St. Mary's

[forever a red and white]

There was an article in this month's issue in football magazine, 'When Saturday Comes' (WSC). First time I bought this magazine and have been impressed so far. They featured our game vs Brighton as game of the month but also discuss the move from the Dell to St. Maary's and talk about the atmposphere and tradtion. This gotr me thinking, how we as the fans and the club could try and make our stadium and little bit more unique, make it more special and make it feel like home again...?

 

One idea, is in the Itchen/Northam corner, where last year we had the Draper Tools triangler banner we could have one with a montage of Saints greatest players or moments, rather than empty seats.

 

Well worth a read, pick up a copy.

[Psycrow]

I buy WSC all the time. Its the only thing I regularly read cover to cover, its fantastic.

 

I had a few problems with the article though. First of all, the front cover of the magazine says "Southampton rebuild in League One". There was nothing in the article about the new owners, rebuilding, how well we're doing after the 10 point deduction, nothing. There was even a reference to Brighton being bouyant after the appointment of a new manager, nothing about Pardew's effect on Saints.

 

The writer seemed very cynical and negative, not just about Saints, but about all aspects of football. He seemed to be using Saints as a metaphor for everything that he considers is wrong in football now. Moving from the Dell to St Mary's was a sign of too much money in football and the effect of Sky on the game. It also meant that Saints were no longer a club you "had a soft spot for".

 

While a lot of these ideals are admirable, he is gone way over the top. Its not Saints fault that football took the route it did, and in order to attempt to keep up they had to advance with every other club. And, lets face it, at the end of the day the majority of that advancement was done well, until the implosion of financial mismanagement from Strachan's leaving to the end of last season.

 

He spoke of Lowe's mismanagement and seemingly embarressed staff who told him with their expressions of the embarressment of having spent money on pointless items like a Saints carpet. But no mention of the new regime and how things have changed.

 

Normally WSC's 1 match report a month is excellent reading, they don't just concentrate on the match, but on atmosphere, the clubs, their financial and political positions, the ground, the food. And maybe the only difference this month is that I am vastly more aware of the truth behind what's going on at Southampton. I don't think so though. This simply wasn't an article on Southampton being rebuilt. It centered on negativity of the past and future of a Sky controlled football. It stank of a man who went to see a team play one match, but didn't research what position they are really in, didn't realise that the result was actually a shock and didn't know enough about this club to even mention the names of the new owner and chairman. Case in point here in particular was the slating of Michael Antonio. We all know he's not the best player in the world, but he has more than pace, he just didn't particularly have it against Brighton.

 

In an article about depression in football a few pages earlier, another journalist condemns German journalists for being too harsh on a 19 year old goalkeeper. Labelling him a buffoon for making 2 mistakes that led to goals in a match. Pot. Kettle. Black. Antonio is a kid who is learning and doesn't need to read the kind of vitriol that was dished out to him in this article by a journalist who hadn't done his homework.

Edited 26 December, 2009 by Psycrow

[Spudders]

Good post Psycrow, well said.

[Ewell]

I buy WSC all the time. Its the only thing I regularly read cover to cover, its fantastic.

 

I had a few problems with the article though. First of all, the front cover of the magazine says "Southampton rebuild in League One". There was nothing in the article about the new owners, rebuilding, how well we're doing after the 10 point deduction, nothing. There was even a reference to Brighton being bouyant after the appointment of a new manager, nothing about Pardew's effect on Saints.

 

The writer seemed very cynical and negative, not just about Saints, but about all aspects of football. He seemed to be using Saints as a metaphor for everything that he considers is wrong in football now. Moving from the Dell to St Mary's was a sign of too much money in football and the effect of Sky on the game. It also meant that Saints were no longer a club you "had a soft spot for".

 

While a lot of these ideals are admirable, he is gone way over the top. Its not Saints fault that football took the route it did, and in order to attempt to keep up they had to advance with every other club. And, lets face it, at the end of the day the majority of that advancement was done well, until the implosion of financial mismanagement from Strachan's leaving to the end of last season.

 

He spoke of Lowe's mismanagement and seemingly embarressed staff who told him with their expressions of the embarressment of having spent money on pointless items like a Saints carpet. But no mention of the new regime and how things have changed.

 

Normally WSC's 1 match report a month is excellent reading, they don't just concentrate on the match, but on atmosphere, the clubs, their financial and political positions, the ground, the food. And maybe the only difference this money is that I am vastly more aware of the truth behind what's going on at Southampton. I don't think so though. This simply wasn't an article on Southampton being rebuilt. It centered on negativity of the past and future of a Sky controlled football. It stank of a man who went to see a team play one match, but didn't research what position they are really in, didn't realise that the result was actually a shock and didn't know enough about this club to even mention the names of the new owner and chairman. Case in point here in particular was the slating of Michael Antonio. We all know he's not the best player in the world, but he has more than pace, he just didn't particularly have it against Brighton.

 

In the an article about depression in football a few pages earlier, another journalist condemns German journalists for being too harsh on a 19 year old goalkeeper. Labelling him a buffoon for making 2 mistakes that led to goals in a match. Pot. Kettle. Black. Antonio is a kid who is learning and doesn't need to read the kind of vitriol that was dished out to him in this article by a journalist who hadn't done his homework.

 

I have no arguments with what you have posted but doesn't it make you wonder if they get all this wrong about us then just maybe the magazine you have been reading 'cover to cover' isn't worth buying after all? You admit yourself you have more knowledge on this particular subject and maybe fans of other clubs feel the same about articles written about them.

[Psycrow]

I have no arguments with what you have posted but doesn't it make you wonder if they get all this wrong about us then just maybe the magazine you have been reading 'cover to cover' isn't worth buying after all? You admit yourself you have more knowledge on this particular subject and maybe fans of other clubs feel the same about articles written about them.

 

I agree that this indeed is a possibility Ewell. That's what I was getting at when I mentioned that maybe I just know more about this subject.

 

However they have covered the situation at Saints in the past, during the time under Lowe, while in administration and I'm sure another article when the takeover was complete. These articles were extremely accurate and well written and I never had a problem with any of them. My problem here this time is the particular journalist.

 

Yes, fans have had problems with items they've written in the past, but every month they carry a letters page and aren't afraid to publish the opinions of fans that are in contrast to their own, nor are they afraid to have fans correct them on facts or take take critisism.

 

WSC is an excellent magazine, covering all aspects of football past and present. Everything from the politics of Argentinian football to non league english match reports. This is the first time, in Saints or non Saints related articles, that I've ever had reason to critisise.

[tpbury]

I agree, WSC is a quality read. Thr thing to do here is to swamp their mailbox, putting the record straight.

[Kenilworthy]

The comment that the author makes regarding the 'images of warfare' depicted in the walkway mural show that he made no effort to research his subject or even to view it properly. Laughably he can't even tell the difference between the cruise liner on the mural and a navy ship.

[equalizer]

I subscibe to WSC and normally it is a good read, but I felt very annoyed at this article. Like someone said there was no background work done at all, nothing about the new owners. It was just plain nit-picking imo. I have written some articles about Saints in the past that have been rejected by the editor yet that pile of **** gets printed!