The9

"Strong rumours" in the sense that the bloke who I know has seen it because of where he was, told me about it 20 minutes later when I saw him, and staff involved in the filming of an advert for next season were happy to discuss too. "Rank Xerox style, broad stripe is white, collar has flappy bits (wing collar), central badge" is everything I'd heard about it. I should really share the mock up with him for more details. Away kit predominantly yellow with navy trim. Could be a very good season for replica sales.

Cheers, all those descriptions tally and clarify.

I can't actually remember what the set up was when they started, tbh. Can someone remind us? One level of share, in what, and is it the same representation for HNW and Trust? ie. was the way the Presidents/HNWs got the majority voting share was by buying shares in the Trust, or investing directly in the club?

Michael Eisner's bid was approved by 1,825 of the 2,272 Supporters' Trust shareholders who voted Caption on the photo in the BBC article: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40000639 That's 80.3257% if I'm not awful at maths. Realistically though the High Net Worth "Presidents" vote should be worth lots more than the PST based on investment size, shouldn't they? They shunted it downwards pretty quickly, but I'm fairly sure the HNWs were underrepresented per £ in the first place, to give the facade of fan ownership. BTW Newport County's supporters trust have at least 1500 members, which makes the 2272 the Skates have look positively awful given the relative attendances.

The results I saw showed 4/16 "Presidents" voted against the takeover - you know, the "Presidents" who by definition meant that they weren't a fan owned club in the first place.

He openly admitted there would be an end of season football review like there is every season. Nothing at all about whether the manager's position would be discussed. Anyway, if it happens I'm going for 7pm on Saturday 27th May - i.e. just after the FA Cup Final finishes.

Celtic can do what they like in the Scottish Premiership as they're not adopting the UEFA rule for domestic competition, they have different shirts for Europe anyway just like we did. The Newcastle one I suspect is because they haven't been paying attention, though I'm sure SportsDirect wouldn't be gutted to sell striped backs as they'd be more popular than plain anyway, even if the actual shirt didn't have them. I mean they sold white Saints socks that we didn't wear until December claiming them as the normal home socks in the season just gone.

Yeah, to the shock of no-one this exact template was guessed about 2 seconds after the rumour of Spurs going to Nike was started. Brighton's new home kit is a striped version of this too.

They had a well-worn model of being gash then sacking the manager in March/April and surviving somehow - it didn't generally include the manager spending all season saying "we're going down" though. Why they didn't do the same thing this time around is beyond me, especially as he's gone anyway immediately afterwards, losing them the only redeeming feature he might have had, which was continuity and knowlege of the existing players.

It's comical that utter failures are preferred to what we already have. Moyes would have been a decent option 5 years ago but Man U broke him, unsurprisingly when you consider the amount of time and planning put into his Everton set-up - not surprising that there are similarities with our recent recruitment techniques, but as a manager his motivation and effort appear to be gone.

I'll be using this one as inspiration for one of the mock-ups.

Looks like random Saints-branded leisurewear to me. I recall something similar with some adidas training tees too, they'd just taken a standard product and slapped a Saints badge on it.

Not if it's large enough.

This should tide you over.

Well, it WAS this post (#90387, 4th August 2013, they lost 4-1 at home to Oxford to go bottom of League 2 with Newport top)..., but the pics are no longer online and can't be ar5ed to rummage around my HDD for my original photoshop, so I'll just dig out the other pic which is still on here. In a mo.

I already did it with "F*CK" after they lost their first home game in League Two 4 years ago. It's in here somewhere...

If you don't, some daft tit will. Surprised it didn't happen in March tbh. It will look something like that, wing collar (dunno if striped collar), mainly white broad stripe, couple of red stripes at the side, central badge (UA logo could be anywhere tbh).

Anyway, here's the March mock up reshared. Apparently it has a central badge...

Poppy shirts don't count, just like the Spurs "The Lane" text didn't count. Apparently.

Newcastle might sell replicas with stripes, after all they've probably had to plan for both divisions.

Firstly, thanks for actually addressing the question. One question in response - when was the Austin resting? Re: West Brom (presumably Sat Dec 31) it seems pretty obvious that our full-backs do a lot of running and would be precisely the kind of players that would need changing for a game schedule that went Wed-Sat-Mon, which only leaves the question of the centre backs. We had 3 potential CB starters at the time, Van Dijk got sent off against West Brom, who were you anticipating they picked from Fonte and Yoshida for the Everton game 2 days later given that Stephens hadn't been tried at that point? Yoshida didn't play on 28th, played on 31st alongside Van Dijk as Fonte wasn't playing twice that quickly and had only done so in two EFL Cup games all season, and because Van Dijk was sent off Yoshida had to play on the 2nd when he'd have been rested, and then again in the FA Cup against a lower league side 5 days later (which is significantly different to 3 or 4 days later in recovery terms). Again, not sure what the problem is, there was a strategy, and the sending off messed it up. If you want to argue that we shouldn't have picked Yoshida against West Brom then you have to justify picking Fonte for 2 games in 3 days, if you want to argue it was wrong to pick Yoshida 5 days later against Norwich in a game where we kept a clean sheet, well, both the centre backs scored in that game and Stephens also started it - albeit at right back. "Since we've been out of Europe" is not actually that relevant, because due to the EFL Cup run (where we needed our first team to play come the January semi-finals) we still didn't have a midweek break until after the Saturday 4 Feb game. So there was a full 2 month fixture congestion period AFTER we were out of the Europa League, so the amount of time spent "on the training pitch" and the effect of the performances shouldn't be judged until there was a period where the club was only playing at most once a week.# As it happens, the first game we played without a midweek fixture we scored 4 away from home and stuffed Sunderland. The match after that we lost to Man U in the EFL Cup Final, in a game pretty much everyone agrees we deserved to win and in which the performance was widely acclaimed. With another week off we scored 4 again winning at Watford. The week after that we lost at Spurs, but then no-one else won at Spurs in the Premier League this season either. Having only played 2 matches in the whole of March, every match since then has been preceded or succeeded by another match within 4 days, so again, not relevant for judging Puel "having more time on the training ground". Your formation suggestion is interesting, but as we've barely had 2 first choice centre backs for most of this season and (as we've just established) we haven't had much time on the training ground, I don't think it's viable to suggest we should have changed formation and nor would it necessarily have improved results. At best it's a "maybe it might have made a difference either way". Conte had time to change his formation given that Chelsea weren't in Europe, and in fact had 31 days without a midweek game to work it out after the 3-0 defeat to Arsenal that prompted their tactical change. So...

All over the bloody forum all season long.

So why all the complaints about our final league position, or the bedwetting when we spend a couple of weeks in 14th with games in hand?

Not 17 goals though, and the general ignorance of the effect other competitions have had on our league position this season is the comical thing about all this "Puel out" balls. Not a single one of the critics has come up with a better way of dealing with the challenges the schedule alone has provided than the one we adopted. Every argument is "we should attack more", "we should score more", "we should pick the best team all the time". NONE of those are viable approaches in the context of a wider season. Next year will be different unless we get to BOTH domestic cup finals.