The9

Dunno what they've got in mind but I DO happen to know Steve has access to three extremely nice pearlescent white Mitre balls with red bits on them, cos I bought them... old style England FA international balls, £70 at launch and got them for £20 each off of yer eBay for the Saints Innernets FC team. Those red shorts are nice, but they do suck as a method of avoiding a colour clash. @hamster - just read the thing about numbers again, slowly, until you understand it. If not, I'll make sure we line up in a WM formation before kick off to show you what I mean

Cos I want to make sure we don't clash, obviously

Also, what *is* the deal with "red shorts on the away kit"? Saints wear them, but they don't sell them, and no-one's going to be able to get them - plus it's always bugged me that teams would change shorts anyway... Socks for clarity on rebounds and throw-in decisions, shirts for quick recognition, but why change the shorts when there's a clash, all grey clashes much less with a red/grey/red kit than grey/red/grey does cos there's only one minor colour clashing rather than two, albeit on different bits of the kit?

I was signed for a set of Sunday football team kit once, beats a set of tracksuits or a bag of pork scratchings any day! Is this a Saintsweb transfer record?

What else has been consistent? Playing football Wearing red and White stripes Being based in Southampton Having people watch matches Occasionally being on tv Having a Club Physio Players wearing football boots Why aren't you blaming any of those "factors" ? You can't just say "it's this", we were crap sometimes and good sometimes before the PLC and we'll probably do the same afterwards. It does make me laugh that you seem to think we made any money from 1978-1995 that would somehow benefit us now, that money simply wasn't around football until the Prem was formed in '92 and even the first tv deal wasn't all that lucrative compared to those since.

LOL, just in case it goes down that road, bagsie/shotgun number 9!!!!!! I did also mention this in my original email just in case as well, not that I'm obsessed or anything but note my username I'm wondering how Steve's going to wangle himself 7 though! I guess seeing as we're having names done on the shirts there will have to be a name/number list somewhere first. As for the 8/10 supporting striker argument, you can make a case for either, the numbering scheme derived from the W- and then W-M formation and in that the CF was 9, wingers 7 and 11 and Outside left and outside right supporting the CF were 8 and 10. Seeing as no-one played 4-4-2 at that point some teams had 8 and some 10. England's 4-4-2 1966 World Cup Winners had 9 and 10 up front in Charlton and Hurst, Argentina and Brazil have always had 10 as a creative midfielder. For similar reasons Brazil have 4 as a centre back rather than defensive midfielder. Squad numbers would be ok, but 1-11 will be easier to sort.

Oh dear, I don't think I agree with a word of that. McGoldrick at his best for Saints so far hasn't come close to achieving anything like what Ormerod did, and he's nothing like as good a player either - Brett's selfless workrate helped create space for Beattie to score the goals he did, he was a far fitter player than McGoldrick and had more influence on play, he was a handful for opposing defenders, won the ball back in dangerous attacking positions with all his closing down, and was a better finisher than McGoldrick when his job was to score goals not help create them (at Blackpool the first time he was there). Plus he played regularly for Saints in the Premiership, for a team that finished in the top half. McGoldrick WISHES he was half the player Ormerod was for Saints.

Yep , interesting goalscorers here though : http://www.soccerbase.com/results3.sd?gameid=219701

I didn't see the abuse or coins as I was running to the turnstile (and got in JUST before the penalty, we must have been on the same train/slow moving convoy), but I did hear a chorus of "Oh Teddy Teddy, Teddy Teddy Teddy Teddy Sheringham" with a lot of pointing at the old geezer in his window when we were stuck in the street afterwards !

Well, I know that didn't actually happen, but well done on being so convincing ! I do have a deep-suppressed recollection of the Skates singing "a version" of it at us for a large chunk of the second half, and the song is still banned in my presence for that reason alone, but the only songs heard after the match were Saints fans singing stuff like "you're supposed to be at home" to the empty stands to entertain ourselves on a day that couldn't have been much worse.

You only have to look at some of the dodgy backgrounds of former and current Prem owners like Shinawatra and Gaydamak to see that the game is morally bankrupt - the "right and proper" owner test the FA have is a complete joke for a start. Beyond that you have the sudden switch of the FA from a relatively independent football governing body to the powerbrokers of a multi-billion pound Premier League with global brands existing where football clubs used to exist, and businessmen ruling where anachronistic blazered administrators may have been incompetent but at least therre was no question of their attempts at fairness, and football was run for the benefit of all, rather than the few. Anyway, now I've dragged myself back out of the 1970s, I still find myself disagreeing with everyone who claims that generally small clubs are dealt with differently - the Luton example was the Football League (not the FA or Premier League) strictly following their rules, and Bournemouth, Luton and Leeds have all received similar penalties for similar administration offences. That's consistent - but it's also not the FA. As for Pandiani, they ruled what they ruled, but to suggest Birmingham are somehow regarded as tangibly a bigger club or more of an asset to the Premier League than Saints to the extend that the transfer procedure was deliberately waived to benefit Birmingham and hamper Saints is frankly paranoid nonsense, as are most of the "we're being hard done by" bleats. Getting back to West Ham, Whilst £30m is a big fine, it's only half of the money West Ham made from still being in the Prem the following season, and that was before the massive overseas TV deal kicked in. West Ham breaking the ownership rules was never in question, the issue was the FA sticking their heads in the sand and choosing not to address the issue until after the season had finished, so they left themselves with no way of punishing West Ham that wouldn't have led to a retrospective post-season relegation, which no matter what the morality of the situation would have been unfair as well. Don't forget that Middlesbrough were relegated due to a points deduction they got for cancelling a fixture back in the 90s - if the FA had left that decision until June when Boro had already stayed up, would they have thought a points deduction was still appropriate then, relegating them with no on-field opportunity to recover ? I'm surprised no-one seems to have mentioned the Leeds legal action for transfer incentive payments they missed out on for Sheff U player Prem appearances, or Fulham's claim for additional prize money either, it's still going to rumble on and on - but you can guarantee that Ye Olde Bert Millichip-style FA wouldn't have walked into a legal minefield like this... or maybe they just had the benefit of existing in a less litigious time, and with far less money at stake. Long and short of it, it's all bad for sport, never mind Premier League football. But when the rulers of a football competition can't be relied upon to rule fairly there are other arbitrators who will, which is what the courts are there for. The FA only have themselves to blame for their failure to deal with it effectively at the time and in the following months. Ahhh, I've missed being able to post more than 3 times a day... :smt049

Oh, and I don't want to worry anyone, but you can also see that all of the teams who've come down from the Prem and been relegated further were relegated in their 3rd or 4th season after the relegation. (Leicester 4 years, Leeds 3, Bradford 3, Wimbledon 4, Sheff Wed 3). We're in season 4.

I like to add statistics to these arguments, so here's the performance of every team that's been relegated from the Prem since 2000 (at least until they leave the CCC again, whether up or down). X indicates how many seasons since they came down before changing divisions again, P = Promoted, R=Relegated. 2007 Sheff U 9th. Charlton 12th. Watford 6th. 2006 Brum 2nd PX W Brom 4th, 1st PXX Sunderland 1st PX 2005 Palace 6th, 12th, 5th Norwich 9th, 16th, 17th, Saints 12th, 6th, 20th, 2004 Leic 15th, 16th, 19th, 22nd RXXXX Leeds 14th, 5th, 24 RXXX Wolves 9th, 7th, 5th, 7th. 2003 W Ham 4th, 6th PXX W Brom 2nd PX Sunderland 3rd, 1st PXX 2002 Ips 7th, 5th, 3rd, 15th, 14th, 8th. Derby 18th, 20th, 4th, 20th, 3rd PXXXXX Leic 2nd PX 2001 Man C 1st PX Cov 11th, 20th, 12th, 19th, 8th, 17th, 20th. Bradford 15th, 19th, 23rd RELXXX 2000 Wimb 8th, 9th, 10th, 24th RELXXXX Sheff Wed 17th, 20th, 22nd RELXXX Watford 9th, 14th, 13th, 16th, 18th, 3rd PXXXXXX Simple fact is that of the last 12 teams to be relegated from the Prem, only 3 (all in 2006) have gone back up - two at the first attempt and one at the second. And whilst 3 went back up, 2 of the teams relegated since 2004 went down into League One. If we go back another year though, all 3 of the 2002/3 season Prem relegated sides bounced back within 2 years. Overall : 24 Prem teams relegated since 2000 (not inc 2008/9 teams as the following season isn't finished) 10 have been promoted back up to the Prem (Derby and Watford being the only teams to take more than 2 seasons to do so) 5 have been relegated further (only Sheff Wed have come back so far). 9 are still in the CCC. Spin it how you like...

As they said in t'other thread, they want to try and keep the sides even.

If what you meant was "she's not really very famous considering the column inches is she?" I heartily agree. The whole family are a bit "nearly" for me... Also, helmets outside pro-skiing and pro-biklists are for gheys and womens, as any fule no. We'll be wearing them in case of falling birds, meteorites and haycorns next.

Now I've sold out and added myself to Teh Full Members list, I shall use one of my first liberally scattered posts (hah, I can do FOUR in a day if I want) to say "Calvin, it doesn't take you going out or being drunk to not have much balance". Ithangewe. Oh, and if I wasn't off up in teh smoke with teh bird, or injured, or busy, or doing something else, I would be there.

Yes. That and the GBA version which had all the originals and more.

He's still ponderous on the ball, he still can't pass, he still needs 10 yards of space to dribble, he still doesn't hold the ball up well, still doesn't attack the penalty area when the ball is going to be there, isn't great in the air in attacking positions, and we probably have 3 or 4 players better at doing what he's trying to do. However, in the two home games we won (I haven't seen the Ipswich game so won't comment on that), he won a lot of defensive headers from opposition corners and that was pretty important, he has played one or two decent through passes due to him taking time outside the box when he has it, and his workrate his improved a bit since he's had Saga and Euell's examples to follow. Plus we won, which is everything at the moment. Keeping him away from the furthest forward position(s) and playing two people who do know where the goal is and actually get in positions to score them has been very successful so far. I think he's got a long way to go and a lot of work to do before he proves he deserves a starting place, Schneiderlin would be a much better player there with his through passing and Lallana's got everything except that final pass and is still probably a better option if not used elsewhere. He is better than Ryan Smith and probably Pulis though.

Not that incredible, here's another one - born in Newport and played against Trethomas and Machen in local football all through the 90s/00s. I will readily admit to being a tad biased given my birthplace, but I've also got a LOT of experience of Cardiff fans from an outsider perspective, and it does have to be said that Cardiff City have a larger proportion of intolerant fight-seeking nobbers than the vast majority of other teams. Even walking the few hundred yards back to my car after the match there were a few bell-ends offering people out as they came out of the footbridge onto Northam Road from the other side of a well-policed fence, I haven't seen that with any other team's fans in the same locations. None of that is particularly relevant to this specific incident, besides raising the likelihood that a few locals looking for trouble knew they could get the fight they were looking for when Cardiff City were in town.

Frankly Saga's attitude in his performances pre-season (mostly when playing left wing admittedly) didn't suggest he wanted to play for us in any way shape or form, and that he wasn't buying into the whole 4-2-1-3 with kids thing either. That along with the need to get as many wages off the wage bill as possible must have been the reason he was allowed to go on loan. I'm pleased that he wants to play for us now, it's nice to have a proper striker.

I wouldn't be remotely bothered as long as he was still paying my wages to do the best I can, naive though that sounds.

Lowe's biggest mistake is signing quantity not quality in 2005. Unfortunately he hasn't learned from this and still seems more than capable of bloating the squad up with crapola reserve teamers who won't improve the first team, judging by the purchases of Smith and Pulis (and possibly Molyneux though it's a little soon to write him off just yet).

If only any of you supposedly morally-motivated minority had actually bothered to, you know, actually make a protest back then, rather than just sodding off and taking your money elsewhere to the further detriment of the club's finances with no-one even knowing where or why you'd gone, maybe you'd have some right to the moral high ground you seem so desperate to lay claim to... the only action was inaction. Good old "I don't go any more... for the benefit of the club". Fine, let's see you outside making that point during games, as by my reckoning you're about 19 home matches short of doing that so far this season.

I'm out, got a mate down and we're going to Newbury races.

Yeah, just so I can play one 11-a-side match this year !?!?!? (That's "year", Rabbit)