sidthesquid

It's taken him a while but a) he's found his 'true' position (which was clearly never going to be centre-forward), and b) he's grasped just what level of effort and commitment are required. Good on him for that, I say, & I just hope, having helped him mature into a decent asset we are not forced to flog him off for a pittance

My soin was just five. It was a bitterly cold day against Derby at the Dell - I think we won 1-0 - and despite complaining that he'd lost all feeling in his fingers & toes he enjoyed it thoroughly & ten years on he still comes with me. You have to get them young, because despite some leanings towards Liverpool he has remained a true sufferer like his old man, despite living on the dark side

It started before him - WGS was a great fan of Fernandes mincing around on the right

Do mean we've never had this thread before? I thought this was one of Stanley's rhetorical questions again. What is the point of it?

Then again, neither will Euell.....

On Saturday's showing Saga will never score again for us

Also, three things that really, really irritate me on this site - 1) the people that claim that Nigel Pearson is the greatest living Englishman 2) That Leon Crouch was not to blame for anything, ever & 3) that Lowe was responsible for everything that ever went wrong anywhere, ever. For what it's worth I thought Pearson was okay as manager, Crouch meant well, and Rupert is a rosy-cheeked twot who had to go, but it is so boring trying to engage in debate with prejudiced people with closed minds & it always makes me end up defending the indefensible (ie Rupert) because I get wound up by other people's bigotry

As I always think of you as Um Pedant, because you pick up on every tiny inaccuracy in anyone else statement, could I ask what a viscous circle is? It sounds nasty.

The loan signings all combined would still only be loose change from Rasiak's wage. And please don't call me Shirley!

And, as you seem to have all the inside knowledge - was Pearson prepared to take a pay cut to stay (to be on less than Leicester would pay, for example) & do you know what Poortvliet was on. I believe - and I'm prepared to be corrected - that it was in the accounts that Pearson was on £250k & I can't imagine Poortvliet was on anything like that. And before you go on about the cost of Wotte etc, even Superman Pearson would have wanted a few staff to help him.

Do you know this for a fact? Have you some evidence?

I thought Saga & Euell were dreadful today - both tried quite hard but they would still be trying to find the goal now. They both had service & chances but they were shocking. Euell never won a header all afternoon & neither barely managed a pass to our own side. Skacel was cr*p,tto, that uis why no-one will sign them

He clearly was told to cut costs dramatically - even Crouch acknowledged that - & to some extent he did. Why Barclay's pulled the plug now is an interesting question - maybe they did lose faith, but whatever reason the timing was odd. But then that's banks for - they always have been & always wuill be a bunch of c**ts in it for themselves

I am still not convinced that Pearson didn't go because he didn't like the look of what was on offer & I believe Lowe appointed Poortvliet because he thought he would do a good job on a shoestring using 'the boysh'. I accept it failed, but I think that was the reasoning behind it. It was not 'no choice', but it was certainly limited choice

He'll be back - all players, especially young ones - go through patches like this. James did & McGoldrick & both came back stronger. Surman has, too, a couple of times, but I don't think he is fully fit at present

It didn't help us at all on the pitch, but it was that or Barclay's pulling the plug. It has been well documented that we had to cut our overdraft by a third in one hit

Do you still not get it - it was all down to money (or the lack of it). Apart from 5 (I accept) it was all down to money. As a CEO of a plc company, he has to put the best shine on events or the shares plummet and you go broke. All the youth thing, a cheap coach & trying to get senior players out was because Barclays were threatening to pull the plug if we didn't act. But if he'd stood up on the 1st September and said 'basically we are doing this because we are broke' we would already be in administration & possibly out of the league. I am not a fan of his by any means, but to still go on about playing youngsters and having a cheap option manager being Lowe's fault is just pointless & totally ignoring reality. We were as good as stuffed last autumn, he gave it a shot at saving us, but ultimately failed. That is reality - deal with it

The proof of who is really a fan will be Easter Monday, particularly if we fail dismally in the next two away games & the sun is out. The turn-out then will prove who really gives a sh1t.

As far as I could see there was a bunch of frustrated kids (and adults of similar IQ) realising they could no longer chant 'sack the board' & 'sack the administrators' was too complicated for them so they took their frustration out on a couple of dozen Charlton fans. All a bit 4th form & embarrassing, frankly.

I find myself defending the kids yet again. Anyone who watched Euell, Skacel or Saga today knows how poor they really are. Other clubs know it, too, which is why we can't shift them on. Now Rupert has gone there is no need to keep bigging up the senior pros & running down the kids. All of the big-money senior pros - including BWP (but excluding Perry - who isn't on big money anyway - & Davis) have been the cause of our problems over the last two seasons, not the solutions. I do not believe that Paterson or Gobern or any of the others could have been worse than the above. Also, there is a chance they will yet come good, like Gillett & James & McG have this season. It ain't gonna happen for Skacel, Euell or Saga, that is for certain

My ratings for what it's worth Davis - 7.5 - Did nothing wrong and a couple of good saves. (probably MoM,, which says it all at home to the bottom club with the worst away record) Thompson - 5 - for trying, but he isn't a fullback Skacel - 4 - for not looking significantly better than the above Saeijs - 4 - looked mentally all at sea. We have come to expect better Perry - 7 - will do well again in League One next season Wotton - 4 - makes Gillett look like Alan Ball by comparison Surman - 5 - looks like he's struggling with an injury Lallana - 4 - was he playing McGoldrick - 6 - great goal and some good grafting. Definitely his best position Euell - 3 - Back to bad old Jason. Lost every header, terrible touch and on a totally different wavelength to everyone else. Enthusiasm is no-where near enough in a 31 year-old on £14k/week Saganowski - 3 - he could still be out there now trying to find the goal. Both he and Euell had service & chances today but looked about as likely to score as I would with Lucy Pinder (sadly) Smith - 6 - added a bit of width, but terribly isolated on the right BWP - 7 - one of his good sub appearances & a great goal. Let's hope Wotte doesn't decide to start with him Liptak - 5 absolutely no idea if this guy is a hidden gem or the new Ali Dia Wotte - 5 - subs seemed fair enough, post match interview likewise, can tyou really blame him for the crapness of his players

Not his fault - you can't polish a turd

Per the Daily Echo: Administrator receives 19 inquiries about buying Southampton Football Club Any advance on 19?

Matters got more difficult when, having agreed a facility with Barclays, Southampton's management were summoned to the bank's head office in London's Canary Wharf last September, where they were told that the facility was being cut to £4 million. Mr Lowe says: “We told them this would make life very difficult. It has forced us to cut costs. It has meant that, this season, our first team has largely comprised many of our young academy players, plus a few seasoned old professionals.” However, The Times has seen a draft of Southampton's results for the six months to the end of December, which bear out Mr Lowe's claim that the club was being restored to a sounder financial footing. Operating losses were slashed from £7.3 million to £3.3 million despite an 11 per cent drop in the company's revenues. I know the Lowe-haters will ignore the above two quotes, but interesting nonetheless. Barclays really do seem like a bunch of bankers, don't they? And his desire to play youngsters, freeze out the old pros & have cheap manager make a little more sense - ie, I don't think he had a choice