Weston Saint

No, a half back as they were called then. No 6 on his back

Jimmy Gabrial?

It does take time before proceedings are issued. There is a civil claims protocol to follow with proceedings being the last resort. The court case manage it from then onwards. I suspect Cortese was not paying the "rent" himself. He is employed by the club (they are a limited company). If so the employers are vicariously liable for the actions of the employee. They will have a right of recovery from him if they consider his gross negligence was outside the terms of his contract. So Cortese might be right that he is not aware of any action against himself. The action will be against the club. There may have been a symbiotic relationship at the time. So if Benali had issues with Cortese actions in him home and asked him to leave the club may have considered that symbiotic relationship was at and end. I heard rumour that Benali business has since failed but I may be wrong. Maybe that smybiotic arrangement was used to prop up the business? However the relationship and business failure are just conjecture on my part

So it is. Thanks

Bill the poster is good friends with MLT or at least was so some while ago. His post was critical of MLT. He might well have had second thoughts and asked for it's removal. I did that once when I made a comment about Wilde but after Wilde contacted me to indicate it breached his privacy I asked for it to be removed and it was, beyond trace. Same here I would think

But you do not express a view on something you have not read Phil. It was aimed at those who expressed harse opinions without reading it.

There was a very interesting post on here a moment ago which has disappeared. It did not break the rules so I assume the poster had second thoughts and asked for it's removal. I will not repeat it but it concerned MLT. As the poster is or was a friend of MLT I found the post an eye opener. It shows it is not all Cortese continuing the rift

I also wonder how many on here who have expressed an opinion have read the whole article.

Duncan, thanks for drawing it to our attention. I have just read the article. I see is all as a "right to reply" He talks about the celebrations and the award. No problem with that. He expresses his sadness that the club had to ring the BBC to distance them from the event and the award. They are entitled to do that and he is entitled to comment on that call. He praises Cortese for his financial steering of the club and his ability to turn big clubs away from trying top by our best players. He wishes him well He is puzzled why the club seem to think he is against the club or Cortese. He says he is not. He hints at media turning support for Pardew into criticism of Cortese at the end of last season. The second part was not the case. I thought it was a decent article almost offering an olive branch to the club. I hope Mr Cortese reads it and gives McMenemy a call.

I have never had any concerns over the loss of the Ted Bates Trophy. It was set up at a time when there was no other tribute to Ted. We were a Premier side and it gave us a chance to test ourselves against good European teams. Since then we have an excellent tribute being the statue outside the main entrance to the ground. We have dpopped into the lower regions of the league and as a result do not have a team who can challenge the better teams in Europe. To make it meaningful the opposition would have to be a Championship team. Hardly fitting to such early aspirations. As for renaming stands I would prefer they stay as they are. That is the history of the area.

Mr Cortese gets upset very easily on anything SFC. Nick went public over his concerns that the club had changed their season ticket policy at short notice and his punishment was withdrawal of that facility for him. Cortese and the club will not go public. It was an impulsive act on the clubs behalf and it looks like they will not back down, at least not this season.

Correct

Expand?

Does he? Lowe offered him a position as an olive branch and he refused.

I have commented about Mr McMememy before with his unnecessary comments made in recent times. He is a bitter man when it comes to Saints Lowe and Cortese Chairmanship. However, putting that aside, his lifetime achievement award is well deserved. He managed us over a high point in our history and is entitles to bask in that glory. Well done big fella for what you did in that time and for your charity work. Just keep quiet, your time has passed with Saints.

Poor game, poor Saints, even poorer Carlisle. Game best forgotton. 3 points though and very welcome.

I think there is a lesson here, not to take media reports at face value particularly when they are perceived as attacks on the club and Mr Cortese. The club have maintained a policy not to respond to all the nonsense reported. They will only respond when such allegations are damaging to the club such as the report that the club was up for sale just when Mr Cortese was negotiating with a new major sponsor. I am glad Ex Saints have gone on record. I thought it strange that there was a rift when we saw so many ex players introduced at the FA cup games. I commented on a previous thread about the protagonists who appear to have a grudge and I will not repeat it here. The club are not innocent. Some of Mr Cortese’s decisions have ruffled feathers. However none have put the club at risk. We are entitled to shout when we feel a decision is wrong for us or the club BUT we must make sure we have all the facts. I do see the clubs reticence to fully communicate contributes to false rumour making but that is the consistent approach they have decided to take.

Just a reminder that it is £3 per transaction not £3 per ticket. When we bought our Cup tickets we did it as a group and only paid one £3 fee. I consider it is a shame the cost cannot be absorbed in the price of a ticket but outsourcing costs money and the fee covers that. The benefit to the club is the pressure is passed to the outsoursing company, no employment issues, no employer NI costs, no pension contributions, no employemt law problems like laying employees off. They keep a small number of employees to deal with walk up tickets and they will have other duties when not needed in that area.

Why is this a sticky? The event has sold out. If people want to comment, fine but why is it cluttering up the head of the forum?

In my opinion those outside the club spitting in know exactly what they are doing. They know one of Cortese's weak spots is his ego. The Echo Editor was in dispute with Cortese. A year into the Liehberr purchase they ran an article praising all he had done for the club. Not once did they mention Cortese's involvement. That, in my opinion, was deliberate and they knew Cortese would fume. He did of course, from accounts I have heard. This group setting up the 125 year event approached the club, I am told by an unreliable source - StuRomseySaint, and were told that the club would not endorse it as they had their own idea's on celebrating the event. The group went away and organised it, sold out within weeks, and many supports/fans are looking forward to attending. Because it is a sell out there is no need for further advertising. Why then, just before the event, is things appearing in the media. Could it be that they knew the invitations sent to the club, not to the individual homes of the invitees, would be rejected by Cortese? Was this not another opportunity to dig? Why did Banali and Le Tissier make comment on two different Sky programmes on the day of the Man Utd cup game? It was clear the question put to Benali was pre managed. Geoff Sterling, returning to Le Tissier after discussing the potential of Alex Chamberlain and whether he should stay, asked about his problems getting tickets from the club to which Le Tissier responded. Stage Managed again? I think so. I can understand that they feel they might be being excluded. It is sad to see it. BUT their actons are not going to shift Cortese nor soften his resolve. What their actions are doing, as demonstrated on this thread once again, is to divide the supporters, keeping the unacceptable face of politics alive and well and gnawing away at our future potential. It would be nice to get them in one room, knock their head together to gain consensus, and move on but there are too many egos. Too much bad blood. We, the supporters and the players we pay to watch much rise above such bickering or we are once again a dead club walking.

I have a question? When McMenemy, Le Tissier, Benali, Osman decided to organise a 125 year celebration at the Mayflower did they first approach the club to discuss the event, organising, charity or did they just look see no event organised and got on with it? Southampton Football Club have a registered Charity - Saints Foundation. As the official charity should this not normally be where the funds raised should go? McMenemy has voiced his opinion on Saints matters in the past. He was part of the political maelstrom that engulfed Saints prior to Administration. He has continued to voice his opposition to the way Cortese conducts business. Le Tissier backed the wrong horse for too long and just maybe his outbursts since on Sky etc have gone against him Benali is in dispute with Cortese and the club Mike Osman is a decent guy and a Saints supporter but is sometimes outspoken against the club and part of that political maelstrom of the past. In my opinion, this is not about the history of Southampton being celebrated. It is about political one upmanship and a way of raising money for their chosen charity, not the official Saints charity. Cortese has a part to play in this but as long as the four of them continue to voice their opinions in public it is seen as an anti Cortese campaign. Cortese runs the club, the players are contracted to the club and he is within his rights to refuse to release them for the event. The wound is festering and neither side seem to be able to apply the healing balm. What a sad state of affairs

Why are posters reacting to this story as they are? We should be proud the Mail sees us, a Div 3 club, worth £50m after what we have gone through in recent years. We should not blame dark forces. There is nothing in the article which destabilises the club or the owners. There are no quotes or attributations from sources near to..... There is no comment that the Liebherr family want to sell only that the club is seen by Middle East interests as an ideal purchase. The usual “no smoke without fire” does not apply. There is no smoke, just a newspaper commenting on our market worth. They are complimentary of our club, our supporters, and our city. Rejoice people. Would the Liebherr family sell? Well they will be aware of Marcus wishes for the club. If someone came in with £50m and could demonstrate they could take the business plan and model forward without gearing, why not. A good business profit without damaging the late Marcus’s dream will do no one any harm A simplistic and naive view maybe, but as valid as all the other comments on this thread.

Martin is very much in Adkins plans for the future, the emphasis being on future.

Schneiderlin was injured in training on Thursday and like Lallana did not travel. Do not know the extect of his injury but Lallana is very close to returning and likely to be in the mix for Carlise game

Calm down. We look like we have a lot more goals in us second half.....mind you so do Peterborough.