Lallana's Left Peg

He agreed a pre-contract deal back in the summer. Been a stop-start season for him injury wise, and I believe he is now injured for the rest of the season as well.

You can go through the FA rulebook if you want and 80% of it will not be adhered to. That doesn't mean a thing. It's professional because they got away with it and achieved what they wanted. Just like 'buying' a foul is, just like timewasting is etc. It's all a part of the game.

Ah - basically I am saying that without human error in officiating in tennis it means the best players win all the time and when the best players win all the time it makes the sport boring to watch. Ever watched the early rounds of a tennis tournament? Everyone is going through the motions. It feels pointless. Human error in sport (including by officials) makes it more interesting to watch - be that the chance of an upset or big clubs getting decisions etc.

Because in tennis the rules are black and white. The ball is either in or it is out, it has either hit the net or it has not. In football many of the rules are open to interpretation, not least because it is a contact sport. When the official has to make a decision based on interpretation rather than having the facts to hand he is open to be influenced because it is impossible for a human to be objective in this situation - we all have inherent biased in our decision making. So because of that players seek to influence refs and that impacts their behaviour. The most common one is when a player is offside. Often he has no idea whether he is or not, but regardless he'll give the lino abuse because he wants to cast doubt in the linos mind (the lino doesn't get to see a replay either remember) so the next time the lino isn't sure and the player may get an advantage. The West Ham players were being professional when they hassled Clattenburg on Saturday. They saw an opportunity to get angry and shout and scream at the Ref and seek to influence his behaviour - and it worked. So if it works why would you stop doing it?

Yes. It's boring to watch until the final or at best the semi-final, and even then it is only ever contested between the same players. Imagine just for a second football was like that The errors Refs make are clearly influenced by the home crowd, players, size of the club and other things (probably even Managers on the sideline). If Ref's got it right all the time then the game loses something. I'm not saying players being respectful to Ref's then mean they get decisions right all the time, but the theatre of the game means a part of it is how players act towards one another and the Ref (rightly or wrongly).

If I want to watch a sport where players are respectful to officials I'll watch Rubgy. But football is much better and good Ref's won't help it much - if we created a sport where everything was fair and correct it would be boring and rubbish to watch. Half the appeal of football is the batsh*t crazy nature of it, and the officials (their standard of officiating and how players interact with them) is a part of it.

I agree. I've set a limit of what I am prepared to pay for an away ticket this season for the first time ever. Anything more than around £35 and I won't go. Have missed out on some great away games but I'm standing firm - we're now entering a phase were ticket money is shrinking in terms of overall income for clubs and its time for a change.

In bold:

But they are both earning far more than any other team would pay them. So even if Liverpool wanted to move them on I can't see any takers based on their current wages. Lallana in particular turns 28 in the summer so whatever club buys him next will know he will have little resale value after they sign him. And lets face it, if both are at a club that appears above their level then they have no incentive to leave.

Lovren and Lallana both have futures at Liverpool, but they aren't the players the club thought they were buying a few years ago. Both attempted to better themselves and thus far neither have to the degree they would have hoped. But they are richer. Much richer.

That is a small part of it - but overall it's basically buying a development 'package' from Southampton and applying it to your club. But I don't think it will work well because a lot of how Saints develop players is down to the amount of contact they have with them and they won't have anywhere near as much contact in the US and then you have to take into account that any good player will then be recruited by a college (at the age of around 17) and then the rest of their development is in the collegiate system. So as I said - access to our IP of how we develop players and then applying it to your environment.

An interesting idea but basically we're charging ten clubs money to have access to our IP and then we'll see if that positively helps the way they develop footballers. I'm guessing it won't because of the massive difference in how players are coached and the amount of contact players have with their teams over here compared to over there but I suppose it is worth a shot.

Spending money does not guarantee success, but we do know to have success you need to spend money. There is always the odd challenge to this rule but that challenge is never one that repeats itself. The increased spending power that those above us have is not exclusive to them - our spending power has also increased so the basic challenge is to continue to invest our extra riches in a way that ensures the gap does not increase - and with a little luck maybe it decreases.

Positions to target: Backup keeper Centre half Right back Winger Keeper aside, I don't mind who it is as long as the approach is to buy better than we have got as first choice. Then obviously spend big on any replacements for enforced sales - potentially Mane and Wanyama.

The U21's and U18's only pressed more when we had Pochettino at the club. They did it to align with what they were seeing in the first team. Also, crucially, they did it with better players in the team. The U21's and U18's do not have the talent to do this now - they would be picked off far more easily and it would result in a lot of poor performances. I don't know of Hunter's and Fleming's past but if that is what means Fleming is now U18 Manager then I don't think it has worked out too well. The reason Man Utd's Academy is in a terrible state is in part due to their own negligence and in part due to how aggressive Man City have been. An example of the latter is that they now offer scholarships to a private school for kids who join their Academy - and they get to keep that scholarship even if they are released. And that is just an example of the sort of money they are throwing at recruiting good prospects in the area.

Some twitchy bums tight now in North London over this one I suspect.

Dodd and Williams were managing and coaching the U18's. The U21's were always Martin Hunter's. When Dodd and Williams left we appointed Anthony Limbrick as U18 Manager. He was previously U16 Manager and coach. The U18 intake the year he was appointed Manager wasn't very good (and considerably supplemented with rejects from other Academies) so the thinking that was for continuity he would step up. He was a highly thought of as a coach but not really known as a Manager. Towards the end of the season Craig Fleming came in to assist him because whilst he was a good coach there was an element of inexperience as a senior professional (or exposed to that part of the game) that he never had and it was impacting getting that age group ready mentally etc. for the professional game. Quite what made the Director of Football at Lowestoft Town suitable for U18 coaching I am not sure about but obviously the club had an idea and Fleming was an ex-pro. Then in the summer Limbrick went back to Australia and Fleming was appointed U18 Manager. Again a strange move but maybe (and this is where I am guessing) the club knew the intake (Slattery aside) wasn't up to much so no point rushing an appointment. The summer we may see some movement with the U16's having some very good players and the U18's should be a little better (but don't expect 'golden generation' type output). I think we can do better than Craig Fleming with our reputation but that may be unfair of me - lets see what happens. The club asked Dodd and Williams to move on as they wanted a slightly more modern approach to coaching and management of the players. The issue is that all the players liked Dodd and Williams. I think we have suffered at U18 level because they moved on and subsequent events as a consequence but lets not pretend that Dodd and Williams took average player and made them great. They had Stephens, Turnbull, Reed, JWP, Shaw, Chambers etc. They played their part but they were blessed with great players as well.

Yeah I would agree that signing a young player who has proved they can cope physically in the lower leagues is better than a young player from another league but I think my point still stands that if we have cash to spend on hoarding young prospects then I would rather we spent that on players who can play for our first team and have less of a risk associated with them. If Spurs purchased all three players a fair strike rate would be that one of them would 'make it' and that total £15m outlay would be worth it. But I think they have the money to invest in a different way to Saints and right now I would prefer Saints to only spend significant money on players who are better than what we have got. I am not sure we will improve otherwise.

If we had £15m to spend then I would rather we spend it on one good player than three lower league talents. Not all the lower league talents will progress like Alli and if first team football is one of the most significant contributing factors to their development then what are Spurs going to do - play Demebele in instead of Kane, Lookman instead of Eriksen and Maddison instead of Alli? Have no issues with the idea of picking up good young talent but the circumstance in which you bring them to the club has to be right and they have to be able to play for your first team. Lets put it another way - would you want to spend £15m in the summer on another three Juanmi's?

Just 20k based on what I've read.

http://www.gazettelive.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/gaston-ramirez-joins-middlesbrough-loan-10789127 In Summary: 1. Saints wanted any interested club to pay his £60k a week salary. This scared off Boro, Bologna and Swansea. 2. Ramirez's representatives then got in touch with Boro again and a 3-way compromise was made. Boro will pay him £20k a week, Saints will pay him £20k a week, and Ramirez will give up £20k a week. 3. He will sign for them later this week as his wife has just gone into labour. Saints will save £40k a week until the end of his contract which assuming it ends 30th June means they will save around ~£1m. I would imagine this has been allocated for Charlie Austin. Good work all round from Saints.

They story of a swap is probably rubbish, but I would suggest Sky also have an interest in promoting their own story of him going to Newcastle or Watford (not to mention the action they will see on SkyBet as a consequence).

He only signed for Palermo in the summer. I've never heard of him. Central-midfielder though?

Losing habits do not concern me as much as a lack of talent. Lots of other clubs spend more on their Academies - particularly the purchase of talent. Our talent is usually sourced through our recruitment rather than scouting of other clubs talent and buying them. There aren't too many we buy. Stephens, Gallagher and Johnson spring to mind. Ignore the U18's for now - they miss Slattery (done for the season I believe) and they just aren't very good - their recruitment was at a time when the club wasn't in a good place. I believe there was a recent article in the media that suggested the club is going to start to buy some players for the Academy due to the delta that exists with talent at the moment. We're doing really well in the U16' downwards in terms of talent it's just this little phase that we need to understand will be dry - and that will be highlighted more by the big numbers we had only a few years ago.

Huddersfield are a big, strong and quick team. At this level it makes a big difference. But it is no indicator of how good a player is in the grand scheme of things - when smaller and lighter players mature physically then it is technical ability that comes to the fore. I don't want to take anything away from Huddersfield as they are playing well and are by far the better team, but I'm not quick to judge our kids when they play against bigger teams (as they often do). I was at Blackburn last season for the first leg of the final for this cup and I saw them kick lumps out of us at times and their team was made up of big lads - the likes of Hesketh was a child among giants and struggled to make an impression. That said, the balance of our team is rubbish tonight. Sims and Gallagher not offering much and distribution from the back is poor. Stephens looking a bit shaky to me, which is uncharacteristic for him.