Wes Tender

So the fact that he's been injury prone recently and consequently short of a yard of pace is a total irrelevance then? As stated, he's not currently in the Spurs first choice, so no need to get sarky suggesting that I think that only somebody of Pique's or Ramos' quality would do.

Spot on apart from the glaring inconsistency of this:- Presumably those ones weren't big games in your opinion.

Recently injury prone and lacking the extra yard of pace as a result. He might well be better than our current lot, but that is not to say that we couldn't do better than him, is it? He's hardly made their starting line-up this season, so not currently deemed good enough for Spurs.

Liquidation is my preferred option, but failing that I would wish for the fans' takeover as it offers the most potential for comedy value.

I hope that he's playing against us, as I don't rate him. Neither does my glory hunter Spurs fan brother-in-law.

The first goal came as a result of the ref awarding a foul against Carroll which was never a foul in a million years. And then it went downhill from there on.

Yes. And who knows; Davis might even have saved the penalty.

Thank God then that you're never likely to be writing any historical literature regarding Saint's managers, as it wasn't that difficult to dismiss your opinion about us being lucky that we played Coventry for our last game last season. A major requirement for anybody wishing to be taken seriously as a historian, is the ability to have an overall perspective for the relevant period. Unless Adkins is sacked almost right away, the perspective of him as a Premiership manager will be a period much longer than 8 matches and I suspect that when comparing him with those others you bracket him with, account will also be taken of the two successive promotions in his CV with us, which wasn't achieved by them. Presumably from your perspective, he's a better Premiership manager than Redknapp, until such times as he gets us relegated.

Pardon me, but I don't put West Ham in the fairly solid 6 and God knows what Villa are doing in that bunch too. We'll end the season above West Ham and Villa, so wherever you put them, we'll be above there.

So Coventry didn't have their pride to play for then? They didn't have anything resting on the result, so could play without inhibitions, could they not? And I just love these speculative opinions. The fixture list is published at the beginning of the season and the run in at the end of last season meant that we were where we were having played all your so-called stronger teams earlier. No doubt if somebody dared to suggest that had we started this season not having had to play three of the top teams within the first 4 matches that we would have been mid-table, they would be told to stop spouting nonsense. So stop spouting nonsense about our last match last season. And your argument about us invariably coming off second best against the big teams is also rubbish too, as we took 4 points off West Ham, beat Brighton 3-0, took 4 points off Birmingham, 6 off Leeds, etc. One could equally make a case that we tended in typical Saints fashion to play reasonably well against the decent teams and throw it away against the bottom teams.

I seem to recall that in the opinion of one of our most respected and knowledgeable posters that players are like supermarket workers, who will switch jobs for an extra £ an hour. If we pay enough, we will get the players we want. In any event, no team is a relegation certainty in early January. Players of the quality we need in defence ought to have enough belief in themselves that they could make the difference anyway.

Yes, you were at the game and therefore didn't have the advantage of slow motion or freeze-frame afforded by the telly. And I don't believe that we are often guilty of that cynical gamesmanship that West Ham employ as a tactic. Perhaps we ought to bring it into our game too

After West Ham had gone two up and Lallana had scored, there was some pretty cynical play from West Ham. Radio Solent commented after one such incident that a West Ham player "had done a job" on our player. I have a strong feeling that managers like fat Sam actually coach their teams to gain an advantage by cynical and unfair practices, gamesmanship in the form of trying to get rival players sent off, or diving.

I wouldn't go as far as to jump to that conclusion. And it should have been defended better. Equally no West Ham player attacked it better than we defended it and the goalkeeper should have done better. But when it was the first goal, it is impossible to predict what would have followed had they not have scored from it. As a matter of interest, do you disagree that it should not have been a free kick?

I've looked at the so-called free kick several times and it shouldn't have been given. Hoiveld challenged Carroll fairly for the ball, but for a big lump, Carroll goes down easily. As the OP says, it wasn't questioned by the pundits for some reason

I consider myself put in my place by the forum's major intellectual poster. In just your four last words, you have given the definitive response that brooks no argument. Any further debate on this subject regarding the actions of the thug should now be considered to be superfluous, as any other contributor has been directed that they ought to be debating the reaction of the victim.

Only on this board could a goalkeeper be assaulted by a rival's fan and the debate ends up focussing on the reaction of the goalkeeper.

Do I recall correctly that Corporate Ho boasted that he had infiltrated this forum under an assumed name? And wasn't the Toy man from Berkshire too?

He has posted in the past if memory serves correctly, that the club wouldn't be interested in comments on a "mong" board. (Or was that CB Fry? Difficult to separate the comments of the Chuckle Brothers). Then in the next breath, he states that he can't reveal sources within the club in case it results in them suffering disciplinary action. I wonder which opinion is the correct one. Anyway, catching up on this thread reveals that it has expanded somewhat on whether Cortese is a nice person or not, into the realms of the club's prowess in providing Corporate Hospitality and the quality (or lack of it) of the beer. Wait long enough and it will also cover every other minute facet of the club, with comparisons of our other historical chairmens' perfomances and how indeed other clubs chairmen stack up against our Nicola.

Happy Birthday Dubai Phil

I'd certainly like to congratulate Beech and all the Trust members for all their efforts that have brought about this exciting news. Without a doubt this is the best case scenario to bring the most entertainment value to all of us, apart from Trev choosing that Joe Cala lunatic to take them on. If it comes about, I'll look forward to the litigation that Chinny is bound to commence, the collection of the pledges, the arrangement of the Trust hierarchy with too many chiefs and not enough Indians and the accompanying ego wars to come, to start off with.

What the f*ck can they find to say that takes up a full page spread, when Peach started it all originally in a titchy little tweet? Judging by the responses on here, if they think that raking over old coals (with as little substance as there is here) will sell them extra copy, then they are deluded.

Prat? Just a guess.

Come on then; give us a list of potential candidates and then explain to us the reasons that the Liebherr family would prefer to deal with any of them rather than with Cortese. Stick to what you know; whinging about the shirts not having the traditional stripes.

God, you're becoming a bore. It isn't exactly a startling revelation, is it, that they don't see eye to eye. So either bring something new to the table, something we didn't know, or stop sh*t-stirring.