um pahars

And I've been suitably chastised. its pronounced V-O (as in Vee-Oh).

Vay-ho

They do indeed frequent this site!! And they are a tremendous bunch of lads and lasses who have built this company up from nothing (and who have ambitions to compete with the big boys). From a Saints perspective, surely all that matters is that the deal is commercially sound and have to say I find it a bit strange how some people get all worked up about a sponsor.

TBH I'm not sure anyone can hold players back if one of the big names offer to treble their wages and allow them to play in the top echelons of the game. I'd be disappointed if any of them went to a Newcastle, Spurs, Everton, but couldn't blame them if they went to one of the top 3/4 or a massive Club abroad. Regular European football, top honours, playing with the world's best etc is quite enticing. But as a footnote, maybe Cortese has played a negative role here, as the rumours I heard were that some of the more established players noses were slightly out of joint with regards the big ££££££s being paid to Osvaldo and Ramirez (made worse by their lack of return for that money).

Didn't realise his goals per starts ratio was almost 1 in 3. I know most were in the lower divisions, but still a decent return. Like a few others, Guly contributed to our rise up the divisions and I will be eternally grateful for that. And as another poster has already said he contributed to a pretty happy period to be a Saints fan. Always thought he put a shift in and will get my applause and thanks next week.

Congratulations fella. Wonderful pictures. All the best.

With all due respect, I don't think we are at a crossroads, instead we are riding the crest of a wave! If we maintain our mid table position, then that will be an amazing feat given the competition in what is the richest and best league in the world. And we are nothing like Liverpool were last season. They were sat on years of success and massive support earning about three times what we do. In fact their merchandise/commercial income alone was more than what we earned last year. There is no comparison. In this dog eat dog world, players who excel at "lower" ranked teams will always get picked off by the "big boys" due to the money they can earn and the possibility of winning things and playing in the best teams in the land. I would love it if we could keep our squad together, and would love it if this squad of players thought more about the Club and tried to break in to the top 6, but I'm also realistic that when the big clubs, big ££££s, European football and potential to win trophies come a calling, some of our players will jump ship. And when they do I hope it is done honourably and with us calling the shots with regards transfer fees.

Always wary of commenting on interviews as too often they are misconstrued, taken out of context or selectively edited. But IMHO this sounds a little like Morgan is getting his excuses in early if someone bigger than us comes in for him (or perhaps he has already been tapped up?).

We rejected him when he was about 14. Hasn't got much better judging by the 7-0 drubbing. Got done by Gallagher for our first, lost his man and was stationary for our second. Think it was the fourth when he was made to look like a dummy and chasing shadows all night. They've gone back to being a complete irrelevance to us, much as they have been for the overwhelming majority of the last half century. Off the radar, not even on a par with Bournemouth.

From what I've read and seen, it doesn't look as though the vote itself would stand up to any semblance of scrutiny. From loaded questions, procedural irregularities, no independent oversight, lack of a secret ballot & potential voter intimidation (from both sides??), it looks a real sham of a process. Personally, I think the idea sounds awful, (then again maybe I'm an old fart), but surely the weirdest thing is the notion that as a result of the name change, the world famous Hull City will start to rake in millions from their soon to be found Far East fanbase!

From my quick look at the numbers I have to say that given our current position (safe in the Prem & with a benefactor still willing to support us), I too couldn't find much to worry about. We cleared £20m+ of transfer fees this season and given the large increase in TV income, can't see why it will be a problem doing it again. Any refund/resale on Osvaldo will also help!!!! So like you, also not sure why the negative slant?? I'd suggest (1) a chance to have a thinly veiled pop at Cortese, and/or (2) an early dampening of expectations with regards spending millions this summer.

Would have to say that judging by the thinly veiled criticisms emanating from SMS today, I don't think the parting was as amicable as the initial announcements suggested!! Then again, as many have said previously, most departures are hushed over as it's not that beneficial to be seen to be washing your dirty linen in public. As for the staff, I wonder if they will carry on using the new coffee machine which I understand cost tens of thousands to buy and install!!!!!

Mate who is out there working for SKY said the players didn't even look bothered today, and can't see how Giles can get the job. in fact he's put some money on Vaughan at stupid odds!!!'

A very open and honest assessment, and IMHO he got it spot on. I've spoken glowingly about us on the after match thread, but Newcastle's response was pitiful. Lacked any passion and heart, and if I was a Geordie I would be fuming about the lack of passion. It reminded of the rubbish Continental games you often see, where as soon as the "big" team get their noses in front then it's all over.

Great performance and lets not forget we made Newcastle look shieite. A number of stand out performances throughout the team, so almost unfair to pick a MOTM. Obviously winning 4-0 helps, but it really does look like this team are enjoying their football. 2 things I haven't seen mentioned so far. Firstly, looked like their were two naughty challenges over the far side from where we sit (itchen), just wondered if anyone had a better view. secondly, did Chambers tire a bit towards the end. Understandable if so, as still developing plus he was phenomenal in the first half pushing on and that must have taken a lot out of him (or did he get a knock??).

Anecdotal, but I'm sure more of my mates went to Saints matches when we were at school, compared to the kids I now teach. Would be interested to know how the make up of our fans now stands compared to previous times in our history. I know a few years back they were worried that the profile was ageing, so would be interested to see if recent years has made a difference (one way or the other). it may be nostalgia, poor memory or rose tinted glasses, but it would also be interesting to know how the price of tickets stack up against average earnings (or whatever an equivalent measurement would be), as they feel relatively more expensive nowadays. I'm sure our first family centre tickets back in the late 70s were peanuts.

Got me too. Have flown that flight a few times and was aware of the original story, but amazed that the main man turns up on this forum!!!! hats off to the Badgers Arse man, a real hero.

Sorry, my mistake. Dont remember the Coventry/Bradford day itself and only heard about the tragedy when in Raffles later in the evening (think I went ou straight after the game and pubs didn't have TVs in and of course no mobiles).

West Ham away

With his kicks, dodgy passing to players under pressure, palming away their second, was Boruc; a) carrying more of an injury than we are being told b) ******ed c) hungover d) talking a bung Certainly made for an entertaining game, and definitely a fully paid up member of the el Loco goalkeepers club.

http://www.submerged.co.uk/gfx/a/a8%202%20big.jpg Dell days, found out only recently that my Great, Great Uncle was a submariner. Here's a piccy of his funeral procession.

We're not in the "37 Days" era having to communicate via carrier pigeon FFS. I'm pretty sure a combination of modern technology and deputies/other Union reps mucking in would suffice. I'm sure I read that Crow and Boris hadn't met for 7 years, which would suggest that negotiations can take place wothout the big willies being involved. It's the same nonsense trotted out when Cameron and Johnson were on holiday during the Syria Crisis and the London riots. The world doesn't revolve around a couple of individuals.

I'm not convinced he (or others) are doing anything wrong. The only case is perhaps the Council House, but even then he has every right to stay in the house he has occupied since before he became leader of the RMT and for which he is paying what the Council/Housing Association are asking.

Don't get the Rio Bob or Champagne Socialist jibes at all. He was a rather successful Union boss overseeing an expanding organisation that had 80,000 members and a significant income (rather well managed as well!). In return for that he earned a salary that wasn't even 6 figures - I don't include pension contributions and expenses when I talk about my salary (and a salary very much dwarfed by the likes of Boris' chicken feed £250,000 for his relaxing Sunday morning writing session for the Telegraph). I don't agree with his politics, but his pay packet looks commensurate with the gravitas of his job (and his success in it). And because he decides to spend some of that salary on holiday to Rio, that should be thrown back at him. Shock horror, man goes on a long distance holiday. The council house jibe is also a bit below the belt, as historically I've not been aware of an earnings cap on a Council tenancy, and historically for many hard working folk a Council House was the norm. My parents were in employment all their lives, but preferred to rent from the Council rather than buy. With the reduction in council house building, pressure has grown on the existing stock, but I don't think existing tenants should be under any moral obligation to move out of what has been their family homes. He has been a council tenant all his life and moved in to his current home before he became the leader of the RMT. You might argue his rent is below the current market and hence he is being subsidised, but as this article points out, it's not that simple as subsidies exist across the housing market. There are many thousands living in council houses whilst earning "big" salaries, so until we address all of them along with the other subsidies (hidden and overt), then I think it's a bit churlish to have a pop.