Saint Pete

Still confident?

Gaping hole where our centre backs should have been!

If Fonte has declined, that may prove the club were right to sell when they did, but it doesn't prove that he has been replaced successfully. We should have been aiming to replace a peak performing Fonte, not a declining one. Otherwise, we are moving backwards from where we were. Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

If that is the case, I think we should hold firm and not sell. There is no way we should give in and accept lower than what we think he's worth just because of Van Dijk and Liverpool's bad behaviour. That would just be the ultimate green light for more of the same from players and agents in future windows. Best scenario for us now would be to go ahead and sign a decent replacement now so that we have insurance if we do get the right offer late in August, and also gives us better options if we don't sell and Van Dijk continues his hissy fit. This obviously depends on us having enough cash to fund the replacement without selling Van Dijk, so we may need to try to move on a couple of other non essential players to help finance? Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

Yet another case of headline being unrelated to article below! In what way are Liverpool "ramping up" their chase for Van Dijk? Interested to know if the bit about talks with the Lazio defender are true though. Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

The real question mark over our squad is in terms of quality rather than quantity, especially in the centre midfield area, where we are over-reliant on Romeu. I also think centre back is potentially a weak area if Van Dijk remains unavailable but suspect we have made our choice there to trust the development of Stephen's and Bednarek. Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

Too many touches from Boufal at times.

Will be interesting to see how that lineup plays - very attacking looking, but will it be balanced in the midfield?

I can't see what's wrong with the odd loan if it's the right player who will improve the team. It's obviously better if there's an option to buy, although I may be wrong but don't think there was officially one with the Bertrand loan and we still ended up agreeing a permanent deal for him. Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

He and his agent really ought to have thought through this possible scenario before signing on the dotted line of a new 6-year contract rather than 5 months after! Also, he may be saying that he sees Liverpool as a big career to move to help him "go down in history" now, but something tells me he will be saying similar things about Barcelona or Real Madrid a year down the line if he is approached by them having done well at Liverpool.

Utterly pointless article as it goes on to say that neither Liverpool nor Saints have changed their position. The news is there is no news! Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

Totally agree with this. Utterly pathetic behaviour from someone who signed a 6 year deal only a year ago. Very important that we continue to stand firm on this - he should not be rewarded for the way he has acted by getting what he wants. If he is to leave this summer, our full asking price must be met and it can't be to Liverpool.

Yep, I agree with that and would be pretty happy if we made the 2 signings that you have suggested, and offload Clasie, who would then be surplus to requirements. I still would rather we had signed a higher calibre CB to replace Fonte, especially given the possible issues we may have with Van Dijk, but I get that the club are obviously hoping that Stephens and Bednarek will keep developing and get better. Regarding left backs, if we were to lose Bertrand, I would expect us to sign another contender for 1st choice position, rather than be left with McQueen/Targett, which for me would look like a weak link. At present, I rate McQueen slightly higher than Targett and think he has more versatility in other positions, so would rather see us keep him and possibly loan out Targett?

Bringing new players in surely shouldn't be dependent purely on selling Van Dijk or Bertrand though? I can't believe we have literally no money available given the huge rise in TV income, and we also have the option of moving on players that would fall down the pecking order if we can bring in better quality to replace them, eg Clasie. Feels like we are being somewhat complacent in just settling for what we've got rather than pushing for improvement. Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

I would be disappointed if we don't do anything to improve our quality in midfield options, which I think was shown to be our biggest weakness last season. It's not a question of numbers but of quality, and also not enough backup for Romeu, who if he were to get injured would be a major worry based on lack of suitable alternatives in the squad.

Will be delighted if we don't sell any of our top players in this window, but would still be surprised if that's the way it pans out. I don't see that Reed is saying anything radically different to what the club have said in previous summers when we have then gone on to make sales of "top" players. Note that he doesn't categorically say "Van Dijk (or anyone else) will not be sold in this window", only that the top players are not "for sale". This and his comment that some players may be sold if it suits both parties gives plenty of wriggle room for sales to still happen if the club get what they consider to be the right offers, and they can also use the argument it's for the good of the team due to players being unsettled. As I say, will be very happy if I'm proven wrong, but based on previous experience, this is likely to be a tactic to force higher offers from those who want Van Dijk, Bertrand, etc. Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

The most important thing is surely that we allow the new manager to pick the team around him that he trusts and is happy will be able to help him get across to the players the way he wants them to play. If that's Sammy Lee, then fine, but suspect it will be some of the guys he worked with at Alaves, which is fine by me. Judging by what some who have some inside knowledge have said on this thread, I would think it's unlikely he would choose Black, unless the club tell him he has to keep him which would not be the best way to go in my opinion.

Let's face it, Samuels is a bit of a ****! His reference to Leicester's title win is particularly laughable - if he's going to use that one-off freak event as a stick to beat us with, then surely that applies to every other premier league club who hasn't won the league in the last 5/10 years, including Stoke, Swansea and West Brom! There is however one sentence out of the rest of the drivel where he does have a half decent point - "If there is a 'Southampton Way' it involves a fine academy that generates revenue and helps maintain an upper mid-table position." This is basically the model we are employing (although it is not just academy players that we develop but also young talent bought in from other clubs) - the problem we are facing in that strategy is that if you keep selling your 3/4 most marketable players every season, it will be extremely difficult/impossible to progress to beyond the upper mid-table position that we have achieved, even if your recruitment and academy development is good (which by and large it has been), as you are having to constantly re-build at the start of every season. So, at the moment, you would have to agree with him in the sense that "the Southampton Way" has been very effective in achieving an upper mid-table position in the league, but it's hard to see how we can achieve further success beyond that unless we break the cycle of sales at some point. Where he is wrong though is belittling the achievement in consistently achieving the positions in the league that we have, and the stats show that we have done significantly better than the other clubs he compares us with.

Why should it be absolute bollix that we would want to keep a current England international with 4 years left on his contract? Yes, he is potentially replaceable (if we are not going to complacently assume that Targett and McQueen are enough) but our default position should be we don't have to sell and it's going to take a very high offer to tempt us to do so. Bertrand is only 27 so don't think age is a factor.

If we are making it known that Bertrand is definitely to be sold, that's the wrong strategy in my opinion if we want to get the best price. Like Van Dijk he is on a long contract, so there is no need for us to bend over and let him leave easily. We should be putting it out there that we don't intend to sell him unless we get top dollar and even then only if we can find a good enough replacement. This may well be what we are doing, but it does seem that in these circumstances we sometimes give in too easily and quickly when we could have held out for a better result/price for the club.

Jeremy Wilson latest piece in telegraph says no decision likely in the next week and also that we are looking at a number of options so sounds like it could be a while. The article also says that Saints are "aware of Tuchels difficulties at Dortmund" which sounds to me like they may be preparing the ground for it not being him? Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

Totally agree with the part in bold. If the Echo article is true, the club are surely making Puel's position effectively untenable going forward, so they may as well do the deed now and make it clear to potential replacements that there is a job available. It's naïve if they are thinking that Puel can continue after everyone knows that they have been looking around for something better. I hope that, in reality, they have already made the decision and communicated it to Puel and it is just a case of going through negotiations about how they part company, because otherwise this seems a bit of a muddle developing.

I'm no expert on German club football - are Leverkusen a that much bigger draw than Saints would be for Tuchel, apart from the fact they are in Germany? I assume he has ambitions to manage in other big European leagues so Saints may be considered a good move at this point for him rather than a similar sized club in Germany?

Of course it's not right for players to behave unprofessionally if that's what they have done. But like it or not, man management is part and parcel of a football manager's job and some are better than others at it. Managers are very rarely universally liked, but they do have to be able to coax performances out of their players, and it certainly helps if they can persuade the players to at least buy into their ideas. Outwardly it appears that Puel has failed to do this with the current crop and ultimately it maybe​ that is what will cost him his job rather than results alone. Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

Luciano Spalletti sacked by Roma this morning. Roma finished 2nd in serie A with their record points and goals totals but fans still not happy as he dared not to pick 40 year old Totti! Can he speak any English? Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk