Wes Tender

I agree enteirely. Some of our posters have really bad incidents of premature ejaculation.

A tale of two clubs; we're appointing somebody from Apple to do our PR, whereas I hear the Skates have approached Gerald Ratner

That was brilliant? My God, you're easily pleased. Why weren't Celtic in for Pochettino then? Or wasn't he right for their own particular strategy?

An interesting article that seems like fair comment. I concur with other opinions that it seemed that some players like Cork and even Lambert early in the season, were not flavour of the month for Pochettino. Also revealing that he was only focussed on our game rather than the threat carried by the opposition teams. The result was often that we would give the glory teams a hard game, but that the lesser teams with astute managers would pursue a strategy to nullify our high-pressing game and we would drop points to them. We took those glory teams by surprise last season, but this season they knew what to expect from us and we didn't have a plan B. It would be nice to have a manager who plays the high-pressing game, but also had the tactical nous to prepare his team to take advantage of the perceived weaknesses of our opponents and exploit them. Somebody who could close out a match when ahead and pepper the penalty area when we were behind. Somebody who managed to get players occasionally to have a shot at goal speculatively, instead of trying to pass it into the goal. One can only hope that having failed to get any improvement in Osvaldo's attitude when he came here, that Pochettino fails spectacularly to get any improvement on the handful of failures that Spurs imported for mega-bucks when they sold Bale. That would be schadenfreude enough for the chance we gave him after his poor record at Espanol, which he just threw back in our faces.

This thread really does take the biscuit for going off at half-cock. Apart from the futile nature of the poll, which calls into question the business ability of our owner who appointed the board, the whole premise of it is poorly timed. Before universally condemning the board because Pochettino got greedy and let his ambition rule his head, let's wait and see who the board bring in to replace him. Certainly Gareth Rogers is a viable target for stating that Cortese had left a difficult financial situation behind him when he left, and that caused the feeding frenzy in the media suggesting that we would have to sell the family silver, our star players, in order to balance the books. That might in turn have convinced Pochettino that he could not keep the bulk of the team together into next season. However, any player who wishes to leave, and indeed any manager, cannot be kept here against their will, as that would be counter-productive if their mind is elsewhere. The board have done just what they are able to; to ask for incredibly inflated prices for those star players, so that the bidding club have to pay through the nose, or look elsewhere. The time to get stroppy at the board, is after they have appointed a manager not deemed to be capable of taking us further, and even then he deserves times to manage the team, just as Pochettino did when he arrived as a comparative unknown. They also deserve time to prove that that manager will have their complete backing when it comes to buying the additional players required to press on upwards and to replace adequately those players who leave. The board have been here a relatively short time and deserve to have a bit of latitude given to them until such times as they can be shown to be incapable of realising their ambitions to build on the progress that has been made since the Liebherrs took us over. Considering where we started and where we are now, it is not even clear with previous precedents whether we might yet appoint a manager who does better than Pochettino. As I pointed out on another thread, I believe that the Saints Forum on Radio Solent will reappear before the start of the season and it will be clear at that stage who the new manager is and which players will consitute the team. Surely that will be the time to criticise the board if need be, or seek explanations to these events.

Had we hit a glass ceiling? We finished 8th and there was certainly potential to advance another couple of places, provided that we added two or three players to complete the squad and kept those that we already had. And if we lost the likes of Shaw, then that money received would have had to have been invested in a decent replacement. It is arguable that we might indeed have finished 6th this season had Osvaldo been the player he was thought to be, and had Boruc and Wanyama not been injured. Pochettino left for money, but also for personal glory, as he perceives that he can advance his reputation further at Spurs. It looks as if he has achieved that by being appointed their manager, but time will show that it was the wrong move, when he fails and is sacked ignominiously. Getting us to sixth would probably have been the better move for his long term prospects of moving to a bigger club and Spurs should realise that eventually he will use them as a stepping stone to better things if he succeeded there. But then again, arguably Spurs have reached their glass ceiling too, below the top four.

Nah. Can you really see a tight-fisted git like Levy paying the 25% sell on fee for Lallana?

I wouldn't mind. Especially if we had already set that in motion

Only Spanish speakers would know that.... Has he started speaking English now that he is with Spurs?

I understand that the Radio Solent forum is to be resurrected before the commencement of the new season. If the statements issued by the official site, the rumours in the media, and the appointment of the new manager doesn't satisfy some on here, that will be the time to quiz RK about the background and the club's ambitions.

Funnily enough, I'm not as disappointed at Pochettino leaving as I was when Adkins was sacked. For some reason, I'm quite optimistic that this won't work out so badly for us. We might even finish next season above Spurs. Now, that would be funny.

It isn't beyond the grounds of possibility that we could appoint a better manager than Pochettino. So here's hoping that we do just that and laugh like drains when Pochettino realises too late that Spurs is the poison chalice and that he will rue the day that he left Saints. Expectations here were moderate and he enhanced his reputation to put himself in the frame for bigger things. That reputation will probably be taking the hit that AVB's did recently, when he fails to get them into the top four this coming season.

My stance has been consistent throughout. I've said on more than one occasion that the sole purpose of UKIP was to convey a much more Euro-sceptic position than the other three parties a vehicle for disenchanted voters who felt that the other parties did not represent their views on Europe specifically. In particular, as I've also stated, their success in the Euro Elections had delivered the kick up the backsides of the three traditional main parties who have broken promises to hold a referendum on our membership over the past few governments. Historical precedent tells us that if they could weasel out of it again, they would. Now they will have to take measures to convince the electorate that they mean business on that and the other issues emanating from Brussels that have given UKIP their power base, or face the consequences at the General Election. I have also stated that had either the Brown Government or the Cameron/Clegg government held a referendum during their tenure's, then UKIP would have faded away by now. So quite how you conclude that I'm hoping that they will become long-term saviours of UK politics, I don't know. I'm a Conservative who voted tactically in the European Elections, like many others. Apart from the usefulness of bringing the European question to the forefront of British politics, they have also done a pretty useful hatchet job on the Lib-Dems, which is a bonus.

This is really going to make you look incredibly silly if it happens, isn't it?

You are talking about the last European Elections in 2009 when the political landscape was very much different to today's because we had the lame-duck Brown Labour administration. Since then, there has been the change of administration bringing the Con / Lib-Dem pact, the breaking of the election manifesto promises to hold a referendum during this Parliament, Romanian and Bulgarian immigrants allowed across our border and several other significant changes. But if you wish to consider that none of that mattered to the electorate, and that none of UKIP's success will translate into an increased vote in the General Election, then go ahead and believe it. As for the marginal seats, UKIP now represent a fourth force in British politics, at least until a referendum is held on our European membership. The potential for them to pick up seats in these marginals and for tactical voting to deny the other parties gains is significantly increased. Labout might end up with the highest number of seats, with UKIP holding the balance of power. They could then form an alliance with the Conservatives, replacing the Lib-Dems. Unless Labour gives a clear pledge to hold a referendum on Europe in their next manifesto, then they will lose ground to UKIP in their traditional heartlands, as they have in the European Elections. I very much doubt that the Conservative and Labour hierarchies are taking the same view as you, that normal service will be resumed in a General Election. I suspect that they are currently bricking it, and the Lib-Dems are facing meltdown to a smaller rump than they are now, quite possibly being overtaken as the third party.

The fact that several neo-Nazi parties made gains in Europe doesn't have much bearing on whether the UKIP vote was or wan't a mid-term protest vote against the Government over here. UKIP isn't an extremist party (much as the left-leaning establishment would like to label it as such) and those that are extremist like the BNP, did poorly over here. As you say, UKIP have certainly benefited from the three main parties attempting to demonise them, and they will benefit still further if they attempt to ignore the support that UKIP has garnered by dismissing it (as you do) as some mid-term protest vote blip. UKIP spent their entire election campaign debating the issues that concerned the voting public, not attempting to be anti-establishment. Those issues are our loss of sovereignty and unfettered immigration from the EU block, as well as the long overdue need for a referendum on our membership. I suspect that those other countries who voted for those extremist parties, did not have a more moderate equivalent like UKIP to vote for, so their votes can indeed be construed as a protest vote. They are countries that have a history of extreme revolution as a means to political change, whereas we don't, so as I say, their situation cannot be bracketed to ours in an effort to prove your point. You do the average British voter a great disservice by believing them of considering these European elections as of minor importance to them and worthy only as a vehicle to register a protest vote. That might have been the case in the past, but the situation has moved on substantially since then, with subsequent Treaties tying us ever closer to European Union without asking us through a referendum whether we want it, immigration spinning out of control and the ever increasing loss of our ability to control our own affairs, legally and financially. That the Government and opposition will be forced to make changes to their manifestos for the General Election next year as a result of this election is testament in itself to the fact that it represented much more than a protest vote which can explained away in the terms you use.

The mid-term Council elections, or bye-elections are the vehicle for people to register their protest votes. I'm surprised that you bracket the major national election poll which is the European elections to those other ones. And surely you realise the significance of votes going to a party which is Euro-sceptic in an election for MEPs? This isn't quite the same as electing people to represent you on the local council or even at County level, where even then only a proportion of seats is up for grabs. It isn't the same as the election of a small handfull of MPs in bye-elections. This is a major national election of all the seats available in the European Parliament. It isn't electing a party on a basket of policy issues from a manifesto as in a General Election, the range of issues is much narrower than that, so it is extremely unlikely that somebody would switch from say a pro-Europe to a Euro-sceptic position just to register a protest vote against the main three parties. The line that the main parties got a good kicking because it was just a mid-term protest vote is one that might suit them, but nobody with any sense believes that. The voters are not only sick of all three main parties, but fed-up with being fobbed off again and again when it comes to being denied a referendum on the several treaties that have changed our European membership from a trading alliance to membership of a European super state and the attendant loss of national sovereignty.

Well, this is the result that was the point of the original thread and all the waffle about how some posters interpreted the Borough Council reults was pretty irellevant. As predicted, UKIP have delivered the kick to the nether regions of the three traditional parties that they fully deserved for breaking their promises to hold a referendum on our European membership these past several General Elections. There is no way that those parties can put any realistically favourable spin on the results. Labour came out less badly than the others, but must still be quaking in their boots regarding the penetration of UKIP in their traditional heartlands. The Conservatives came third for the first time in a national poll. The Lib Dems were pretty well anihilated, weren't they andysaint? The boy Clegg is under intense pressure and his crass stupidity in taking on Farage has now been proven. The Greens picked up some seats because they represented a protest vote alternative to all those who couldn't bring themselves to vote UKIP. With a General Election next year, these results will concentrate the main parties' minds wonderfully on what they promise regarding a referendum and what they will say about uncontrolled mass immigration from other EU member states. OK, accepting tbat many will vote along party lines in a General Election, UKIP should not do as well as here, but many floating voters will have been encouraged to accept that their protest votes will be effective in many seats and the Lib Dems are bound to suffer again, because they had been a vehicle for protest voters fed-up with the two main parties. It is gratifying also that UKIP's success has been mirrored to quite a significant extent by Eurosceptic parties in other member states and this is a clear signal to Brussels that issues such as their immigration policies, loss of national sovereignty and the financial instability produced by the Euro are issues that might see the whole edifice enventully fall apart unless they make substantial changes. UKIP says that they will not form alliances with these other groups because of their more extremist views, but patently they can still form a formidable voting block on issues where they hold common ground.

I picked it up and posted it at 3.11pm on the other thread about the No news hysteria.

The boy Clegg argues that if we wished to bring about change to the EU, the best policy is to be a member and attempt to bring about change from within. But you reckon that Farage ought to leave his position which gives him a perfect insight into the internal machinations of the Union, in case it makes him look a hypocrite. No doubt if he had not become an MEP, it would have been easy to have levelled the charge at him that he didn't know what he was talking about, in the same way that our MPs believe that it is only they who are in a position to know the ins and outs of whatever policy change they seek to implement and arrogantly assume that we plebs are not qualified to make up our own minds. In terms of their manifesto, where you correctly identify that they exist to campaign for the UK's exit from the EU, they are effectively a one issue party and if they achieved their aim, would then fade away gently. They have no more need to have credible policies than the Lib Dems did for years and can attempt like them to be a populist party with the expectation that they would never be elected. But who knows, UKIP might find themselves hodling the balance of power in a year's time like the Lib Dems did in the last election.

They were within handful of votes of beating the Lib Dems in the Eastleigh bye-election. In the previous by-election when Eastleigh elected their first Lib-Dem MP following the death of Stephen Milligan, a certain Nigel Farage made his first attempt to stand as a candidate in Eastleigh and there are rumours that he might stand here next year. Thornton isn't a particularly good MP and tried to smear UKIP in the run up to these elections, got their facts wrong and had to apologise, so not much better with the truth than his predecessor. But you reckon that if Farage stood in Eastligh, he wouldn't beat Thornton? Your comment that you don't think UKIP will get an MP into Parliament within 50 years is sheer comedy gold, even by your usual standards.

How things change in the rumour departments of the media. All of a sudden, the Shaw is 99.99% a Man United player story, suddenly begins to change to Shaw wants to get the World Cup out of the way without any distractions, so that is apparently now on hold. Noises start to emanate from Manchester that perhaps they might keep Evra another season, which would put his nose out of joint playing second fiddle to an 18 year old kid, or Shaw's propects of bench-warming not pleasing him if Evra plays. Lallana to Liverpool was another dead cert, yet Liverpool appear to shy away from the sum we want for him, so the fans of several other clubs are getting a bit nervous because some of their players are now in the frame instead. Who knows, we might even keep our manager, now that De Boer is starting to creep into the frame as potentially the better choice for the Spuds. As the hysteria quietens down with the first division of transfer candidates, so the media move on to our second division of Schneiderlin, Lovren and now Fonte. One has to hope that they in turn will require quite inflated prices to persuade us to part with them too, so the vultures begin to identify other potential pickings elsewhere too.

I have known the political landscape in Eastleigh for over 45 years and am not that surprised that they held on to their seats. They are very well organised. What would UKIP realistically have said? "We really don't expect to win anything in Eastleigh? The Lib-Dems every Parliamentary Election, say the exact same thing; Labour cannot win in Eastleigh, it is a two horse race between (insert name of their candidate) and the Tory. They said as much in the Bye-Election and nearly lost the seat to UKIP. If they say the same thing next year, they will look ridiculous. They must be worried stiff that instead of voting along traditional party lines, a substantial number of voters might vote tactically to unseat them.

Your tiny mind doesn't seem to have realised that the point you have just made, is the point that I just made. It's those who on the basis of Borough Council elections attempt to project the UKIP vote forward to the General Election, express surprise that UKIP didn't win anything in Easleigh, believe that nothing has changed, or don't acknowledge that UKIP can now count themselves amongst the political hierarchy who you ought to aim your bile at.

I would anticipate that they would do at least as well in terms of numbers of MEPs if the European Elections was run on the FPTP system. Who can say?