Lallana's Left Peg

The question was raised in relation to the West Ham striker issues, he said can't speak for Sam Allardyce but he trains all his players during the week to have the mentality they will start so if they are called upon they are ready. He was then asked how does he keep players happy who don't play, and he answered quite firmly that it is a players responsibility to train not to automatically be a starter and play. He said sometimes we forget that, and he chooses the team as a Manager, otherwise a club may as well only have 11 players and no Manager. He said players should understand that too and anyone who doesn't is going to struggle in football. It is the players challenge to train better and be in contention to play. It was actually good to see him be so firm on something and show a bit of assertiveness.

His answer about squad balance and players obligations

Any update on this? Nearly two months since the announcement, I don't think Crocker has left yet but it can't be far off?

Despite everything about them meaning I must surely find them annoying, I actually quite enjoy the Jason Cundy and Andy Goldstein show on TalkSport. I'm sure they'll be delighted with my endorsement and both be entirely validated.

Ball playing centre-halves suitable for the modern game who can still defend well are at a premium. I suspect we only got Lovren as he had a poor season at Lyon in the first place. That said, Astori is still at Cagliari - and he seems very suitable and attainable.

Have seen more than a handful of Pompey supporters bleating about how good it is to own the club and not be a part of the 'soulless' Premier League etc. Haven't had the heart to remind them that it is the 'soulless' Premier League's new TV deal that gave them the extra £4m in parachute payments which prevented them from disappearing and the fan takeover failing miserably.

Ever since the successive defeats against Newcastle and QPR last season, I've noticed a distinct change in our general match tactics. In general I would summarise it as follows: 1. Attacks are very slow and built up to ensure that when men are committed forward we can't be hit on the break 2. Pressing high up the pitch is very circumstantial and not done by default For me this was a clear departure from what Pochettino initially attempted to do, and what we were told were his hallmark tactics at Espanyol. I am going to speculate this was done to stop us conceding so many goals whilst still retaining some goal threat. In the 10 games since that change last season, we only conceded 9 goals (this includes the West Brom game where we conceded 3 which was a nightmare all round). I was curious to see what sort of brand of football we'd play this season but it looks like it is more of the same, and that is reflected by only conceding two goals in three games. However, it has clearly come at the expense of our goal threat. Our football is less expansive and swashbuckling. It is still very fluid but it seems very considered and less 'off the cuff'. There seems to be set patterns and rules to what we do, and our goal threat comes from working the ball and looking to take a chance rather than rushing forward in numbers and using law of averages. What do we think of this approach? There has been lots made of our lack of goals however not so much made about a defence (both individuals and system) that has improved immeasurably from a year ago. We're always 'in' games these days and whilst they aren't as exciting is that the way forward - to remain tight at the back and rely on quality in the final third to take advantage of fewer chances created? Or are the last 13 games reflective of any other change perhaps I haven't picked up on?

Most of my mates are pleased for him and think it is cool. You'll find many plastic supporters of 'big' teams don't care much for the national team anyway so I wouldn't be bothered about what they say. You could always ask them that if they were going to choose their club team based on how good they are perhaps they should do the same with what national team they follow if they don't like the players Hodgson selects. That usually stumps them a little.

It's hard to pick a team based on speculation though. For what it is worth I would find it strange for Pochettino to make a decision over a player without having the chance to look at him in training. Sharp is hardly an outsider - he was a popular member of the squad who was involved heavily pre-season and then dropped very methodically the moment Mayuka arrived. That Sharp hasn't even had a chance to prove to Pochettino what he can do in training doesn't sit right to be honest, and again I'll speculate that I think there are influences outside the first team coaching staff (last year and this) as to why that is. But if I try to look at it and exclude the way he has been treated, I don't see a place for Sharp whatsoever now. Last season, maybe I do - perhaps after it emerged how unrefined Mayuka is. But I guess by then Sharp was on a seasons-loan and there was nothing we could do about it. In terms of Ramirez, he hasn't started a game in the league for us this season so I am not sure where further negativity against him comes from.

In your opinion would Billy Sharp make a difference to that?

If Billy Sharp could genuinely offer something to a team that has Rickie Lambert, Jay Rodriguez, and Daniel Osvaldo, and he 'only' earns £18k a week, how come another Premier League team has not offered us £2m for him and snapped him up straight away? I won't pretend there wasn't anything peculiar about his exit and Mayuka's arrival (whole thing stinks of decisions made outside Adkins and his team if you ask me) but speculating about last season is useless. If this is about what Sharp has to offer now surely it is very hard to justify him being anywhere near the team?

I can see why a Championship side would baulk at 18k a week. It's a lot of money for an on-loan player. Nearly £1m a year in wages that has no asset value and is basically a £1m spend to get 10 - 20 goals for the season (depending on how good you are as a team). In fact the only team I can see who would go for it is Reading however Simon Peach alluded to something last week where he suggested that Saints aren't really engaging in any business with Reading due to Adkins, so that potentially scuppers that prospect for Sharp (it seems the best fit for him on many levels). Alternatively I suppose Sharp could agree to take a pay cut if playing matters that much to him but all things considered at the age of 27 I wouldn't be walking away from my contract to play - and I don't think he should get any stick for taking that stance either. If someone wants to pay you 18k for 4 years then that is enough money to want to receive whether you play or not.

All eyes on the Bristol City game then. If he really is genuinely 'back' he has to be in the matchday 18 for that (as long as he is fit, I suppose). Plus he only has a year left on his contract and Saints rarely let deals enter their last year unless they have no intention of keeping the player so all in all I think it is just another body for the squad.

Forecast comes off very well in that article. Giving him a 5 year contract though

Just back from the game, I've calmed down a little since the final whistle but these are my thoughts from the game: 1. Whilst as a fan I don't insist on knowing exactly what our formation is, I usually have a fair idea but I had no clue today. It shouldn't matter whether or not as I fan I do however it didn't look like the players knew either. At the break we switched it up to 4-3-1-2 and then just as Lallana was getting going he was taken off. 2. Defensively we were solid. Lovren is such a good player. 3. I wish the players would be more incisive and pass the ball properly. They looked so tentative today and it only led to more mistakes. There was a massive lapses of concentration at times which led to the opposition breaking on us - that is unacceptable. 4. Wanyama had an absolute nightmare today. I have no idea why he wasn't hauled off. Stupid fouls, loose passing, and poor decision making. Lets hope it was just one of those days for him. 5. Clyne and Shaw have to come back in as they are the only players in the team with pace and any appetite to beat a man as a result. Our full-backs for Christs sake. 6. I can't work out Osvaldo, but it feels like he and Lambert cannot play in the same team. But Lambert must play if all we are going to do is lump it long which is becoming a concerning tactic. 7. Poor Morgan is getting lost in the shuffle - I don't think he is too comfortable with anything other than being in a two ahead of the defence and he definitely misses his partner Cork. We didn't even need to play well today to win but as it turns out we couldn't even manage a half competent performance in midfield and attack. We're a young team and I am prepared for us to have games like this but performance levels were not at a good enough standard today. I am glad the players have a while to dwell on it because if they aren't going to pass the ball properly and move with purpose they may as well not bother at all.

The U18's were always in for a tough season. The vast majority of them from last season are now a part of the U21's. The squad is made up mostly of first year scholars and I think they even had some 14 / 15 year olds play for them recently too. This is all very deliberate as the idea is to promote players through as soon as possible so they can get used to what is required from them even if they may struggle - I believe Pochettino did it to great effect at Espanyol and it is starting to become an accepted method in the UK. However, it is not conducive to winning football. The U21's is a different story. They are fully loaded this season. They are expected to challenge far more as they had the best youngsters promoted to them and there is more expectation on them. They have made a poor start however you cannot necessarily say that Hunter is to blame - there may be lots of factors. Plus it is important for the kids to learn lots about the game - and losing is a part of it however you would never want to deliberately lose a game of course. However, as has been said the purpose of the Academy is to provide players for the first team and on that basis everyone associated has done a brilliant job. But eventually the club will want to start to win things at that level - and I think Matt Crocker mentioned pre-season that he has introduced a psychology module to the players education curriculum as he believed that aside from talent level both the U18's and U21's last season fell just short of qualifying for the playoffs in their elite groups and better mentality may well have seen them win more games.

Nice one - keep up the good work on ESPN and The Metro.

I'm not one to nitpick but seeing as he is a nipper who is starting to receive some attention he'd probably be grateful to see his name spelt correctly - it is Harrison Reed not Harrison Read.

Read the first two lines, thought it had potential, then I read the last two lines and was so disgusted I had to look away from the screen and contemplate what I had just read.

http://www.tribalfootball.com/articles/fc-utrecht-signing-de-ridder-slams-southampton-culture-3977455 Didn't he get a hair transplant last summer!?!

I found it interesting to hear Cortese say in the summer that Saints had an obligation to provide players for the national team should they wish to select them. It was the first time I had seen anything in public be mentioned about it. You could argue that a successful Academy would naturally provide that anyway (and the view that 50% of the first team be made up of Academy products has been around since the takeover).

Jesus Perez said something very interesting last night. He said players don't play in positions, they play from positions. On that basis it would appear anyone who starts out wide in the three behind the striker must be able to come infield and be comfortable - be that with or without the ball. That would appear to completely eliminate the view that we'll ever play traditional wingers in the first team at a senior level and may provide some insight as to why Puncheon was let go and found himself out of favour towards the end of last season.

That is a great draw for us, a home tie and a chance to use the same squad that beat Barnsley.

Yes but it is not a "good" chance is it? It perhaps represents our best chance of success this season, but it is hardly one which we should be directing our focus in. If we got to the semi-final I can see personnel changing a bit however until then I think the club will be focussing on finishing as high up in the league as is possible.

Bookies odds of 28/1 doesn't feel like a good chance of winning it. That said, I too would like weaker opposition so we get a chance to test the squad and give an opportunity to kids.