Dark Munster

My guess it was more from Ralph. He seems to be very fond of teacher's pets.

Me too!

https://www.saintsweb.co.uk/topic/59176-summer-2022-transfer-window/

I think some people confuse improbable with impossible. It's improbable we'll go down, but not impossible. Of course, there are different levels of improbable. It's improbable, but not impossible to win the lotto jackpot, but the odds are so astronomically low that it's essentially zero, which is why I never buy one. Same with commercial flights, the odds of crashing are extremely low so most don't worry about it. But if I needed to get from France to England quickly, and the only flight was a poorly maintained 2 seater, with an unlicensed pilot going over a stormy channel, I'd be nervous even if the odds of me not dying were 99%.

If City win their next two matches by an aggregate margin of 6 goals, then Liverpool would need to win their last 2 matches (including us), and hope City lose their final match. And also make up 9 goals.

Good summary. Of course, once in a lifetime scenarios tend to happen once in a lifetime 😉.

I think we should give him a start against Liverpool, so that after 2 minutes he can get sent off for a studs up lunge on Salah, and we can then go on to lose 9-0.

Exactly. And, like the Donkey from Monaco, many of us said so at the time. So it isn't a case of 20-20 hindsight.

The problem with that approach is we'll have more RB's than Southgate's England!

https://www.saintsweb.co.uk/topic/54858-claude-puel/ Anyway, back to Ralph ...

We could well be safe by the time our match starts. Or if not, Liverpool could be out of it (dropping points against Villa, with City winning 2 out of 2), and not care about our result, yet alone goal difference. I think the only case where Liverpool would want to give us a good Rogering is if they and City win their next matches before playing us (Liverpool one match, City two). Then Liverpool would be 6 points behind City, and would need to beat us by a big enough margin to get close to City's goal difference, and then hope that City lose their last match and they win theirs. Even in that worst case scenario Liverpool would probably only need to beat us by at most 5 or 6, and win their last match by one goal.

I'm going to stick my neck out and predict the head to head and matchday results will be identical at the end of the season!

Is it the same one where our players currently are? If so, give them my regards tell them to f**k off.

I just Googled it: Denying an obvious goal scoring opportunity.

They can ask for whatever they want. But at the end of the day the selling price is what the seller and buyer agree to, and the buyer won't be willing to pay more because of a sell-on clause. Also a seller will hold out for as much as possible*, regardless whether there is a sell-on clause or not. * Except when Saints sold Mane.

Normally, of course. But not when they're betting on their own team's relegation. That's what many of them say, anyway.

"Hold my beer ..."

I wouldn't do it, (because I don't like losing money), but I'm guessing that any self respecting Saints fan betting on us getting relegated is hoping to lose his/her money, and just doing it as an insurance bet to soften the blow if the unlikely happens.

That's what the Blue Phew believe to this day, but we actually finished bottom by losing to Utd, so even if WBA had lost against the Skates and gone down we still would've gone down.

Probably true. But since Broja is probably off, we need to find a new Tadic and an Ings. I've said many times that a goal-scoring forward lifts the whole team. We've been shit since Broja went off the boil, there is no one else in the squad who can find the back of the net regularly. If we'd had Ings this season (and at his peak, not injured) we'd probably be upper mid table, and no one would be calling for Ralph's head.

Glad to oblige.