Jump to content

stevegrant

Administrators
  • Posts

    9,672
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by stevegrant

  1. Considering we've drawn 2-2 there on 3 separate occasions, I'd probably put money on that scoreline again. I'd certainly take a draw, just so that we're not the team who are the first to lose to Derby in the league for nearly a year.
  2. Match drawn. We'd got to 196/1, with Carberry and Lumb unbeaten on 88 and 83 respectively. 10 points for us, 12 for Somerset. A couple of other games going on in division 1, but they've got an extra day to play. However, the first innings have been completed in both so we know the bonus point scores already, which leaves the table looking like this: 1. Somerset 12 146 2. Nottinghamshire 12 137 3. Durham 11 136 4. Lancashire 11.5 126 5. Sussex 11.5 121 6. Hampshire 13 121 7. Yorkshire 12 116 8. Kent 11.5 119 9. Surrey 11.5 102 Barring a lot of rain tomorrow, Kent will beat Lancashire, and Surrey will probably draw with Sussex, which would put Kent onto 133, Lancashire unchanged on 126, Surrey on 106 and Sussex on 125. We play Durham next week, but the key game starts on 9th September at the Oval against Surrey. Interestingly, Surrey only have a day's break before that game, as they have a game against Kent starting on the 4th.
  3. Not much danger of that, to be honest, particularly if Ian Blackwell and the number 9 are hanging around for a 100-run partnership. We've got 11 overs to take 2 wickets to get us the third bowling point and then it'll be played out as a comfortable draw IMO.
  4. I seem to remember reading that the ticket office has changed its e-mail address as well... if you tried tickets@saintsfc.co.uk, try ticketoffice@saintsfc.co.uk (or vice versa)
  5. He was offered a deal at Wolves but he rejected it. They only offered him a monthly rolling contract.
  6. Given Harte's injury record at Levante (who he left a year ago to join Sunderland), I'd be surprised if he wasn't offered a pay-as-you-play deal, assuming we offer him anything at all.
  7. Based on performances, Lampard is the one who should be dropped, without question. Last night, I can't remember Lampard being involved in anything at all, not even a little one-touch layoff in the centre circle, whereas at least Gerrard was trying to get things going in the first half. I turned off after an hour so missed anything that happened after that, although somehow I doubt Lampard suddenly upped his game and put in a man-of-the-match performance... Rooney plays that way even on the rare occasions we've got a balanced midfield. It wasn't anything to do with the tactics/performance last night.
  8. Rectifying his own scandalous mistake. That decision must have cost the FA millions in revenue and sponsorship.
  9. I think you answered your own question there. Gerrard's the only one who's looked remotely likely to create anything so far, apart from set-pieces. We're screwed if we're having to rely on free-kicks and corners to score goals. Good to see Lampard, Terry and Rooney backing up what I said yesterday about them. Lampard has been entirely anonymous, Rooney isn't a striker and Terry got turned in the penalty area by Milan Baros, a player who hadn't scored in 24 games.
  10. Better late than never.
  11. stevegrant

    Moving

    You're not suggesting that Jouls fouls people a lot, are you?
  12. Does he? Feel free to point to an article where he states this.
  13. Lumb gone for 107. 226/6 from 91.1 overs. Can we get another 74 runs to give us 3 batting points? Ervine looks in surprisingly good nick, currently unbeaten on 40, and Mascarenhas has just joined him at the crease.
  14. From more angles than I think you're suggesting. After all, many people on here claimed (and still claim, despite mountains of irrefutable evidence to the contrary) that Lowe refused to spend any money when he was chairman the first time around.
  15. http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/search/?page_id=6853
  16. That's true, but if the only takers are willing to take them on a loan basis, I don't see that we've got an awful lot of choice in the matter.
  17. Rasiak signed a 4-year deal when his loan from Spurs was made permanent. Saganowski's is a 3-year deal, so I think they both expire at the same time, i.e. in 2010.
  18. They did: http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/news/?page_id=10414 It seems as if nobody is willing to take the likes of Saganowski and Rasiak off our hands on a permanent basis right now, presumably because of their high salaries. They can probably afford to take them on loan, paying the salaries for a short period of time and with no obligation at the end of the loan period to sign them permanently. In terms of the benefit to us, it gives us a short-term cash flow relief but we also still own the registration of two players who have demonstrated an ability to score goals at this level at times in the last 2 years. If we can get ourselves back to a situation where the finances aren't so tight, perhaps we might still see the pair of them play for us again, or (again, if we get to a non-desperate financial state) sell them for more than a pittance.
  19. Indeed. Alan Shearer, sold for £3.3m in 1992, replaced with Kerry Dixon and David Speedie for sod all Tim Flowers, sold for £2.4m in 1993, replaced with Dave Beasant for £300k Kevin Davies, sold for £7.5m in 1999, replaced with James Beattie for £1m Dean Richards, sold for £8.1m in 2001, replaced with Michael Svensson for £2m And those are just a handful off the top of my head dating back 16 years.
  20. On paper, it's a very good side. Unfortunately, football isn't played on paper and players have to perform to their abilities on a regular basis if they are to keep their reputations intact. The vast majority of that team didn't do that last season.
  21. Fair enough. I have a strange recollection of a news article somewhere stating that he'd been released by Reading in the summer.
  22. Bennett was apparently released by Reading in the summer, although SoccerBase are indicating that he's still owned by them. He's currently playing for Brentford, although whether that's on loan or if he's under contract there now isn't too clear.
  23. http://www.southamptonifc.co.uk Currently, the only player profiles are the ones from the WorldNet squad. I'll update that when I get time. The first series of league/cup fixtures are on there. We also have a friendly against FC Intier, formerly known as Old Thatched House (who will be playing in the division above us), on Sunday 31st August on the rubber-crumb surface (can't find anywhere with goals up at the moment) at Wyvern School, 11.00 kick-off.
  24. And he's now apparently injured as well, so not much chance of him being sold right now.
  25. No, they have a hotel.
×
×
  • Create New...