CanadaSaint

I don't have much time for Lawro but, as Kracken said, there was fact and logic behind his comment. After all, "the people who run the club" did fire someone who, not long after, became Premier League Manager of the Year. I agreed with Cortese then and still think he was right now, but it makes "the people who run the club" look nuts to most people outside Southampton.

Judging by the attendance and lack of atmosphere at the Wigan game, I wouldn't look that gift horse in the mouth.

You have a decent chance of getting away with having an average 'keeper if you have a dominant middle-two at the back, and you have a decent chance of getting away with having an average middle-two at the back if you have a dominant 'keeper. What you'll never get away with in the PL is having average in all three positions. I'm not ready to write-off Kelvin (although I have reservations) until we strengthen in CD and still find him lacking. I'd say the same about Fonte and Jos but for the fact that I think Nigel is fully committed to Kelvin as his starter.

I'm still stuck on my personal perception, gleaned from watching too many bad movies, of meetings between Italians battling over a share of something worth having.

As I said, I'm not arguing with your point that Alpine isn't very well placed to venture a medical opinion. Nor am I and nor are you. What I'm offering is the perspective that they are discovering, over here (NFL and NHL), that concussions can do a lot more damage than the medical profession recognized at the time, and that this damage accumulates with further concussions. These things have often only been discovered post mortem. I think Seaborne's injury was more than just a concussion, and for him to keep playing and heading the ball MAY be doing more harm than he (or others) recognize. The revelations over here have lead to a much higher level of caution and numerous premature retirements. From the player's perspective it's all about personal wellbeing. From the club's perspective, it's all about legal liability. I'm taking his side in this because he's just offering his opinion - and because I think he might be "inadvertently right."

I'm not arguing those points, just the fact that we're learning more and more about serious head injuries and the fact that they can be a lot worse than doctors thought at the time. Based on that, rather than any medical competence, I think Alpine has voiced a valid opinion - whether you and others agree with it or not.

Not necessarily, MLG - and he was just stating his opinion. The long term affects of serious head injuries have been in the news a lot over here, amidst revelations (from autopsies) that severe damage can go undetected and can build up over time. And that doesn't even relate to sports in which frequent heading is a characteristic.

I might have missed this, but does anyone know whether we can revoke the Martin loan deal? Not that this would solve the problem - just give us a little more depth.

Now there's a word to sum up this thread. We might have all been better off with the original post and 6,309 "bumps".

Man, I hope so. But even then it doesn't sit very well with me because the two clubs are supposed to have reached agreement, with the only major issues being a deal with Penarol and the medical. It's like one step forward, two steps back.

That's the bit that has made me very queasy about this whole thing. When was the last time that the selling club organized the press conference to announce a transfer? Especially when its chairman has taken a load of abuse from the fans for thinking about selling the player.

It's not just about whether "Diego Kickaball" ends up signing but also the fact that we - and especially Cortese - have invested so much time and effort in pursuing him when we have other serious deficiencies to address. If we miss out on Ramirez and also fail to address our clear weaknesses, Cortese is going to look rather silly and somewhat out of his depth, and our quest to survive in the PL could be seriously damaged. At that point, who knows how Cortese will react? There may be a whole lot more riding on this than an exciting signing.

Me too.

We'll be far from the only team in the PL that's a hell of a lot better going forward than defending. This could be a record year for goals. But we still need to strengthen at the back, big time.

A little more about him: http://www.fifa.com/worldfootball/clubfootball/news/newsid=1436927.html "It's my dream to play for Manchester United. Ever since my childhood, I've always been fascinated by the way they play. It's an ambition which I won't stop striving for ..." Sticking a couple in their net on Sunday would be a good start, Emmanuel.

Mine too, but I want three points.

I don't think we need much more evidence that Cortese doesn't "do" sentiment, or that he will do what he believes to be the right thing - regardless of how well or poorly it's received by the fan base. He has long been committed to "the Southampton way", and it's clear from the signings and especially the pursuit of Ramirez (still stunning, even though we're now somewhat used to it) that we're going to be playing a different kind of football. It wouldn't surprise me at all if Adkins was told that the price of signing Ramirez is losing Rickie. Especially if the excellent point made by Amesbury (above) is correct. It also wouldn't surprise me if both deals were formally announced on the same day, with getting Ramirez dulling the shock and reducing the controversy of losing Rickie.

I guess I wouldn't be as surprised as some if this deal went through, because we have bought (or are trying to buy) a number of players who may not easily dovetail with Rickie. But, besides all the issues around selling our top goal scorer (not to mention how that would play out with the fans), there's the question of whether it would be smart to sell a talent like Rickie to a potential relegation rival.

Does anyone remember NA making similar remarks when Seaborne and Barnard arguably did things that reflected poorly on the Club? If not, perhaps the decision has been made to crack down.

If we can find a way within our system to get them an early ball from time to time, those two can destroy a backpedalling defence. We will waste their talents if they constantly receive the ball with their back to goal and one or two players right up their arses, although Ramirez looks like he has the skills to turn and beat them even in that situation.

Never particularly rated him (very left-footed and quite uni-dimensional) - and he doesn't fit the "young and destined to get better" criteria we seem to be following.

“The arrested followed after police officers noticed a vehicle being driven erratically in the High Street, Southampton, at approximately 4.35am.” Guly doing something erratically? Surely not.

Amidst this ongoing orgy of transfer rumours, I thought it would be fun to see (with thanks to Duncan Holley et al) what things were like when we were first promoted to the top division in 1966 under Ted Bates. Last Game in Division 2 - May 18, 1966 (Manchester City – away): Forsyth, Webb, Hollywood, White, Knapp, Walker, Paine, Chivers, Melia, Deane, Sydenham First Game in Division 1 - October 20, 1966 (Manchester City – home): Forsyth, Webb, Hollywood, White, Knapp, Walker, Paine, Chivers, Davies, Melia, Sydenham The only line-up change on opening day was Ron Davies in for Norman Deane. On the last day of that first Division 1 season, the only changes from opening day were Eric Martin replacing Campbell Forsyth, and Hugh Fisher replacing Ian White. Things weren't much different on our second promotion to Division One in 1978, under Lawrie McMenemy. There were only three line-up changes on opening day, one forced - Mike Pickering, Graham Baker and Terry Curran in, Manny Andruszewski, Nick Holmes (injured) and Tony Funnell out. Holmes was back in for the last game of the season, along with Austin Hayes (RIP) and Trevor Hebberd; no longer in the line-up were Pickering, Ted MacDougall and Curran. It's going to be mighty different this year.

Are most people still convinced that we're going for Ramirez AND Phillips? I think it's an either and not a both - not just because of the price tag but because we have higher priorities that will also be expensive to address.

You could be right, but he's been a key late introduction, I think. And, right now, Blackpool wouldn't give us a spot if they had the measles (although it could all be "verbals").