Wes Tender

Everybody knows that the Lib Dems have a stranglehold on Eastleigh and have had for many, many years. Examine the results from each ward and it becomes clear that in many cases, there was potential for them to have lost some of their seats had the Conservative vote mainly, not been compromised by UKIP. What will be far more interesting, will be how the votes pan out in terms of MEPS in the area, particularly because of PR. And of course, it is useful to remind you that in the Parliamentary Bye-election in Eastleigh, had their campaign had another couple of days, UKIP would probably have beaten the Lib-Dem candidate. Who is to say that in a General Election, that the Tory and Labour vote might not vote tactically to unseat the Lib-Dem MP? Borough Councillors are small fry and a very reasonable case could be made that all local Councillors would be Independent in an ideal World. The bigger picure in terms of the Political landscape is the MPs and MEPs

You are capable of seeing this from the perspective that the thread is supposed to be about the European Elections, the results for which won't be available until Sunday. Others seem to think that they can draw conclusions about the prospective performances of the parties in a General Election to be held next year, based on a low turnout vote with only the results of the Borough Council results as a basis for their conclusions. That position leads one to conclude that they are either extremely naive, or not really capable of thinking their position through intelligently. Exactly. I doubt for one second that even if the three traditional parties are dismissing UKIP's results in the Borough Council Elections in the media as poorer than they expected, I suspect that they are privately crapping themselves over the European Elections and the implications of those results on the public perception over whether UKIP are to be taken seriously as potential rivals to the established order.

What do you mean, nothing's changed? Do you know what the outcome is in the European Elections? I refer you to the thread's title

It's a bit pointless looking at the Borough Council results and drawing conclusions as to how UKIP will perform in the European Elections, the results of which we will not know until Sunday. Many friends of mine have done exactly what I have and voted UKIP in the Europeans and for their favoured party in the locals. I suspect that they will also therefore be voting for one of the three traditional mainstream parties in the General Election, although undoubtedly UKIP can reasonably claim to have joined the other three as a major political force and an effective option for a protest vote in marginal seats. This should serve as a bitter lesson in particular for Cameron, who if he had held a referendum on European membership during this term, would have taken the rug from under UKIP's feet. As it stands, the electorate are fed-up with broken promises from the main parties and will almost certainly have given them a good kicking in these European MEP elections. With the success of UKIP's rise behind them, the main parties must be running scared as to how their votes will pan out in the General Election. In my opinion the Conservatives will look pretty weak guaranteeing a referendum in 2017, which could be a year or even two years after the General Election and the electorate will not believe that they will keep their promise, as they might use a hung Parliament as an excuse yet again. The other parties might also have to revue what their manifestos say about the referendum and their position on it in light of UKIP's success. Even when the referendum is eventually held, it is not as clear cut as voting to stay in or leave. I suspect that the majority vote would be to stay in Europe solely on a trade basis and nothing more, i.e, a return to the Common Market and nothing else that had been agreed in subsequent treaties that turned it into the EU. As such, that scenario ought to be offered as a third choice in the referendum.

I agree entirely. Once it was said that the incoming board had inherited a difficult financial position, the vultures started circling, sensing that they could have the choice of pickings from our star players. Had that statement seen the light of day from within the club with Cortese still in charge, the responsible individual would no doubt be looking for a job elsewhere. The damage has now been done, but it would be nice to believe that a valuable lesson has been learned and that somebody with a bit more PR skill will prevent such a faux pas ever occurring again.

I don't think that you're far wide of the mark there; apart from the last line, which wasn't at all necessary.

I'll be voting UKIP in the Europeans, specifically because the other parties have promised a referendum on Europe for the past several years and broke their promises. They need a damned good kick up their backsides. The Conservatives could and should have held a referendum this Parliament and used the pact with the Lib Dems to avoid one. I'll be delighted that the Lib Dems in particular will get stuffed in the Euros. I'll be voting Conservative in the locals

Two youth team coaches depart and even before their replacements have been named, it is already heralded as a disaster by certain sections of the media. The club is in meltdown, they proclaim. Dodd and Williams were the best two youth coaches in the business. Why, look at how they brought through such players as Shaw, Chambers, Reed, Ward-Prowse and even Lallana, (who was already established when they were appointed). They are irreplaceable, Cortese would never have dismissed them; he never replaced managers or staff for anybody better, did he, because his appointees were always the best to start with. So what happens when their replacements are announced and people are impressed with them? Are we still in a state of meltdown? Will the red-top rags admit that they were a bit too hasty in making their judgements? Will a squadron of pigs take to the skies and do a victory roll? And more to the point, will those bedwetters who consistently wring their hands and wail "woe are we" ever look back at their past errors of judgement regarding the club's record since Markus Liebherr took over and admit that once again they have looked a bit of a tw*t for jumping to conclusions based on hearsay, rumours and innuendo? I won't be holding my breath.

The article in the Mail is really quite hysterical. Do they actually have proof that Shaw and Lallana will be off at the end of the World Cup? What happened to the reports that it was a certainty that they would be sold before the World Cup? Surely such reliable sources couldn't have got that wrong? As for the club being in meltdown, they really shouldn't indulge in such hyperbole, unless they want to be seen for the shallow idiots that they probably are. Not a word to justify their conclusions, so it just comes across as verbal diarrhea, or that they have an agenda against us.

Surely the two posters most likely to incite anything have been banned, thank goodness. And may I say how pleasant these recent threads have been without them. But if we are seeking the one with the most insight into the situations listed, here is my stab at it:- (1) Yes (2) Foreign (3) One (4) Three

When I said this sort of thing, I was taken to task for it, but you two seem to have got away with it.

It would be lovely to believe the statements the club issued recently at face value and that it all came to pass; that we not only kept our manager, but also all of the players who have been the subject of this mass hysteria drummed up by the media. I will laugh like a drain, seeing the media with egg all over their faces. Like most who have expessed the opinion that they are happy that the club has on more than one occasion expressed their desire to keep those players and our manager, I am also content at the way that they have dealt with it all so far. There are two sides to everything like this and it would be nice to believe that despite all the noise coming from the media which is based on innuendo, rumour, hearsay, it could all be proven to be nonsense. We will just have to wait and see. But I hold out hope that it would be naive to sell players before they have competed in the World Cup after which their value will almost certainly increase, so perhaps that will give us some breathing space to allow the dust to settle.

P.S Fry. That is the last I have to say to you on the matter.

Have I ever said that anybody from the club stated that they need to balance the books? No, I haven't. So I'll just pompously demand that you show me where I said that, just so as not to disappoint you. What your feeble brain probably misread and misunderstood, was me saying this:- Did that penetrate your cranium? As for the other bit, show me where I have ever said that Liverpool, Chelsea, Man United, Arsenal, Bayern Munich, Real Madrid or anybody else would be prevented from bidding for any of our players because of our chairman. You must be thinking of somebody else. Do keep up Fry. As usual, you're probably being deliberately thick. just. to. be. obtuse; in WUM mode.

I've explained it in as simple terms as I can manage. If it is still too complicated for you to understand, then I'm afraid that I really can't be bothered to make the effort to explain it again just for your benefit.

Again, I'm grateful to you for clarifying what Rory intended to mean but did not say.

Firstly, put me firmly in the camp of the dinlos for generally appreciating the article, with the few reservations I mentioned. I note that in your opinion, which you are entitled to express, that you feel that the media frenzy about the offers for Shaw, Lallana and others, has nothing at all to do with the statement issued by our FD that the financial situation at the club was a matter for concern. That rather flies in the face of the articles written by the journos that mention our financial situation as a reason why Southampton need to sell our star players to balance then books then, doesn't it? Although you appear to have missed it, I did mention that clubs will covet our star players and wish to buy them, so it is not anything surprising that offers have come in for those two players and others. Any player is worth only what somebody is prepared to pay for them. When several minted clubs are after those players, then the laws of supply and demand dictate that the price will rise. As already mentioned, their value will also almost certainly be higher after the World Cup. If we have no need to sell them, indeed if we have a positive desire to keep them, then it also follows that it would require a very inflated price to secure them. The cost of replacing them is also a factor that we will consider. But I note that you believe that I am not entitled to pass comment on the figures reported in the media as to whether in my opinion the sums are acceptable or not. And I thought that the essence of a forum was to exchange opinions about this sort of thing.

Thanks for clarifying that on behalf of Rory. I did realise that we did not pay a fee for them, although if we are being pedantic about it, whoever buys Lallana will have to pay a fee to Bournemouth. But Rory's assertion that the players cost nothing is factually incorrect, as we did spend time and money on their development over several years. Why is that concept hard to grasp?

So the players cost us nothing, eh? We spent nothing on developing them since they arrived here at a very tender age? Nothing in pay when they starting playing in the first team? At the height of their value? Don't be an idiot, Rory. You might as well have stated that we sold Bale at the height of his value too. Even in the short term, both players are likely to be worth more even at the conclusion of the World Cup than they are now.

The reason why the vultures circled around the club and why these offers have streamed in for half our squad and our manager has little to do with us being seen as open for business. It is purely because our financial director naively and rather stupidly put it in the public domain that the financial situation was a cause for concern. This article at least says that the club have no need to sell the players if we do not wish to do so, but pretty well every other article in the media states that players will need to be sold to balance the books. Yes, it is natural that top clubs will covet our star players and attempt to buy them, but had we not released that statement, we would not have had the ridiculously low amounts offered for them and the incessant repetition of the stories assuming that just because Man Utd, Liverpool, Chelski etc want to buy our players, we will roll over and accept their paltry offers with gratitude. Even now, a press release saying that our financial situation causes us no worries and we do not wish to sell any of those players who are the subject of current speculation, would go a long way towards offsetting the press speculation and reassuring the fanbase too.

:lol:

As you say, it was very naive. But I don't believe that the problems are with the fans not being able to cope with it. As as been proven, the problem is with the journos putting their spin on it and generally sh*t -stirring. Virtually every story has mentioned our financial situation as the reason that we will be forced to sell off the family silver, whereas laughably we have significantly lower debt levels than most other Premiership clubs, especially these big clubs who reckon that they can therefore offer derisory amounts for our players. Quite what the point of it was, I don't know. The result has been very retrograde from a PR perspective.

I have to agree. The way that they spoke about financial difficulties has indeed led to vultures circling, in the form of other clubs reckoning that we will be forced to accept their pathetically devalued offers for our star players in our efforts to balance the books. If there is not the pressing necessity to bend over and take it up the arse, then they should come out and say so and hopefully they have learned a valuable lesson and will keep their counsel for the next time, a la Cortese.

Yes, it is bizarre, isn't it? On the other side of the coin, it is these facilities and our ethos regarding the academy that has produced the likes of Bale, Walcott, the Ox and the current batch of Shaw, Chambers, Reed and many others. The future academy stars will not only be attracted to us because of the success of those mentioned, but also the fact that the training facilities we have are second to none elsewhere. And if also bizarrely the cost of the training ground did drag us down to the extent that KL had to sell the club, then of course the training ground would set us apart as an asset from most other similar sized clubs. That and Jackson's Farm, of course.

It's still a valuable asset for anybody wanting to buy the club though, isn't it? Therefore it is an asset to the club. It certainly isn't a liability unless you mean that the overun on expenditure on it added to the financial liability. But even then, one assumes that additional value was added to the training ground because of the extra expenditure rather than the cost being wrong by a factor of two.