SaintJackoInHurworth

I'd agree with both of these. While I feel our board in previous seasons has shown how a football club should be run, it now feels like they have convinced themselves that they are the experts and beyond reproach. If they don't wake up and smell the coffee then they have got too big for the club and need to be replaced. Now they are facing the last chance saloon to see whether they can turn things around. In my opinion, their only hope of doing that is to sack Pellegrino and appoint Silva immediately. Otherwise we are ridiculously doomed.

If we can get a winner then we are up to 15th and would be just three points behind Bournemouth in tenth. Concede a goal and lose and we are two points off the bottom!

Interesting that no-one has picked up on my reference to Silva. Does no-one think that he would be in the running should MoPe get sacked? Personally I would far rather Silva than Hughes! Or would he be too expensive? Presumably being sacked twice within a year should reduce the wages he would be able to demand?

I was just looking through the forum and it appears that the threads calling for MoPo to be sacked and/or for protests against him seem to have slipped down the pecking order. Is this a sign that we are now resigned to the club keeping him or are some fans now changing their mind? Do fans still feel he should be sacked? Personally, I wonder if the club are just biding their time for the end of the transfer window so as to not affect any last minute dealings. If that is the case then if we lose (or only draw) against Brighton, maybe we will see some action finally being taken on Thursday? I am still hoping that MoPo will be replaced by Silva. I answered a 'Voice of the Fans' survey yesterday which I believe will have been published in The Sun today. It was showing that Pellegrino was the manager that most people thought would be next to go.

So, if we sign Promes and a centre back and/or a keeper (looking unlikely but you never know) who would be omitted from the squad? I assume it would be out of Gardos, Taylor or Rose unless we were to sell or loan out Gabbiadini or Long. Anyone got any thoughts?

I think it's a good point and probably makes no difference to the managerial situation as I think the board will feel sacking the manager just before the close of the transfer window would jeopardise any potential transfers in. Nevertheless, I hope from here that either of two things happens from here: 1. Pellegrino is sacked as soon as the transfer window shuts or straight after our first defeat or embarrassing capitulation from a seeming almost guaranteed win situation. 2. Everything suddenly clicks into place, the team start looking like a good team and we go on an unbeaten run, moving up into the top half of the table. Sadly, I doubt that the second is likely to happen, but when it doesn't I fear that the first doesn't either and the board dithers and waits until it is too late to do anything!

I'm going to go for the following turn of events: Spurs (h) - defeat Watford (h, cup) - draw followed by defeat in replay Brighton (h) - draw West Brom (a) - defeat -> Pellegrino is finally sacked Liverpool (h) - draw Burnley (a) - defeat Stoke (h) - win Newcastle (a) - draw Swansea (a) - win West Ham (a) - draw Arsenal (a) - defeat Chelsea (h) - draw Leicester (a) - draw Bournemouth (h) - win Everton (a) - draw Man City (h) - draw That is 16 points which when added to our current 21 points would give us 37 points. With that we will be border line between relegation and staying up. I will go for just staying up: 1. Man City 2. Man Utd 3. Liverpool 4. Spurs 5. Chelsea (Conte knows he is quickly going out of favour so buys Crouch and makes weird team selections so that they just miss out on Champions League) 6. Arsenal 7. Burnley 8. Leicester (Their climb up the table loses a little momentum after seeling Mahrez to Liverpool, but they still have enough to finish eighth reach a cup final where they are unjustly beaten due to a bad refereeing decision) 9. Everton 10. West Ham 11. Watford 12. Stoke 13. Crystal Palace 14. Huddersfield 15. Newcastle 16. Swansea 17. Saints 18. Bournemouth 19. Brighton 20. West Brom

I seem to remember some article a few years ago which tried to show that a new manager doesn't necessarily do any better than the the one they succeed. However, in order to show this they had to ignore the honeymoon period when the effect of having a new manager is to galvanise the squad for a short time. It is possible that that is what we are seeing in these other clubs. Nevertheless, even a honeymoon effect is better than the same old, same old of keeping this manager. Those extra 6-12+ points could be the difference between staying up and getting relegated.

To claim that we have a squad that is way weaker than we have had before is just plain making excuses for a rubbish/limited manager. OK, this is not the same squad that we had under Pochettino - in some ways it is weaker, in other ways stronger - but it is not much different than the squad that Claude Puel managed to get up to eighth. Only we now also have Lemina and Hoedt - both of whom are (or were) in my opinion good purchases and better than the alternatives: Hoedt is better than Yoshida or Stephens and Lemina is better than Davis and Hojbjerg (though I think Davis has always been a good player for us and Hojbjerg is now beginning to finally live up to some of the hopes we all had for him when he arrived). Of course, you could argue that now that we have sold VVD the squad is weaker, but that again ignores the fact that we have got to where we are with VVD until two weeks ago and that he was actually injured for half of last season. At the same time, I am not denying that we have lost some great players and that some of the players we have bought have yet to adequately replace the players that came before - but nevertheless, this is still a squad that a decent manager should be able to get up to the top half of the table without too much difficulty and with a full season of games in which to do it. In addition, each time we have sold a player for a lot of money we have generally used that to strengthen what used to be a squad with no depth, so that if a player gets injured we have players of sufficient quality to replace them that we should generally be able to minimise the effects of that (though, yes, there are still clearly weaknesses in the squad). So, let's avoid revisionism - Claude Puel was not the world's greatest manager but he did get this squad up to the top half of the table despite injuries and involvement in European competition and the League Cup. If he can do that, then this is certainly a squad that we should have been expecting to be able to get up to the top half. In short, the change that could have the biggest benefits in terms of how we fare for the rest of this season is a change of manager; other changes including the addition of a decent quality striker and centre back could also help that new manager to begin to restore our fortunes in the remainder of this season.

I've never called for a manager to be sacked before, but this guy needs to go imo. He seems pretty clueless about how to play football with a style that works in England. He only seems to have a clue about limiting the scoreline when playing the top sides whose style is much more what he would have been used to abroad. However, I am not among those who blame Les Reed - there has been too much good before this to blame him entirely. Yes, this has been a poor appointment, but there have been many other good appointments and purchases for which he deserves some credit. I also don't think you can blame the players - they are simply trying to implement the instructions they have been given by MoPe and Black (who also should go!). Redmond gave a very strong hint about that to Guardiola after the City game. The only player that deserves any significant blame is Van Dijk whose petulance has hung like a cloud over the club for far too long (though I still believe we need to hold out for the right money for him from the right club!)

I've never been one to call for a manager to be sacked and didn't think we should have sacked Puel, but I can't see this going any other way than for Pellegrino to be sacked. Puel had a weaker squad (no Lemina or Hoedt and only had Van Dijk and Gabbiadini for half a season each) yet he got us to Wembley and we still finished eighth. The biggest barrier to us sacking him is the question of who we bring in to replace him. I don't want to see Fat Sam, Hoddle or Pulis taking the reins; however, there may be other potential possibilities: Keegan - hadn't thought of him til I say the OP of this thread, but I don't think he would be a bad call at all - definitely would play an expansive attacking brand of football and would develop younger players. Koeman - I would not be averse to bringing him back, though I would be worried about our development of younger players. Monk - He has potential as a manager even though he has had some tough times recently. It might depend on who is put with him as he needs a good team around him. Dyche - Obviously... but I don't think he would leave Burnley to join Saints. Silva - Also, obviously, but again, I don't think he would leave them to join us! Michael Laudrup - Has done really well in football management for the most part and his approach would fit with the Southampton Way. Admittedly he had a bad run of form that led to him getting sacked by Swansea but I think that was not all his fault and to a large degree he was a victim of his own success in previous seasons. Chris Wilder - up and coming manager of Sheff Utd and former Saints trainee. Has had an up and up career in football management so far!

Sorry if this has been posted elsewhere, but I haven't seen it... I see that Graham Potter who played for Saints briefly back in the Souness era has been achieving a fair level of success in football management in Sweden: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/41902664 I wonder if/when Pellegrino is sacked we might consider an approach? Maybe he can at least match his playing record for Saints (maybe even double the length of his association with the club?!) Seriously, though, hats off to the guy for what he has achieved... and maybe at some stage he could be considered for a coaching job at the club (e.g. under 18s?)

* I would welcome Koeman over Pellegrino though I would make sure he is not given the power to spend millions on transfers as he has done at Everton and I would insist he is significantly involved in developing a good strategy for the development of youth - not one that forces him to play unready younger players but also not one in which younger players are largely ignored. * The only other former manager I would particularly welcome back would be Pochettino - though that is never going to happen... >> Pardew was great in League One but has never been able to discover that at Premier League level and when things go wrong he gets down on himself and everyone else and it all falls apart. >> Adkins was great at Championship level but didn't cut it in the Premier League. >> Pearson was also better in the lower divisions than in the Premier League. OK... actually I might possibly welcome wee Gordon Strachan back too...!

It was too early to get rid of Puel at the end of last season; it is currently too early to get rid of Pellegrino. However, you have to say that we seem to be worse under Pellegrino than under Puel at the moment so if we don't improve by the end of the season then you have to anticipate that he will have to go. If we do end up sacking Pellegrino then it is vital that we first identify who we are getting in and we must be absolutely sure that whoever we get in is going to be an improvement. It would be catastrophic to sack Pellegrino and then bring in someone who is even worse - as we seem to have done with replacing Puel with Pellegrino. Of course, one other consideration may be the current availability of Ronald Koeman. You would imagine that he wouldn't want to come back and we wouldn't want to bring him back, but who knows?! Personally I think we made a big mistake in the summer by acting too slowly and as a result not bringing in Marco Silva. If we had brought him in I think we would find ourselves in a much better position. Sadly, I currently fear that Pellegrino will not be able to turn it around and will be sacked at the end of the season. Who we bring in then I don't know - it is unlikely to be Tuchel, so it's hard to know. I certainly wouldn't want us to be looking at Hoddle, Allardyce, Pardew or any of the usual names that are linked (with the possible exception of Ranieri). I would have been interested in the Turkish coach we were linked with a couple of years ago but since returning from some time out of the game I'm not aware he has done much. Overall it is a big dilemma - not the simple decision that some seem to be suggesting.

Firstly, a disclaimer: I live up North so don't get to see Saints as often as I would like and have not seen a live match yet this season (just two pre-season matches against Augsburg and Sevilla) so I cannot claim to know better than those who have been to see us play. Nevertheless, I do find myself wondering if some of the comments on here are rather knee-jerk reactions to the disappointment of seeing us fail to win a match we would normally expect to win. Whether Pellegrino is failing to deliver or not I think it would be very difficult for the club to even contemplate sacking him just yet. I think there are a number of significant considerations that need to be taken into account: 1. We are only 5 points behind Chelsea, Arsenal and Liverpool. 2. We are above Everton, West Ham, West Brom and Leicester - all teams who have finished around us or above us in the last couple of years. 3. We rarely have a great start to the season - some of the last few seasons have seen us achieve better starts than we would normally expect. 4. The Van Dijk situation affected our start to the season and it will take time to deal with the aftermath of that. 5. Pellegrino has never managed in England before so needs time to adjust to the Premier League and the style of football of some English teams. 6. A number of players have been injured. 7. A number of players are suffering with low confidence going back to the Puel era and maybe even before. 8. We have had a number of interruptions to the season so far and have not yet had a long spell of stability for the squad. 9. The preferred option for a manager may well have been Thomas Tuchel but he ruled himself out of the running early on. 10. The other option for a manager was Frank De Boer. Would people have preferred we appointed him bearing in mind what has happened at Palace? 11. To those claiming we should have appointed an English manager rather than a foreign one, may I ask which English managers have made a huge success of management in England including taking teams to the Champions League or Europa League? And which of them have also developed young players and played an exciting brand of attacking football? Dyche and Howe aside most have struggled - and Howe is not doing so well this season so far! 12. As an extension of the above point, both Pochettino and Koeman were foreign managers and both achieved unprecedented success beyond what was expected of them. 13. For those wanting a manager with a record of success managing in the UK, the list of managers that we have had who may fit that bill includes Harry Redknapp, Paul Sturrock and Ian Branfoot. 14. One of our strikers has just managed to score two goals in a match, which could signal a change in fortunes and confidence - not really the time to be sacking our manager. I am not saying that I think Pellegrino is doing a great job - clearly we should be doing better than we are when we have arguably the best squad we have had for a couple of years - maybe potentially better than the squads managed by Koeman and Pochettino. What I am saying is that it is too early to think about sacking him yet.

I've always said that one day I would try to create a Fantasy Football team made of ex-Saints players supplemented by current Saints players up to the number limits for how many you can have from one club (the main Fantasy Football league has a limit of 3 players per team I believe). I've never quite got around to doing it though. If you were try to create a Fantasy football team in this way what would your team look like? I believe the following are all of the ex-Saints players playing in the Premier League: Goalkeepers: Gazzaniga (Spurs), Boruc (Bournemouth), Stekelenburg (Everton) Defenders: Cranie (Huddersfield), Shaw (Man Utd), Clyne (Liverpool), Martina (Everton), Lovren (Liverpool), Alderweireld (Spurs), Fonte (West Ham) Midfield: Wanyama (Spurs), Schneiderlin (Everton), Cork (Burnley), Surman (Bournemouth), Lallana (Liverpool), Mane (Liverpool), Antonio (West Ham), Oxlade-Chamberlain (Liverpool), Walcott (Arsenal), Puncheon (Crystal Palace), Dyer (Swansea) Strikers: Crouch (Stoke), Rodriguez (West Brom) Make a comment if there is anyone I have missed! Hopefully admins might amend my initial write up in that case!

I notice that for the last few minutes of the Palace game Pellegrino opted not just to bring on Van Dijk but to keep Hoedt and Yoshida on the pitch too. Does this give a clue as to where we might see our tactics change in coming weeks? Or at least might it be a clue as to what Pellegrino might try out against Man United next week? What would people think if we played five at the back? And if we did that how would the team be structured? With Lemina playing so well on Saturday does Romeu's place come under threat or does it free up the full backs to play a more attacking role resulting in one of the wide players being dropped and the other moving into the middle? I wonder whether we might see something like this... ..............................................Forster................................................ ......................Hoedt...............Van Dijk...............Yoshida..................... Cedric...................................................................................Bertrand ..................................Romeu..............Lemina.................................... ............................Davis.............................Tadic................................ ..........................................Gabbiadini...............................................

Well... I came on here looking for news that we have signed Hoedt but just found Toomer's bizarre comment about 'not so'. Maybe we should have a sweepstake as to its real meaning? I would guess at him implying rather scandalously that Biglia is known to his team mates as 'not so biglia' but I'm probably miles off and the actual meaning is instead something to do with Clasie not speaking in a Geordie dialect!

So if we don't shift Gardos but don't view him among the top four or five CBs does that mean he won't take up a place in the 25 but will still draw a wage and play occasionally for the reserves? Surely loaning him out to League 1 or Championship would be a better plan even if we have to contribute towards his wages!?!

So, a few questions... * If Hoedt signs will that be our last signing or will there be others? Some people have mentioned Vietto but from what others are saying that seems unlikely. * If Hoedt signs and assuming VvD stays, who from our current squad will miss out on a place in the 25? Will Gardos be the one to miss out? Or will this lead to the sale of Gazzaniga? * If we do sign another attacking player who else will miss out? Might that signal that we are going to sell Shane Long as some have suggested? Or again might this signal that both Gazzaniga and Gardos will be superfluous?

Oops! Actually of course since we don't have two lots of two players called Davis and Ward-Prowse it is only six players - which only serves to strengthen mny argument that we are not overloaded in midfield! LOL

If you want to include all midfield and attacking players then for completeness you need to also include at least Redmond, Austin, Sims, Long and Gallagher and you need to talk about seven different positions: Defensive midfield Box-to-Box Attacking midfield Right Wing Left Wing Striker Second striker ('in the hole') Alternatively, lets remove Gabbiadini, Tadic and Boufal from the reckoning and just look out the straight-forward midfield positions (i.e. ignore wingers and strikers). That leaves the following players to fill three midfield positions: Romeu, Lemina, Hojberg, JWP, Davis, Clasie, JWP, Davis - eight players for three tactical positions (or four if we were ever to pack the midfield and play two defensive midfielders and no wingers - though not advocating that particular set up!). On the basis that we have sought to have 2 or 3 players for every position I wouldn't say we suddenly have far too many midfielders at all just because we have signed one more! A few days ago many of us were arguing that we look incredibly short in the defensive midfield positions if Romeu were to get injured with only Clasie as direct back-up (in the sense of being a defensive midfielder). Compare it with the eight or so players in attacking positions, whether strikers, wingers or playing 'in the hole'. Or compare it with the ten players we have in defence (where many of us are also arguing we need to strengthen!): Left Back: Bertrand, McQueen, Targett Right Back: Cedric, Pied Centre back: VVD, Yoshida, Stephens, Bednarek, Gardos (NB You could of course also add in Flanagan, Jones and Wood, but equally you could add Valery and Hesketh as midfield options, so I am ignoring them for now - I don't it makes much difference) My point is that whether or not we keep Clasie is actually more about whether there is scope in the squad numbering system and I am arguing that while we do need to shed at least one player from the current squad I believe Gardos is more likely to be that player than Clasie.

Why does it have to be either of them that leave? It will depend on how many more players we sign, but surely the first players to make way are likely to be Gazzaniga (or possibly Taylor) and Florin Gardos. After those we might also loan out Gallagher. Surely Clasie is more likely to be picked than any of those three and certainly Gazzaniga and Gardos.

Targett has been given a new contract because he is playing well. He has benefitted from Bertrand's late return and then getting injured and he has played the best football we have seen from him. While there may remain questions about his defensive abilities he has been particularly good going forward. When we have Bertrand as first choice and then two up and coming young players as back up you can hardly expect us to be spending any money to strengthen in that position, especially bearing in mind the lack of spare places that we have in our squad. As for Ings and Barkley I have heard no credible rumours suggesting we are about to buy those two and I would be gutted if we wasted the small scope we have to develop our squad in bringing them in rather than a defensive/box-to-box midfielder and central defender. If we are to buy any attacking players they need to be better than what we already have and we only have the potential scope for one of them if we are to strengthen in those other two positions - and only if we are to omit two or three of our current squad players (eg Gazzaniga, Gardos and maybe one other e.g. Gallagher). Sent from my Fusion5 using Tapatalk

We will finish 6th, 7th or 8th, competing with Liverpool and Everton for those 3 places; we will be about ten points better than the team in ninth which will be West Ham or Palace. Liverpool will struggle defensively resulting in calls for them to meet whatever demands Saints have to get Van Dijk. We will benefit from playing a more pressing game with Hojbjerg particularly thriving from playing that way, though Boufal will not and will continue to struggle. Bournemouth will suffer some key injuries which will see them struggling against relegation alongside Burnley, Watford, Brighton and Huddersfield. Jack Stephens will establish himself alongside Virgil who will knuckle down and produce even better performances than last season, while Tadic will return to his best and improve on that to become our star performer. Sent from my Fusion5 using Tapatalk