Wes Tender

I seem to recall numerous compliments going our way after our Cardiff FA Cup Final when many said that we were the best fans that they had seen there. Many similar comments after the JP Trophy final too. Mind you, that might have been the best behaved fans, something that your load of uncouth oafs might struggle to be labelled as, even if you are capable of the loudest grunts. But we're really not interested in a p*ssing contest along those lines and we are quite comfortable in the knowledge that our fan base is considerably larger than yours. Even when we were in the third division recently, we often had larger attendances than you when you were in the Premiership. That is loyal support and I'm quite convinced that a few years in wilderness will erode your hardcore support to half its current level, which is really quite shocking in itself, bearing in mind the parlous state of your finances (as usual) and the desperate need for revenue. Why, I even thought that I had read somewhere recently that you had booed one of your players.

It wasn't that West Ham were briliant, it was because Leicester were pretty poor. A lot of the time, both teams were hoofing the ball. Leicester looked as if they were knackered and West Ham weren't much quicker. It just seemed as if neither team had very good fitness levels. I just hope and pray that we do a job on Coventry and send West Ham into the play-offs, as I don't think on last night's showing that they will be good enough to go up that way.

But surely you bow to Turkish's superior knowledge of such matters. That players are like supermarket shelf-stackers who would move to another supermarket if offered an extra quid an hour. And no use arguing also that he might like it here too and that his family might be settled, or else you'll get the withering response that you'd be loopy to imagine that the extra dosh would lure him away from the cream teas in the New Forest.

So the referee got it wrong and is incompetent. We have endured worse referees in this division who have made worse errors of judgement. Granted that it is arguable that their errors appear to be less costly now, but points lost from their earlier mistakes would have made the loss on Saturday irelevant, as we would have already been promoted. But for my money, the bigger mistake that lost us the game was Fonte's stupidity in giving away an unecessary free kick in such a dangerous area, when there was a covering defender available. If it costs us promotion, I'm bracketing him together with Leon Best and the spectacular own goal he scored against us in the play-offs last time around.

He will miss the open goal more often than not even when he intends to score. He's really not that good.

I have slept on this to see whether I have another perspective on it the morning after. I don't. The three reasons for us leaving that match are 1) It was on the television, the kiss of death yet again. 2) Their player should have been sent off for a clear second foul on Lallana, who was just ready to pull the trigger with a good chance of scoring. The referee bottled it. 3) Jose Fonte. Fonte's stupidity was a major factor in us losing that match and the full implications of that are yet to be seen. If we fail to gain promotion, then there is potential for this to be seen as a defining incident. It isn't the first time that he has given away unecessary free kicks right on the edge of the box which have resulted in us being punished by a goal. When is he going to learn that sensible, intelligent and skilled defenders don't give away stupid free kicks in those sorts of areas, especially when there is another defender as cover right beside him and the attacking player was going nowhere? If it can be made clear that he has to erase this tactic from his game, then he might still have a future at this club. Otherwise, I'm afraid that we can't afford to be at the mercy of Premiership strikers with a CB who has to cheat to clear any danger. As it stands, in that match he has let down his team mates and us.

I suspect that in the event of a stadium expansion, every possible scenario will be examined by experts and I am confident that whatever we go for will be the right move. There are too many possibilities as to the alternatives available. For example, the blend between the number of seats available for corporate hospitality against those for ordinary fans has to be right. I strikes me that we have nowhere near the number of corporate boxes that we could sell each season and that is depriving us of valuable revenue. As for whether seats would have to be discounted or not, then that depends on how many we might be talking about. Certainly there are quite a few matches against the glory teams where we would sell out up to a certain ceiling number. The profitability gained from that has to weighed against the number of empty seats for those games against the unglamorous teams. Even then, accepting that there will be those empty seats, there are a few ways that they could be filled, either by a pricing system of gold/silver/bronze, or by twinning the ticket sales for glory matches with those for the unglamorous ones, to mention just two possibilities. If the redevelopment is of the current stadium, then the infrastructure allows that to be done in stages, so that the capacity could be increases in stages and continue on as demand increases.

What evidence do you have that they could not afford both? As you say, you make an assumption based on guesswork. It is all purely hypothetical too.

Polished up your cystal ball have you? Doesn't it tell you that policies to fill an enlarged stadium in the Premiership might differ from those employed during the past couple of years in the lower leagues? No? Perhaps you ought to buy a new one.

Good morning, sonny. If it appears that I am examining your backside, it is because I am fascinated by the apparent prospect that most of what you say seems to emanate from your posterior orifice. The thought did cross my mind that by responding in this way, if you were clever enough you could counter by accusing me of lowering the debate by the same sort of childish insults that you were flinging around at all those who disagreed with your edicts. But on reflection, I think that this response falls under the banner of repartee or banter. Or even trivial musings.

Frank, it is gratifying that most of the posters on here accept the sensible arguments put forward for expansion of the stadium and welcome the show of ambition by our owners that it entails. Of course, it could be that the few dissenting voices are right and the majority are wrong; but I very much doubt it. When people who put forward counter arguments and then have to attempt to belittle any dissent by petty insults, then you know that they lack maturity and feel insecure about their position. Patronising their opponents is also indicative of this too. You asked what he does for enjoyment, especially in the company of others. Well this is what he does for enjoyment in the company of others. He thinks he's winding us up, not realising that some of that is going the other way.

Quote: CB Fry: You still haven't named anybody who has suggested this, so I must assume that you cannot. And I'm not going to waste my time debating some flannel of your own making in your attempt to divert attention away from the fact that you haven't named anybody who suggested that.

1. Ah, so one poster mentioned the kids for a quid. That's a really conclusive groundswell of opinion for that idea then. 2. So you can't find any reference to anybody suggesting that the expansion of the stadium was for the purpose of making tickets cheaper for everyone (your quote), so you typically put your own form of spin on your reply to disguise your inability to respond to the question asked. Fair enough then.

I agree entirely.

Did anybody suggest "kids for a quid" anywhere in this debate? I must have missed it. Did anybody suggest the notion that the expansion of the stadium was for the pourpose of making tickets cheaper for everyone? Again, I must have missed it.

So I take it that the refusal to answer my enquiry about what qualifies you to question the financial astuteness of Cortese or the Liebherr family is probably because your qualifications would look stupid when compared against theirs. So point and laugh at you I will, until you come up with something more plausible as reasons to question their ambitions. Winding me up? I'm afraid not sonny.

Yes, you're quite right. A win or two draws, or maybe one draw will suffice. Frankly, having come this far, it doesn't bear thinking about if we were to fail now.

You mean the game at the other end of the country that is also on the telly? I'm a long term season ticket holder and won't be going. But would I go if it was a home game even on the telly, even on a weekday night? You bet I would. We're talking about attendances at home, so what has an away match got to do with it? As for the other games in the Premiership against lower placed sides, that should have phased pricing as it was last time around. Your Wigans, Boltons, etc, would be bronze games, priced accordingly. The capacity won't be to sell out the stadium at every game against the likes of them; it will be to fill it against the gold teams, where corporate hospitality will also make a killing.

The situation is the same with other industries where hotels will sell empty rooms at a heavy discount, or airlines will discount seats. In the case of the hotel industry, they anticipate making money from takings in the bar or restaurant. In terms of a Saints stadium expansion, it's really quite a simple concept, based on the economics of it having been assessed to make a reasonable profit at a certain capacity and then beyond that it is preferable to have the extra bums on seats because of the ancilliary income generated by merchandising and refreshment sales in the concourse. The general principle of attracting the youngsters to attend with their parents is also a good strategy, as they will then become the addicted fans of the future. As already mentioned elsewhere, there would be a considerable expansion of the corporate facilities, where a lot of additional revenue could be generated. I expect that the main financial genius blathering on about the possibilities of expansion, is Nicola Cortese, who would have to have the blessing of the Liebherr family. So if it comes to pointing at them, laughing and calling them nuts, then go ahead. But could you please kindly remind me what your qualifications are that enables you to laugh at a high level banker and a family whose business make billions? Because as it stands, I feel more inclined to believe them than you and your fellow naysayers.

Well, for a start, there are all the plastic fans to the east of us who will prefer to watch Premiership football at St Mary's, rather than going to Moneyfields to watch the Portsmouth Football Club (2013) Ltd playing at basement league level

Really? They sing "Oh when the Saints go marching in"? I must get my ears checked.

I'll make a note of Turkish's displeasure at this and ensure that I chant it at the Coventry match; whether there is any better reason or not, other than to cause him annoyance. I wonder whether you could oblige me with a list of what not to wear, do or sing, so that I can wear, do or sing those too?

The Skates have just brought in a couple of younsters on loan, whilst having loaned out a couple of their youngsters quite recently. Only I suspect that those brought in are more capable than those who have gone out. This is cheating and shouldn't have been allowed. The FL rules probably permitted it because those players loaned out had not played a certain number of matches at senior level, whereas I can't be arsed to check on whether those brought in fulfilled that criteria at their clubs. But looking at their Reserve/Academy squad, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portsmouth_F.C._Reserves_and_Academy, there are several players who could have played for them, had they done what we and other clubs did under similar circumstances and played the youngsters. For crissakes, there are three 18 year olds who have played for Australia at under 17 level. Sam Magri could also have been good enough if he is deemed worthy of a trial by Liverpool. The three out on loan to Poole, Totton and Frome, are all 19 year olds. Cheats, cheats, cheats.