Wes Tender

I have already stated my case. It is that we had a better team than Spurs last season, even though they finished above us. Try and twist everything like you normally do if it amuses you, or rack your brains, such as they are, to defend your position that a higher league position necessarily equates always to a better team. I don't see you debating that, just as usual taking your normal supercilious position that because you say it, it must be fact. Nice of you to spare the time to respond to me but a pity that you have ignored everybody else who has expressed similar views, like Redslo for example. And just to be clear, I am not offended by anything, not even your inane ramblings. After all, it is only a forum of opinions. I accept that you don't like mine and that I don't accept yours, nothing to get all worked up about, is it?

I expressed no opinion on whether I was offended or not that Spurs finished above us in the league, merely that I disagreed with you that they were the better team, but carry on extrapolating whatever you like. It's only making you look dumb.

How is it the same sort of thing? Somebody already commented on that earlier and expressed surprise that you would bring that up as an argument. I'm not going to state that because we finished above them that we must have the better team, because although league position is indicative of the quality of a team, it is not a conclusive measure for the reasons I have given. I just believe that player for player, we had a better team than Swansea did. On the other hand, I am happy to offer the opinion that Swansea arguably had a team which was at least as good as the Spurs team. As has been pointed out already, Spurs' position in the table was over-reliant on one player rather than a team effort.

You seem to have a problem in accepting that other posters can disagree with your opinion, as usual. It makes you look arrogant. Others have expressed the opinion that we had a better team than Spurs last season, so presumably you are also looking down your nose at them too.

What is important to a player considering a move elsewhere isn't all to do with that in the case of us and Spurs. Just because they finished slightly above us last season doesn't mean they will again. Yes, he might improve their defence, which their puny goal difference is testament to, but how much better would they be signing Toby and losing Kane, for example? Toby doesn't have a crystal ball and if he is considering them, the fact that they fluked a narrow advantage over us because of Kane and a handful of late goals from Erikson won't play heavily on his mind. I very much doubt that he even feels that their chances of finishing above us this coming season are greater when he knows Koeman but not Pochettino and he must harbour doubts as to whether he might form as effective a partnership as he did with our defence, even though Clyne might not be there. But if he perceives them to be a step up, is attracted to the bright lights of London, will undoubtedly earn more, then they might be a draw for him. But he seems happy here and could probably do much better than spurs if he wanted to move on.

They are a better team because CB Fry says that the empyrical evidence conclusively proves they are, because they finished above us. We were the better team than them, Liverpool and Man Utd for much of the season, based on that same empyrical evidence, but they trumped during the last few weeks of the season. Pochettino is also the better manager than Koeman based on this same empyrical evidence according to Fry. The table doesn't lie. PS. As far as I can see, nobody is saying that we are a bigger club.

Therefore using the same argument, objectively we were the better team than Spurs, Liverpool, Man Utd and Arsenal for much of the season, because we were above them in the table. I believe that we can argue reasonably that we have a better first team than Spurs player for player, and a better defence and midfield than theirs. I agree with Saint IQ when he says that Spurs were the jammiest team in the division, because Kane earned them 26 points alone, so their position had more to do with an individual performance than a team one. A Rodriguez style injury ealry in the season and they're mid-table. His impact on their season is akin to Bale's before him and Suarez at Liverpool. Presumably you would also argue that objectively Spurs has the better manager than us because they finished higher up the table than us?

But nowhere near as much of a difference as there used to be historically. Their ambition is to get back to where they used to be, at the top of the division and doing well in the CL. We have ambitions to finish in the top four eventually and to play in the CL too. Although past precedent suggests that they will be better placed to achieve those ambitions than we will, it is not beyond the bounds of possibility that we could finish higher than them next season at least. Changes to player personnel at both clubs and how those new players perform will be key, but the evidence of how player changes at both clubs turned out last season suggest that we are better at managing them. I would argue that it isn't the case that anybody suggesting that Koeman is the better manager than Rodgers is wearing rose-tinted glasses.

Us?

You mean Hull who were relegated, compared to us who finished 7th? I'm not saying Clyne going to Liverpool is a sideways move, just that it isn't as big a jump in his career as it would have been a few years back. Currently they aren't any longer a top four club and I don't see them being one this coming season either. But as you say, it is a step up in many ways, but not in every way.

Of course, that is not necessarily the case, as you are bracketing the player to the club and making assumptions that because the club might be successful, that every player associated with it will be equally as successful. It can be argued to varying degrees that the players here who replaced those who left for Liverpool had more successful seasons for us than our ex-players did for Liverpool, even though Liverpool managed finally to get above us. Yes, Clyne would be earning significantly more money with them and his CV profile will have been enhanced by playing for them, but whether his individual season will be seen to be more successful than his past one here remains to be seen. Perhaps he shone here because he was part of a very talented and well-drilled defence, whereas the Liverpool defence last season is possibly the worst I can ever remember. Liverpool might have been above us historically for ever and a day, but last season the gap narrowed to the extent that even one dodgy refereeing decision going in our favour could have put us above them. It is not beyond the bounds of possibility that depending on the additional players brought in to strengthen both teams, we could finish above them next season for the first time. It could transpire that by mid season we are hailing Clyne's replacement as yet another inspired bit of business by the club, the Liverpool fans moaning about how they have been done over by us yet again. Who knows?

I quoted Dig Dig's opinion that buy early and the players would be bored of Ocean Village and the novelty of seeing their first New Forest Pony and continued in a similar vein, i.e. putting forward an opinion to deliberately go against the historic flatulence that starts to appear when we haven't signed anybody by a certain stage in the Summer break. Whereas I'm very happy that we get in replacements early for those who will most certainly leave and also as additional cover for our European adventure, there is some basis to accept that the point I made is a reasonable argument. Yes, there is the likelihood that other clubs will believe we could pay more for their players having received inflated prices for those we sold, but then again, most of last season's signings were quite late in the day. Ultimately, the price paid for a player is determined by supply and demand and if we are still short of players before the window closes, the price would often rise. But equally if there are players desperate to move to the PL, or clubs desperate to sell them because they need the money, then the point I made half in jest gains validity. I am entirely happy with how we go about things, keeping a low profile and then striking when nobody expects it. The glory clubs' laundry if washed in public by the media in an attempt to destabilise players and raise their expectations. I also think that there is some mileage in picking up some of them late on in the window if their ambitions have not been realised. Nothing wrong with that ploy, is there?

Also sign players too early and you only get to choose from the ones who aren't wanted by the bigger clubs, who are after the best available players. Wait until the big clubs have bought all their first choice players and then you can go after all the remaining good ones who have had their ambitions of playing for the glory teams thwarted and then we are the next level down in the PL. Once the glory teams are out of the equation, then the price will be lower too.

Since he's been here, he has been the consummate professional. We were lucky that he came to us when we were at our lowest ebb and he obviously had enough confidence in our ambitions to progress further than Crystal Palace eventually. As we have grown in stature, so he has grown with us. He played an integral part of that progression back up through the divisions, scoring some vital goals, in particular the winner at high-flying Brighton that led to our automatic promotion that season. Since then he has improved steadily to play a commanding role in the 2nd meanest defence in the PL and as a result of his success with us, he has achieved his ambition to play for his country. He is an exemplary captain, leading by example and playing a significant part in the spirit and cameraderie of the team, popular and well respected by his team mates. Buying him has been one of the best pieces of business the club has done during the past decade.

So can this guy. It hurts just watching him. https://www.facebook.com/JamesAlexanderEllis/videos/758523120912466/?fref=nf

You speak as if on behalf of all Southampton residents. Do all of them find his speeches grating? What about Saints fans from outside Southampton? Any thoughts on how they perceive his speeches? What is your preference for how he should sound bearing in mind his background? Plummy like Lowe?

Oops.

We have some very shallow, petty fans when we have a chairman who is heading arguably the best and most successive board in our club's history and all these individuals can choose to moan about is that he speaks with a Canadian accent and with his background in Ice Hockey, uses sporting terminology that is more in tune with the North American market. This is a board who are more open and inclusive towards the fanbase than most, are considerate towards our requests and preferences in many matters that are deemed important to us, respectful to our past, and who have appointed a manager who has brought in players producing some of the most exciting football that we have seen in recent years. We are held up as an example of how a club should be run, investing in our academy, profitable and respected by our peers, our reputation exanding around Europe and the World. I suspect that Krueger has had quite a lot to do with all this and if his accent is all that some individuals can complain about, then they ought to attempt to apply some more intelligent perspective to their opinions.

Mine too. In particular, Smalling, Jones and Evans shouldn't be allowed anywhere near an England defence, even though they do play for Man Utd.

I suspected that it had already been fixed. All modern cars since about 2003 have ECUs as their electronic brains and the info was certainly worth posting for anybody else who encounters ECU problems in the near future to bear these people in mind. Whenever an ECU fault surfaces, the main dealers are inclined to recommend new replacement parts to come from the manufacturers at great expense. Many people faced with a potential bill for around £1500, might consider that the car's current value with a faulty ECU renders it not worthwhile to do the repair and they then scrap the car. There are probably people in the trade who know of ECU repair specialists like this one, who make it a policy to buy up cars with ECU problems on the cheap, get them fixed and sell on at a healthy profit. That site identified that Honda had problems with their ECUs, as did Mercedes and many other makes. I was tipped off about these people by a friend in the motor trade. Online Mercedes forums indicate that many owners around the World do not know of people like this who repair them. There is another place in Poland, I think it was, and people in Canada, USA and Europe were sending their ECUs to them. Regarding the lifetime guarantee, I was sceptical, but they were insistent that the repaired ECU would outlast the car.

If it hasn't already been fixed, send it to these people in Derby:- http://www.ecutesting.com/honda.html They did the Transmission ECU on my Mercedes. Mercedes insisted that a replacement ECU would have to come from Stuttgart and would cost £900 + removal and fitting for about £600. In the event, these people repaired it within a couple of days of receiving it and the repair/removal/refit cost about £500. They give a lifetime guarantee. The past few thousand miles have been faultless.

I'm delighted to hear that he is continuing as Chairman. I don't know exactly what his contribution has been specifically, but suffice it to say that the club has been very well run this past year in all areas. I would go as far as to venture the opinion that we never ever been better run than we are currently.

After all this crowing by the Skate Council, it's probably a timely opportunity to remind them that Southampton has for donkey's years had a dry ski/ski-board slope. Now, they might feel that £10 represents good value for just one ride, but at the Southampton Alpine centre, it is £15 for a two hour session including equipment and whereas £35 gets you unlimited use of their slippery slope an hour before it opens, or an hour before it closes, £35 pays for unlimited use of the ski slope for a whole month. But we don't even have only the one, as there is another at Calshot. Comparisons between the prices of the rival facilities is a good indication of the difference between the financial acuity of the two City Councils. Portsmouth City Council probably haven't taken account of the fact that their water slide is a seasonal facility, whereas the Ski slope is pretty well all year round.

We have the World's biggest and most prestigious Passenger liners using us as either their home port or one of their major ports of call. They have car ferries to France & Spain

The residents of Paulsgrove can slide down Portsdown Hill on Tea Trays for free. Why would anybody pay £10 to go down the Hill in a rubber ring? I love the way that their Council Leader implies that they have stolen a march on Southampton in applying for this over-priced kiddies' playground ride. Is this a bit of bravado because Southampton was preferred as the site for IKEA?