benjii

I'm not suggesting Gaydamak has no money and I never have. It is a published fact, however, that Pompey have no money and that he wants to sell it. It is therefore quite irrelevant how much money he has IMO. I'm not saying Pompey are going to go down the drain (although obviously it would be very funny if they did), but what is clear is that anyone who states Pompey are not in financial trouble at the moment, is wrong.

Yes, it does seem an odd admission. The problem is you never know if his utterings give rise to "lost in translation" moments or are what he actually means. Basically, he seems to have admitted that we haven't had any proper wingers for ages. Pretty obvious to all those watching, which is probably why we have concerns about playing a system that relies on wide players holding width to strecth the opposition.

Assuming we must stick to "the formation", I would pick: ---------------------KD----------------------- Cork-------Perry-----Pearce-----Skacel------ ------------James------Wotton--------------- Thomson--------Euell------------Surman -----------------McG------------------- No point rushing Holmes back. He is too important. Surman is ****e in centre mid so he can play left wing and can actually be trusted to hold his position, as can Thomson. Lallana is ****e anywhere at the moment so he can sit on the bench. BWP is ****e.

You should not need to give prior notice of your intention to attend. Bring some evidence of being a shareholder if you can though.

I don't think anyone can object to this: http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/articles/article.php?page_id=11101 being described as a right load of ********.

Fair play to Brighton who have stated they didn't vote for this as it was a waste of time and a cop out.

Ok, no probs.

You quoted me. I replied. It's sort of how these things work. I will leave now because this is getting tiresome. Nighty, night.

Why you need to persist in attacking arguments that no one is putting forward is a mystery to me but whatever floats your boat...

But how will that benefit us? It just means bigger, more ambitious clubs will put more energy in getting "home grown" (whatever that actually means) players. It's not as though we're going to steal a march on people by having the quota upped to 9 overnight. Lowe plays his own game anyway.

Don't think you'll find me slating the players often. Maybe one or two when it's deserved for things they have complete control over like being disciplined and making the right decisions. It's the ridiculous management of them that get on my nerves. And by "management" I am referring to the very top, down.

Beattie worked his socks off for us. I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that Legod Third Coming has very poor eyesight.

That would make more sense but it isn't how this is being reported. :confused:

The rule, as portrayed, seems utterly pointless.

Decent shout. Might put a couple of quid on that.

In fairness to me, I posted the thread following the Burnley game and someone turned it into a poll a couple of days later I think. I also try to keep my opinions on JP completely divorced from my opinions on Lowe (which is what this thread is about).

Everyone knows Pompey are skint. The only people denying it are those with a vested commercial interest and a few numpty skates sad enough to register on a Saints messageboard.

Kinky bugger...

Trust me mate, I'm right. In any case, your quoted passage even goes to show that. "the total voting rights of the members who vote" It's not complicated.

If you honestly think all our problems are attributable to missing a few one on ones (and to be honest, we have had plenty of abject performances where we have barely even managed to create a one on one) and have nothing to do with a completely one dimensional and easy-to-play-against system then I have little respect for your footballing knowledge.

Obviously there is no formation that can guarantee that and no one is being moronic enough to suggest there is. There are formations however, that don't result in a bunch of players wandering around aimlessly upfront, in full backs being completely isolated, in the opposition defence not being put under pressure when on the ball, in the attacking team getting players in the box etc... The question is: does 4-2-1-2-1 obtain the best results our players are capable of getting? No one can answer that as you can only play each game once, but I think most of us suspect the answer is "no".

Good stuff.

They can increase their share capital and issue new shares but they can't offer them for general public sale (or trade them on a listing exchange). In other words, unless the directors are prepared to dip into their pockets or individuals are preapared to pump cash in and come on board... "no". However, given that there is presently no public appetite whatsoever for shares in Saints it wouldn't make much difference.

75% refers to the proportion of votes cast. It doesn't matter if most shareholders don't bother voting.

I think most people can manage to "concentrate" on our survival battle and also have a little at Pompey at the same time. Blimey, the other day I managed to blow my nose whilst boiling the kettle.:supz: