Lallana's Left Peg

An interesting question. In the grand scheme of things I don't think it matters, and that if there was to be genuine reasons for doing so (say, an increase in revenue which allowed us to further invest in the team) then I can see how from a business perspective (and FFP) it could be justified. However, from a tribal football perspective it matters as it would feel like it would be a bit more of our identity stripped away and that doesn't feel too nice. Overall, I think we know now in Premier League football that the business comes before the tradition. But that still wouldn't make it feel right.

Just seen this:

Oh dear, the fun police will be out soon condemning the chant. Remember kids, you are only allowed to chant things other people like you chanting. If they do not like it then it isn't allowed.

Wow, 18 year old Sam Gallagher preferred on the bench ahead of Gaston Ramirez. Unless Ramirez got injured between yesterday morning and today.

The 'wheels falling off' scenario for me is our owners walking away and some sort of financial issues if we were to have a lot of debt. As much as I am optimistic about the future of our club Premier League football and continuing to give youth players a chance is all I want from Saints. Anything else is a bonus for me.

I haven't seen the goals back on TV so I will need to check who was marking who from the free kick. Whomever was marking Wes Brown is at fault for that, as they completely lost him. Just because Wes Brown headed it back across the box from the far post doesn't mean Fox is at fault for that one (unless he was of course marking him). The second goal came after an awful pass from Cork made us lose possession as we were chasing the equaliser. It was an awful shunt forward that was devoid of ideas or technique (it looked a very tired pass to me).

Just back from the game. I am quite surprised by the 'win a cup' notion on here tonight. I didn't get the feeling it existed in the two earlier rounds so not sure why it exists now? If it is because the second team should have been good enough to win in those rounds then the same excuse should be used tonight - this team was good enough to win if they performed well enough - and they didn't. We had lots of first team experience in the second string, it isn't like Pochettino left them hanging out to dry. Too much focus is given to the 'rest players' reason as to why the second string played. Whilst that is a part of the reason it isn't the only one. The Manager also values giving opportunities to other players and also giving youngsters a chance to impress. A big squad on paper doesn't mean much if there isn't viable competition for the first team and the best thing the players could do tonight is play well and give the Manager selection issues. Davis has done it this season (perform well enough in the cup to earn a recall to the first team) so the Manager has proved he will change things up based on performances in this competition. It isn't an empty gesture. As it goes, not many come out of tonight with any credit. K Davis, Yoshida, Hooiveld, Cork, Ramirez, and Lee all poor. S Davis, Fox and Jay-Rod ok. Chambers and Reed the better players for me. No-one else really made a case for themselves, though Gallagher had more impact on the game in 10mins than Lee did in 60. So this weekend when Pochettino selects the same 11 that started against Stoke no-one on that bench can feel aggrieved. No-one can say they don't get an opportunity, and no-one can start moaning about stuff. Whilst I appreciate some will say it is hard to impress in a team full of second string players where they are not match sharp I will argue it didn't stop some in the previous rounds nor tonight (Chambers and Reed). As a fan I would love a proper run at a cup and a Europa League run. I can understand why the club thinks otherwise though, and I'm not fussed that they don't fancy it themselves - certainly not to do so with any negative impact on the league form. All that money on those new signings comes from our status as a Premier League team, it doesn't come from nice little cup runs or even Europa League runs (in fact don't some teams lose money playing in that competition?). I just see the pragmatic view that puts the League Cup as an opportunity to do other things rather than a competition where you play the first team and try to win it.

As I understand it the club were GIVEN the money to aid our away support. They appear to have spent it in a way to try and improve the opposition away support at St Marys which they directly benefit from. Poor form.

So rather than use the money to help the supporters who follow the team away they are investing it in the stadium in a way that only helps* away supporters? *That is if away supporters care about the general state of the away concourse at St Marys anyway. That is pretty pathetic. The Hull away game on a Tuesday was crying out for free travel and subsidised tickets.

Back from the game. We did well today. Stoke are very much a team stuck in transition and they will be up and down for the rest of the season. The conditions didn't make for anything hit over 15 yards to be accurate, which given the workrate of both teams meant the game got very congested and messy at times. I felt we were the more refined team, we worked the ball well but the final pass was lacking at times - as it has been at several times this season. I was interested to see the impact Ramirez would make when he came on but his presence just disrupted stuff. We're a powerful team these days and he was not powerful enough in possession and considering the amount of men we commit forward it created a few counters for Stoke at times which felt risky. A decent point away from home and we move onto the next game. Very encouraged by our resiliency and quality, I think we've got a good season ahead of ourselves.

Ramirez wanted by Galatasaray according to this: http://www.turkish-football.com/news_read.php?id=5348 If he is going to leave then it wouldn't be a bad destination as Galatasaray pay well for players and the tax breaks footballers have over there mean Ramirez would still earn a very good wage as well.

I don't understand the question, as if Rickie Lambert can be physically trained to fulfil the role then I would say just about any striker can as long as they have the appetite and desire.

Lots of people saying he has talent but the original question I posed was not questioning his quality it was what position will he settle on when he is a fixture in the team? Is he one of the two ahead of the defence or is he one of the three behind the striker? Or doesn't it matter?

Not seen much of the U18's this season, it is effectively a new team full of first year scholars (lots of 16 year olds) so be interesting to see how they go against a Liverpool team that should contain the likes of Harry Wilson (15 year old who made debut for Wales recently) and Jerome Sinclair (who has made his senior Liverpool debut).

I know nothing about accounts and finances, so this may be an incredibly stupid question but...are there any financial benefits (tax breaks and so on) when you as a business have a loan and debt to pay? In that the financial benefits it brings offset the interest paid on the loan? Or would there literally be no benefit to taking out a loan other than the short-term cash flow benefit?

They were very good, very quick and fit but I enjoyed the challenge and we had some half decent moments in the game ourselves.

It was done between JWP and Calum Chambers. One volleys the ball to the other who uses their first touch to both kill the ball a bit and pop it up to volley to the other and so on.

Nowhere decent around the ground, and none officially like away supporters either. Honestly it is much better in the City centre, and then catching a cab down.

Great interview, surprised he was allowed to be so open about the tactics. They seem very complex as well!

Whilst I don't disagree with you, the single biggest thing that attracts new fans is success and a good team on the pitch. Saints appear to be going at it that way.

Awful idea. Sounds like the sort of rubbish a club does when they can't even fill their stadium to 33% capacity. A bit like Middlesbrough.

The guy asking the questions annoyed me. Asked about five different questions in the same breath and then tried to answer them for the panel as well. Then when a panellist was warmed up sufficiently to given some real insight he'd do in another direction. For example, when Cortese said Saints could never bridge the commercial revenue gap with a team like Man Utd but had to be smarter and better in other ways, and generate ideas to do so, he could have been asked what and how - but the guy just ignored it and asked an entirely different question. I like the idea of the event but it could be so much better.

"Temporary 5 year use" Hmm, interesting.

An extra 108 car parking spaces means the club should be able to roughly cover the cost of the training ground about 4 days after it has finished and is being used...

It appears to me that the club are taking the approach of trying to protect revenue rather than ensuring they have a full stadium. There are probably business practices where this is justified but the football club exists for the supporters so it doesn't sit too well when they are priced out of going to a game. I can't see it changing, the club had a chance to pack out the stadium for the Bristol City game but chose expensive pricing and look what happened.