CanadaSaint

You need to watch the game again and see Lallana's effort and involvement in every third of the pitch, because you obviously missed it first time around. Sure, many of the magical moments came from the feet of Ramirez but we would not have won that game without Lallana's contribution. "Ramirez makes Lallana look silly", my arse. God, you do come out with some drivel.

Yep, that's exactly the point DD. I think Rickie was a little slow because he din't think the pass was "on", which - for 90%+ of players, it wasn't. I don't think that will be lost on Rickie, and he'll be quicker next time.

He learned a lot about them in the first half and put the knowledge into practice in the second half, but I don't think we've seen his full array of talents yet. When the other get familiar with him and keep making the runs he's capable of feeding, we could really see some goals.

He's a great believer in positivity so it was really good to see him get some positive reinforcement from the fans. His reaction to "There's only one Nigel Adkins" was actually quite touching in the cold, calculating, unforgiving world of the Premier League.

Exactly the same ball-watching that he's been doing for two seasons or more. Hopefully the ghost has been exorcised permanently.

You could see that our guys were still learning how to play with eachother as the game developed. That's a "tough ask" in training sessions because it can only be done in real-game situations. Ramirez took it all in during the first half and saw the little, angled runs that he started to feed in the second half. The others started to appreciate what he brings to the table, and they - in turn - gave him the ball in the right situations and then pulled off to create a pass option for him. Very impressive.

A big nod to Nigel for having the courage to drop Kelvin and pull Fox off at HT. Without those two decisions I doubt we'd have won.

I thought Lallana was superb all over the pitch.

I couldn't agree more that Fox is the main reason we've been pulled out of shape defensively. Yoshida looks excellent and he certainly did help Fonte to play much better. I don't share your optimism about Richardson - I think he'll get done regularly at this level. I don't think it will happen but I'd like to see Yoshida at LB with Fonte and Jos in the middle, and Clyne going back to RB.

Well, four games in and we've already played what I think will be the top 3 at the end of the season. Zero points (no surprise) and -7 on goal difference (others, I suspect, will do worse.) Our midfield played far too deep in the first half, much better in the second. Fonte looked better - even more so for having Yoshida alongside him. I'd be inclined to play Yoshida at LB because Fox is constantly done for pace, seldom goal-side, and he ball-watches. Our middle two continually have to cover for his inadequacies which pulls us out of shape, and that makes us vulnerable down the other flank. And Kelvin was not at all good again today - his positioning for the free kick was pitiful.

Yes, and he's looked even better for having Yoshida alongside him. But I think we need Yoshida more at LB because Fox has been a big problem all day. All season, actually.

Our midfield has played (or been forced to play?) so deep that we've just invited Arse to keep coming at us. They've poured forwards in numbers because they had nothing to worry about defensively. And don't even get me started on Kelvin.

Is that Kelvin's third or fourth near-post goal this season?

With a left footer almost certain to take the kick, Davis covers the wrong side. Abysmal goalkeeping.

I agree with your comment but MLT's going a bit beyond "sticking up for hies friends", though: "Matt Le Tissier ‏@mattletiss7 @stateofplaylee no team interference? Ask the club who bought guly?"

Are you being serious?

I'd say we were prepared for it. Let's face it, for teams like us the brutally realistic goal is not so much to get a point from the City and United games (although that would be great) but to make sure that our goal difference doesn't take a hammering. On that front, we were -2, which I venture to suggest will prove to be much better than most of our "relegation rivals." Yes, the Wigan result was very disappointing but that's a team that went W8, D4 and L3 over the last fifteen games of least season, and they have - arguably - the best young manager in the game. They are not the crap team that some people think, and we should have been well ahead by half time. In one of the first three games Nigel's substitutions changed it for the better, but in two of them they changed it for the worse. He's learning at this level, just like the players, and I believe that we will continue to consolidate and end up somewhere between 12th and 16th. Sure, Villa is a big game but don't forget that Wigan - with a similar style but less depth than us - were dead and buried at Christmas.

I'm still not sure how much of our CD problem this season is the players and how much of it is the zonal marking, which seems to be a problem for them. I can see teams targeting Clyne at the far post by drawing their main striker out there (as United did with the first goal), but that doesn't make Clyne a bad defender.

And Cortese had a career in banking and finance. Did it ever occur to you that it might have been a financial decision rather than a football decision?

Perhaps so, whatever they are, although I very much doubt it. One thing I don't doubt, though, is that it won't be the intellectually- and socially-challenged "Boris" (aka SRS, I believe) who does it. He's inventing a whole new definition of "obsessed."

As excited as I am to see Ramirez in a Saints shirt, I'd be inclined to start with him on the bench - largely because he hasn't had the time to gain any familiarity with our systems and the various roles, tendencies and capabilities of his teammates. Apart from that, we have plenty of offence with Sunday's starting line-up, but Puncheon is likely to be more responsible in the defensive role that will be vital in an away game at Arsenal. For all the plaudits heaped upon Ramirez, a commitment to defence isn't one of them, and I don't think this is the game in which to give him his first start. It's about practicality rather than sentimentality for me. I'd certainly introduce him at some point though, circumstances permitting.

There's not too much of this but it's worth a read: http://www.epltalk.com/a-tactical-look-at-southampton-man-united-and-liverpool-arsenal-46561?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+EPLTalk+%28EPL+Talk%29 Extract: "But it was the introduction of Hernandez that helped facilitate the space for Scholes to work in. With the Mexican’s pace stretching the Southampton defense, it allowed Scholes the time to dictate the game alongside Carrick." I'm not sure we had the players on the bench to counter this - almost as though we expected to be trying to come back from behind rather than trying to stay ahead.

He's got two weeks to get over it.

Smirking, the only reason I'm responding is because you're misrepresenting what I said. As I quickly clarified, it was the second goal, not the third. And the problem was much less the clearing header (yes, it was certainly better than Fox's against Man City) but his slowness in getting out to help Rodriguez with the two-on-one that resulted from the header. That doesn't mean I'm making Guly the scapegoat - there were bigger defensive lapses than his, and others made far more mistakes than he did. It just means that IMO he should have done much better than he did in a situation that led to the tying goal. That's all. But because of the heavily polarized opinions surrounding Guly - and I've generally been a supporter - the response from some quarters has been ridiculous; you, for example, accused me of being "mental." FWIW I agree completely with your comment that we need to drastically upgrade our defensive coaching because we're making repetitive mistakes. Anyway, enough. Let's move on.

It also pulls opposing defensive (including midfield) formations apart, which ends up creating the space for the eventual (hopefully!) scoring opportunity. And that's apart from the fact that it can be great to watch, and the fact that it can give rise to the kind of superlatives many media types used to describe our play yesterday. Sure, we lost yesterday, but I felt much better about that loss than I've felt after some of our wins - and I'm a really bad loser.