CanadaSaint

That's three straight seasons where we've started with an away game. I was sure we'd have a home opener this year.

I don't have a problem with the thread. At some point every society (whether it's the broader one or one like this) has to police itself - because the cops and moderators can't cover everything, and because some of the ills are annoyingly anti-social rather than illegal. Most of us have posted something that turns out (with hindsight) to have been utter crap, and I'm okay with having my stupid comments rammed back down my throat later. It's a learning experience. The ones that get "both barrels" on here are the ones that never seem to learn, and keep posting over-the-top rubbish - usually of the negative kind. The events of the past few weeks have seen more drivel than I can ever remember seeing on here ("asset stripping" etc) - and that's saying something! But some of it has been downright nasty (obnoxious personal comments about Katharina and Ralph). If the guilty parties don't like threads like this, perhaps they should think a little more before they post.

Oh, I think the club can play it with Lallana in such a way that he would be committed here - if they and the new manager want to keep him, given the "stories" about his attitude. For example, "Adam, what they were really offering was not just an insult to us - it was also an insult to you. If they viewed you as a starter they would have done better than that and they wouldn't have been so quick with the ultimatum. Your career is at a key stage - stay in the spotlight and keep developing with us, or potentially warm the bench at Liverpool. But you'd have some bridge mending to do here." He may not like hearing that kind of thing, and losing the captaincy would probably hurt, but - unless he's completely burnt his bridges here - we either have to get proper value (compared with replacement cost) or keep hold of him IMO. After all, he's an England international and - in most people's eyes - a starter. My frustration about the supposedly unanswered phone calls was not so much that his conduct deserved an answer but that it was a chance to give him some hard facts to chew on. Instead, he was left with his own (probably inflated) ego, the advice of people with other agendas, and a footballer's brain struggling to cope with all the real ramifications. But the time to convey that message was before he left for the WC.

I've lost count of the number of times I've read that argument - I just don't agree with it. And I was dragged, kicking and screaming, into this new electronic age. Forums such as this, for all their faults, are the only public barometer of a fan base, and they are read much more widely than many of us might imagine - by clubs, by media, by players, by fans of other clubs, by agents AND by Lallana's father. And so posts on here inevitably influence things to some degree.

Dave, I don't disagree with that. There was a reason why we failed to turn dominance into goals so often last season, and - for all his magical moments - Lallana was part of it. That said, we'd still have to replace him, and if I knew who his replacement would be I'd be more inclined to say "screw it, just let him go". I'm concerned that too much anti-Lallana venom from our fans hands more cards to Liverpool and makes things worse if they pull out and leave him (and us) with zero options other than to stay. Yes, he would need to eat a big chunk of humble pie, which wouldn't be easy, but I'm just advocating taking the steam out of this.

Not only did he do nothing about it - he actually fuelled it with his omments about Rickie. It wasn't just us that saw those comments - Lallana saw them as well. I'm really p*ssed off at Lallana too, but we need to take the steam out of this issue instead of making it worse. The end-game could involve anything, including Lallana still being a key Saints player next season.

I don't think SOG's comment was unfair at all, and I couldn't agree less with your last sentence. Much of it wasn't even negativity, never mind constructive criticism - it was irrational, way over-the-top venom. Accusations of "asset stripping" and cluelessness, and nasty personal comments about Katharina and Krueger, aren't on the same planet as "constructive criticism". The only reason it has lessened is because there's a new lightning rod for the same stuff - Lallana. And because the Board is showing itself to be much more focused and true-to-statement than many had accused it of being, and is now (after only two weeks) talking to some quality managerial candidates - one of whom will help the Board make the very important decisions that need to be made. The people who have turned on Lallana with some similarly nasty comments (not that he doesn't deserve a bit of a 'kicking') are the ones who will whine about his price after they've done all they can on here to hand all the cards to Liverpoool by making it clear that he can't stay with us. They're also the ones who are in danger of making it virtually impossible for Lallana to come back here if Liverpool pull out and nobody else (Spuds) are willing to cough-up the price. Yes, mistakes have been made by a lot of parties, but lashing out at everyone - sometimes with outright nastiness - hasn't helped anything.

For those who think our board lacks ambition and gonads: http://www.givemesport.com/472222-javier-hernandez-wanted-by-southaampton-as-part-of-luke-shaw-deal?autoplay=on

Gareth Rogers. I think he's primarily the finance guy, so I'm not sure how he got to be CEO - especially when there were people like John Williams supposedly available. He is probably heavily involved in trying to grow the revenue base, but that still doesn't make him a CEO. Either Ralph is effectively the CEO or nobody is really fulfilling that role. But then, like nearly everyone else on here, what the hell do I know.

Yeah, that caught my eye too. My first and continuing thought is that Katharina doesn't like how things are going and is taking a closer personal involvement, which might not augur well for Ralph.

Of that I have little doubt, but that's just an opinion. And he may be lurking in the weeds ready to pounce for a few of them. For all his scintillating football, I wouldn't trust him as far as I can p*ss him, and as I can't even p*ss p*ss very far these days, that's not a long way.

Thank you Guan - much appreciated. Hopefully we can enjoy this thread and its encouraging news for a while before the "you know who's" arrive. Most pleasing of all, Katharina certainly seems to be here for the duration and bearing a lot of her Father's dreams. Asset stripping, my arse. If I read your post correctly, I'm a little concerned that our managerial appointment may be delayed if certain of the candidates hold aspirations for a post-World Cup national team appointment. We (and Ralph and Reed) need a high-calibre manager in ASAP but - if forced to choose - I'd take the high-calibre over the ASAP.

I agree with BadgerBadger. I opened the link expecting to read something that someone else had written, but I could see Rickie's lips moving as he continually wiped non-existent sweat off his forehead and temple. What we've experienced - and what fans of other clubs experienced after his England call up - was one of the precious few modern players who seem "just like us". He was almost more a fan than a player. And it's that very dimension of Rickie's personality that makes me very happy for him even though I'm sad as hell that he's gone.

Anyone else catch the irony in this post?

My God, WTF is wrong with some of you? I'm as p*ssed off at Lallana as most of you but - as many of them are when it comes to the Board - some of these comments are way, way over the top. Lallana's conduct may be symptomatic of the ills inside football these days, but he didn't exactly invent those ills. He has been, until now, a loyal and highly valuable player for us - for more years than Rickie, and nobody (as far as I can see) is defending his actions; they are just saying that he deserved to have his phone call answered/returned. By all means, tell him things he doesn't want to hear, and even be quite pointed about it, but return the damn call. As I said earlier, let's not lose sight of the fact that (with Spurs' interest apparently waning, and with Liverpool setting out an ultimatum - and having other options) Lallana could still be a Saints player next season.

Can anyone tell me whether the "5% clause" is still in effect? (The player receives 5% of the transfer fee if he doesn't request a transfer, 0% if he does) If so, I'm all for telling Lallana that he is under contract and we don't want him to leave, and, if he wants to go, he'll have to request a transfer. That doesn't just suss out whether Lallana really has his eyes on Champions League or a 1.5 million payday - it also acts as a club principle that won't be lost on other players.

I agree with all of this, and the last line is especially true. Most of the problems of the past few days have developed and worsened precisely because the "man management" strength that was one of Pochettino's fortés has been replaced by a disastrous vacuum. It's also important to note that, if Spurs really aren't interested, Liverpool may well be Lallana's only option. And if they're true to their last position and turn their eyes elsewhere, he could still be a Saints player in August. Burning bridges isn't going to help anyone.

I'm not sure how things stand these days but it used to be the case that a player received 5% of the transfer fee if they didn't ask for a transfer, and 0% if they did. Rickie supposedly "forced the board's hand" and it worked for him, so I fear that he and Lallana have been comparing tactical notes. But, in fairness, the Board (Rickie's case apart) has stuck to its word that nobody would leave until the new manager has arrived, so they probably have nothing to add to that in any phone conversation with Lallana. That said, in the interests of at least trying to avoid ill feeling, they (which means Reed) could have returned his call. Recruiting the new manager - I suspect and hope - is their sole focus right now because everything else flows from that.

To further Kingsland's suggestion, I've pulled this from the "Replacement for MP" thread. The last line is the key part for this thread. This sort of thing magnifies the importance of getting a top-notch manager in ASAP.

I would hope that the club remains true to its word and keeps all the key players until the new manager has had a chance to talk to them. And I would hope that, by the same token, all the key players remain true to the club until they've had a chance to talk to the new manager. Amidst all the stuff that has been flying in recent weeks, including a lot of irrational panic on here, that is so far what seems to be happening. Despite the critical absence of a manager/head coach, despite Les Reed doing nothing on some key player contracts, the dyke is just about holding. Perhaps we need someone Dutch in case the dyke does spring a leak. But if Rickie is determined to force our hand, despite saying that he wanted to end his career here, we should let him go.

The evidence seems to be mounting that Reed might be the problem - I just hope that Katharina and Ralph are becoming aware of it. On a side note, I can remember when we used to fear our players getting England call-ups because, after chatting with other players, they would soon find out that they were under-paid. There was also, supposedly, some player-to-player "tapping up" going on. It may be just a coincidence but the three players most likely to leave us all became part of the England set-up his year. I don't think we know half of the story behind what's going on now, and yet that doesn't stop people from firing bullets at Katharine and Ralph.

What did Gerrard say about Reed? I thought Rogers was much more focused on the finances than anything to do with the playing side, and the only real "head honcho" in a team of specialists would be Ralph, but please correct me if that's wrong.

Dave, the only real reservation I had about Ralph when it was clear that his role would be away from the playing side was whether he could acclimatize to football quickly enough. The jury, at least among the open-minded, is still very much out on that one. Your post forces me to add another caveat to Ralph, and this one is equally troubling, given where things sit. He is not a guy to don "hob-nailed boots", even in a situation that may cry out for them. Reigning someone in takes a lot longer if you take the kind of gentle, subtle approach that Ralph is very likely to take. If we are to turn the corner on this horror period, the impetus will come from a strong-willed manager rather than from Ralph.

Agree with this, although I think they're definitely suffering from being naive rather than probably - and that problem is greatly magnified by the fact that Reed is their only attachment to football reality. The "asset stripping" suggestion is ridiculous. I've tried to make the point again and again that the very private Katharina would not have come out of her preferred shadows to take on a high profile leadership role unless she wanted to continue to build towards her Father's dream. She could have sold the club and stayed in the shadows or paid people to do any dirty work. Her heart is entirely in the right place, and so is Ralph's, but Les Reed is letting them both down badly IMO, and the only salvation is bringing in a top-notch, strong-willed manager/head coach ASAP. Having said that, I fear that Katharina's appetite for Saints has taken a pounding in the past three weeks - not just from the Pochettino saga and the player unrest, but also (if she's aware of it, and I suspect she is) from the sheer nastiness that some fans resort to in times of stress.

I agree with most of that, but the problem is that Reed is supposed to be the football guy on the board. If you have to hire someone else to "keep checks on him", he probably shouldn't be there in the first place. The bigger problem is that it might take a while for Katharina and Ralph to realize that he's not up to the job, and a lot of damage could have happened by then. They need some effective counsel from someone other than Reed, but will they know where to look? The hope rests in hiring a strong-willed manager capable of taking the playing/player side on his shoulders, but will Reed want to see a strong-willed manager now that he has more power of his own?