Minty

Will always remember that day, listening to it on a radio in the model railway attraction at Beaulieu Motor Museum, while I was working there for a summer job...! Super Kenny Monkou!

Why do fans make these outright judgements without any kind of justification (especially given that Richardson hasn't even played a game yet). These threads are a bit pointless if that's all it's going to be: Fox is ****. No he's not. Richardson is ****. No he's not. We need to recognise that the squad we have is the squad we have, and options like Clyne at left back may need to be looked at, not just dismissed out of hand.

I doubt many people would argue with that, we have scored goals and created chances, but conceded too many. But that doesn't detract from a, IMO, misguided original post.

Since it was decided on here. Pretty spectacular really. I'm all for a reasoned and constructive criticism but some of the stick Fox has had is ridiculous. People need to remember the likes of Lee Todd and Graham Potter before they start making silly judgements on Fox. He has made mistakes, he has been poor at times, but some of the reaction has been way OTT IMO. Anyway, *if* Fox is injured then Clyne at left back is an option. Richardson won't be the best right back in the Prem but I suspect he can do a job and arguably deserves a chance if it comes his way.

Agree with Manuel above, although I would add that uniform guidelines are in place at a great many employers and whilst I may or may not agree with them, they are not discriminatory against any particular kind of religion or faith, rather they usually specify jewellery in general. So if another member of staff is not allowed to wear, for example, a locket with a picture of a child or loved one, then that should be applied equally across the workforce to religious crosses and all jewellery.

For me, it's kinda like seeing two friends having an argument. You don't like to see it or hear it, you don't want to take sides because of the respect you have for both of them, you just want them to sort it out for everyone's sake.

You mean in pronunciation terms I assume, not spelling? I'm not sure how many fans have ever sung a foreign players name in the correct accent before, so good luck with that!

While I understand your concerns, I think we should be continuing to work on improving any methods of keeping possession rather than deliberately seeking out 'percentage' balls or throw-ins. In the final third is different, as you rightly highlighted, decent balls into the box can cause problems, but elsewhere on the pitch, whenever possible, I think we should look to keep possession. It doesn't matter who the opposition is, if you move the ball quickly and accurately, no one will take it off you, and I would expect us to practice, practice, practice as a result. It's the only way to reduce the 'howlers'. So yes, I agree we need to work on things like throw-ins (we should never stop) but we should not use any perceived failures at present as an excuse to take what is (in my view) a backward tactical step.

Absolutely. But possession of the ball means the opposition can't score, so it's just as important an element of our defence as any individual player is.

Came back from 3-0 down to earn a 3-3 draw: http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/news/article/saints-u21s-3-3-aston-villa-u21s-350446.aspx

Uh-oh, that's opened a can of worms. I agree entirely with you, Magilton was a footballer, and always looked for a pass and to keep possession. Unfortunately he was surrounded by people who didn't want to ball or who didn't want to move to get the ball, and fans who had no appreciation for possession. The longer we have the ball, the less the opposition can hurt us. Really quite simple.

Why take sides at all?

Presumably this was before he touched the ball or made an intelligent run? Bless 'im, I liked Brett, but JWP is a far more intelligent player with far better touch IMO.

I do apologise Dig Dig. Clearly I'm also not up to it, and therefore offer my resignation as a Saints fan.

It's an impossible question because the money spent on GR has nothing to do with potential defensive signings. The question makes an assumption that that money would've been spent elsewhere if it weren't spent on him, which we don't know and Adkins' interviews suggest otherwise IMO, with him giving clear hints that other defensive targets were identified but not signed for some reason. I for one am glad we signed Ramirez, based on what I've heard and seen, and think any signing in any position that potentially improves the squad is money well spent.

If it was that simple, you'd be a manager. It's not. You're not. All this is getting a bit OTT now. Adkins subs did not lose us the match. Poor defending lost us the match. The personnel on the pitch at the time *may* have contributed to that, or it may have happened anyway if the subs hadn't been made. I happen to agree that Adkins made incorrect decisions about the subs, but poor marking of Ferdinand and RVP (twice) were not directly the fault of Adkins. It's a shame that so many people seem to need a scapegoat.

OK, so you're in your own box, facing your own goal, and a cross comes towards you... what do you do? I would suggest the first thing is to get your head to the ball before any opposition player - check Secondly, direct the ball to the area where there is least threat. Now clearly that is not going to be down into the area (Fox v Man City!) or towards the edge of the area where a follow-up shot is likely (P*mpey last season), so you direct it out towards the wings, which gives you and your defence time to regroup. Given his position and facing his own goal, I fail to see what else he realistically could've done with the ball. The fact there was a Man U player on the wing to pick it up again is not his primary concern (especially as he can't see him). Seriously, what would you have expected him to do? The only other option may have been to put it out for a corner, which is arguably just as dangerous as what he did do, but 'pathetic'? I don't think so.

No fight required here! We're not exactly at polar opposite views, we both rate him, you just feel his lack of physical presence is more of an issue than I do. It is ultimately a good problem to have and Cork is an excellent player in a very similar mould IMO. Above all else, I trust Adkins to manage him and introduce him correctly.

Just re-watched the two passes that were intercepted and it appears more than likely to me that the intercepting Man U players were unsighted when Davis played his passes out, and in BOTH cases, the receiving player did not move towards the ball at all, a basic error IMO.

Agreed. There may be occasions when experience is called for but from what i've seen of JWP he has a maturity far beyond his years and as a result is not prone to the panic or rash behaviour that many youngsters are, and which often lead to calls for a 'more experienced head' alongside or to replace them. I think fitness is more likely to be the issue, and not burning him out, but I have complete faith in Adkins in that regard. JWP can go a long way. IMO, the third spot in midfield is currently his, with Cork having to wait his turn. That's a great position to be in.

All absolutely correct, but nothing to do with this issue IMO. Matt is making something public which, IMO, needn't be. It's not a major issue, certainly not one I'm going to slate him for like some, I just think it's a bit unfortunate and unnecessary. The same goes for NC - done lots of good things, and done plenty not so good. This particular issue seems petty (IF true, and IF it is on his own direct instruction) and unnecessary and only serves to cause concern when we should be focusing on the football and our return to the Premier League. Some fans make their mind up about individuals and feel the need to take sides, when actually no one really wins or loses in things like this.

Clearly two seperate issues here, the online system, and the hierarchy in the TO. Given how the new system was much heralded in the summer I would hope someone within SFC is putting a lot of pressure on the system supplier to rectify the problems. But just as important with these things is the ownership and customer service... we can all accept that problems will occur but how you respond to it and handle it is just as important as resolving it.

Key thing here for me is that Pistorius is entitled to have similar blades to the Brazilian... he uses his blades because they are IAAF approved, but there is nothing to stop him using longer blades in the Paralympics. All rather silly IMO, a bit like a Formula 1 team complaining that another teams front wing is better than their own, and not recognising that they could use the same wing if they wanted to/had the ability to develop it.

Clearly none of us know all the ins and outs of this, so it's not for me to say who is right or wrong - but to keep it in public, whatever it is, does not help the club going forward, and it would appear that the only one bringing anything out in public is Matt. That's a shame. Nobody is perfect in this world. A bit of tolerance and humility go a long way. (And that could equally apply to this forum.)

If we can compete with this side out, we can only improve once Mayuka, Ramirez and Yoshida settle in...