Wes Tender

That is briliant.

Are you using some sort of code that needs deciphering? The difference between this article and your rumour mill ramblings, is that this is an article from a respected source, subsequently also reported on the OS, not something that was texted to you by a mate. Otherwise, I must confess that media relations and communications did need improvement, so a step in the right direction.

Agreed. There is also a recent thread titled Ramirez rumours. Quite why Barry wanted to start a new one regarding a Ramirez rumour is beyond me. Probably wanted to say "hey, look at me, my mate sent me a wind-up text". Close it mods.

I just got a text from a friend of mine too. He says that Barry Sanchez is a Skate on a wind-up.It must be true, as I trust him implicitly over such matters. He's always been right before.

Could you please post in a way that is clear to everybody what your point is? Who isn't happy? Ramirez, or you? If the latter, then understandable, as you're never happy. It is said that he has gone home to Uruguay for family reasons. But you prefer to add two and two and come up with 5, on the strength of a rumour put about by a throwaway line of his that he would be open to return to Italy at some stage in the future.

I think that we really could do with a thread in the Lounge devoted entirely to attendances and catchment areas. At this rate, it would soon catch up with the Pompey thread and potentially overtake it, as posts are added before each and every match. It will be a lot tidier than having other threads hijacked by the usal suspects the minute that somebody posts an observation on some unrelated thread that there were empty seats in the stadium.

Exactly as you say. It is all speculative bullsh*t, opinions on both sides. We were discussing Lallana, not other players. Whether he would go if we were relegated is not a certainty as far as I know.

So you dispute that the value of a player increases if several clubs might be after him? You reckon that it will always go down if a club is relegated? I don't know exactly why we took out the loan. Do you?

And even then, Dorkish is not correct in including me. I never said that we needed a 50,000 seater stadium now. He can't find a post from me saying that and yet he continuously parrots it like a stuck record, presumably hoping that if he says it often enough, people will actually believe it. Regarding the man walking on the moon, that is what is called an analogy. A bit like his analogy that players are like supermarket workers who will move jobs to a rival supermarket for an extra £ an hour. I used it to illustrate that you never say never about such things as our potential future development. I note that Adkins used the analogy of Bannister's sub four minute mile to illustrate some point regarding something else deemed to be impossible or improbable, but Dorkish doesn't appear to ridicule Adkins over it. But it is satisfying to note that other posters are getting very tired at this constant repetitive crowing from Dorkish about how clever he is to adopt his position over attendances and catchment areas, and how stupid others must be to disagree with him.

Will it? Do you know that for a fact? Do you have it from the horse's mouth that despite staying with us in the lower divisions, that Lallana will be off if we're relegated from the Premiership? His value, if we decide to sell, if he wants to leave, will be determined by how many clubs will be after him and what they are prepared to pay for him. As far as I'm aware, we do not need the money.

Well, Tajjuk systematically demolished all your points. Do you have a white flag handy?

Very sensible. As I said earlier, the value of any commodity is what somebody is prepared to pay for it. All this talk of comparisons between the value of Lallana against Jarvis is totally irrelevant except as a yardstick. Unless Newcastle offered a vastly inflated sum for him, I doubt whether we will even bother countenancing it. We don't have to sell, Lallana shows no signs of wanting to leave, Cortese probably wouldn't sell to Pardew anyway. So anybody trying to assess what he might be worth, especially when compared to what they consider to be a similar category of player, is wasting their time trying to justify their position. He's worth what somebody is prepared to pay for him and what we are prepared to accept, as VK says.

No, Dorkish is still on ignore, but people keep on quoting him. But to answer him, I bow to his superior knowledge on Prisons, as of course he has first-hand experience of them as an inmate, for football hooliganism. But inline with his reasoning about that, then most of the judiciary or the Government have not had the benefit of that experience themselves, so presumably they are not qualified to express a valid opinion on the Prison Service either. And I don't form an opinion just from what I read in newspapers, as often they have their own agendas and bias. And I wouldn't wish to form a personality or sense of humour bearing any resemblance to that of Dorkish's. That wouldn't be anything to be proud about at all.

And therein lies the weakness in your argument, as the Agents are the ones with the largest pecuniary interest in fabricating rumours. They do so to raise interest in their clients, or to ratchet up the players' values by suggesting that there is widespread interest in their players, when often there is not. It is precisely for these sorts of reasons that people are sceptical about what you admitted yourself to be "rumours". It would be quite possible to make up a "rumour" as a journalist and when questioned about it, say that you were not prepared to say from whom the information was received, so as not to jeopardise your source's identity. Undoubtedly the journos do have access to contacts in the game where they receive accurate information tip-offs, but the trouble is that unless they develop a reputation for getting them right, a giant pinch of salt is the perfect accompanyment to most of these rumours.

Au contraire. Tajjuk in running rings around Dorkish shock is more appropriate. Given your past confused ramblings in conflicting opinions in various threads recently, I detect a huge pinch of irony.

Well, I'd say that Dorkish has been comprehensively shot down in flames by Tajjuk and so the only response that Dorkish can offer is the usual childish sarcasm, as he isn't capable of sensibly debating his position further. Ultimately though, the value of any commodity is determined by what somebody is prepared to pay for it. In the case of Lallana, if we don't wish to sell him and he doesn't want to leave us, then Newcastle would only get their man by paying a stupidly overinflated price for him, an offer we couldn't refuse. Under those circumstances, it is futile to make comparisons with other players and their valuations except as a benchmark.

I was there at the end of the 73-74 season where we played Manchester United under Tommy Docherty. A 1-1 draw wasn't enough to help either side avoid relegation and we both went down together. Other notable matches were the 3-1 and 6-3 beatings of Man Utd and the game where we were losing 0-1 to Newcastle and came back to win 3-1 in the last few minutes - plus too many matches where we could have been relegated on the last day of the season. Oh, and of course the last league match at the Dell, beating Arsenal and MLT scoring the winner.

As Turkish believes that players are like supermarket workers who will go to work at another supermarket if offered an extra £1 an hour, we should be worried.

You've got more faith in human nature than me. I suspect that whereas there are many on low incomes who do budget carefully, there are also many who will spend beyond their means given half a chance. Like those pursuaded to lower their monthly debt payments by consolidating them into one larger debt and then when they find that the monthly payment has reduced substantially, (because the loan term has been massively increased), they go out and buy a car or book a holiday on the never never.

Don't stop there. Let's have your list of the top 10 items that you find cringeworthy at a football match. I'm sure that you can find another eight as there is plenty of scope beyond what they shouldn't consider funny of what they shouldn't chant. For myself, I'm a live and let live sort of bloke mostly.

Thanks for unearthing that, WG. So in your opinion, which of those applied in Clyne's tackle? Was he careless? Reckless? Used excessive force? Neither seemed to apply as far as I could see and if it happened within the box, then would Clattenburg have awarded a penalty? No, as I say, that rule opens up either discouraging defenders to tackle in case they give away free kicks or penalties, or it encourages defenders to dive to seek a free kick or penalty. Looking at our recent games, there have been numerous occasions where our players have been tripped, charged, barged, pushed, or tackled so that the player was bundled over in much the same way. And I don't recall much in the way of sympathy from the referees for our players. When we were in the third division we had some very poor refereeing and that was perhaps to be expected. But the standard of referees and linesmen in the top division often seems to be just as poor somehow.

As I posted elsewhere, I believe that I might have found him on Facebook:- https://www.facebook.com/barry.sanchez.73 In as much as one can make a judgement about somebody's personality based on their appearance, if this was him it would explain a lot.

Thanks for agreeing with me that he did get the ball first; Appy must have been watching something else. It begs the question, had the tackle been inside the box, would a penalty have been awarded? The reason I ask, is that it seems that there is one rule for outside the area and another for inside. Also, if a player is going to run the risk of a free kick having made a tackle where he clearly gets a foot to the ball first but the opponent tackled goes down, that is going to be a major factor in changing the dynamics of the game, encouraging players to take a dive. Is it just a case of the referee's interpretation of the rule, or do the rules now say that even though the defender gets the ball first, he must not bring down the attacking player in the process?

Well, having watched it on MOTD to get a much clearer view than from the Northam during the match, I'm a bit surprised that there doesn't appear to be any debate as to whether it was a free kick in the first place. Clyne clearly got to the ball first.

It's an entirely different language you speak, isn't it? I'll excuse it because your name hints at some Hispanic roots and being in Liverpool might also be a factor. Simple really; it's called identifying a trend. You can look at the first handful of matches and conclude that we're not good enough to stay in this division. But now that there has been a run of recent results that shows that we are improving and that if we continue to improve we will be OK, I would have expected you to be happy if you were a Saints fan. If it annoys you that posters are happy with the last four results, then I hope that you continue to be annoyed by them for the rest of the season.