott, why say it was the only way to solve the problem.

Great! You lead then and the Army can move to Cheshire, that'll fix him.

Duncan, Ron, I was in Block 5 on Sat when the protests/fighting kicked off. Probably more than 99% of the crowd weren't involved and most seemed more interested in the football. When the second goal went in, quite a few walked out. A bit of noise/aggravation doesn't mean there is a majority waiting for a revolution. A lot, me included would like to see Lowe out, but a lot more would like to see the coaching staff and ultimately the players show some level of basic competence. Watching coaching staff, week after week, ignoring the importance of width and playing players on the wrong side is peeing me off a bloody sight more than Rupert Lowe, because that is why we are not winning matches.

Stadium side of the Itchen Bridge would be the place, anywhere else other than Hoglands Park would allow the police to block/divert it away from the city centre/SMS.

Ron, my views entirely, I have posted a similar view here this week, I think that initially a start would be a referendum guaranteed association for the 55% of the shareholders not in the Lowe/Wilde axis. High profile figures of integrity would be needed to give it credence. If those shareholders not in the axis could be persuaded en mass to proxy their votes Lowe could be unseated. However as a bystander I see the trust as a body which is tainted/discredited and lacks the necessary drive, will and credibility to do this job.