Saint Pete

Wow.

Yep, they are very strong. World class players on the bench, only just bringing on Cherki from Citeh!

Brilliant from Olise.

Agreed, I don't think Downs should be written off at 21 years old and the example given above of Larin is a good one as he shows that strikers can go through fallow periods in front of goal but then come good. But I also think we shouldn't put reliance on him to fill the gap left by Stewart if we are serious about promotion ambitions. Can we afford to keep Downs in reserve as well as signing another starting option forward? I don't know but I can't see it somehow. I think they will maybe have a look at Downs in pre season but another loan for him is the most likely outcome for him. Then we will bring the Stewart replacement in, probably another loan like Larin. Can't see us moving for a striker until quite late in the window.

Well yeah, but is that later part the club view or Alfie House's view? The bits that are quoting Solak or club "sources" seem to be angling towards Downs being given another go, but time will tell I guess.

https://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/saints/opinion/26194932.southampton-must-back-larin-stewarts-free-transfer/ He might be looking at this from the echo? Includes this section on Downs:- "Downs looked a lost cause in his limited appearances at St Mary's, but owner Dragan Solak believes he has all the attributes to succeed in England. Sources have suggested that Larin, who struck up a good relationship with struggling Archer, can help Downs to better settle into the squad."

Agree, the club definitely shouldn't fall into the trap of thinking "let's give Downs another chance, he will come good eventually". Appears he did nothing on his loan spell away so there's absolutely no justification for placing any reliance on him back with us! We should stick with the blueprint of 2nd half of last season and look to sign another target man type of striker with physical strength to interchange with Larin to replace Stewart. If Archer is happy to stay, I would keep him on as an option for a smaller different kind of striker for when plan A not working and also as useful backup option in wide positions.

Not sure about re-signing Ballard, it only makes sense for either party if we think he's likely to be a regular starter. The lad's benefitting from regular football now so wouldn't be the right move for him if he ends up back on our bench for most of the season. I haven't seen him play for Orient but seems like he's been played centrally? I don't think he fits the profile for what we need to replace Stewart as he doesn't have the physical stature (think the Larin/Stewart interchange worked really well in terms of the way we want to play so we should be looking for a similar kind of striker to continue that plan). Equally not sure West Ham is the right move for him either, he probably needs a season with a lower ranking Championship side to establish himself at that level in a starting role.

It's unusual circumstances for sure because of the play off situation but surely we didn't have to wait until the last game, we could have triggered the extension at any time before that point? But presumably we chose not to because of not knowing what league we would be in, i.e. we didn't have faith/loyalty in extending Stewart's contract whatever league we were in. For that reason, my view is that Ross is entitled to try his luck in getting a better deal elsewhere given his stock is reasonably high at this point. I don't see that as being disloyal to us, it's just business, the same as it was a business decision that we chose not to trigger the extension at an earlier point. "Loyalty" works both ways.

Morocco 1 up and have looked the better side so far.

Ultimately though, I can understand in his circumstances that he wants to get the best possible contract at this key point of his career. He's 29 years old and has missed a fair chunk of his time to progress his career through injury. The end of his contract with us has coincided with his best period of fitness and scoring at Championship level in his career to date and he can't guarantee that will be the case in a year's time, he may be long term injured again. So I personally understand why he is trying to pursue the best possible deal while he can and wish him good luck. (We could have avoided this situation by activating the extension clause in the time frame allowed but didn't do that, possibly for good reasons due to the play off situation but that was our choice (or balls up) so fair play to him).

Yep, that penalty looked suspiciously like a VAR cock up to me. Will be interesting to see if image released to show it wasn't offside as certainly looked like it was.

His corners were fine from what I remember. But for several years we failed to sign anyone who could attack the ball and head it in either box.

They would only ever considering signing a pay as you play deal if no other club of a similar standing would offer them a "normal" deal. Which clearly wouldn't be the case with Stewart after he has just scored 11 goals for us in the Championship this season. If he was still recovering from injury and hadn't played much when his contract runs out, then he would be in a less strong position and might have to accept that kind of deal for a little while.

Fantastic news! So important to have a good foundation and Peretz also showed he is a good character in the dressing room in the last few months. If we can also secure new contracts for Bree and Stewart and a deal for Larin in the next few weeks, that would be a great start to the summer.

I personally doubt we have any insight into what the outcome of the FA investigation will be. But I'm relieved that at last, we have a line coming out of the leadership/ownership with some active decision making and backbone attached to it. Whether the backing of Tonda will stand up to whatever comes back from the FA, only time will tell. I would like to think Dragan will still be preparing contingency plans for if Tonda gets a long ban, but at least he is nailing his colours to the mast and providing a direction for the club to follow now.

It is pretty weak I agree, but didn't honestly expect any different after the way this has been handled by us up to now. There's a couple of complaints, but as others have said the one about the makeup of the panel feels hollow as it should have been argued more strongly before the case, potentially with a public statement on it. Boro were putting out statements so we could have done the same to apply pressure to get a fairer hearing. It's interesting there's not more reference to the severity of the punishment, you can only assume our lawyers don't think we have much of a leg to stand on in pursuing that angle unless we are keeping our powder dry (which I doubt).

A number of players plus Parsons have put out statements since the expulsion. I don't expect chapter and verse but don't think it should be beyond Tonda and the club's capabilities to draft something for him to put out that doesn't implicate him any further than his own actions up to this point have and to explain why he can't say more yet. Still say it looks gutless on his part to say absolutely nothing given he is supposed to be our manager.

It's tempting to give Tonda another chance given the football we have been playing and the promise he is showing as a young coach. But it's concerning to me that we still haven't heard any kind of statement or apology from him since we were kicked out of the play offs. I realise that the club (and by extension he) is still under investigation by the FA, so there may be reluctance to give a full explanation for his actions until that is concluded. But I would have wanted and expected some kind of words from him to at least express some regret and contrition for the impact of this on the Saints players and in particular the fans, given that he is the manager and has been so heavily implicated in the EFL judgement. It feels a little gutless (and perhaps even arrogant) that he has said nothing at all since his holding comments in the pressers for the Boro games. If we are to stick with him (which I think will likely depend on the severity of any FA sanctions on him), we will need to hear some genuine and convincing explanation and contrition from him if he is to maintain credibility as our leader after all this in my opinion.

It's probably going to come down to what happens in this FA investigation. If he gets a lengthy ban, I don't see how we can realistically keep him on. But if there is no ban or a short one, my feeling is he will stay, and a "heartfelt" apology will be made by Tonda so that the club can try to move on. You would have to assume Saints would like to keep him on if his FA punishment is not really harsh otherwise you would think he would be gone by now?

You seriously believe there would have been no opportunities for JWP to move to another Premier league club over that 20 year period if he had wanted to push for it?! If he managed to secure a Premier league deal when we got relegated, he certainly would have had offers when he was a regular starter as a teenager under Poch or when he was regularly banging in free kicks or appearing for England. If you want to get angry at judas players who force a move at the first opportunity, there are plenty of better candidates than a player who stayed at the club over 20 years that's for sure!

I think it's more than a little unfair on JWP to say he "jumped at the first opportunity" when he stayed at the club for over 20 years!! Many players who have achieved international status would have moved on long before he did so I felt at the time he had earnt the right to move on and try to maintain his status as a Prem player. That said, I don't think it is right to go back to him at this point as he doesn't seem the same player now that he was a few years ago. I do feel we need to keep some experience in the middle of the pitch though and have some concerns that we may end up light of that if the likes of THB and Downes move on.

Good stuff, totally agree with them, why should Boro automatically get a free pass to final when they were beaten over 2 legs? I read the judgement from the "independent" panel and it doesn't even address the decision to reinstate Boro in the final, no justification given at all, just assumed that was the only option, no consideration for other alternatives. Also opens up potential legal action from Wrexham. And I think Hull could also include in their legal action should they lose the fact that their preparation for the final has been seriously disrupted by having to prepare for 2 different opponents until very near the final, another advantage on the Boro side.

Why from Southampton? It is EFL who are responsible for deciding if playoffs are replayed.

And not only that, results achieved by players shown to have dived for penalties should be reversed afterwards with points awarded to the other team or reinstatement of teams in Cup competitions.