Wes Tender

How much of it was physical tiredness and how much mental? It seemed to me that whilst they were ahead, there was plenty of life in them and then when BR equalised, they just almost gave up trying. There is nothing to suggest that BR's players were more fit than ours, but they had the determination to believe that if they kept at it, they would get something from the match and so it proved. It is like two long distance runners, where one is leading into the final straight, but sees a rival closing fast on him. He kicks for the line and realises that the tank is almost empty. He senses defeat and the rival sniffs the prospect of gold with a little more effort and suddenly the adrenalin gives him the extra energy to prevail. We are lacking belief and the confidence to propel us on and losing like that in the last minute will not have helped at all.

It wasn't a great surprise to find that out. It was self-evident when Lowe jettisoned all of the high-earners and tried to sell them or loan them out, or not play them because of appearance fees. Quite why he also released a perfectly competent manager and replaced him with those Dutch jokers is harder to explain. I suppose that he knew instinctively that Pearson would have told him that he was barking if he thought that we could survive the league playing just the kids. As is clear from those mentioned who dared criticise the Fuhrer's master plan like Hockaday and Webster, he wasn't very accepting of criticism. As a ruse to keep afloat, Lowe's scheme ranks equal to that down the road, where the Skates hope to survive by selling all the decent players and replacing them with mediocrities. As with them, as soon as the scheme is implemented, you just know right away that failure is inevitable.

Only when we lose or draw. But even then, the standard of refereeing in this division is dire, isn't it? Even worse than in the fizzy pop.

No, agreed. But on the other hand, referees and linesmens' decisions do have the potential to change games. What would have been the outcome had their player been sent off? I'm pretty sure that a ball was out on the right and should have been a throw in. From the resultant play in the few minutes afterwards, they equalised the second time. We ought to have had a penalty before they scored their winner. As you say, we have to get used to the poor refereeing standards in this division. If they were better, they would be refereeing in the Premiership. One hopes that over the course of a season, the poor decisions agianst us will equal out with those for us. Otherwise, the poor standards are the biggest argument for the use of video evidence, which I would love to see myself.

The ref also bottled sending off their player for that two footed tackle too. And quite where he found that 5 minutes of extra time from too...

Credit where it's due. A good summary.

Another post that has me agreeing broadly. As I said in my earlier post, why is it that we seem incapable of believing in ourselves? For much of the game we were playing awesome football, making BR look an extremely ordinary side. As soon as they scored their second equaliser, we looked certain to lose. It was almost as if we were a totally different team. We're the Jekyll and Hyde of this division.

This is close to what I thought. For large parts of the first half, we were playing very competitively, looked to be more up for it than them, passed the ball well, won virtually all the 50/50 balls and looked a class above BR. Even when they had gone in with the scores level, they came out right away and imposed themselves on the game, going ahead for a second time. For once it looked as if we might score again and again, as it looked as if BR were playing into our hands by allowing us to play passing, possession football. And then what went wrong? When they scored their second equaliser, we froze and BR's self-belief grew and grew. Towards the end, although we could have sneaked a win, increasingly it looked to be more likely that BR would snatch the win. The mistake by Kelvin that gifted them their first equaliser was dire. I hope that he doesn't do anything as bad for the rest of the season. The defence that had looked so solid, suddenly became hesitant and instead of clearing the ball quickly, they dallied on the ball. Harding had a decent game, but the others were suspect. I seriously believe that the players need to see either a sports psychiatrist or a hypnotist. Either will do. They have simply lost their self-belief and cannot sustain their game when up against it. And as an aside, when their fans had half of the Northam and in good voice, why did we allow them to play towards their fans in the second half? It is about time we changed that, isn't it?

Well, it could be that he can see it all ending in disaster and didn't wish to be associated with it on his CV. Also the possibility that he could see Hart getting the boot somewhere down the line and the new manager wishing to bring in his own backroom team with him. Either way, it involves instability and heartbreak for him and his family.

I read elsewhere some conjecture that the deal fell through because they weren't prepared to offer him a longer deal. Mind you, that is probably sensible as it is by no means certain that there is longevity in Pompey's future at the moment.

At least the bickering has been about football.

*Yawn* Things must be really slow on here if we've got around to discussing cricket on a football forum.

A reasonable question, Chez. My opinion on James goes right back to the start of the last season when Poortvliet was forced by our precarious financial position to throw James and others into the first team before he was ready. Things were exacerbated by the fact that RB was not his preferred position. Admitted that after a poorish start, he did improve until he was reasonably competent, but is that goor enough? Murty was the purchase of the good player deliberately for that position. Thomas has proven to be OK there and IMO James is third choice. Why do we have to go for third choice when we could get in an emergency loan of a dedicated RB from a division or two above? Does anybody on here that attended the Carlisle match disagree with the commentators on Radio Solent? Were they mistaken about him being skinned for pace several times by Robson? The reason I call for a loanee is not at all because I don't rate Murty, I do. But both he and Thomas are possibly more prone to injuries at this stage of their careers, so it is a reasonable precaution to have some cover for them. IMO, James is not that cover, especially as he hasn't done too badly in midfield and might be needed there as cover. P.S. Thanks for your support, GM.

This is Southampton you are talking about, isn't it? I thought that Carlisle did manage to score against us, or did I dream it? I presume they did, or we wouldn't have scored the last gasp equaliser. You reckon that he did alright on Saturday, whereas as I've stated several times, according to the match commentary I heard, he was skinned several times by Matty Robson. Whether any other player would have done better is debateable, but basically I disagree that we can hang on until Murty gets back. Even when he's overcome his injury, he will still need to get match fit and I don't think that we can take the risk of playing James there, or an injury prone Thomas there as stop-gaps. If we had pace out wide and decent cover at RB to allow wide play, Lambert would score more. The two things are not unconnected.

Yes, James might learn better positional skill eventually, but can we afford to wait until he gains that knowledge? In the meantime, managers who have studied videos of our past games this season will conclude that our right flank is our weak spot and we will suffer the consequences. Dodd and Murty are very much alike. Both of them lack the pace that they had as youngsters, but both have an extra yard in their heads. James doesn't. I'm quite happy with him in midfield, but please not at RB.

How do you know whether it was an improvement on our part, or a collapse of confidence or discipline on the part of the opposition? Who are we talking about, anyway? Hampshire, England? I don't follow cricket.

It could easily be argued that unless we play the players in their best positions, then that situation is unlikely to improve. As I asked, surely as we are not exactly cash strapped, we can now afford to bring in a decent loan signing of a dedicated RB of quality, rather than soldier on with a third choice player who isn't in his strongest position. As has been mentioned, canny rival managers will realise that we are weak down that flank and employ tactics to exploit that. Would we want that?

Do the refs and linesmen know the offside rule yet?

Personally, although James improved at RB last season, he was still a player out of position and as such a weak link. He proved that in the Carlisle match when their LB /winger Matty Robson skinned him several times. Murty was a dedicated RB and was really solid there until his injury. Thomas had been OK there, perhaps because he is a big uncompromising lump, but as both Murty and Thomas are unavailable, why do we have to make do and mend with players like James? We are a wealthy club in terms of our ownership now and do not have to play some of our team out of position as we did when we were paupers under Lowe. Why can't we get in a dedicated quality RB with ability and some pace as an emergency loan? Otherwise, the better managers will have assessed through video evidence that the right flank is our weakness and exploit it. I suspect that has already happened since Murty has been absent.

Nobody can really dispute that we do have a goalscoring problem. That is self-evident from looking at the number of goals scored during the matches played so far. We have signed the top scorer from this division and also possess a Polish International striker to play alongside him. Paterson is still a raw talent, so not fair to expect too much from him. Waigo is also an unknown talent so far, but could turn out to be the answer. So where does the problem lie if these forwards are not banging them in every week? Clearly they are not getting the service they need from the midfield. I think that there is substance in the arguments put forward by many that a couple of those players in midfield have question marks against them. It is a connundrum that a midfield of Mills, Harding, James and Schneiderlin dominated large parts of the game against Charlton, but produced little up front with Lambert alongside Lallana. Against lowly Carlisle, we didn't even appear to have that domination and although we had opportunities to have won it, equally there were occasions when Carlisle could have taken the points. Over several matches, I get the feeling that we are weak down the right flank and yesterday their nippy LB/winger Matty Robson punished James for pace more than once. We seemed to be fine when Murty was fit at RB, but shaky without him. I agree that it could be Lallana that is the difficult player to accommodate in a formation and it never seems to work playing him wide right with two strikers, Lambert and Saga. Perhaps it could be different with Waigo wide right, introducing pace to our right flank and keeping the rival LB occupied. I'm sure that Robson would not have marauded forward so readily if he risked being out of position had the ball come to Waigo. Our left flank seems less of a problem, Mills impressing often in front of Harding and forging a decent understanding. There is also Holmes coming back into contention there too. It did cross my mind that if we had a couple of nippy backs, that we could play 3-5-2, as in Harding, Jaidi and Trotton, we possess three tall and solid defenders. Whereas that might provide a solution to Lallana who could be slotted into a free role behind say Lambert and Saga, the midfield could be Mills, Schneiderlin, Hammond, Lallana, Waigo. The question would be whether Mills and Waigo could manage to track back for cover to the back three. Is it a viable solution worth trying, or a big risk that could backfire?

Read it again. The minor transgression was part of a list including convicted criminals and reformed drug addicts. The point that you have missed by a country mile is that these people will for evermore be suspected by you to be capable of further transgressions in other directions, if your train of thought was followed. In your mind, they are not capable of reform, even if they regretted their original misdemeanours. Based on that, who is the arrogant one? As for you losing your faith and trust in MLT, so what? As you say, you don't know him. It's sad that you seem totally incapable of divorcing his abilitities as a footballer from his outside private life. As we are supposed to be football supporters, most of us couldn't care a toss about the players' private lives, provided that it doesn't affect their ability on the pitch. The fact that you do not seem capable of doing that, makes you appear like some sort of train spotting anorak. Some might have had their perceptions of him as an individual dented a little, but most are capable of realising that their perception of him as a player is a totally separate issue.

Unless we wee playing Lallana as a striker, we were effectively playing Lambert as the sole striker, which for me lacks ambition. And when Waigo came on, was that as a striker, or as a wide man? From what I could gather from the commentary, their player Matty Robson was a real threat all afternoon and he is the sort of player we seem to be missing. He skinned James for pace several times and if we did indeed have 5 across midfield, then his pace got behind them time after time. It's a shame that Thomas was out, as the back four seemed much more solid with him at RB and James in midfield, although quite how Thomas would have handled Robson I don't know. Perhaps two up front would have meant that our extra goal threat would not have allowed them to be so adventurous. Was Mills injured? He seemed to be doing a great job on the LHS. OK, Holmes came on there, but not immediately, leaving me wondering why he was taken off. Seemingly, Pardew was considering replacing Jaidi with Perry, as Jaidi appeared to be tiring badly, lacking match fitness. Damned good thing he left him on! I hope that we're a bit more adventurous and play two up front on Tuesday and get some width and pace into our game too. If Lambert does not get the service and goes off the boil, team confidence could take a bad knock.

A ball back into my court, but what an easy one to put away. So your justification for concluding that MLT might have fabricated some of those names is based solely on the premise that he digressed in the matter of the betting scam and therefore he is likely to be capable of fabricating these names. So by your code, anybody who was guilty of a minor transgression in the wildness of their youth, anybody convicted of a criminal offence, any reformed drug addict, any or all of them is not allowed any latitude from you for the rest of their life. Furthermore, they will be suspected by you of being guilty of further transgressions fabricated by you as a result of their past behaviour which they might even have admitted that they regretted. The eight hours that it took me to respond? Simple. I was asleep in my bed. Surely you are intelligent enough to have figured that out for yourself.

Thanks for that, CL. Always encouraging to know from anecdotal evidence that somebody is respected in the professional circles they move in. Like most others, I had formed my own opinion of him from listening to what he had to say on the forum, but it is good to have it reinforced. So far, the board has not put a foot wrong and we are making solid progress at a steady pace. For me, the most pertinent quote from him was the recognition that although ML was the de facto owner of the club, they saw themselves as the custodians for future generations. That is very comforting and refreshing in this day and age in the modern game. I suspect that the same could be said about the early boards, who comprised the great and the good in the local community who owned those token £1 shares, but we all know that eventually they became greedy and motivated by personal gain. At least we know that somebody as wealthy as ML is more likely to be motivated by other aspects, as personal greed is unlikely to be a motive for him. It seems that both ML and Cortese both understand that a successful business is not only one that has the financial input necessary, but also one which understands the needs and desires of its paying customers. As debated many times before, this business is different from many others as a large proportion of its customers are fans, fanatics who will continue to support it regardless of price and league position within reason. Although this aspect of the business allows the owners a degree of latitude when it comes to the pricing and service offered, I feel confident that the new people will understand something that their predecessors did not; for a business to succeed and prosper, the customers need to feel valued and content. There is already some evidence following on from the forum that Cortese not only listens to the fans, but also acts promptly to address their concerns. The best businesses have some facility whereby they can meet their customers regularly and listen to what they want. I believe that should we put together some group representative of the fans, that they will be receptive to meeting us periodically and would welcome the opportunity for dialogue. Having said that, I for one believe that so far everything they have done in the way of managerial appointment and background staff, purchase of players, pricing of tickets, etc, seems to be spot on. I'm certainly both a very happy customer and fan.

Nineteen Canteen: The usual contradictory individual. What happened, Nineteen? Does a few hours sleep completely erase your brain's memory function?