up and away

We all have opinions, but where is the logic for this "I'm getting a bit fed up of reading this tripe about Pardew working them too hard and that is the reason for everything bad about the start of the season" You freely admit that the problems with Puncheon, Barnard and Lambert were down to injuries picked up in pre-season. maybe that was the problem with Hammond as well. From the Plymouth match report I found on the Ugly "Hammond & Scheiderlin did not impose themselves in any way shape or form, Hammond looked injured and certainly in the last 10 minutes was too tired to do anything" So that gives you 4 key players in Hammond, Puncheon, Barnard and Lambert, not to mention how we mishandled Lallana. Is it any real surprise we started the season the way we did? It does not matter why these players are not fit. The simple fact is that it is because of pre-season training that they are in this position. You can surmise Pardew was very unlucky, but that just does not fit when two experienced members of staff actually report to Cortese that what is being done to the players is more damaging than good. By reporting to Cortese in such a manner, you are really sticking your neck on the block to get it chopped off. Why would two independent sources go out on a limb with such accusations unless they were extremely confident about what was happening. Even if what they were saying was correct, but the players managed to attain fitness by the start of the season, they would have been gone. This was no being wise after the event, this was called at the time and individuals put their jobs on the line in coming forward. We saw in the sacking of Benitez by Inter Milan, that analysis of his training and injuries collected were attributed to his methods and why no sympathy was allowed in that case. In our case you have two professionals go out on a limb and predict the outcome, not wait until after the event. The subsequent history of our injuries and fitness has proven them totally correct, with it taking half a season to fix the damage.

This is very basic, Pardew was in charge of pre-season training, something he insisted upon doing his way, even against the advice of experienced staff. During pre-season Ricky, Barnard, Puncheon picked up injuries that stopped them attaining full fitness until now. Hammond was just a shell of his previous self and if you think he was fit, I can only assume you were looking at someone else. We arrived at the start of the season with our fitness levels poor, exacerbated by injuries and the regime they went through. Our fitness levels and injuries were down to one person, Pardew, whether he had them singing extracts from the sound of music or lumping sand bags up and down the mountains. He wanted things his way no matter what others were advising, so this one is pretty simple. Pre season is all about getting the players fit to withstand a full season, without impeding their progress with injuries, something that spectacularly failed us. That's without allowing for the natural set backs you have such as the dislocation, etc.

If you could not figure out from those first two home performances against two poor teams in Plymouth and the O's, that something was not drastically wrong, your view must have been severely restricted. We were so sluggish in those games, tapering off drastically in the second half as tiredness set in. The state of fitness and sharpness of the team at the beginning of the season was woeful, I would have expected them to be at that level with no pre season. The most noticeable being Puncheon and Hammond, who took an age to get his fitness levels back to where they should be. Puncheon jut ran out of steam in the second half, ending up running down blind alleys. The case of Ricky has been well documented and it is only now he is starting to look like the player he was. Hopefully we can rely on a fully fit Barnard in the coming games. Lallana's injury was not handled well at all, whoevers fault. He should have had an exploratory immediately and going by what subsequently happened, missed the first week of the season at worst. If you are going to nurse a player through a problem, maybe not best to play him nigh on the full 90 in a pointless cup game, then see him break down a couple of days later in a league match. The simple facts are that fitness levels at the start of the season were woeful, with several injuries to key players that decimated the team, resulting in the poor performances we saw. This from a pre-season training regime fully under the control of Pardew, the most expensive in the league with behind the scenes support that many league 1 teams can only dream about. It's taken us a half a season to fully undo the damage that was done by pre-season training, something that Pardew fought strongly to have total control over, even though he was warned otherwise by that experienced support staff. The position we are now should have been where we were at the start of the season!

Yesterday was a great game of football, we all went away happy. But if this game had been at Huddersfield, it would not have surprised me for us to lose this game. The first 20 minutes we were dire at the back and should have been 2-0 down. Then it's a lot down to chance to be able to pull ourselves back from that, similar to how it panned out at their place when we got mullahed. We have to tighten things up, because against any half decent team with some endeavour, we will be in deep water. If we play like that we won't be clawing things back away from home and our forwards will need to be really sharp just to get something at home. This is not automatic form, until we learn how to defend from the whistle. This is not something new but something that keeps recurring and until it actually is addressed, why should it suddenly stop?

It's down to frustration which we all must feel to a certain extent. If you have a look at Guly's record for goals and assists per minute on the pitch, I doubt there is a better player in the Saints team on that basis? This may not have Guly's goal scoring day but his contribution was vital, bordering on essential. Think back to those games where teams come and park the bus and we always have suffered with breaking them down, well in Guly we have someone who can perform that task. The only time I have ever booed at a Saints game was when Redknapp subbed Jones instead of Fuller. Frustration got the better of me, even though it took Fuller another season and a half to sort his knees out.

We were a lot sharper today and Ricky was a lot better, whether this is just because of the rest we will have to wait and see. Oxo still gets my MOM, even though he was subbed. Ricky's link up play was excellent, his goal classy, but he never forced their team to change out the centre half. Guly really came on strong at the end, compensating for Ricky and I hope we keep him. This had Brentford written all over it again, but we were a lot sharper this time out. Their keeper made a couple of good saves, the Red sea parted and we were one down. What is it with this weakness? We have to prioritise the defence until we get on top. I am getting slightly paranoid with having Schniederlin in the midfield, seems a trademark when he is involved. However good that game was to watch, I just don't feel it's the best way to play with the talent we have available. far too open for my liking at the start, but that's where the excitement comes from. A little concerned with Oxo having cramp, especially with all the games coming up and Holmes no longer available. I would be very tempted to get Puncheon back and see how he pans out for a couple of games, let him go at the end of the window if it does not work out.

It's very difficult sticking up for D'Urso after some of his decisions and I won't even be tempted to go there. But the FA have set up procedures to avoid this type of thing. The referee is required to give a pitch inspection 90 minutes before the start. Previous to that, the club has to inform the FA immediately they believe there may be a problem. They then get someone local in and a decision can be given to save most of those fans travelling. I can't see D'Urso and his assistants getting this totally wrong (on a ledge here), so I would put Charlton's enthusiasm for getting revenue in here as the problem. The very fact you had so many other teams around having similar problems and it was not as if they were throwing resources at solving the problem.

That must have been uncomfortable!

You only have to look at all the other grounds and the postponements to quickly come to the conclusion, that only clubs with the resources to get the ground playable have any chance of putting on a game. And what is abundantly clear is that Charlton had no where near the resources to assume they could get this game played. If they had just put down sand in places that could of worked, but they never even had sufficient sand available. Some of those covers look to have the insulating properties of a crisp packet, maybe good for water but they have not done the job here! If you are relying upon blowers to clear the pitch, you need enough to cover all, not just the goal mouths. Andy D'Urso may well have problems, but the culprits here are Charlton and they should be made to pay for this. The groundsman knew the state of the pitch from early this morning and the management took the decision upon themselves that the pitch would be playable and not called the game off.

I don't know the exact details apart from what is published, but the Charlton ground staff had a duty of informing the FA if the pitch was not playable. This was clearly not done otherwise we would not have had this problem. I fully understand a game could have been played upon the pitch, but at what cost? The referee then has to make allowances for players sliding around uncontrollably and that the standard rules of the game cannot be employed without mind to the conditions. One ******* blower? this just shows what a micky mouse league this is. I've seen games in the past where they have had greater success with straw! D'Urso may be at fault here, but the Charlton management and groundsman are the main culprits. I would imagine both managers have cabin fever by now and would have wanted the game played, but that does not make it anywhere near correct.

As with Beattie, if he was carrying an injury, he was not worth a Pulis. If Ricky can't jump properly, just wasting your time in playing him. We all want Ricky back and scoring, but don't even think about playing him if he can't jump. Ricky picked up 3 different injuries in pre-season that restricted his training. Not knackered, buggered!

You can easily see both methods of training working, as you say. The Bellamy article was really interesting and deserves another mention, but I would not argue that fitness could not be achieved by other methods. But the crux in what ever you do has to satisfy two important points, you do not injure a player such fitness can never be achieved and you monitor the fitness levels to ensure what you are doing is working. We have had three key injuries which I felt were not handled well,Lambert, Barnard and Lallana. Lallana's injury had nothing to do with pre-season, but the manner in which it was handled certainly leaves a lot of doubt in my mind. Fitness was definitely an issue in those first couple of league games against poor opposition in Plymouth and LO. We started off well enough without a great deal of co-ordination and bad luck. Ran out of energy and the ideas that diminish with it, resulting in the hoof. The worst example for fitness to me was Hammond, huffing and puffing all over the place, a shadow of his former self. It was only under Adkins that we eventually got to see the Hammond we first signed. When you lose fitness like that, all of a sudden the ability to create space and give yourself other options goes away from you. Players are not moving into positions to give you options for an outlet and all you see is the opposition. Mentally the team looked jaded from the very first game. That can be down to a variety of reasons, but generally not evident in a team when you are at your fittest. What we do know is that the control of injuries was poor and the fitness levels were off, just go back to the match reports for that if you are in doubt. We also know that we had expertise that recognised a lot of this and were not listened to, for a money no expense pre-season that 95% of other League 1 team could only dream of. There seemed a lot of bad blood between Pardew and some other members of staff which allowed this to come about. The question then is, who is at fault? Well if you get your own way and are proved wrong, you really have fooked up good and proper.

The more I am hearing about this, the more I believe Cortese did let him manage and it was all self inflicted. Go back over all of Leftbacks posts and although he knew what was going on, did not say much at all. You had all the expletives aimed at Les Reed for knowing nothing and poking his nose in. He admitted pre-season was screwed up, but blamed that on Cortese without any specifics. If Pardew had pulled it off and got these players to the correct fitness levels, I reckon all the other teams would be forgetting about even trying for top spot. There is no doubt we played our best ever football under Pardew, but lacking fitness to give us consistency over the season. I think Pardew could go on and be a success even at Newcastle, something I derided previously. If Pardew had used the resources at his disposal, I don't think any of this would have happened. But for this to develop as it did, I get the feeling there is some bad blood in the history here! If Pardew stayed he could well of done very well, but for the errors he made, I can't see any CEO not giving him the sack.

That will teach me not to read every new post that comes on here during a day. I don't think there was too much in that, just not standard in this situation. My guess would have been money put in by Crouch that helped keep us afloat or out of Liebherrs hands, which ever way you want to look at it. No way of paying it back officially, no matter what may have been promised or errors by the administrator. And I can't see Liebherr being too happy about reimbursing someone he viewed as damaging.

Well if the others were doing Pardews bidding and offering anyone who put their noses in, a poke with a stick! Would that do it for you? Les Reeds word was not taken, that is the whole crux of the matter. What would you do in Cortese's shoes should a coach come and tell you the manager is doing something badly wrong? I would have thought pre-season is meant to hurt and let the manager get on with it, which is what happened. The rumours at the end of last season were just that and totally unconnected to this, the reason he got the sack. Pardew knew he was on borrowed time all right, after he saw what he had done to the players after those opening games. Or you think that's just motivation? There was no escape from this now, he had been told of the possible damage and was reaping his error. I don't suppose those that made the original comments about the training were keeping a low profile either. I can understand why Pardew made this error, because it was the one thing holding the team back from winning this league by record margins. Some of the football played by Pardew was superb, but we could never keep it up with two games a week. Sort that fitness out and he was on easy street, trouble is it all back fired.

Your stance is against any of the logic out there. For your theory to be true, Cortese is a liar and he has come out with these comments just to justify himself. This guy is not into justifying himself, keeps his mouth shut more than any other chairman we have known and has not even bothered to comment about most of the other controversial actions he has taken. I never fully understood Pardews sacking until this news on pre-season came out, with the rumours about wives obvious rubbish. I even thought Weston's theory that Pardew did it deliberately to get a pay out, had merit. Go back and look at Leftback's posts, apply the bias filter and that all fits in. His condemnation of Les Reed makes no bones about where one of the sources against Pardew came from. Leftback openly admitted that pre-season was a disaster, but placed that blame on Cortese rather than his chum, Pardew. Even the fact the whole of Pardew's aids were also sacked instantly makes sense, when you consider the problem. There is so much out there that falls into line behind this being down to screwing up pre-season, you are peeing into a force 9 arguing against it. Just look at those early season performances under Pardew and the injuries we have had! What else do you put that down to, some form of epidemic? Trying to portray Cortese's character as opposite to all his known traits to suit your purpose, just appears clutching at straws.

But Pardew did become a bellend between May and August when he ruined most of the squad in pre-season training! Why are Cortese's comments dismissed, that Pardew went against team and medical staff and caused damage to the players which lasts to this day? Why is this so difficult to accept? Every comment and inference lines up behind this statement, from The comments made by the OS The condition of the team at the start of the season, nigh on relegation form The loss of our 30 goal striker Pardew's gallows demeanour when the "I tolds" were putting the boot in Cortese was then faced with the situation that severe damage had been done to our promotion challenge this season, do you think he should just let it ride? He went against Cortese's wishes in not maximising the chances of promotion last season and he has done the same thing again at the start of this season, where do you draw a line? Cortese knew full well the effect of changing managers at the start of the season, something he specifically underlines. I said at the time that I did not believe the attributed comments by Markus regarding Pardew, it just did not seem his style. Subsequently I changed that view when reliable people repeated this, way before any of this blew up. Your theory that it was Markus allowing Pardew to keep his job just does not follow any of the slightest facts we have. Cortese had total control at Saints, not frightened to upset anyone and absolutely no admonishment from Markus. If Cortese wanted Pardew out, it would have happened immediately! Cortese may not be everyone's cup of tea, but compared to all the Wayne Kerrs we have had previously, he is 24 carat. We may not have the extended finances with Markus passing, but he is by far our best chance. To try and portray Cortese as weak when it comes to the position of Pardew is ludicrous. Suddenly you believe Billy buffalo bollix transforms into Mr Bean over the issue of Pardew, even when it has been stated several times that Cortese was in total control.

Just before the Rovers game, we had the cup game against Bolton in mid-week. Pardew commented after the cup game "it was not a priority game, but we treated it as such anyway". Now bearing in mind everything that happened previously, can you think of anything dumber to say? Then during the Rovers game, Lallana broke down and required an operation, after doing close to the full game in midweek. It looks to me like Cortese felt the damage had been done, add in the previous and there was no way back. The club statement at the time "These targets for sustained and significant progress embrace both the First Team and the Football Development & Support Centre as integrated, co-operative units" now makes full sense. Pardew went out on his own, disregarded all the facilities and expertise put in place to aid him and just bluggered things up. What's the point in spending £M's on a set up, just to do the opposite whilst inflicting heavy damage? The really interesting bit is as you say about the finances. Now we know Markus set up a trust fund for the club, but obviously this is not going to be to the full extent Markus may have ploughed into us with the talk of CL. What the family's position will be down the road when this comes to a head, we don't know. We can certainly guess that there is a likely problem here from the comments, but one that could be reduced / over come, by sponsorship or additional investment. Your assumption we will need to sell does not add up with the light of the trust fund, but we are not in the same place if Markus were alive today. Maybe we won't have the funds to force us into the Premier and stay there, but the one thing I am positive about, we really would be worse off without Cortese. Without any objectivity, all you are doing is phissing down your leg, filling your boots. I don't agree with the team building sufficient to compete / get promotion from the CCC. The priority has to be League 1, the CCC can be dealt with when it's there!

Any Saints fan adores what Matty did on the pitch for us, but he must be a sandwich short of a picnic to keep repeating this nonesense. If the money was there, they would have bought the club, rather than just Crouch getting mugged to stump up the deposit. To then go onto say even more imaginary money was there to buy the likes of Lambert just beggars belief, put the spade down and try and forget it ever happened. I don't think Matty realises how close he came to putting us into liquidation, as the Adminitrator stated. Luckily Liebherr did not get the dog and came back to the table. As soon as they came back with the requirement to renegotiate the points deduction with the league, this had essence of kipper over the whole affair. Anyone with just a minimal knowledge of football would have told them the league would be immoveable on this point. Just bringing this up can only be seen as a stalling or an exit strategy.

And if they look at them all, they will find just as many bad Antonio performances as good. Similar with Papa, but he scored some scrappy goals when played upfront, that bit more effective than Antonio. But just take a way Ricky's goals and mount him on the back of a slug and there is your over riding reason.

? Have you been on one of those trips under the pole? Pardew was sacked for footballing reasons, Cortese has already stated that. During pre-season training Pardew was warned that his pre-season regime was in danger of doing more damage than good for the players, something that was relayed to Cortese but he did not interfere with the manager. I assume Les Reed had something to do with this, explaining Leftbacks position, but Reed was backed up by one of the medical staff. When the season started and the players were less fit than when they went into pre-season + all the injuries, the writing was on the wall. Obviously by this time some had the knives out for Pardew and he had the look of a dead man walking when the damage was reflected on the pitch. The statement given out for his sacking is fully in line with this. This was not directly related to the playoffs, but something separate. That's not to say there may have been a certain cumulative effect in the decision, but it was triggered totally independently.

The one over riding factor in all of this, is that Ricky has only scored one goal from open play. The other problems we have is that we don't have two forwards remaining that we can play 442 well enough, and we leak goals. That's why I would set up the team to counter attack and overload the midfield to ensure control. Having a midfield / attack of Lallana Hammond Fonte Chaplow Oxo --------------Guly--------------- For this to work, we would have to draw the opposition onto us, but these players have all the requisites to play the counter attack far better than everything we have been doing up until now or anything the opposition has had to deal with. Even the option of putting Fonte upfront as a target if required in the later stages. We need someone in the middle to give control, something we have regularly had problems with. Hammond and Chaplow have performed best in midfield, but even they have issues with a half decent side with that extra man in midfield. Fonte I believe could do that and add the extra strength to the defence. He brings the ball out well and is a real threat in the penalty area. We are in a real hole right now with injuries and forwards not able to contribute fully. This I feel could reduce the damage until a point where we have the facilities to go out and dominate teams. With that amount of skill and pace on the wings , I can't see this not working away from home where we draw teams onto us. But we would have to set up defensively, leave too big a gap between the defence and midfield and it would all end in tears. I would go this way for every away game, varying it at home depending upon the opposition and what we have available, until our resources are such we have viable alternatives. We have in Oxo and Lallana, two players of pace and skill that most other teams cannot boast one of similar ilk. We must utilise their strengths, whilst limiting their weaknesses and that of the team.

If you look back, Cortese was far more generous to Pardew than the vast majority of chairmen out there. When Pardew said he prioritised the cups, after being specifically told the league was only priority, he should have been a goner, there and then. In any other walk of life he would have been sacked immediately and no one would have any qualms about doing as such. I understand this does not mean he cost us promotion, but he cost us the best chance of promotion. Cortese then had to decide what to do for this season, looked at the alternatives, the good and bad of Pardew, then decided on what he thought was best for Saints. Irrespective of his previous spat with Pardew, he looked at the cold hard facts and did not let the emotions confuse the issue. Pardew over did pre-season training and did so much damage to the squad, that we are still suffering from those effects even now. Pardew was warned by other members of the football and medical staff, but he ploughed on regardless. Even though Cortese was made aware, he still considered Pardew as manager and let him fall or stand by his decisions. When the season started and it was obvious to all the extent of the damage, Pardew was history. This is not to mention the dumb comment after the league cup game, "it was not a priority game, but we treated it as such". The damage Pardew has done could well extend the full length of of this season and considering everything, he was treated too well by Cortese. So looking at Cortese's history, it's more the opposite is true to what you are insinuating!

Anyone with any common sense would see that Adkins is missing a 30 goal striker, something Pardew would not lasted the season without. And the reason we are missing that 30 goal striker + a range of problems, is because the same thwat screwed up pre-season. We played some superb football under Pardew, but the method of play (requiring high energy levels) and our stamina meant we suffered when having to play two games a week. It was constantly a case of after the Lord Mayors show. Pardew rightly thought that if he could sort out that stamina problem, we would mullah this league. He was right to an extent, just never had the players who could raise to that challenge. And in his failed attempt, has bluggered us for most of this season, doing far more damage than good. Adkins is now forced to juggle with the pieces that are left. As for the hormonaly unbalanced, those criticisms will always be there to some extent, no matter who the manager. Thankfully the one that matters does not see things that way.

Lambert's problem is that his "condition" restrains him from jumping for the ball (not a couple of half jumps), also making him very slow off the mark. He is just so easy to mark man to man that he has to drop off to find the space to be any sort of use. Well done to Ricky for adapting with his problems, but I would not start him away from home until we can get him up to speed. When Ricky starts competing effectively for headers we will all notice the difference, he is just putting in a restricted cameo performances at the moment. I think playing Fonte as the defensive midfielder could change our season around, even making the defence more solid. Fonte's biggest problem is trying to cover for everyone around him, well in that position he can do exactly that, with the added back up behind him. I don't feel it would be that bad to start out away from home with Fonte, Chaplow and Hammond in midfield, just having one up front (but not Ricky at the moment). I remember Craig Brown answering how Scotland punched above their weight, "by having control of the midfield and having an extra man in midfield against the better opposition". Until we get midfield control, we will never be able to consistently use the skill we possess. Have a fully functioning forward line and that midfield of Fonte + 1 could well work, but without that pressure from the forwards, I don't feel Fonte + will be able to plug all the holes. Kelvin had a howler on Saturday, but Adkins should know if Bart is up to it. I would like to see Bart have a go, but more than happy to go with Adkins on this one. We have more than enough skill and attacking threat for this league. What we do not have is midfield control to make any use of that attacking threat.