The Left Back

There's therapy available for this level of obsessive compulsive behaviour.

So sorry to hear that @Winnersaint. Look after yourself

I believe the UK deaths total each day could be split to show the percentage of deaths by vaccinated and unvaccinated victims. I've often wondered why this is not reported on daily, and guess it would be seen as manipulative. My understanding is that, over the last few weeks, around 92% of covid deaths daily are unvaccinated people. I'm sorry, but can't remember the source for this; just the number struck me as being very high. And that putting that number in the public domain daily might encourage more people to get jabbed. What I do not know is that last week in my local hospital 100% of the patients being treated for Covid (i.e discounting those in hospital for other reasons who happen to test positive) were unvaccinated. All of which suggests to me that underneath all the bluster and blame the reality is that the people at greatest risk are those who don't get jabbed. (This also correlates with the US study published recently). My responsibility, as a triple-jabbed person, is to minimise my risk of acting as a carrier by wearing a mask and sanitising when appropriate; and also to encourage people I know that they should get vaccinated for their own sake. The difference between this and the argument about smoking/diet etc is that Covid of course is contagious, whereas those other things aren't. So I do think it's in all our interests to learn enough to be able to have an informed opinion and then use this to advise others. Having said that, I'm not in favour of some of the more totalitarian suggestions being put outer the last few days. When national identity cards were proposed by that Luton tory guy in the 80s it was rightly trashed - and I think Covid passports as a government thing is a step too far. Having said that, if private institutions, like football clubs or cinemas want to protect their patrons by inviting on masks, sanitising, social distancing, or proof of vaccination then that's up to them - in the same way pubs and clubs already ask for proof of ID for youngsters.

@SalmonSiPlease read this back and have a fresh look at whether it's realistic for others to take you seriously based on stuff like this. Are you really citing Stanley Johnson as proof of a global depopulation program? I work with HIV - so be careful how you answer this next question - do you really belief that HIV, after decades of progress making it less fatal, is going to be the weapon of choice for mass global depopulation? I'm also confused, are you saying the deaths in the last 20 months didn't happen? Are you saying the reduction in death rates following the vaccine is a ruse to increase the death rate later? Please advise the source for your knowledge. I'm genuinely interested in what's fuelling your opinions. I'd also like to know if you believe you are influencing opinion on here. The only influence I can see you are having is a hardening of the view that you are talking bollocks.

Perhaps not excited, more like intrigued. I like these stories in football generally so why not with us? It could all end badly of course but it could also be a headline-catching fairy tale. Given our goalie situation pre last week, this twist is unexpected and, as I said, intriguing.

You can all laugh at me, but for reasons I can't fathom, I actually fancy us to get something on Saturday. I though it first yesterday morning and it hasn't gone away. I've been trying to rationalise it away ever since, which should be very easy to do, but the feeling just won't go. Our backs to the wall, depleted and suffering - it's just one of those unlikely scenarios where we grind out a 0-0, 1-1, or who knows even squeak something better. I am an optimist by nature - and this post is stretching that to the limit - and I know I am going to get rightly lampooned on here for this post, but I thought I'd take the risk and share it any way.

I've always liked Caballero when I've seen him play. A good keeper, solid professional, calm and, importantly for the way we play, good with his feet. Obviously we don't know how fit he's stayed or whether age has caught him up, but as things stand it's probably as good as we could have wished for. It was a freak set of circumstances that lead us here, but it may end up being a really good short term signing. I'm not as down on our first two keepers as much as some on here, but even I can see this might actually be a short term upgrade. It will be interesting to see if Lewis is given a chance on Saturday or whether Willy will be straight in (it's the name that just keeps giving). Either way I expect him to be a stabilising and positive presence in the squad.

I've started a new thread on this (my first) rather than carry it on under the McCarthy and Lewis threads. My understanding is that if both McCarthy and Forster are injured we can sign a keeper because Lewis hasn't made enough appearances. Am I out of date with this? For the many on here who don't rate any of our keepers here's the chance to get some fresh blood in. Not the ideal scenario I know but if the footballing gods are conspiring to offer us our own mini-window, who would you bring in? I guess the market is loans from other clubs or short-term signings from out of contract players.

We're on track to stay up, but not much more. I suspect the board won't do anything while that's the case. Today we were 2 minutes from going 11th. For those who want Ralph gone we are not doing badly enough to create momentum. It still feels like the Ralph out movement (not cult) is on-line more than in the city or the stadium. For those who want Ralph to stay he's not doing well enough to make it easy for us to defend him. I'm more in this camp, which is why I try to stay away from here on days like this. But like a moth to a flame I've been drawn in. As things stand I''m pretty certain he won't be going anywhere. And that's alright with me. But we need to change the pattern soo. Not scoring enough early, fading in the 2nd half and dropping points is so familiar we need to try something different. And that's down to Ralph. I thought he'd fixed it earlier but 3 of the last 4 games suggest it's still there.

I agree with this as well, although I do feel Patel's bill and even foreign aid are merely treating the symptoms not the cause. It can't be a surprise to anyone that we have people turning up from Iraq, Afghanistan, the Balkans, Yemen, Syria etc etc. And it shouldn't surprise anyone either that people want to enter the UK specifically or that they will try to get through however many other countries to do so. Edit. I want to add that the other complicating factor is we can't solve this on our own. We are not the sole cause of the problem and we don't hold the levers for the solution. We need a global response to a global problem - making it even more difficult to achieve. So this isn't a Brit-bashing view, but neither is it blaming the French, the Turkish, the people themselves. Mass migration of humans (which is in our DNA anyway) is a natural by-product of a complex global free market system - in my opinion.

I completely agree with this. The solution requires people to not want/need to leave their homes in the first place. The problems all flow from there. All the solutions I see and hear (included those being debated on here) are treating the symptoms only, and often with an inadequate plaster. So if we put on the table solving the issues of why people leave their homes we immediately come into rather large questions about globalisation, inequality, religion, colonialisation, the role of the UN, even the whole capitalist system. In the face of that I just hope for honesty from our government, rather than using the topic as a political football. And also that we try and treat everyone humanely and fairly. It's easy to feel some empathy for political refugees but even economic migrants are coming because they want some of the lifestyle we have here. We tell the world this is the best country in the world and then we are surprised when people want to come.

I'm thinking 1, possibly 2 of the 8 - how is that the majority? I agree with this. Trouble is in our system the 10's play more like inside out wingers. Someone sitting in the hole with guile (like Madison, Mount) would really help, but not sure the club would be looking for that type of player. And before that Bednarek gave away a corner that he could easily been a throw. Without the corner Evans stays in his own half and there is no goal. Pot. Kettle. Black.

Cracking game between two teams who really wanted to play. It's a shame to draw when we were ahead twice but it was the right result. I thought JWP and Adams were out MOTM. Romeu and Redmond played well. And for me McCarthy had a decent game. Probably could have done better with the first one but people blaming him for the second either have an agenda or don't understand the game. His distribution was much better and the Barnes save was fantastic. He claimed every cross. It was great to see Tella start. He is still a rough diamond but he brings energy, pace and just a buzz to the team. I think he should get minutes every game, either starting or sub; he could really grow into something special. Broja was lively when he came on but why oh why did he not hit the chance first time with his left? He's another who needs polishing although I'm less interested if he's not ours to keep. Good to see Bednarek with a better game, I though Salisu was a bit iffy, he just seemed over confident and went for things he wasn't going to get. It was strange down there. A flat atmosphere compared to Villa. Lots of empty seats, I assume our two defeats, the weather and Amazon Prime are to blame. And there were loads of spectators round us who seemed new to us and football in general - 'football tourists' I believe is the expression. Some were trying to start a Mexican wave, a group of girls tried and failed to get OWTS going a few times. and the half time heart attack in the Kingsland was something I've not experienced before - it was nice to see our subs giving the person a round of applause. It all added up to a weird atmosphere, even when we were winning. I'd say it was only in the frantic last 10 minutes that things got really loud. All in all, a good point against a very dangerous attacking side. I think if we had won we would be in 11th right now, so we're not far off.

I am very out of touch because I now live back in the city. But 6 years ago when I used to drive in from Romsey direction, I used to get off junction 7 and come in over Northam Bridge. It was always pretty straightforward - use to get free parking outside the methodist church and get away quickly too. (And before it's asked, I lived in a village with no public transport apart from 2-3 buses a day)

You raise an interesting comparison there. I think I agree with you that pull may have been a better coach and tactically stronger than Ralph. You acknowledge he was defensively minded and for me that's the problem. I found the end of that season turgid beyond belief and was praying he would go. I know he achieved a decent season and all that, but it was the manner of the football that put me off. And for that reason (as I've said before) I'm happy to stay on the Ralph Rollercoaster (as opposed to the Puel Plod?) So given the choice now you'd pick Puel. I'd pick Ralph. Who would others pick to be our manager right now out of the two of them?

This I get. I don't agree with the end of last season opinion but its seems coherent and thought through (And the carrot made me laugh out loud) This I don't get. It's so short-termist that it I just can't get on board with it. If he's 'stuck and can't find a way out' and 'we need a fresh mind, fresh energy and fresh approach' why should your view depend on just two matches? From what you are saying, presumably if we win one of these games you are happy for him to stay As this pendulum thread shows, there's room here for people who want to him to stay and those that want him to go. So pick one but try and base it on something more substantial than 2 matches. Edit. As per Lord D, for the avoidance of doubt, I am for Ralph staying for the season. We've played some good stuff so far, we just can't score. Ralph has shown more flexibility (criticism has moved from being too stubborn to too tinker man). The spirit seems there, were doing ok (but not great).

I've pretty much given up on twitter. I'm sure there's stuff worth reading on there but it's hard to find among the rabid, the vacuous and the advertorial. Glad you clarified that, I could sense some tension building up. Good luck with the group. I agree with others about attending football alone. At various times I've gone to various games (not just Saints) alone and have always enjoyed the experience. Has one bad experience in the early 80's going to Port Vale v Hull (don't ask) but the fact that I can only recall that says a lot.

I'm feeling like the only decisions Ralph is pondering are at fullback and one of the number 10s. Macca will play and the spine picks itself Bedders, Salisu, JWP, Romeu, AA, Che. At full back it all depends if Tino is fully firing or needs a rest. If he plays then KWP at left back, if he doesn't then KWP at right backhand Perraud at left. Redmond will be back and I actually think we've missed him. For the other number 10 I guess it's between Moussa, Ely and Walcott - not the best choice. I'd personally go Moussa out of those, but I guess Ely has the shirt. Perhaps he'll go with Diallo again and do more like 4-1-3-2. The line up we had v city seems likely (with Salisu instead of Jack) - this sees Ely + Redders get the 10 and Tino and KWP the full backs. We were 8/1 for a draw that day (and 18/1 for a win). Currently we are only 5/1 for the draw and 9/1 the win. 40 years ago almost to the day (28th Nov 81) I was at Anfield for Moran's 87th minute winner. That is the time to score a winning goal away at Anfield. How I wish for a repeat of that. Our team that day was Ivan Katalinic, Ivan Golac, Nick Holmes, Steve Williams, Chris Nicholl, Malcolm Waldron, Kevin Keegan, Mick Channon, Steve Moran, David Armstrong, Alan Ball. Ironically probably only McCarthy from the current side would get in that team.

It's a book recommended to me after I had a bust up with a work colleague in the weeks following George Floyd. Basically I thought he was accusing me of being racist and he (England born of Indian parents) said I was minimising his feelings on the matter - that's not exactly right but close enough, truth be told it was all so heated I got a bit lost in what I was exactly being accused of. Anyway to cut a long story short I bought the book and gave it a read. It's totally American-centric in its analysis and I couldn't buy into all of it, but it did have some points that opened my mind up a bit. I don't want to review the book here, and I'm not advocating it necessarily but it does offer some new thinking on this very old subject. I've become more interested in the subject, hence my long rambles earlier. I'm interested in how we get through this and come out the other side. I think what I've learned today is that it is not easy to get any sort of meaningful dialogue going on the topic. It's either violent agreement with those who think like you or trench warfare with those who don't.

Thanks for strengthening my belief and confirming a couple of the opinions I had about you. I'll waste no more of my time or yours on this. PS I'm not your pal or your mate. Is that just a quaint turn of phrase or something more passive-aggressive?

If we were playing chess I would describe this as the Turkish defence. I don’t know it’s not true as much as you don’t know that it is. Let’s not play that game. I am happy you responded back though. You are a fellow Saint and a major contributor to this forum so I wanted to give you the courtesy of explaining why I believe you were victim shaming/blaming and also why I think your story needed challenging. I use the word story because that’s what we’re dealing with here and, in my view, stories are more powerful weapons than bullets and guns, because they can be re-told and used to both right wrongs but also to spread propaganda. We tend to re-tell the stories that confirm our beliefs, opinions and biases, and ignore (or sometimes challenge) those that don’t. So when I read your story this is what I saw: “I played golf earlier with a couple of fellas with connections in sport in the area, cricket, golf, rugby and football” = This is not my story, so don’t blame me for it, but it comes from a credible source. “they tell me he is pushing this as he’s skint and needs to make so quick cash” = he’s a liar and a fraudster “It’s well know in Yorkshire sport apparently that he is not the victim he’s making out to be” = He is not the victim of bullying, harassment or racism from Yorkshire Sport because Yorkshire sport said so. “but due to the sensitive nature of it no one will be honest” = he’s using the background of racism and white fragility to exploit the situation for his own benefit without fear of being challenged or called out. I am happy to own my beliefs, opinions and biases, and it’s safe to say that I will not be re-telling this story. But it’s already been re-told to you and by you. In my imagination stories like this are flowing round the golf clubs, pubs and wherever in Yorkshire (and beyond). People re-tell them, embellish them; they need to believe they are true. And of course they might be. Or they might not. This is not new territory. Victim blaming/shaming, as a subset of propaganda wars, has been around as long as we have. Stories of crusades and colonialization, war and oppression. More recently you could study the Lawrence enquiry or watch Uprising. If you prefer something a little whiter, read the Taylor report or watch The Accused. And the reason I wanted to challenge the story is because I saw it as dangerous. Let me try and explain with an example. Here’s a story. This is a made-up story. It is not true. I am using it to make a point. “I received private mails earlier from a couple of fellas on this forum. They tell me Turkish is an active member of a white supremacist organisation. It’s well known on the forum apparently that he is not the normal, rational person he’s making out to be but due to the risk of being banned from the forum no one will be honest.” This is a made-up story. It is not true. I am using it to make a point. This story has three effects: 1. It confirms the biases of those people who already believe something like that could be true. They re-tell this story, they may even add their own embellishments, calling on previous comments you’ve made. The people I tell the story to are like me so they believe it too and re-tell it some more 2. It enrages those who either know the real you or have similar views to you. They either ignore it but resentfully, or challenge it – often in a way that draws more accusations from those they are challenging. Perhaps they are met with “How do you know it’s not true?” It confirms the feeling they have that they are righteous. 3. It sort of silences you. Because any response you might offer can be met with something like “well you would say that, wouldn’t you.” Also this story lets me off the hook completely. I am simply the messenger, the vessel through which this stuff flows. I take no accountability for its accuracy (though it’s clear what my beliefs, opinions and biases are because I am re-telling it so gleefully). I am not to blame. It’s a long ramble and I hope you make sense of it. I wanted to share it here because I worry about how topics like this can ever get resolved, when social media enables unchallenged stories to run rife through society. I like to see the best in people and I still hold on to hope that your motivations on these sorts of threads are honourable. But as I’ve said a couple of times, I am not always totally convinced about your intentions. I keep trying to stay in dialogue with you, despite the advice of others, because you are a loud voice here; one that I sometimes enjoy, and sometimes disagree with.

I didn't say it was. But "they tell me he is pushing this as he’s skint and needs to make so quick cash. It’s well know in Yorkshire sport apparently that he is not the victim he’s making out to be but due to the sensitive nature of it no one will be honest" is.

I usually only read when in the Lounge but can't walk past these unchallenged opinions. In the history of oppression, victim smearing/blaming has to be one of the most commonly used tools to justify the past and condone the present. To be honest I'd let it go if I believed the source to be unbiased but I'm afraid @TurkishI have doubts about your impartiality. Apologies if you feel this is unwarranted; it comes from (far too much) time spent reading your contributions on this forum. See above - this sounds like more victim smearing/blaming. not necessarily by you @The Cat but certainly by the person you mention. The idea that someone in cricket is having a swipe at someone who is accusing cricket of being institutionally racist is perhaps the least surprising thing I've read on here today, but in my view merely adds credence to the victim's claims. I've worked with two county sides as well as the England Lions and the accusations do not surprise me. I imagine the discrimination to be nuanced and not necessarily noticed (and certainly not condoned), but that doesn't mean it's not there, nor that the don't victims suffer as a result. And I would describe all the cricketers I worked with as pretty standard, decent, mainstream young men.

Didn't realise that. In which case, it's a no for me too. How about Acid country by Paul Heaton? It's a little long at 8 minutes but covers pretty much every thing you can think of - it's more UK than England but would be a good replacement for the already unpopular GSTK

Kevin Keegan lived out at Romsey. I've got a funny feeling he might still own the place. Last I heard Matt Le Tiss was Awbridge way.