Fitzhugh Fella

Perhaps - let's hope you are right and I am wrong.

the suspense is killing me:)

Marcus wins then!

I think one of the reasons you and I "fall out" when discussing NC/ML is that while I agree they did "save" the club by buying us (and I am grateful) I am pretty sure "saving" the club was not their driving motive. They did it for pure business reasons, I would imagine, but a by product was that we got rescued from oblivion. 2 wins = everyone's happy for now. (I am definately happier now than I was 12 months ago ) You are right "we should enjoy it while it lasts" and being in a position to plunder clubs like Palace feels good after all the crap and heartache over recent years. But (and I always have a but with Saints - I can't help it) while I am very grateful for Marcus's euros I am not going to fool myself that he and Nocola are in it for the love. Hopefully their investment will meet our expectations and they might indeed even grow to love the club but one eye should always be kept on the left hand while we watch the right. The development at Staplewood for me was a most encouraging sign as it signifies long-term planning. As for Murray I think he should be encouraged to resign - he's been here a long time now and the Echo need to build some bridges. Having said that I would never want them to be in a position whereby the club tell them what to print.

I am a great believer in magnanimity

the administrator at Palace is saying that he will be trying to loan out players when the window opens next week so the wage bill can be lowered.

this is, by far, a too reasoned post. Please ban this man

Yes the Echo (Murray) have not conducted themselves well at all. Can't argue otherwise. Cortese has won this contest so I still think it is up to him to call the truce.

Yes I can understand why you might not have agreed to that last bit. All I will say is while NC seems to be a steady hand on the tiller and, on the surface, to be doing a good job, I think we should all save our "adulation" until he actually delivers a little more. I am not having a go at you now because I can understand why many see ML and NC's involvement as a massive plus (and it has to be considering the alternative was Pinnacle) but that does not mean we should treat their evey act as being the right step. Cortese has made his point Nick, Murray is wounded, probably fatally, so now is a very good time to play the magnaminious humble winner scenario. I support NC in this over Murray because Murray really is a prize prat, but I can't say I want the Echo to be destroyed. And that could happen and it would be caused by a man who this time last year had never picked up the Echo in his life. Food for thought.

I think this is a very fair reflection of where we are. I have been told by people in both "camps" that Murray is keen to meet to sort it out but NC won't talk. His perogative I agree but, I think he has made his point. I think Murray will be the loser here because his position is becoming untenable but NC needs to stop digging his hole.

I agree the club have no responsibility to the Echo, but both parties have a responsibility to the citizens of this City some of whom rely on the local newspaper for information about their local football team. This is a true story. While waiting for the nos 1 bus last week at Otterbourne to go to the match v Stockport, a litle old lady at the bus stop said if you are going to the football give them a cheer for me, my Dad used to take me to the Dell. I asked her if she had been to St Marys and she said No "I just follow them through the Echo". Murray is a twit - no doubt about it and of course the club are a bigger commodity but NC is not covering himself with glory here. If he wants to make a point v Murray fair enough but do it in a way that is less childish and harmful to the general public. Perhaps ask Murray for a public letter of apology? maybe a pint I don't know but this is stupid. Nick, contrary to what you think NC is as fallible as the next man and, if you don't mind me saying you would be wise to temper your unconditional, unwavering support.

Quite nicely put

Sort of sums this forum up I'm afraid. I am no fan of Murrays and have clashed with him on a number of occasions but this has got really silly now. Some old-timers rely on the Echo for Saints' coverage and the club and the Echo have a responsibility to sort this out. I hear Murray is keen to attempt a reconciliation but NC will not meet.

I think the main difference between old and new regimes is the money being spent now is "private" money and under previous Chairmen the money being spent was technically the "club's" money. ML doesn't have to cough a penny if he doesn't want to which is the point I was trying to make in the summer when he took over. Who are we to tell him how much to spend? I would be interested to know, however, now the club does not have to service a debt whether or not our income matches our outgoings putting to one side expenditure on transfers.

I wonder if PFC fans would now accept wiping the FA Cup win of 2008 from their honours board in exchange for solvency. The lifting of that Cup was under massive false premises and no one can have any pride in that achievement and football in general should expunge it and award the Cup to Cardiff.

Having watched that game tonight shame we never got Danns - an all energy player. Cortese out Just joking NickG!

I don't think we have heard the last of Marc Jackson - at least I hope not because that tv interview when he was spearheading the Bournemouth takeover was pure Ricky Gervais and deserves a special place in our heritage as a reminder of how bad it could have been.

only most?

hey we agree!!!

Yeah my take too at first but then the Flybe announcement so does that mean both replica and home shirts will be sponsor name free?

Nick, I can tell, you are as nervous of PFC scraping out of this as I am of Saints letting in a last minute goal. Unfortunately the latter does happen but I can't see our fishy friends swimming their way out of this net.

We very much wanted to do "Southampton FC the PLC years" but when we approached the leading protaganists not many were prepared to fully participate with our research. And as it is our 125th anniversary the Who's Who does tie in with what the new owners are happy with. Now I just need a decent title.

well for one reason, I am at present compiling the complete who's who 1885-2010 and whether a player is on extended loan (and therefore could potentially be called back) or has signed a 6 month contract is relevant and will be needed to be accurate in his career details. If you check out ITN you will see how fastidious we are. So Nick nothing sinister just like to be accurate when it comes to the small print, but please don't let that get in the way of your theory that I am out to bring down SFC because I haven't swallowed my NC tabs

well that is an impressive list, but most of those outlets get their info from one source. I will e mail the club to find out. Even if I am mistaken in his status, there is a difference to him being "on loan" or on a perm 6 month contract. For instance do Reading have call back rights? If he has a broken leg does he go back to the parent club and, say today another club wanted to buy him (a la Puncheon) - who would they negotiate and settle a fee with? Us or Reading? Whatever his status it is relevant would you not agree?

Thank you St Clark - but I don't regard Wikipedia as being reliable and the Saints web article is inconclusive. The BBC have been known to get it wrong too. There is a subtle difference between "extending the loan" and "offering him a 6 month contract", mainly because of the rule on the max on loan players allowed at any one time. I am pretty sure the Echo reported at the time that we had given him a 6 month contract. I will have a look at their website when i have more time. Either way contrary to what NickG says there is a difference.