stevegrant

They've quoted me on something, but used a really old photo.

2004 called and asked for its photo back

I'm intrigued as to what you would consider a major enough rumour that the club should respond to...

He was at the Football Writers Association dinner in London last night, so probably just meeting someone for lunch as he was already up there.

Wood plays. Carberry, Adams, Vince, Ervine, McKenzie, Pothas, Dawson, Cork, Herath, Wood, Tomlinson

Believe what you want, I'm past caring. If you genuinely believe the events of the last week are down to the Echo making things up, you need serious help.

Why?

I'm certain that he did.

Yes, as I was saying from the start, but apparently that makes me an Echo employee Well the only person who knows for sure is Cortese himself, and let's face it, there's not a cat in hell's chance he'd admit to changing his mind based on fan support as it would a) implicitly give credit to the Echo, and b) demonstrate a lack of conviction in his own decision-making. We'll never know what made him change his mind, but I'm certainly thankful that he did.

No, we conduct our business privately

Incredibly, you can get odds of 29/2 (strange price!) on a 90-minute win for Pompey with bwin. Full list: http://www.oddschecker.com/football/english/fa-cup/chelsea-v-portsmouth/win-market

If you are naive enough to assume that Cortese is telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, and hasn't (reluctantly) changed his mind on certain issues, of course.

Indeed it is. Also, newspapers who print libellous stories and comments tend to find themselves either issuing a public apology pronto or up in front of the High Court. As a result, a key duty of any journalist is to ensure that they are not going to encounter any legal issues with what they are publishing, particularly at a relatively small publication like the Echo where they don't have the financial clout to defend any resulting lawsuit.

They really don't. You're guilty of exactly what you accuse the journalists... being lazy. Maybe so, but to take an extreme example, you wouldn't see one paper report on David Cameron being appointed Prime Minister and the rest ignore the story because it might make them look lazy that they're reporting on the same story as someone else. Not an entirely unfair question in the context of how so many fans can motivate themselves to go to Wembley but less than half are at St Mary's every other week. I tend to read them but tend not to take much notice of the individual poster most of the time. I think that allows me to be more objective with any replies I choose to make. I read a copy at half-time - it wasn't my own copy, sadly. I read it from cover to cover and couldn't see any editorial comment that could have caused the withdrawal.

Sorry, but that's just absolute nonsense. It is not in their interests to create unrest among the fanbase... successful team = more sales of the Echo. Pretty much everyone I know bought one the day after the JPT final, even those who were "boycotting" it. Their job is to report the news. Radio Solent said that Liebherr was unhappy, and was the reason for him not being at the Southend game. The matchday programme was withdrawn without any sort of reason given as to why it was done. Rumours have been circulating about Pardew's future for weeks, if not months. The national papers then pick up on it and get reports that he's going to be sacked. Put all that together and it's a tidal wave of overwhelming evidence pointing to one thing. Why would the Echo not report on it? If they hadn't, everyone on here would be whinging at them being out of touch with what's going on. If - and it's a big if - there genuinely was nothing in the "Pardew Out" rumours, Radio Solent and in particular Adam Blackmore need to take the blame for the crescendo of Chinese whispers of the last week.

Well firstly it was Radio Solent who broke the story, the Echo (and others) have just rehashed it. Why is nobody giving Solent a hard time? Secondly, don't you think NC would probably have avoided all the hassle if he'd come out sooner with the sort of statement we've seen today (given that our season effectively ended three weeks ago), and at least given some sort of explanation for the programmes being withdrawn on Saturday? Neither I, nor the two aforementioned tabloid and agency journalists I know and spoke to, had any recollection of a similar thing happening at a game. All it does is feed the rumour mill. The national press generally don't give a toss about us, unless there is a genuine story to be written. Believe it or not, journalists don't just make things up (although they are often "padded", clearly) - there is always something behind the story.

This wasn't the Echo waiting for him. They know they'll get sod all from him so don't bother anymore. These were journalists from national newspapers and news agencies.

While it's "pointed" and very petty, it's not showing a lack of support for the club. My point was that the Echo's remit is to report on what's going on at Saints, and they will be supportive of the club because that's the general consensus among its readership. However, if there is a story - which there was, started by Adam Blackmore on Radio Solent on Saturday - then they will see it as being in the interests of Saints fans to print it, regardless of what Cortese thinks. They can't withhold a story from print just because they don't want to annoy Cortese, otherwise you'd get people (rightly) asking why they weren't reporting on key stories, and let's face it, the potential sacking of our manager is pretty key. Let me ask you this - if there was nothing in the "Pardew out" rumours that were circulating on Saturday before and during the game, why did Cortese feel the need to sneak out of the stadium via a back entrance into a waiting second car, thereby avoiding the journalists who were waiting by his car in the car park to speak to him?

What in any of their articles suggests they're not supporting the club?

I'll be sending an email to everyone with full details of the itinerary etc either tomorrow or Saturday.

If ever there was a case for a player being sacked for negligence...

Are we? Obviously there are no publicly visible figures for this, and won't be for some time (private limited companies have more time to submit accounts to Companies House), but my estimation is that we're actually pretty close to break-even (if we're not making a profit), particularly with the attendances we've had this season and the spin-offs from the two cup runs.

No chance, all it means is that Ancelotti moves Ivanovic into the centre alongside Alex, with Ferreira or Belletti at right-back. Intelligent defending >>> "Brave" diving-into-tackles defending

They were only docked 10 points for financial irregularities (payments to agents made through a third party rather than through the football club), the other 20 were for failing to agree a CVA in the club's third period of administration.