Wes Tender

I must confess that when I saw the title of the thread, I thought that it referred to this article. http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/saints/news/8843331.Saints_in_sight_of_scoring_record/?ref=rss Now this is a pleasant change from the Echo; something positive about the Club. But seeing that the thread is all about the sloppy journalism and the sort of silly mistakes made in their articles, then yes, I agree that it has become noticeably worse over the years. Even if they did employ a proof reader, one gets the impression that it must be some spotty youth on work experience training.

I've always loved winding you up.

Well, as I only made the one remark, one incidentally that some others didn't take such umbrage too, some even agreeing with it, I thought that it was quite a mild comment. But I obviously hadn't realised that there are those on here who believe that because of what MLT did for us on the pitch, he is totally beyond criticism for what he does now that he been retired a few years. I'll be more circumspect in future. The next time that such xenophobic or racist claptrap or just puerile name-calling is aimed at Cortese, I'll just report it to the mods as inappropriate instead of retalliating.

I didn't see you castigating those who resorted to much worse abuse towards Cortese, so don't you try and stand on any moral high ground. I made my remark to see whether those who dished it out could take it back. But it came as no surprise that they couldn't. It became clear that there could be no even-handed debate when people were only too ready to slag off one side, whilst not being willing to accept any criticism of the other side.

I saw that too. Arsenal noses being put firmly out of joint because Southampton no longer have to roll over to have their tummy tickled when one of the glory clubs come knocking on our door to take away our best players. How dare we?! Well, that is all debateable, isn't it. The question has to be asked, that if we are such a poor prospect when it comes to player development, how come that we have brought on such players recently of the calibre of Bridge, Walcott, Bale, not to mention others such as Surman, Lallana, Best, Jones, etc? Our record in youth development seems at least the equal to Arsenal's. And what became of those players who left us to join the glory teams in the Premiership? It was some time before Walcott got a really sustained run out at Arsenal. Why, he had had an outing for the National team before Arsenal really gave him a chance. Bale? It also took quite a while before Twitchy realised that he was plenty good enough for a sustained run in the first team too. Surman? Whatever became of him? How many matches has he played for Wolves since he left us? So the response to Ashburton is that regardless of whether your team is playing Champion's League football, that is no guarantee that Chamberlain would be playing other than reserve football for a while, or warming their bench. Surely his apprenticeship is still being served and he will develop more quickly and keep his feet planted on the ground more readily playing first team football for us. He can hone his skills against the rough and tumble of this division, which will be much more character building than reserve team football with Arsenal.

The other thread had deteriorated into a petty slanging match because it was side-tracked into other issues and became personal. That thread was closed because it was going nowhere. So what happens next? The pettiness and personal jibes are being transferred to this thread instead.

Exactly as Southampton has done. Everybody has to pay for their seats now. No freebies, no hangers-on, no favouritism or special treatment. Everybody knows where they are. Good, isn't it?

Saw this photo of Cortese in the Daily Star http://www.dailystar.co.uk/football/view/175984/Big-guns-get-Alex-Chamberlain-rap/ Now I can see why C B Fry describes him as a swarthy beady-eyed sleazeball and Dune calls him slimey.

That's fair enough; as I have said elsewhere, criticism is a two way street. So are you saying that criticism of MLT is fair comment as a matter of opinion, (providing of course that it is constructive opinion?) Because, as you can see, there are some who would have it that just because he gave us good service as a player, he is somehow immune to criticism for his actions now that he has retired.

I submitted a comment to that article linked above, pointing out that there was more to it than meets the eye and asking who the tickets were for as MLT patently couldn't be there and in the BBC studios simultaneously. I also commented on the contributions from Slovakia, Italy and New York and suggested that it indicated that we had truly become the Manchester United of the third division. It seems that the Mail only like to publish comments from those whose opinions are in line with their agenda, as they did not publish my comment posted yesterday.

These are not FACTS. They are your opinion. And your view is that just because MLT gave good loyal service to the club for many years, that he is totally beyond criticism for anything that he does afterwards when he retires? Bizarre.

Equally of course, so-called Saints fans calling Cortese slimey might also be labelled as Pompey fans. But then you have plenty of previous in juvenile name-calling when you can't get your argument across by proper debate.

I would have liked to go to the Centenary Dinner, but this thread has demonstrated that I wouldn't enjoy it, as it will almost certainly consist of a series of snide remarks from people whom I had the greatest respect for, attacking the Club. The end result under those circumstances would be that I would lose much of that respect for them. At present, I can remember all the good things they did for the club and that is how it should remain. This debate has become hysterical because some former Club legends have been criticised for actions they have taken against the current club hierarchy and some don't like it. But they are quite happy to dish it out to those now running the club. It is a two-way street and if posters take the side of these past employees, then they must expect that some criticism comes the other way. I am content that those getting increasingly more hysterical are a select few who are gaining a history of complaint against Cortese and although they get ever more shrill, they remain a small minority. If their posts were removed from this debate, it would be considerably shortened. No doubt something else will surface either through these disgruntled ex-legends or some red-top rag and the very same people will surface again to vent their spleen.

LOL! You're a fine one to talk about being shown up. The number of times you've been demonstrably shown up is legion on here.

Why? I'm sure that he has far more important things to do with his time. I'm pretty sure that many on here have probably worked out why the players and manager have been banned from attending, if indeed they have been.

Well, just accept that pointless name-calling doesn't advance your credibility as nobody takes anybody seriously in a debate if they have to resort to such pettiness.

You don't know the facts though. You might have heard some things from various sources, but anybody with any sense doesn't accept just one side of a story as being factual without hearing the other side

Did I slag off how he played? I said that he was lazy. I'm sure that I read him admitting it himself in his autobiography. I'll apologise for the lazy remark, if you're big enough to withdraw the slimey tag you gave to Cortese. But I don't think that you're big enough to do that.

Let's not forget the context for my remark I just thought that I'd give Dune a little bit of his own medicine back. He can dish it out, but he can't take it back, so he had to resort to infantile name-calling. I have enjoyed watching Le Tiss as much as the next fan for many years. But don't think for one minute that it isn't possible to divorce feelings towards him as a player from those of him as an ex-player who is acting like a spoilt child.

What is not a fact? That Cortese did the research? That he was the one originally interested in it? That he got ML interested in it? That without Markus' money Cortese would not be here? That without Markus' money we woudn't be here? Or that some of us would prefer us to go under or still be struggling?

Really? Surely the unwashed average fan couldn't care a **** provided that we're winning games and climbing the league.

Hundreds of years? The way that technology has developed over the past half century makes me doubt that. We'll probably have something akin to Rollerball. But make no mistake about it, the ownership of the club, first by Markus Liebherr, then by his daughter/family was the biggest single event in the Club's history in my opinion. Cortese had already mentioned that he was merely the "custodian" of the Club at the first Solent Fans' Forum not long after he arrived. But there is no doubt in my mind that the family are content with the situation provided that Cortese is happy to continue running the Club his way, on their behalf. We might be the spiritual owners of the Club and as such we might well have kept some entity alive with the Saints name in the lower divisions had not ML come in and rescued us. Ultimately though, everybody realises that the business will be more successful if it is run well, providing a product that is attractive to the paying fans. That means ticket prices at a reasonable price, players that we want to watch, playing attractive match-winning football. I believe that most of those boxes are ticked. If there is anybody who is not going to attend matches because they wish to demonstrate solidarity with some ex-players/managers who have had their noses put out of joint, then I admire their principles. But they are going to miss out on a thrilling ride back to the Premiership.

So kindly point out where I have made any judgement on any particular piece published in either rag? I spoke generally and made the point that not every article written in either publication was always accurate. If that were the case, then of course they would not ever have to make any retractions, or end up in court on libel charges. Am I to take it that you believe every word printed in these publications? Because if you do, you are extremely naive.

Ah! So your comments on here detailing his shortcomings will be the place where you will demonstrate that he needs to improve himself. So how is he to improve his performance unless you are to show him the error of his ways? Or do you expect him to notice your advice from on here?

Whether an article in the Mail has any credibility or not surely depends on the source the information came from. So yes. One article could be of dubious provenance, whereas another might have some credibility. With a rag like the Mail, being selective about whether you believe everything written in there is a sensible trait. The same goes for the local rag too. Often articles in both need to be taken with a pinch of salt.