Dark Munster

I assume Potter would have to give up his remaining Chelsea contract for a lower salary if he joined us, and if so he'd be mad to do so. Maybe he could come to a deal with Chelsea where they just pay him the difference for the payoff period. That way he doesn't lose any money, and Chelsea pay him less than if he was spending his time gardening. If they had just paid him a lump sum compensation when they sacked him then of course the above is moot. I'm not sure how it works in general.

Me too. Yes he's been crap in the PL, but he's shown that he can do it at a level below. It would be mad to get rid of him without giving him a chance for half a season at least when we go down, and under a manager who isn't a clown. It's not like goal scorers, even at the Championship level, are ten a penny. I won't be happy if rumours that he's off to Ipswich are true, unless of course we bring in someone like Ings or Broja (which is highly unlikely).

Everyone but the Hants hierarchy it seems. As I said before, it's like Saints not getting a striker who can score goals. Is it something about being in Hampshire that makes clubs blind to the bleeding obvious?

There was a cut-off date: go into administration before that date, and the 10 point penalty would only apply to the current season, regardless of relegation or not. After that date, the penalty carried over to the next season if you're relegated without it (which happened to us of course). The ruddy-cheeked bastard chose to go into administration a few days after the cut off date, a parting "gift" to the club. His "attempt" to avoid it by claiming the parent company was in administration, and not the club, was a pathetic attempt to cover his vindictive tracks. He knew full well it was a bogus argument, and that the club would be stuffed in League 1. He could easily have taken us into administration a few days earlier to avoid the infamous L1 -10 points.

He's not Rasmus W. Ankersen so that's a massive step up.

He was tracking Nathan F*cking Jones for ages, so that diabolical decision certainly wasn't a panicked one. Just pure, unadulterated incompetence.

More like a constipated turd that won't come out. But point well made.

Wow, that was a lot of work. I'm impressed with your patience and diligence in sorting through the huge pile of turds and ranking all of them. 👏

Anyone nervous about this massive game? Me neither.

Where would you take him? P*rtsm**th?

We've already suffered that with Rueben Half-Wit Selles. I'd prefer a competent manager who looks like a tramp.

No, no, no! It should always be drunk warm.

Some may argue that they are punching above their weight and their natural home is L2.

More like "He's our best player so I'll haul him off at half time."

Yeah there would have to be some like for like rule. Maybe have two subs available, one a specialist batsman and one a specialist bowler. Players 1-7 maybe can be replaced by the batsman, the rest by a bowler.

It’s going to be really nail biting when it gets down to needing 4 from 3.

Yes, but it'll take forever if the manager is out of his depth.

His shot stopping percentage is appallingly bad.

Good shout 😀. He actually might not even make the squad! Just ask Djenepo and Mara for their audacity of creating and scoring a goal against City.

And his reward was for clueless Selles to haul him off at half time. What message does that send? As for the "he was on a yellow so better safe than sorry" bollocks, do we take off every player that has picked up a yellow? Especially the one who was miles better than everyone else. Fine if he was lunging into tackles left, right and centre, with the ref giving him a final warning. But it wasn't even close to being like that.

AArmstrong. His hold up play (and everything else) was non-existent. We were set up to park the bus with Lyanco coming on anyway, so at least Alcaraz with Walcott would've been a threat on breakaways.

I don't understand why cricket doesn't allow subs for injured players who aren't able to come back. It wouldn't have made a difference today, but it does make the sport rather amateurish.

Yes we needed to strengthen the defence, but Alcaraz isn't a dirty player, lunging in all the time and on his final warning from the ref. It wouldn't have been a huge risk to keep him on.