Legod Third Coming

You have to take the Chairman at face value. He wants promotion THIS YEAR. So why would he not back his manager (proven manager) to achieve it??

If it is inevitable we will lose at home then why is it also inevitable that our away form will continue to be as bad?? This is one of the most ridiculous arguments I have ever heard - that basically losing (either away or at home) is inevitable but winning isn't. The longer we go on winning at home, the more likely we will continue to do so. Did Tiger Woods winning his first major make the second LESS likely????

I wasn't there but I can see that Barnard would have scored the chance Morgan missed. Seems bizarre to have a striker who scored so many in League One and not play him when needed. As for those who wonder if he can cut it in this league, are they the same people who asked the question about Rickie??

Even without Lambert, we should be (and are) good enough to beat Donny. The idea that Barnard can't cut it against a defence destined for League One is a nonsense. I think Nigel has to take this one on the chin as poor selection. If we were being outplayed every week it would make the arguments for drastic signings more valid. We do need signings but is the lack of another striker the reason we lost yesterday?? Or was it playing square pegs in round holes?? Morgan up front - really??...

I'm not sure it is a return to Saints of old, more that the manager has clearly mastered how to win at home, but not yet away. Thankfully, because of our home form he has the opportunity to put the latter right!

You can be delighted with our overall position and still seek to improve.

That line is utterly ridiculous. YOUR Chairman has pointed out he is targeting winning the league and has just sanctioned the spending of over £1m on a central defender OUTSIDE of the transfer window. You don't even mean that sentiment, so why post it?

The answer is not as simple as a striker to replace Lambert. You simply will not find a player who can fulfil his role as playmaker and scorer in one (and would sit on our bench) - when he's not scoring he's laying the ball on because his delivery is simply superb. The question is how we play without him to ensure we make best use of the remainder of the side? Where was Lallana attacking today, with any of the creativity we know he has? Where were those long diagonal balls we know Morgan can hit? Where were the balls over the top for De Ridder's pace - his only real attribute?? And why oh why do we not play away from home with the same patience and precision as we do at home?? It needs a long look at our tactical approach not simple a dip into the transfer window. It wasn't that we failed to finish today, we failed to create.

Like most good teams we'll probably win at Upton Park and lose at Doncaster!

What are we doing differently away?

As are West Ham so calm down.

If we need a goal, why don't we have the second top scorer from last season on the pitch?

All we have to do is get the ball down and pass it confidently like we do at home and we will win every game.

Wht the feck don't we go away from home and play EXACTLY the same as we do at home??

Ffs!!!

Boo WHU in front.

Right can we stop fecking about and score a couple please?

I am sure this is why we are top of the league - even when we swap players in/out, they are well drilled in our style and system. If we are without Rickie, Guly must step up and fill the role of hold-up/playmaker up the field and we need to see Barnard show his true mettle.

Don't apologise!!! You and Clarkson are entitled to express any (N E) question or opinion you bloody well like. The thought police are KILLING this country - one which used to be proud of its tolerance, freedom and justice. Pretty soon someone will have a go at you for naming your teddy bear Jesus or flog you for having a snog with your mate's missus at the Christmas party... Those who pilloried Roger should be fecking ashamed of yourselves.

You only need to attend one game and listen to the comments to know about 30% of the crowd have no idea how we play. We're 2-1 up or 2-0 up and we're holding the ball beautifully and we have a chorus of morons baying for players to hoof the ball upfield!!! Conveniently forgetting that the one time the opposition cannnot score is if WE have the ball. I wonder how many times in the build up to the 27-passes-goal players were yelled at to get the ball forward quicker... Thankfully the manager and players seem deaf!

Perfect post.

You jammy bugger. I thought 14/1 was a steal!!! Let's hope we're both collecting big time when we WIN the league. What a bunch of sorry t o ssers who say it doesn't matter! Sure, it doesn't matter if all you care about is watching Rooney come back to St Marys. Call yourself football fans??!!!

I forgot my tickets to Ascot one year many years ago. They charged me full value (about £80) but said when I sent the unused tickets to them they would refund me. And they did. Simple. Cost me nothing in the long run. It's called customer service. It's pretty simple and is worth a great deal in the long term...

Sorry mistyped - meant the likelihood of us winning doesn't change because of the odds changing doh!!! ~(Muppet).

I wouldn't say they 'frequently' get it wrong but yes ultimately it's often the decision of 'one' man who is fallible. That's the fantastic thing about betting. I've arrived at a racecourse and backed a horse at 50/1 (Time for Rupert, Kreon, Always Waining - funny how these names always stay with you when you made a packet!) simply because they were unconsidered by odds compilers in the morning and then subsequently ignored by punters as a result.... You're right, the likelihood of us winning doesn't change because of results, but fundamentally the odds reflect someone's opinion of the likelihood of us winning - and being five points clear of West Ham makes us a bit more likely to win than being two points clear. And annoyingly bookies don't make big mistakes that often. Put it this way, the only time I've seen a skint bookie was September 29th, 1996.