Jimmy_D

Congratulations to Dean Stoneman, a Southampton lad that has just won Formula 2, and qualified for a F1 superlicense. He's been picked up by Williams as a test driver. Hopefully he'll get a drive one day and we can all get behind him http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/9012803.stm

Thanks! A full sized version of http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/4151/lightning009.jpg would be great.

Very nice. They'd be awesome for a desktop background, if you don't might them being used, just on my own computer?

And the tide is starting to turn back against them it would seem...

At the moment, Pompey are still in administration, so they're protected from a winding up order etc. and bills like that fall to the administrator to pay, if Pompey can't cover it themselves. If the Administrator is not willing to pay it they can wind the company in question up and distribute assets to the creditors.

http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/showthread.php?14620-Pompey-Takeover-Saga/page616 ?

I'm actually amazed now. I mean, I know it's Pompey, but for over a year now, I actually can't remember a single week without a bad story about them.

No respect for our history eh? Have you seen our shirt this season?

That's from before our statement. A few hours is a long time in football! (Also, tinyurl is your friend) Like this: http://tinyurl.com/2v8dtfc

Aww, do you think that the fact this is going on and on and on and on and on and on is starting to get to him?

Who's dressing it up as anything? We don't like you. That doesn't stop us being disgusted by the fact charities had money stolen from them by your club. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

Just realised I hadn't taken into account the compensation issue, but it still fits (maybe a bit better now). We ask for permission to talk to Adkins, which is granted. During this the issue of compensation comes up, but we can't agree. They let us talk to him as the interview might convince us to pay what they want. We interview Adkins, tell him we'll get back to him, and start preparing for the next candidate to be interviewed. The media get wind that he's been interviewed, try to get a scoop and assume he's been appointed. Their chairman, hearing in the media he's being appointed, and not having heard anything from us about compensation etc. assumes the worst because we couldn't agree compensation, and goes off on one to the media. We release our statement.

Bearing in mind their chairman has been quoted as admitting he hasn't talked to Adkins yet, I think it might have gone something like this: We ask for permission to talk to Adkins, which is granted. We interview Adkins, and start preparing for the next candidate to be interviewed. The media get wind that he's been interviewed, try to get a scoop and assume he's been appointed. Their chairman, hearing in the media he's being appointed, and not having heard anything from us about compensation etc. assumes the worst and goes off on one to the media. We release our statement.

I was arguing they should present both sides to let people make up their own mind. Are you saying they should only present one side of it because you happen to believe that side and no one else should think any differently to you? Idiot.

Yeah? Well I think that Scunny chairman's quotes are an emotive, bitter, swipe at Saints for not offering as much money as they think the best manager they've ever had is worth. Oooh, look, we can both play that game!

I wish they'd update the BBC article with our statement, looks very bad on us atm until they do, when it'll be down to people to make their own mind up.

Notice how the quotes from the Scunny chairman don't say we didn't offer any compensation, only that none was agreed. Methinks they were asking for a silly amount and we walked away. What's caused their chairman to come out with claims of tapping up in effect... could be us, could be him, but there's no way of telling for the moment.

Hm, Scunny chairman is spinning that I reckon. Notice it says that compensation wasn't agreed, NOT that we didn't offer any. I reckon we tried to come to an agreement, Scunny wanted a silly amount of compensation ("difficult to work with") and THEN we (stupidly) tried to get him to resign.

Something along the lines of 'well we triiiiied to get rid of him, so can we not count him in the 20? OKTHXBYE!'

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/s/sheff_wed/8980290.stm So still on 10 points. Good. That means they'll have no excuse when we overtake them. I wonder how different things might have been if we'd been with CoOp instead of Barclays...

Saints stopped being more leaky than a sieve just over a year ago for some strange reason. Since then, the rumours that we used to be able to rely(!) on so confidently remain just that. Rumours. We might be one of the few clubs where the OS is actually the first place we're likely to hear news.

It occurs to me that since he left, no one has said anything official at all about Pardew being sacked. Not from Cortese or from Pardew. No goodbye, no explaination, no 'me and the chairman didn't get on,' no 'he was a nightmare to work with'. Maybe there is something in the gross misconduct rumours after all, and Cortese gave him the option of leaving quietly to protect the 'victim' of the gross misconduct, if there was one, or maybe the club itself, depending on what he might have done, as much as to protect Pardew. Given the timing, I can't make anything else sit with me that fits, Cortese is a rich businessman, he's probably had to work with people he doesn't like before to get where he is, it doesn't seem 'right' to me that he would just sack him because he doesn't get on with him. Dunno, just thinking out loud here, can't see how else it makes sense.

back out to 3's with SkyBet now

If we knew whether he'll ever be in the reckoning for a top job we'd probably try and find some way of making money out of that knowledge. If he can take Scvnthorpe into the Championship he must have some talent as a manager, how far that goes remains to be seen. Hence 'up and coming'.

4's with VC now.