Sour Mash

Which one of our current first choice centre backs would people drop for this lad? Pretty harsh on either of them to be honest.

Why on earth has this been dragged up now? It was a valid question to ask in May 2009. Weird.

No it wouldn't be a crime, it'd just be one of those things that happens in football.

I don't think you understand the topic. How many players have Man Utd, Arsenal, or Spurs bought with money "they don't have"? Have a read of Buctootim's summary of Man Utd's debt, it explains it very well. I don't think you have any idea of the vast sums of revenue they generate each year.

This is hard work. How do you think they bought Van Persie and Kagawa? Do you understand the reasons for United's debt? Man Utd were just an example, take Arsenal then and explain to me they won't still be massively financially stronger than us after the FFP rules come in?

It's one of the reasons I think some of the foreign owners at Man Utd, Liverpool etc got involved in them, it's the one remaining area to really be exploited and grown for their benefit.

Which bit of Manchester United still having far, far more income than Saints and therefore far, far more to spend on players after the FFP is introduced, do you not understand?

But the big teams will still have far more money than us and will be able to buy our best players, just like they pretty much always have. Football is more commercial now than other, regardless of team's using debt or donations from wealthy benefactors. The fair play rules will just benefit those clubs that are able to generate the most money themselves - so Man Utd, Liverpool, Chelsea, etc etc. It doesn't help us at all.

ANd how will any of that help Saints to compete with 5 or 6 of the biggest clubs in world football? They will still have far, far more money and resources than us. If anything it will just mean match tickets for away games at these places go up, as these clubs scrape every £ they can out of their other sources of income now.

Where has anyone said we should just avoid relegation? How will the financial fair play rules change anything?

A strong side, with a couple of adjusments if any are carrying knocks or particularly tired. Saints at full-strength at home have a fair chance of nicking something against Chelsea. What a buzz it would be to knck them out of the FA Cup, the confidence it would give the team, the momentum to be taken into league. Secondly, you can't complain about the likes of Man Utd devaluing the FA Cup and then want Saints to play a weakened team. It's the greatest cup competition in the world, it's a crime not to at least give it our best shot.

I think you're missing the point. It doesn't really matter whether they were direct products of the youth team or not. They were young players nurtured and developed by those clubs into top-level Premier League players and then sold onto bigger clubs. It's the way the world works.

Just pointing out that even big, well supported, established clubs lose their best young players to bigger clubs.

Villa had to sell all their decent young players. Swansea lost Allen and Sinclair. Newcastle lost Carroll.

I agree with the idea of limiting the amount of debt that a club can have loaded onto it, but I don't see why there should be a limit to how much a company or individual can invest into a club. It actually makes the game more interesting and competitive, gives sides the size of Blackburn and Wigan to compete in the Prem or some of the Eastern European sides to compete with the traditional big clubs in European competition.

I know there is supposed to be a rule to stop trumped up sponsorship, but I reckon they'll be able to find a way around it all one way or another. Regardless, the FFP does little to help club's our size compete with those at the very, very top of the game.

The problem is, even by boycotting at that price, it won't help drive the price down in the future, but will just be an excuse for clubs to squeeze out away support more and more, safe in the knowledge that they'll be able to fill the remaining seats with football tourists from Japan and Norway who are happy to pay the one off £50 for a trip to Stamford Bridge.

"the Buenos Aires Herald - an English-language paper with a circulation of around 20,000", guess they might have got a bit more coverage as a result of this. Correct sentiment from The Sun, but cringeworthy the way they've stuck their nose in.

Exactly that. There are possibly some good intentions behind the FFP, but in practice it'll only aid the biggest of clubs. THe lkes of Wigan and Blackburn would probably have never competed in the Premier League the way they have.

£47 for lower tier and £50 for the upper tier for the league game, they can stuff that!

Right, that makes sense to be fair. Yeah, won't be cheap regardless!

Is this great squad dymanic and collective team-spirit what saw Hammond, Harding and Sharp straight out of the door as soon as we got to the Prem. Football has always been a fairly cut-throat, ruthless business, and pretty much always will be.

Massively short-notice and how are they going to work tickets for this? Unless its the same size allocation and same price tickets for both games, which shouldn't really be the case.

Agree with the majority of that. One never knows what can happen in football many years down the line, but at the moment, Champions League aspirations are pointless for a club our size. However, a few points to pick you up on; Even if we were to match the "big 5" in wages, players will still move to the big clubs due to the chance to play in the Champs League, regularly win trophies, increased status and international chances etc. Also, we haven't been "promised" a bigger ground if we stay in the Premier League.

WHy? The score is an obvious error, but you'd have to admit it would be a pretty pointless story to just make up?