Rowan Gorilla 5

Why would we not try to improve every area of the first team and squad if that option is available? I don't understand how we can settle with what we have and not strive to better what we've got. Where did we finish last season again?

Interested in January but it didn't go through and was for a few million less than £21m. If memory serves nearer £15m.

Possible rekindling of interest in Abdelaziz Barrada?

Aleksandar Dragovic loosely linked to the club. 22 year-old Austrian centre back of Serbian heritage currently playing for FC Basel. http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/12691/8696962/Transfer-News-Basel-defender-Aleksandar-Dragovic-keen-on-Premier-League

I stick by my comment on the 'Deadline Day Countdown' thread. "I'm extremely happy with the players that we have signed. I'm a little concerned that we could do with a goalkeeper, left back, centre back, holding midfielder and at least one winger. I know it's greedy but there we go. That's 5 players short and a long time till the next transfer window. Is there enough strength in depth?" We were obviously looking at a goalkeeper and centre back with the comments from Adkins, a bid rejected for Butland and the links to Fontas and Kana-Biyik. We must have been looking for a left back with the Buttner saga and the later links to Boilesen and Olsson. Likewise a winger with the bid for Phillips. I can't help but feel that we wanted to add 4 players to fill these positions but for whatever reason we weren't able to do so. I only wanted a holding midfielder to be added to that list because of the way we are supposedly setting ourselves up to play this season. That's a big chunk of a 25 man squad missing. Having said that I am genuinely pleased with the players that have been brought in. None of them the finished article but a great deal of potential there.

I'm extremely happy with the players that we have signed. I'm a little concerned that we could do with a goalkeeper, left back, centre back, holding midfielder and at least one winger. I know it's greedy but there we go. That's 5 players short and a long time till the next transfer window. Is there enough strength in depth?

Obviously I don't want to see that. I don't want to see us lose at all let alone to prove a point. I hope we go on and win. I really do. But please. Can we finally put to bed this myth that Bialkowski is some kind of goalkeeping genius? I am now all out of posts. Come on you Saints! Win!!!

My opinion is not based on these 45 minutes but on how he has played over the last few years. I swear people are still judging him on that superb run of games when he was a nipper. He hasn't shown anything like that form since. This game he has been awful. And some moan about Davis! I agree that we are giving them too much time and space when they have the ball.

Would people please stop banging on about Bialkowski being brilliant and deserving his chance and being good enough to take over from Davis as he is obviously so vastly superior. He quite clearly isn't and hasn't been since he injured his knee against Newcastle all those years ago. We need to get shot of Bialkowski and Forecast and get in at least 1 top keeper if not during the transfer window then during the Summer.

No, paedophilia is not acceptable and the comparison is still daft. Unfortunately with finite resources it is not possible to go to the lengths required to ensure that no crime is committed. Sometimes the only option is to allow a crime to happen and then arrest the criminal later. This is not Minority Report. Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows that your team losing 4-1 to a local rival is no reason to balloon off and start hurting people, damaging property and acting like a wally.

That's a ridiculous comparison and you know it. The Probation Service would have dropped a tremendous b*llock on that particular example. Anyway, I think most would consider it a bit Judge Dredd if the police did away with such formalities as judicial process and custody.

So, if person A acts like a numpty then it is person B's fault?

The police are in no way, shape or form to blame for any of this. The only people culpable are those that were incapable of exercising rational thought and behaving themselves.

Charging decisions and delivering the case and evidence at court is down to the Crown Prosecution Service and it is they that have to make sure that "those named were nailed on Certs to be found guilty" and not the police.

The people involved have nobody to blame but themselves and if they receive a harsher sentence because it is football related then so be it. It has been long known that in this country football violence is treated differently to other violent crime owing to the massive problems experienced with hooliganism in the past. It's not as if something new has been sprung on some poor unsuspecting types.

If you are rat arsed you cannot be given street bail. Fact.

What a load of guff. "If nothing else works a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through."

How is it wrong that law-breakers are being made an example of? It's just a shame that more law-breakers are not made an example of.

If all these simple folk that wish to indulge in violence at football games actually had some self-respect, respect for others, respect for property and respect for authority then this wouldn't have happened. Don't even begin to say that respect has to be earned, some does yes, but not all. Had these people actually had respect and responsibility instilled in them then they would not have done what they did. Unfortunately for the majority they did not and this is the problem with so many today. Society is at fault as are the individuals concerned and for people to blame the police, the courts or the poor little urchins' upbringing and to question the tactics used and the sentences given is totally off the mark. Are the police meant to involve themselves in every aspect of the lives of people like these so as to ensure that order is preserved? Don't be absurd.

The sentences are not that ridiculous. Check out some of the sentences dished out for the Bradford, Burnley and Oldham riots. Officially large-scale violent disorder and not riots. Just because a repeat burglar gets a slap on the wrist does not mean that 14 months for shaking a fence in this context is over-zealous. It means that the slap on the wrist is too soft a punishment. Complain about that.

We need to blame someone or something for all of this. I know, authority. It must be the collective faults of the police, the CPS and the courts that all of this happened and a number of unfortunate innocents were wrongly convicted and given grossly disproportionate sentences for what they were wrongly convicted for in the first instance. Outrage. Why isn't the criminal justice system more like Minority Report? That would sort it. Wouldn't it? Oh no, innocent until proven guilty isn't it? Back to the drawing board then. I seriously don't know what some people expect. How are the police meant to totally prevent large-scale public disorder? If disorder does take place then the police are wrong to arrest those they catch in the interests of fairness because some others got away? It's wrong that these same people are then found guilty even though evidence and the letter of the law suggests that they are? It's wrong that custodial sentences of roughly 12 months each are handed out because a murderer might get away with 14 years? They broke the law. They were caught. They were found guilty. They were punished. Lucky they don't live in certain other countries where the police are slightly more hands on and a little less accountable and the sentences passed down by the courts just a bit sterner.

See what a 'designated sporting event' is and that will shed some light on the matter. Because one sentence for one type of crime might seem unduly lenient it does not necessarily follow that another sentence for another type of crime is therefore unduly harsh. Look at the sentences that were dished out to some of those involved in the Bradford, Burnley and Oldham riots.

Check out the definition of 'violent disorder' and look at the various different levels of assault and the types of criminal damage that there are and you will see why. What criminal act(s) people are charged with is down to the Crown Prosecution Service and not the police.

That is not like for like. Next it'll be something about feeding ducks stale bread and some pointless analogy concerning Wycombe, Swansea or Norwich fans. Really? You could still kill someone by that action whether by recklessness or intent. That looks very much like GBH or attempt GBH. If nobody gets killed you are still looking at violent disorder, affray, ABH or common assault.

I think that a certain section really ought to brush up on their history of football whilst paying particular attention to football violence and the very reasons we have the laws that we currently have relating to these specific sporting events. Likewise, a little time spent digesting the various crimes associated with football; missiles, alcohol, public order offences, assaults, as well as some of the helpful points of law such as transferred malice, recklessness, mens rea etc. might prove rather enlightening. It's not a case of 'massaging' statistics or 'making an example of' but rather the whole justice system applying the law of the land.