Village Saint

With all due respect referee or not, your friend clearly has a limited grasp of the laws of the game. For a penalty to be awarded - like it or like it not - the use of the hand must be deliberate. All this unnatural arm position nonsense is just that - nonsense. It is not in the laws of the game. When a ball is kicked at great speed at any player from a couple of yards it is absolutely impossible for them to make a deliberate handball. Human reaction times just aren't that quick. Far too many of these do get given but on this occasion the referee got it dead right.

He actually looks very good. Technically he remains an excellent young keeper. That's never been the problem with him. The big worry is that he has looked very nervous playing in the first team; this has led to him making mistakes; this makes him more nervous - downward spiral. We won't know whether he has got over this until he is called upon. We have professional coaches who work with him every working day. I am inclined to trust their judgement.

This should be the starting line-up. If it is I too predict 1-0 to Saints. United dropping points at QPR would be excellent but seems unlikely.

You are right in identifying a difference between giving people stick for poor performances (understandable) and scapegoating them by unending criticism when actually they often performed pretty well. The first one I remember was big John Page - he did a good job for us in Division Three but mainly seemed to get picked on because he was fat. Then there was Joe Kirkup a decent enough fullback whose only crime was to have been signed from Chelsea which was assumed to make him a big-time Charlie. More recently Telfer and Wright - who was totally committed and did a decent job in umpteen positions in a very very bad team - were as you say unfairly picked upon whilst Prutton probably the worst midfield player to ever play regularly for Saints was lionised because he ran about a bit.

We already have astriker who hits the ground running - arguably far too often - in Shane Long. I also imagine he knows where the back of the net is. What would be nice would be if he could put the ball into it a bit more often.

What an utterly preposterous argument. There was no evidence whatsoever of lack of effort by the team in general and those three in particular. But as can often happen they played sh1te. They had the balls to come over and salute those who had supported them. They weren't patronising anyone. Scuttling off and pretending nothing has happened may be your way of dealing with poor performance but thank God its not theirs. The booing and coin-throwing was a disgrace and neither is likely to help a team low in confidence. Like someone else in the thread said we have some real dickheads as fans and sadly they really let themselves down. If they don't like what they I seeing they should just stay.

Sadly one of the problems with internet forums is that they attract people with unthought out knee-jerk reactions. Obviously no-one who has watched football in general or Saints in particular over any period of time could seriously suggest that Mane was not as good as Jonno Quick; Antonio; Papa Waigo (!!!!!!) or even dear old Guly (a great club servant in the lower leagues) but reasoned views don't attract attention and so these frankly ridiculous statemnets just get fired off like tabloid headlines. And you are right people do love to have a scapegoat.

Sadly you have. Despite all these players being sh1t, we still should have one every game we have played over the last month and that's definitely Ronald's fault.

At last someone who actually knows something about goalkeeping. Forster like all good goalkeepers makes mistakes - c.f. Villa Park. Even Shilton made mistakes - I remember one near post howler at Coventry which cost us a win. But to blame Forster for either goal on Monday is laughable and could only be suggested by people who have never played in goal at a decent level.

No you don't. Or at least you don't remember it correctly. What was said was that no-one would be sold that unless it was in the club's interest (or a slight paraphrase of that). Completely different. More to the point why would you want to sell anyone in January. I can't even see it as a possibility. Who would it be? Isgrove?

I can't see how anyone could see it any other way. It's how it happened. The actual match report (by a different journo) in the Guardian was even more emphatic. Phil Neville said much the same.

We shouldn't have it at all. Forster is a huge upgrade on the erratic Boruc. He's made one ort two mistakes but none of them was yesterday. The defence have much, much more confidence in him which of course is one reason our defence has been so good this year. It was good too to see he had learnt from the Villa gaffe and got that decision exactly right. We lost yesterday because City gave their best performance of the season and frankly were better than us.

Whilst not wishing to enter into the debate about how right you were before etc etc every single thing you have written here about the relative merits of the keepers; about the judgements people make on here and the transfer fee (surely no one is still going on about that!) are dead right. You might also have added that Forster has been an important element in the transformation of our defence because the people min front of him believe in him and trust him which is why last night's ricket should not have any lasting effect.

There isn't one. Modern footballers are ridiculously pampered. In the good old days they played on Christmas Day, went home and got stuffed full of turkey and booze and then played the return match against the same side the next day. Today's allegedly fitter players supported by all that science can't play two games in 3 days. Perhaps not surprisingly Boxing Day games were always entertaining and full of goals then.

How can Townsend have scored a 'few' spectacular goals. He has only scored 1 in his entire Tottenham career (and 2 for England).

What a bizarre comment. First because Chambers is not yet the finished product, although personally I expect him to get over his current struggles and become a half-decent premier League player and secondly because Long only cost 75% of Chambers fee - hardly a fraction. Are you pursuing some strange agenda here? Still my main point isn't about this but I have read that Telegraph article and the weird thing is that - and to be fair they may be distorting what he said - Mitchell does not appear to speak English. The quotes from him in the article don't actually say anything and are simply gobbledegook.

Indeed they proved to be COMPLETELY untrue although whether Cortese had anything to do with them is a moot point. I rather suspect he has moved on both geographically and in terms of ambitions etc. I very much doubt whether we will see him in English football again.

Please can we just not keep saying he has completed his sentence. He has two and a half years to go. His release is conditional. What I can't understand is how he has been released when he has shown no remorse and no appreciation of what he has done. The whole point of early release is supposed to be about reintegration. How can somebody be reintegrated into society when they don't think what they did was wrong? It just doesn't make any sense to me.

It is years since we have had a keeper that is this secure (Shilton). He is the most important signing we made in the Summer. Boruc did okay at times but was always likely to do something bonkers and defenders didn't have much confidence in him - not surprisingly. Forster has such presence and this has been very important in the improvement in our defence which in turn has given the rest of the team the space/scope to becoming a better attacking force. He is still pretty young for a keeper so will get better still. Money extraordinarily well spent.

Pelle deserves no criticism at all over this booking. It's a daft interpretation of the laws of the game anyway but more to the point he did so because he is playing in a team that really cares and who were relieved to get over the shock of losing a two goal lead. An extravagant celebration was merited. Of course, we could instead not score goals; not win games and then the problem would be solved!

It's more than that. As Cup Finals they were all great, great days but I have to say the Johnstone's Paint Trophy final was pretty special in itself and in 1992 when we lost in extra-time (a magnificent game) to Forest in the Zenith Data Systems Cup Final (Cloughie's last trophy win) before a packed Wembley. I am sorry but even that one - in a competition some of you will never have heard of - is more prominent in the history books and the memory than any single league game, although 6 goals against United does push it close. 5 finals in 57 years is just not enough so yeh I am for putting some effort in in the Cup competitions.

This is not correct. We have played two top six sides - both away - and we have won both games. As ever our problems come when we are up against the lesser lights. One of our away defeats was against the hapless side currently occupying 11th place.

You can't possibly say what Long is 'worth'. No footballer has an intrinsic worth. Transfer fees are what they are - what one club is prepared to pay to get a player that they want - they never have been and never will be a fair assessment of someone's worth. Some players who have gone for more than 12 million have proved to be poor and many costing less than 12 million have been excellent but it's irrelevant. We wanted Long; that was the asking price; we had the money. Job done. Shane Long is an enthusiastic scrapper who is a useful option to have in a squad which has other assets. So far he has seemed to fill that role more than adequately and I am very happy with him.

You seem to be suggesting that only last Saturday's team is relevant! Targett has started this season; Ward-Prowse was a regular until his injury and will be again; Reed and McCarthy have been on the bench; Gallagher will certainly get his chances when he returns. Okay not so many starting just at this moment but no change in policy and no signs of slippage in the supply-line!

Exactly. This in spades. It's embarrassing that we are being linked. Surely agent talk only?