CHAPEL END CHARLIE

I'll match your 'Yikes' and raise you a 'Bloody Hell'. Paying this kind of money for another teams teenage prospect - who is not even called Theo or Alex is insane. Unless he's brilliant of course, in which case I reserve the right to claim that I always said it was a sound investment.

Ever since I can first remember I always wanted to be a gangster .....

We have very good reason here not to like him here of course, and the fans of any club he is at can rest assured that Harry Redknapp will always put the interests of Harry Redknapp above any other consideration. But those on here who think he's a crap manager are mugging themselves off. When he's still interested in the job he has - rather than the job he wants - then old 'arry is still one of the best 'football men' in the British game. Damn him.

I've done it twice and was Jury foreman the second time. Believe me getting 12 complete strangers to agree on anything can be surprisingly difficult, even when the evidence seems perfectly clear. Be prepared for lots a hanging about and possibly being sent home as well. If I may give you a small hint - as a Saints fan wanting a skate defendant to deliberate upon is probably not the attitude the court is looking for ....

Is it true that the current generation of England Internationals are really still suffering from poor early age coaching ? We've been debating exactly this same subject for what seems like decades now, and surely many of our current generation should have benefited from being attached to a professional FA accredited club academy from quite a young age. I understand our highly successful academy for example first starts to monitor boys from the age of 6 upwards. Surely it's common knowledge now that youngsters should be encouraged to enjoy the game and develop their core ball skills, rather than focus relentlessly on competitiveness is it not ? For what its worth I think that (very substandard as we still are) we have gotten a tad better compared to the EURO 2000 team of Kevin Keegan's reign - when it seemed our best players were utterly incapable of passing the ball to a teammate at times! But Keegan inherited much of Terry Venables very decent Euro 96 squad, and reinforced it with real young talent such as David Beckham, Paul Scoles and Micheal Owen. So make of that what you will, but is it all down to the manager ? Perhaps the British game 'talks the talk' but in the final analysis still doesn't 'walk the walk' when it comes to skills. If what our game really wants is warriors, rather than players, then so be it. Looking at many of todays crop however I'm not so sure we're all that good at developing either.

A hard fought point against a fairly good French team, but pretty grim to watch in all honesty and as for proper shots on target ? You could count them of the fingers of one hand. Compare todays England squad with its Euro 96 counterpart - Alan Shearer, Teddy Sheringham, Paul Gascoinge, Paul Ince, David Platt, Stuart Pearce, Tony Adams ..etc. Like for like I suppose Joe Hart might give Dave Seaman a run for his money and Steve Gerard easily gets the nod ahead of Gareth Southgate, but as for the rest .... A fan has to wonder if something is going seriously wrong with our national game.

Like any right thinking Saints fan I'd like to welcome JR to the club and hope he goes on to become the Premier League star we would all hope he can be. But just to inject the smallest note of caution amid all the celebrations, when Burnley came to St Marys back in February I can't really say this player made all that much of an impression on our defence - or this fans memory to be brutally honest. Nevertheless a player of some promise who I look forward to seeing in the old red & white.

I have seldom seen the goalposts shifted more adroitly mid-match. Firstly you argue that my understanding of the destructive aspects of human nature is all wrong because cultural factors (what we might call the 'Zeitgeist') explains our behavior and that there is no such thing as a "swastika gene" of course - your term not mine. I pointed out that cultural or sociological factors cannot fully explain the historical phenomena of war crime because people raised in exactly the same culture can - and do - behave very differently when subjected to extreme environmental situations, such as living under the heel of Nazi occupation for instance. Now you have executed a very rapid 'volt-face' and shifted your position to opining that psychology has become a outdated activity anyway (!) and that the science of Molecular Biology has conclusively proved that the awesome diversity of human behavior can be fully explained by the study of the double helix structure of our DNA. So which of us is now claiming that "the genes made me do it guv" - you or me ? I can only invite others reading this to form their own judgment as to how convincing an explanation they find that.

Again, you don't seem to like my understanding of Human behavior while having nothing much to offer of your own. How do you explain why some people collaborated with "political evil" during WWII while many others didn't? Is it just a matter of national identity and culture, or is some more profound force at work here? If evil is a mere cultural effect then presumably you still believe that we need only eradicate dysfunctional nations/cultures from the face of Earth and Humanity will then become perfectible - how Marx would have loved that. It seems to me that the relationship between the more anti-social & destructive aspects of Human behavior and the ancient structure of the Human brain are immensely complicated questions that don't fit easily into your oh-so-trite "swastika gene" oversimplification of the argument. Do try not to confuse the fundamental difference between explaining a thing and excusing it. For what it's worth I don't accept the "I was only obeying orders" or even the "my genes made me do it" excuses for criminality (on either an individual or societal level) on the grounds that while I most certainly believe that it is within our nature to sink into barbarity at times, it is also (I hope) within the nature of any mentally healthy adult Human Being to exhibit sufficient moral judgment to resist the impulse for evil as well. Put simply, their is a ageless conflict between the impulses for good and evil that dominates the Human condition, and while I do believe it is in our base nature to act appallingly at times, that in no way justifies immoral behavior in my view.

Call it genes call it Human nature if you will, but if it is not something buried deep within our ourselves then how are we to understand the observed and timeless phenomenon of Human evil then ? - if we may resort to employing that religious term. If it is not an intrinsic part of our nature to be self serving and cruel whenever these behaviors become permissible or advantageous, then where do these regrettable Human characteristics emanate from ? Did the Devil force the French into collaboration with Fascism in his eternal conflict with God for the possession of men's souls ? Not for me I'm afraid. The only answer that makes any sense to this observer of Humanity is that we are indeed still animals at heart, with the innate animistic tendency for savagery and self survival (Richard Dawkin's 'Selfish Gene') still capable of triumphing at times over all our more noble aspirations. History shows us time and time again that our sense of civilisation can often prove to be skin deep at best. In the light of the 20th century's bloody history who can possibly doubt the truth of this ? As for the existence of any readily identifiable and truly significant "national characteristic" differences among the peoples of neighboring nation states - well I gave up believing in that nonsense back in my early teens. But I'm more than happy to await your explanation for the darker aspects of Human nature - no doubt Marx & Engels had something to say on it.

Debating the merits of footballers is of course what we do on here, but how bizarre it seems to me that quite so many Saints fans seemingly consider a 32 year old current England International goalkeeper to be in any sense 'not good enough' for this club. Signing a promising young keeper for the long term is a splendid idea, but throwing a relatively untested youngster (such as this Butland lad) straight into the midst of what may well be a hard Premier League season, gambling on his ability to swim rather than sink ... well that's a bridge to far for this fan. If there is one position in any top level football team where proven ability and years of hard earned experience is of paramount value then it is surely that of the goalkeeper. If you were to argue that young keepers need to be given a chance to play and develop into the experienced high quality keepers everyone wants then that is a perfectly valid 'Catch 22' style argument of course. Nevertheless better we let them learn their trade anywhere else but in the crucible of a Premier League survival battle I say. Not to put too fine a point on it, it should be bleedin' obvious to everyone reading this that a keeper of Robert Green's ability could significantly improve the quality of our squad. So if we can persuade him to come here we should sign him pretty damn quick I reckon.

I was going to say that betting on football is a mugs game ... but then I remembered I know a lad who has made thousands betting on those accumulator thingies. So I better shut up I suppose.

You're a man of the world Art in ways I could never hope to match. However I'm pretty sure the majority of wartime French citizens did not denounce their fellow citizens or actively engage in deporting Jews to the concentration camps. But some certainly did commit these horrendous crimes of course, but to my way of thinking what this teaches us is not that the French (or even the Germans for that matter) are a uniquely culpable people where war crimes are concerned, but rather that it is an intrinsic part of Human nature that some of us will behave in a deeply cruel, self serving, and inhumane manner when the normal boundaries of 'civilized' behavior are removed for any reason. This is the 'nature of the beast' is it not ? Had the forces of Nazi Germany successfully invaded and occupied Great Britain in 1940 then I have not the slightest doubt that exactly the same sort of thing would inevitably had happen here as well. If anyone reading this finds that an uncomfortable idea then I can only beg their forgiveness and explain that this is the lesson I take from a lifetime spent contemplating the profound insight the war can give a man into the darkest recesses of our human nature. If we were to be perfectly honest with ourselves there's a darkness lurking somewhere within all of us isn't there ?

Some actively opposed the occupation, others shamefully collaborated with it, while many (the majority perhaps) didn't do much of either and just continued with their everyday lives as best they could in the circumstances. Far from being some perversely French character flaw, it seems that much the same could be said about the very British population of the Channel Islands. It far too easy to sit here in the comfort of our secure peacetime armchairs and opine that we of course would have done better - you should walk a mile in another mans shoes before judging him they say.

The origins of WWI are properly the subject of several very substantial books rather than a brief post on a internet forum - suffice it to say that this great nation found the prospect of a German dominated Europe utterly unacceptable in 1914 and given the remorseless rise of German economic and military power during this period British Strategic reasoning was probably sound. Looking back at yesterdays Cameron-Merkel summit in Berlin nothing much ever changes. I don't think anyone would seriously claim that the Free French contribution to the allied cause in WWII was in any way comparable in scale to the efforts put in by the British Empire or Russia for instance. However many brave Frenchmen most certainly did continue to fight on the allied side after the fall of France in 1940. From the Free French Brigade's heroic defence of Bir Hakeim in the western desert, to French crewed corvettes escorting Atlantic convoys, and the numerous French Squadrons that operated under RAF control, the Free French contribution to the allied victory in 1945 was real and noteworthy. If you really doubt the scale of French civilian casualties during the last year of WWII then I can only suggest you research the terrible suffering of the people of Caen, the grim slaughter of 642 men women and children by the SS Das Reich Panzer Division at Oradour-sur-Glane, or even the French blood needlessly shed during the RAF bombing of Le Harve shortly after D Day for instance.

I never said that our Head of State has to visit the Verdun battlefield, but if you really understood the national traumas bloodbaths like Verdun or the Somme still represent to the people of both nations then you might not question the wisdom of doing so quite so readily. Many veterans have attested over the years that the French people have constantly displayed the utmost level of care & devotion to the memory's (& the war graves) of all the allied servicemen who fought on her soil. Furthermore, it is clearly not the case that French Heads of State have never attended allied war graves before M Hollande's recent visit, although perhaps they could have done so more frequently. The forces of the British Empire & France fought together during the Great War to preserve our joint security and prevent any German dominance of the continent. All those countless French & British soldiers who suffered so horribly on the western front during WWI fought in the same cause rather than in separate ones. As for Normandy and WWII, the record shows that 'Free French' air, land, & sea forces were certainly involved in the invasion, partisans were active behind the lines and French civilian casualties were very substantial indeed I'm sorry to say. This is the grim truth of war - everyone suffers.

A very good keeper in my view and the kind of quality signing we will need to improve our somewhat suspect defence. It seems to me a player of this stature would not come here to be second choice keeper behind Kelvin - this may well put KD's nose 'out of joint' I'd have thought. But however well any one individual has served the club, this is a ruthless game and the interests of team must always come first. Needless to say all the usual provisos re the reliability of the tabloid press still apply.

Why ?

I've not the slighest doubt that numerious British & French Heads of state have paid their due respects at each others respective national memorials over the years since 1918. Well done to M Hollande for this very welcome mark of respect to our fallen, but I wonder if any British head of state has ever visited Verdun for instance ?

I don't believe for one moment that the traditional 4th from bottom finish is the limit of this clubs Premier League ambitions. However wanting something and getting it are different things unfortunately and it doesn't take the insight of a footballing genius to see that our current defence is nowhere near good enough to allow us to dream of top 8. Norwich & Swansea last season prove that no newly promoted club need consider itself a lost cause, but to give us a decent chance of a respectable mid-table finish methinks the Don is going to have to spend in the region of £20m on players this summer .. oh and sign talent like this De Bruyne lad on loan if at all possible. For a club of our size is that level of spending either advisable or even feasible ? A tall order in any case.

Arthur Clark I think. Re Bradbury, it's actually his short stories I most admire - science fiction often lends itself to that format. If you twisted my arm I might admit that 'I Sing the Body Electric' is a particular favorite of mine. It deals with very the same kind of AI subject as Asimov's wonderful 'Bicentennial Man' ... but even better perhaps. The perfect symmetry of the story arc (quite literally) leaves me in tears whenever I read it - frightful old sap that I am !

I just seen the sad news that legendary Sci-Fi writer Ray Bradbury has died at the ripe old age of 91. Even since the TV adaption of the Martian Chronicles first sparked a interest in his books I've been a dedicated admirer of his works. The Illustrated Man, I Sing the Body Electric, The Toynbee Convector ... and half a hundred others, I loved them all. The 3 giants of 20th century science fiction writing have all gone now, Asimov, Bradbury & Arthur C Clark. We won't see their like again, but what a magnificent legacy they're left us.

SRL signed a contract extension only last July that means he is under contract here until the summer of 2014. I can only presume that both club and player reached a amicable agreement on his wages at that time.

Blaming the fans for a players shortcomings is as unconvincing a argument today as it ever was. In any case criticism directed at this player from the stands has - from the Chapel anyway - been sporadic and limited to a small minority. If you mean by technical ability that he can (on occasion) do things with a football that are truly inspired and result in a 'game changing' effect then I agree with you. Unfortunately doing that every now and again for half a season, when your general play is often substandard, is just not good enough at Premier League level. Guly's role as a striker was more or less finished when Lee & Billy Sharp arrived in January. With the prospect of even better forwards (such as J Rodriguez) signing this summer he will soon be even further down the order in all probability. So if he's not going to be a regular forward and many of his most ardent admirers agree that playing on the wing is not really his forte, then the question is what good is he to us anymore? To answer my own question - little more than a cover player I'd have thought.

Nonsense. Guly's repeated selection in the face of numerous lackluster performances does however point to Nigel Adkins being even less impressed with the contributions of alternative players such as Jason Puncheon or Steve De Ridder. ps - As for Guly being nearly as good as Matt Le Tissier - Care in the Community has a lot to answer for!