Rod Le Shearer

You are contradicting yourself somewhat here. You ask us what we want the club`s priority to be ! it doesnt really matter if it is a long shot,or what is more likely to achieve,does it ? the essence still boils down to the simple question: should we go for Promotion or winning the JPT,that is what we vote for ! and everyone in their right mind would vote promotion,as I did.

agreed. maybe that will get their confidence down a bit before they play us

I don`t think we`ll need 75 points this season to get to the play-offs. and I don`t think getting 2.1 pints on average is impossible either ! look at it this way: for every 4 games we play,we must win three,but can lose 1. that would give us an average of 2.25 points per game. this means there are room for a couple of draws in between..! not impossible by any means...infact,thats no more than what I expect from the set of players we`ve got..COYR !

I don`t see why people are so upset about the seedings. after all,both the seeded teams and the unseeded ones finished as runners-up in their group. that should mean they are at about the same level-at this very moment in time. Its just the "historical" factor that made France favorites against Ireland. Infact,on the basis of all the qualifiying matches,I`d say Irland played much better and should have been big,big favorites ! and,on the basis of the results,my point is proven: two unseeded teams got through and two seeded ones. the seeding shouldn`t in theory make any difference,and it didnt. I dont blame Fifa for making sure the teams with the greatest interest,history and tradition didnt meet eachother. But that decision was a very bold move: it could just as easily have ended up the way Uefa didnt want-with all four unseeded teams progressing.

I remember Shearer jumping up with the goalie at the six yard line,sending the keeper (who held a firm grip on the ball) flying into the net. Goal was allowed. not disgusting per se,but very funny ! Think it was against Forest away,in 1988-89. ended up being registered as a Des Walker own goal,since the ball in came from his looping backpass.

are you telling me you thought he played well ?? he was extremely poor,IMO. and all that running you are referring to,never led to anything. not one ball won high up the pitch,and not one decent tackle made on the defender. infact,Connolly has got this irritating habit of skipping out of tackles.. I`m not saying there isnt a place for him in the squad,just that he should not be playing at the expence of sacrificing the holding midfielder. there is enough goals in the team without him, what we need is that extra man in midfield to limit goals conceded.

on the basis of last nights performance,that has got to be the easiest conclusion ever to be made in fotball. Connolly was truly shocking: weak,slow,lethargic,and his passes and shots..oh my,not worth a discussion on a forum concerned with football ! the midfield was non-existance in the first half,we need that extra man there. be it Wotton or whoever..

I do not like the "if" part of this topic. I think we are very much within striking distance right now,with 30 games left to play! the only thing we need to do in january...is keep winning

Well,that doesnt make any sense to me..remember,before a ball was kicked,we were just 10 points shy of a play-off position. so 9 points short of a play-off position at any stage in the season is really just status quo from where we started ! This one`s is easier,though not as complicated and elaborative as yours : Lets say we end up on 75 points. That means we would have actually picked 85 points from the opposition. this means that from the total of points dealt out that season,the other teams in the league would have ten point less between them. since the top teams naturally are the ones with the highest percentage of points,this would affect them the most. if those ten point were to be "removed" from teams based on the percentage of total points they got,I`d guess that we`d get an "advantage" of max 1 point in comparision with our neighbours at the table... more than enough under close circumstances,in other words.

Agreed. In fact,I would want the top four sides to win all their remaining games and run away from the rest..as long as they dont win both matches against us of course

a very good point,which makes it even more important for us to beat the teams floating around 5-10`th position. If I`m going to try and explain what you are saying,I`d go with this: Lets say we end up on 75 points. That means we would have actually picked 85 points from the opposition. this means that from the total of points dealt out that season,the other teams in the league would have ten point less between them. since the top teams naturally are the ones with the highest percentage of points,this would affect them the most ! does this sound about right ?? hmmm..

I know what you mean,mate ! for the record, I agree with NickG`s idea with this thread. We both can,and possibly should, be able to reach the playoffs this year. I`d give it a 55-45 % chance not enough to make a wager,but enough to make this season very,very exciting !

but your arguement has got two sides,even from your point of view.. if I get you right,what you are saying is: "if Saints were in that league,instead of (insert team),then 74 points would have got us to the playoffs". but by saying so,you assume Saints would "replace" one of the top six teams in that table. If saints "replaced" the club at bottom,74 points wouldn`t be enough,S****horpe would still have had 76. if Saints "replaced" any of the top six sides,however, 74 would be sufficient.

aha..thats why I cant remember- wasnt born !

we`ve scored from two corners..how many decades since the last time that happened ??

agreed,our most valuable player by miles.

sounds as if Lambert is on fire ! goal,assist,flick on`s,holding the ball up..he`s winning everything.

I agree - if our ambition is to fight for a play-off position....which,IMO,should be our target !

what normally happens when a goal is scored after 90 minutes,is that the team benefitting from the goal will celebrate for a looooong time just to get the clock running. (if City needed one more goal,they would have been at the mid-circle ten seconds later). the refs answer to this,is normally to hold one finger up- thats him saying "I`ll add one more minute since you are wasting time here".

the sign from the fourth official came up before City equalized. that said 4 minutes. after that,they celebrated AND there was another substitution-Carrick came on in the 92 minute. now,following your logic,the game should have lasted until 95.15. Besides,there was some deadball situations right at the end,and they always take a very long time to execute at that stage of the game. also,it is common practise to see out a dangerous situation before blowing the whistle. in other words:the ref was in his full rights,and you are just splitting hairs !

crap.

Better,but still not good enough.

maybe a little.but being right outweighs that..by a country mile

I have never implied you have had an opinion on anything,you dozy camel. learn to read,or keep your hands off of the keyboard.

too bad a match lasts 90 minutes. we are being arse-raped at the moment.