Lallana's Left Peg

They don't but they often get a loyalty basis based on the number of years left on their contract. Sometimes this is waived depending on how desperate the player is to leave. It's a shame Lallana's camp chose to leak this as well.

He has struck some awful penalties in his time. Never really looks convincing.

I doubt the Board have any football plan beyond allowing Les Reed to do what he wants. There are two sides to the Lambert transfer. The first is that he is on the turn a little, getting a bit old to be first choice and lead our line, and the opportunity to get £4m+ for him and £40k a week off the books to reinvest can in isolation appear a half decent deal. However, any logic when assessing the deal is completely shot when you have no confidence in the current set-up that he will be adequately replaced - indeed that he will even be sold just a few days after our Chairman said no-one would before we had a new Manager.

I have been quite critical of the Board the last week or so however whilst they shouldn't be ignoring the efforts of their best player and Captain to contact them Lallana should know that unless Liverpool meet the asking price the Board will not (and should not) budge just because he wants to leave. If he is that desperate to move the answer is simple - get in touch with Liverpool and ask that they raise their bid to the asking price and state that the difference can be taken from his wages over the duration of his contract. Liverpool get their way as it doesn't cost them any more, Saints get their way because they get their asking price, and he gets his move. He just doesn't earn as much, but if it is all about Champions League football and not money then he shouldn't be bothered...

Andrei Kanchelskis

Comes across as quite bitter to me. He had another opportunity and he took it. We're going to hate him for it now?

Trying to look at this pragmatically: Last season we lost £7m operationally. Last season included Premier League payments of £44m. Although some of the new contracts were signed before the end of last season the full brunt of them wouldn't be felt until this season. Since last season (and the £7m loss with Premier League income of £44m) the following has happened: Rickie Lambert signed a new deal Kelvin Davis signed a new deal Adam Lallana signed a new deal Morgan Schneiderlin signed a new deal Luke Shaw signed a new deal Calum Chambers signed a new deal I will suggest that Lallana, Schneiderlin, and Shaw received significant pay rises. The others less so. We also spent £32m on three players and it would be fair to assume their wages aren't cheap either. The wage bill will be very big for a club of our size. This season we received an extra £40m in Premier League payments (up to around £84m). We also know that £22m of transfer fees are owed in the summer. That would leave £18m for other costs. I can comfortably see most of that gobbled up by the increased wage bill. We trimmed some fringe players in January but I do not see that having a significant impact. I would suggest we will not be making a profit whatsoever for this season. That doesn't stop us buying players of course, however if a spend of £30m on transfer fees each summer (which most of the transfer fee paid in subsequent years) leaves us without a profit each year then exactly how does spending £50m become possible?

Ok - so £22m owed this summer. Do you think we'll spend another £50m this summer (fees owed over several years etc.) even if Lallana and Shaw stayed? My guess is the Lallana and Shaw deals cover the £22m this summer and allow some money to be spent on new players. I can't see any 'new' money being spent beyond that. Of course, I'd be delighted to be proven wrong as long as we're spending money we have...

I do, with £27m owed this summer for players already at the club.

If the club wish to detach Krueger from the football matters then how about we stop wheeling him out to talk about football matters?

How do you know we won't go down? Without a good Managerial appointment and appropriate enough signings we'd be in a world of trouble.

I suspect we'll get a new Manager very soon. Saw in another thread that Les Reed is interviewing candidates over the weekend. Of course whether or not you think Les Reed is the right man to sell Southampton to candidates and appoint a Manager is another thing.

It is hard enough to hang onto players when the big clubs start circling. To do anything to encourage them to move is criminal.

His heart is in the right place but at a time when the football club (not the organisation, the FOOTBALL club) needs real leadership he is helpless as he has no familiarity with the sport. Took over at a very bad time. Would not be so bad if there was ANY football experience on that Board beyond Les Reed (who I have already said I think isn't qualified for the role).

You aren't half clutching at straws there. At best an extra million I'd say. What sort of add-ons would you expect for a 32 year old signing a 2-year deal?

Monk I don't have an issue with our place in the football world and nor do I have the expectation that Saints will ever become any better than we are now. What I don't like to see is the club go through a period where it looks like several players will seek to move on and we have this situation at the club: 1. An unproven DoF of whom it is said players do not like 2. A DoF who is the only person on the Board to have experience of football 3. A Board who do not appear to be on the same page 4. A Chairman who makes public statements (and public speaking is something that is a strength of his) which in 24hrs time will appear like the fans are being lied to. Managers and players come and go. We all accept that. But what we don't accept is a lack of a backbone and unqualified people in important roles running our club. It does not bode well.

I know what his responsibilities were beforehand as Reed listed them in an interview. I know what his responsibilities are now as Krueger and Reed have mentioned them in recent interviews (April and May). The players not liking him comes from Adam Blackmore.

His previous role was overseeing the Football Development Centre. He had responsibility for the Academy, Sports Science, Scouting etc. It is widely believed he was also a part of the 'transfer committee'. And clearly he had an advisory role with Cortese. In the new Board he is now effectively Director of Football. His increased responsibilities (as long as he is a DoF in the traditional sense) are: Transfers, Contracts (both new players and existing), Managerial Appointments, and setting the direction the club / team is to go in on a sporting level. His increased responsibilities means he has far more touch points with the players, and makes decisions that directly impact them - both personally and at a sporting level. If they do not like him that does not bode well at all.

I took my position and questioned his credentials the moment Pochettino left. I raised an eyebrow when he listed his responsibilities back in April. A few days ago I wondered a) if he alone was suitable to be a DoF, and b) whether he was especially appropriate with zero other football experience at Board level. Most people responded suggested I was talking rubbish and Les Reed was entirely suitable to be DoF. In the last 24hrs we've had reports emerge that we're about to sell our best striker for £4m and now Adam Blackmore has publicly come forward and stated players have told him that Les Reed is an issue for them. So given the ease with which my view was dismissed by many a few days ago I'd be interested to see if people still hold that position in the face of all this.

People still think Reed is the best man for the DoF role? They've gone quiet the last 24hrs.

Oh dear.

Decent kit for a premium price flogged to anyone that will have it. I wonder what it was that attracted Saints to her - I didn't realise she'd be marketing the players not the club.

There is no doubt he'd want to join Liverpool. Boyhood club, better team, CL football, moving home - I can't think of a reason why he wouldn't join them.

I wouldn't bother - I pointed out my concerns with his credentials as a DoF and also that he appears to have all footballing decision making power in the Krueger interview thread yesterday and I was told by 90% of people I was talking rubbish. So I can only assume those same people are delighted with the news we're selling our best striker and talisman for £4m and that it is all a part of the Les Reed masterplan.

Where are all the people saying Les Reed is a great choice for DoF?