Noodles34

have we finally put embarrassing 'That Elephant in the Room' thread to bed now?

I do not know what game you were watching? To call our performance abysmal is beyond me. The truth is, like many of our recent performances, we have suffered a lack of creativity in the final ball, Wallcott has been off form and if Danny Ings is not scoring, no one else is either. I think Leicester, Arsenal and Villa are games that could have gone either way, but each of those teams had just a little bit more and we did not offer enough. We are going through a poor run of results, sure, but we are still playing reasonably well and it will turn round at some point, and we'll win 3 or 4 from 7 or 8 and we'll be talking about Europe again and then we'll lose a couple on the spin and finish mid table, maybe 4 points off 7th. Welcome to the world of mid table Premier League football.

It’s a shame that whilst we were doing well, he’d do these interviews on how good he was, but when it was bad, nowhere to be seen. You can’t ave it both ways.

Seriously, if we are losing players to Leicester then what’s the point.

I bow to your your greater knowledge sir

despite how we are playing, I fancy our chances. As long as KWP is back that is. Didn't think Vallery was that bad on Tuesday, not in the same class of course, but he was okay but going forward he couldn't get a decent ball in. Hopefully Romeu is back and if KWP is unfit, play JWP there. The key will be stopping Grealish but not drawing the fouls. Win 3 - 1 If we do not win, then that's that for the season I think, mid table pottering.

yes, but match fit is based on playing, which he has been. he should be match fit and probably is. Here's a theory, maybe he is just out of form as are the team in general. You find that when is a team is not functioning at their best, the score less goals. I don't buy into the fact that he looks unhappy, he's just frustrated with the team not creating chances. Just a theory though.

no, dont think so, Rupes didn't like his arrogance apparently, the irony of that.

You can see this one played out. we sell him for 2m and he goes on to play for Barca or Real...... or Everton we look stupid. Just like when Rupert turned down Drogba

To be fair, you’ve summed up Walcott career.

I think with the club sports scientists etc. If Ings wasn’t fit enough, they’d know and he wouldn’t be playing. Whether being fit enough is 100% is another matter.

Is it me, or do there seem to be a lot of Adolf moustaches in the Milton?

Who gives a fuck

Seen a few of them, scary mate, surprised you didn’t do a Henry Hill.

I really like Armstrong but he does get caught with the ball once too often, a charge that could be labelled at others as well, to be fair. That said, the way we are trying to play now will invite that risk. But i like the way he drives forward and is not afraid to shoot and score.

Goal kick to the opposition

and i was surprised to know what would happen if the keeper threw the ball into the opponents net (obviously from his own box, otherwise that would be handball).

Think at the time, as you said, Timmy was fucking brilliant and we were gutted to lose him, same for Bridge, but maybe losing a LB isn't the same as losing a striker or goalie. Ironically, most people felt losing Shearer wasn't a massive deal at the time considering the money we got for him.

what are we saying here, that Ings is more important to the team than Flowers and Bridger were (haven't scrolled back to look)?

The only thing that doesn't make sense is that by signing a new three year deal, that effectively upps his market value anyway. I do not understand why he would think that we would offer a new contract and accept a 20 mil release clause. He's worth that now anyway, arguably more but certainly by next summer, if he has not signed, he will be with a year left. However he risks a lot by not signing (unless he moves this window), it is not incomprehensible to suggest that he might not return to the prolific goal scoring form or may he get injured again. If he does sign for us, not sure a release clause is that necessary, he's playing for a club that sell, sell, sell. We just want to sign him to protect his value so we can do a Fonte and get good money just as he goes on a downward curve, which is fine from a financial view. Not sure the manager comes into it as he'll be gone next year if we finish in the top 6 or maybe 7 this year.

someone else said that it may be that the 'clause' is just a smokescreen to Ings wanting to leave but not giving that impression i.e. he leaves (with a heavy heart) and says he was happy with everything except the release clause and Saints would not budge on that. He leaves but saves face and blames the club..

This is what Alex Crook said yesterday, it is the release clause that is the issue. Saints want around £40m and the Ings party want around £20m, that is the issue, everything else is fine.

and who might they be?

Traitors? They’re doing a job mate, not following the messiah. When will football fans get the fact that players aren’t supporters and are in it for the money and kudos. They don’t care about loyalty and shit like that.

Bale? That left back we sold to Tottenham? Right. wouldn’t say Shearer was better for us than Ings is now.