Wes Tender

Cortese started out badly with his media connections and gradually learned how to handle them better. Towards the end of his tenure, he had cultivated a few chosen journalists that he gave the time of day to, in return for them writing glowing articles about him, praising his meticulous attention to detail when it came to preparation before a match, the mattresses, hotel room cleaning, their own chef, etc. It made good copy, a Club Chairman who was a control freak. When he left under a cloud, no doubt it also made good copy, possibly aided and abetted by Cortese, for them to portray us as a club in crisis. After all, Pochettino had already been used as a pawn in Cortese's earlier spat with KL and had not unnaturally muttered platitudes in support of the man who gave him his chance of managing us. So what made the better scoop? A club in crisis, rudderless without the ambitious chairman who had brought about its meteoric rise through the divisions and who harboured dreams of us playing in the Champion's League, the owner wanting to sell, the dynamic young manager following him out of the door and the best players leaving as a result? Or business as usual? The journalists have had their little feeding frenzy, but the manager didn't leave, the owner made the right noises about business as usual, the players are still all here and apparently happy to remain here for the forseeable future. Now the journos have another angle that excites them; the arrival of a top coach from a different sport to take over as chairman and they can happily resurrect the parallels when SCW came to us and speculate about how it may become the disaster that befell us that last time. The way that things have panned out with us in the media has much more to do with how journalists favour doom and gloom copy than it has to do with Cortese being media savvy.

As the OP is cherry-picking one line from the long interview that Ralph Krueger gave and putting his own spin on it, why couldn't his opinion have been posted on the original thread? Are we to have the whole interview dissected and separate threads started for every little nuance? Typical of this place and those posters that have to have their "look at me" moments.

What a contrast Ralph Krueger is to Nicola Cortese. Cortese kept his own counsel, was undoubtedly a man driven by single-minded ambition and a perfectionist down to the smallest detail. But he was aloof and came across as one who didn't suffer fools gladly, seemingly lacking in warmth and humility and generally a difficult man to have much affection for. Krueger, just on the strength of this one interview is a very good communicator with the common touch, somebody whom one immediately feels an affinity with, approachable and self-assured. His vision for the club is probably equally as focussed as Cortese's, but he is going to make the journey much more enjoyable for us, because he is going to include us, the fans in his plans. Cortese was the hard-nosed banker, with the personna that went with it. Krueger is a team player because his whole career has been based in the Sports arena, therefore he has developed leadership skills that rely on earning the respect of the team players and he also realises the importance of the fans to the success of the team. Although from a different sporting discipline, the principles remain the same. In all my years of supporting Saints, I have never experienced a Chairman who promises so much for our future success, so eloquently and openly. It is also very encouraging to hear that Katherina Liebherr is so involved and in it for the long term, if the inferences from this interview are to be believed.

Little Ernest Spencer (who calls their kids Ernest nowadays?), 8 years old and from Emsworth, enjoyed his run out as the Skate Mascot for their match against the mighty Burton Albion last night. Invited back onto the Chris Evans Breakfast show to tell him how it had all gone, there was disappointment in his voice when he revealed that the score had been 0-0. But on the plus side, he was upgraded and not only had a free tour of the ancient crumbling edifice they call a stadium, but he was given all the players' signatures, presumably a piece of paper with eleven crosses on it. This is undoubtedly an experience that will see him indoctrinated as a true Skate fan for the rest of his life, or at least as long as the club manages to survive, which might not see him into his teens. And when Chris asked him to mark his experience out of ten, in true Skate maffs style, he gave 1000 out of 10, the other side of the coin to when the Skates owe anybody money and pay 1000th.

On the Chris Evans breakfast show on the radio this morning, he had his usual spot where he interviews kids about what they will be doing today for the first time. This morning's nipper said that he was going to be the Pompey mascot in their match against Burton Albion. He will come back onto the radio tomorrow to tell Chris how it all went. I do hope that the mighty giant killers will turn over the Skates

I think that this current team stands comparison against the 2002/3 team. I'd have Niemi over Boruc, but in most other positions it is much harder to call. I'd take Shaw over Bridge and Chambers/Clyne over Baird/Dodd/Telfer. I'd put Fonte/Lovren on a par with Claus/Killer. Our current midfield beats the 2002/3 one in my opinion. There wasn't a player then that was as good as Lallana, although Fernandes had the skill, but was frustrating. Anders v Schneiderlin is a tough call, but this midfield works better as a unit than the former one in my opinion. Up front, a Beattie/Pahars combination would be hard to beat, but Beattie had his barren spells and Pahars didn't feature that much then because of injury and only scored one goal. Ormerod ran around a lot but didn't contribute much to the scoring. Marsden was a good leader and was good with Bridges overlapping up the left flank, but then Shaw gets forward in the same way as do the right flank via Chambers/Clyne. Fringe players like Tessem, Williams, Higginbotham, are certainly not better than the players we have as back up now. I think that this team would beat the 2002/3 team, as they are a more complete unit with probably the best team spirit I've seen.

The second game in a row where Wanyama comes on for Cork and we lose the dominance and impetus that we had in midfield in the first half. How many times did Wanyama give the ball away? It sounded like quite a few. Thank God we weren't punished for it. But an ugly win, three points and a clean sheet isn't to be sniffed at.

I think that the parents of pupils from a minority cultural or religious group ought to have the right to send their children to schools that reflect those cultural and religious beliefs. Therefore there should be provision for schools for white children whose families follow Church of England Christianity. They should be allowed to dress in a school uniform that exposes their faces, take part in sports in mixed sex classes, celebrate Christian festivals such as Christmas by having Nativity plays, etc. Wherever possible, in order to promote this ethos, the head teachers should also have been born in the UK and be Church of England Christians.

Thirded. If you have Channon and Paine there, why wouldn't Big Ron be up there too? If Lallana stays with us like Le Tiss did, then yes, include him too in a few years.

Stroke of tactical genius that. Having substituted hard-working, hard tackling midfield dynamo Davis with the quixotic Ramirez, who blows hot and cold so you never know which one you will get on any particular day, he then had to replace the other hard-working, hard tackling midfield dynamo Cork, with the unfit, overweight lumbering midfielder Wanyama. So then Liverpool began to gradually win the midfield battles that they had been losing, found the space for their passing game and we in turn gave up after their second goal, two of our most spirited, never say die players having been substituted. Nice one Poch.

*yawn*. Empty vessel, BooHoo, etc.

It's a bit rich you of all people thinking for one moment that you speak for "the rest of us".

Careful what you say. He used to be a glazier and doesn't take well to smears.

I agree completely, but it does answer the assertion that we are not up to spending money on a quality striker. We'll just have to be a bit more careful next time and get one who does want to play with us and who is not a disruptive influence. Pochettino obviously thought that he could control Osvaldo, but it seems that Osvaldo merely intended to use us as a stepping stone to a top Italian club, knowing that Roma wouldn't sell him to a rival. Lovren arrived under a bit of a cloud from his last club and has turned out really well and there have been other players who leave clubs under a shadow and then become very good players elsewhere without making waves amongst their team mates.

Cork was a bit less effective when Davis went off and was replaced by Ramirez. I don't know whether Davis was carrying a knock, or whether it was just tactical, but I knew when it happened that we would lose control of the midfield and so it proved. If it was a tactical thing, then Pochettino's credentials really need a good hard look at. Until Wanyama slims down and sharpens up, he will be a liability to our style of play.

We bought a quality striker, Italy's number 9. Shame though that he is only good at playing in Italy.

Shakespeare sums up nicely what CB Fry represents on this forum:-

Having watched Match of the Day, it is clear that we should have had a stonewall penalty where their defender changed his direction to deliberatley barge Lallana off the ball in the box. Then Liverpool should not have had a penalty against Fonte. He had put his foot down having attemtped to get the ball from Suarez and Suarez seeing his leg planted there, deliberately chose to run onto it. Fonte did not move his leg to trip him. But this is what the cheating, diving bastard does to perfection nowadays. He has honed his skills and perfected them and now he can con most referees with his play-acting. But I am still left wondering why the team that outplayed Liverpool in the first half was far less effective when Cork and Davis are replaced by Wanyama and Ramirez, who were a waste of space today. And I still think that the team's performance in the last 20 minutes deserves them getting a bloody good rollicking with a couple of exceptions.

We shaded the first half and any neutral watching on the box would have thought we were the better team. Liverpool scored very much against the run of play, from a bit of luck that put the ball in Suarez's path and through on goal. Apart from that, we ran the midfield, pressed high, mobbed their players when they had the ball, hassled them into mistake after mistake and had we had strikers of the calibre of theirs, we could have been ahead at half-time and worth the lead. When we started the second half, for a few short minutes we continued where we left off and I thought that we would draw level within 15 minutes and have a chance of going on to win. But Davis had been replaced in midfield by Ramirez and it soon became apparent that without him, we gradually became overan in midfield, stopped closing them down, lost the 50/50 battles and started to become sloppy in our passing. Now, I don't know whether Davis was injured or whether the change was tactical. If the latter, then Pochettino screwed up. A last throw of the dice, introducing Wanyama for Cork and Gallagher for Lambert and we became totally toothless and a shadow of the team of the first half. Most other teams would have thrown bodies into the box, applying pressure right up the whistle, but we seemed happy to pass the ball sideways and backwards in our own half, a totally busted flush without ambition or desire. Wanyama is about two stone overweight, ponderous in his movement and giving the ball away freely. Cork is for the moment the much better player. Wanyama did do something positive, by scything into that diving, cheating dago, and it was entertaining watching the theatrical way that he hobbled about the pitch afterwards, surely his career ended. But of course, it was only play acting and when Liverpool made their substitution, I was positive that it must be Suarez who would go off. But no, it wasn't. Liverpool must know that Suarez is never injured as much as he appears to be. In some ways it is a shame that Wanyama wasn't on from the start and could have given the diving cheat a tackle that actually did some real damage to him. I'm afraid that I'm another one who thinks that the team isn't motivated enough since our departure from the Cup and our defeat by West Ham and that their heads went down after Liverpool's second goal. If they don't get a result from the next two matches, this is going to look very much like Pochettino's end of season last year, when we limped to the end. I wonder whether this Ice skating bloke can have an impact in motivating the players, because frankly that last 25 minutes or so were absolutely dire and the players deserve a kick up the arse for it. Credit where it is due, to Shaw, Chambers, Lallana, Cork, Davis and Fonte and Lovren just a little behind. Brickbats to Lambert, Wanyama, Ramirez and Rodriguez for general ineffectiveness and wastefulness.

I thought that he had played too, but went by Soccerbase, who obviously got it wrong. Liverpool: S Mignolet, K Toure, D Agger (J Enrique, 57), M Skrtel (Luis Alberto, 72), M Sakho, S Gerrard, I Aspas (R Sterling, 45), Lucas, V Moses, J Henderson, D Sturridge Subs not used: M Kelly, J Ibe, B Jones, A Wisdom Southampton: A Boruc, L Shaw, D Lovren, J Fonte, N Clyne yellow card, P Osvaldo, A Lallana (J Ward-Prowse, 76), M Schneiderlin, J Rodriguez (J Cork, 89), V Wanyama, R Lambert (S Davis, 66) Subs not used: G Ramirez, C Chambers, K Davis, J Hooiveld Referee:Neil Swarbrick. Attendance:44755. Stadium:Anfield

Apparently not. Suarez didn't play. Was he still on his ban? They are much more of a threat when he plays together with Sturridge.

He was probably bullied at school and this is his way to make himself feel good about himself. I don't need to place him on ignore, as he is the fount of so much amusement, the very personification of Mr. Angry. And here is yet another perfect example of him reading into a response what he wants to, to enforce some feeble argument of his:- CB Fry Wes Tender: Apparently in his mind what I said above means exactly the same as what he said. :lol: (just to annoy CB's bosom buddy)

I appreciate that you have a short attention span, but that doesn't mean that Frank has to precis down his thoughts just so that you can grasp it; I expect that most others are fine with it. If he bores you, don't read his posts. Achievements so far since ML and Cortese arrived are perfectly valid reasons for some to have raised expectations of future accomplishments, to harbour dreams of greater things. Most talk cautiously of the possible, rather than the probable. And you state that Frank doesn't do nuance and then christen him Captain Nuance. Or is that you trying to be ironic, duckie?

Frank has a far better record of saying something intelligent than you. He's always capable of debating a point rationally and with consideration towards others and has the humility to admit that he will be happy to hold his hands up if proven wrong. You're the master of looking down your nose at other posters who hold opinions that don't align with yours and usually have to twist those opinions in a vain attempt to make them look stupid and make you look clever by default. We have a prime example right here:- As far as I'm aware, nobody has concluded that because NC had delivered the progress that he had so far, that it would follow that he would have got us into the Champions League, although it was his ambition. What Frank actually said was An intelligent reader of that post would have picked up the nuances implied by words and phrases such as "one could be forgiven for thinking", "he might" "even though" and "probability" But I can see why they went right over your head.

What is gratifying is that he will always be recognised as a product of our academy, perhaps the greatest so far, but just one player in a long list of illustrious names over the past few decades.