benjii

This is true. He could also take bungs and get us relegated two divisions for financial irregularities. Probably not though.

The atmosphere was pretty poor. Not having a roof doesn't help but then witnessing possibly the worst Saints performance I have ever seen was likely to have been a bigger factor. Some absolutely awful performances and a manager doing an impression of Jan Poortvliet. Brilliant. KD was immense. Harding at least looked like a footballer. Lambert was isolated and Lallana tried to carry the attack to them. Everyone else, including Pardew, was absolutely terrible.

Do you honestly think the Sporting Director will be repsonsible for picking the team and tactics? Me neither.

Can't say I've seen the guy play but I'm still excited by this possible signing: 1) Replacement for Wotton presumably so should see our ball use and retention improve; 2) Clearly accomplished at this level; 3) A signing which will really hurt the departing club, which is in our division. On paper then, excellent.

If combined with an orange tan, short hair and a silver chain it will make the tatoo on your neck look that tad more menacing.

Once the Dr gets his bonus he'll have some money. I actually really hope this goes through.

I apologise for the extremely non-de rigeur apostrophe, by the way.

Cor blimey.

Robsk II - yes! Good guess That's mental though. Over 2.5m per stride.

Anyone want to hazard a guess how many strides Bolt took in that 100 metres?

Actually, you're very unlikely to get your costs in the Small Claims Court.

I thought it was Keith Peatw*t.

I disagree completely. There is no more injustice in that goal being disallowed than there is in a goal being chalked off for an incorrect marginal offside decision. Both have exactly the same impact but we wouldn't expect a centre-half to say, "well, actually I did step up a bit late and he wasn't offside, so let's allow them to score a goal to make up for the linesman's mistake". If the latter happened it would be ridiculous, and if the former happened but not the latter that would be inconsistent and arbitrary. When does an official's error become blatant or obvious enough that the beneficiary of the mistake must rectify it? At the end of the day, this seems particularly galling because it's such a bad error, but it's just tough luck. It's also funny because it's Neil Warnock who tends to produce bullying, thugish, cheating teams full of ****s.

Ok, I've run the article through an online translator and it's come up with this: "Come and get me, Harry." It did struggle making sense of this rather baffling section though: as a Luton fan and, although it pains me to say it, Luton's troubles were never entirely surprising. For years the club seemed to survive on a shoestring budget, with a dodgy stadium, low revenue and small attendances. But at Portsmouth it's a different scenario altogether No, David. No, it isn't.

- oh dear.

I was thinking about that the other day! If we do get back in the Prem this must be a definite possibility. Under the old Prem regime to do so would have meant raising further debt and so it wouldn't have happened for fear of it being a white elephant should we go down. Under Marcus, we simply write a cheque for £20m or whatever, no probs!

Just said he knows we need a few more players. That it was "evident". We can probably close about half the threads on here now!

I expect it was Fulham's legendary giant away following which meant they had to ring-fence 3,000 seats in the home section, just in case.

Just over 17k..... Massive club. Massive.

With our current crop of central midfielders and centre backs, staying up would be an achievement on a -10 start.

Frankly, after reading that, Poortvliet seems like a complete idiot. Cheers for the translation.

Good stuff. Mind thoes toes on your next shot.

Just shows how badly we were stitched up by the absolutely incompetent senior management team of the business. Still, all's well that ends well!

Not per se but it depends if the average attendance in those years was less than the average attendance in the following years. Given that football crowds were probably on the general increase through the early days of the game then I suspect, in this case, those extra 13 years probably contained lower crowds.

Actually, that's just about the strongest argument there is. HTH