VectisSaint

Agree totally with you, but you need to note that not paying the Living Wage is not illegal (sorry about the double negatives). The Living Wage is voluntary, but is a decent benchmark for good employers which Saints should definitely be. There is no reason they should not pay substantially more than the LW. If they are not paying the Minimum Wage that is a different matter and would be an illegal operation. Sadly in today's economic environment more and more businesses are flouting the Law but our Govt doesn't care.

England have been relegated to Division B, not D

True, there were strikes previous weekend as well.

Think they will have them at your local 1980s golf shop 😉

The strikes will always be targeted to.maximise impact, any other plan would be a nonsense. I think these are the first strikes planned for Saturdays, the impact on weekdays was not as extensive as expected, so new strategy. Will continue until Gov get their heads or of their asses and get involved with negotiations (so that will be never).

No it wouldn't. It would have been right to say give us the last season of your contract and you can leave for free with our blessing, meanwhile we will endeavour bring in an adequate replacement. Instead the possibility of getting a (relative small) fee took precedence. From what I have read Oriol only pushed for the move after their Chairman made a cheeky offer to Saints and was somewhat shocked when Saints didn't tell them to take a long walk off a short pier.

She 😉

There is no compelling evidence that OR's legs had gone. With Lavia he would not have been required to play every minute anyway, so it was not such an issue. Basically Saints made a big mistake thinking Oriol was expensive, and we are reaping the rewards with Lavia injured.

JWP had Lavia and Diallo in support in the middle (at least for 60 minutes). JWP is struggling when he has to hold the midfield together and play Romeu's role.

I didn't say that I agreed with the tactics, merely that this appears to be what has been happening in most games so far this season. Fact is that all 7 points we have gained this season we have come from behind. Every other game we have lost (also from behind of course). In the past we so often lost having gone in front usually because Ralph had no idea how to protect a lead, it seems logical to me that Ralph (with his new staff) has sought to address this, but we don't have the players to do it, especially with Lavia out. I don't think anyone has really realised what a huge loss he has been coupled with Oriol's crazy departure.

It is clearly the tactics that Ralph and his team are employing, and there is evidence other teams are doing the same. We used to go hell for leather from the start, get a goal and then get beaten, hence we are top of the points dropped from winning positions. Now the game plan is to keep it tight for the first half, with the possibility of a goal and then change it up with attacking players after half time, and to some extent it has worked (we were actually top of the most points won from losing positions table). Trouble is without a solid midfield since Lavia got crocked we are a shambles and don't get the service to the attackers to make the difference. I don't think there is any issue between Ralph and Stu, just Stu doing what he is asked, but I think it will change soon as it clearly isn't working at the moment. But there is no doubt that 5 subs has brought a new dynamic to team selection and tactics and managers, not just Ralph, are still working out how best to exploit it.

90+ minutes of my life I will never get back (and at my age that hurts). What an abysmal game of football, and what an appalling performance by Saints. Beggars belief how we can be so bad. Hurts to say it but one of the worst offenders was JWP. Really isn't anything positive to say, OK Larios did look good.

Ahem, apart from AMN it is exactly what I predicted. Must say without AMN the lineup is crap. It really was a bad decision for us to let Oriol go.

Olly Lancashire 😉

Assuming that Villa start with 3 in the middle then we need to match up. It was Villa that first exploited our 2 in the middle last season by overrunning us and Coutinho providing the creative spark, others followed of course. We should start with 4 at the back, with JWp, AMN and Diallo in the middle, Moi, AA and Adams upfront. Second half bring on Aribo, Stu and Edozie to go for it assuming we are not already winning.

I saw that the Womens' match got moved to Totton on Monday due to "a fixture clash", suspect that it was more to do with the pitch being unusable possibly because they were going to relay it immediately after the Brentford match. Maybe they've now started earlier. The PL have said they expect to reschedule this weekend's round of fixtures to the New Year, so no chance that the pitch would be needed until October. Is 3 weeks enough to relay the pitch and have it ready for a PL fixture?

Is there a problem at Staplewood as well?

Think Ralph is spot on. Clearly the Club were not best pleased when he moved away, but are more than happy to have him back.

Depends on the tactics. Nowadays it is no longer the case that we start our best XI. With 5 subs it seems to be Ralph's plan to keep it tight for 45-60 and then bring on our better midfield attackers to have a go at tiring defenders. To me Moi is more solid defensively than Stu or Jo, while still providing some offensive threat. But maybe Ralph will see Brentford more of a team that we can have a go at early doors. I'm not a fan of 5 subs, but it is fascinating how it has seemingly changed tactical thinking for many teams.

and it had no material effect on the result and clearly wasn't big club biased. All referees make honest mistakes (but not all referees are honest), prefer to allow such mistakes to happen than to have a system in place that compound mistakes by making further ones. The problem is not VAR per se, but the useless idiots thatnuse it, along with the current laws of the game (e.g. offside) which have been tweeted to suit VAR rather than changed to reflect the original intent (stopping attackers gaining an unfair advantage) such that VAR is not required.

I imagine Chelsea understand these things better than most. Having a new owner probably makes little difference to the day to day operations, at least in the short term. Buy back clauses are not really intrinsically complex and have been around for a few years and are regulated by the governing bodies AFAIK. Think that if there is any truth in this story (an assumption in itself) Chelsea were just chancing their arm. If you don't ask you don't get.

It isn't being reported on BBC Sport, it is a line in their Gossip page, directly quoted from the Daily Echo/Alfie House (I'm beginning to sound like MLG)

Buy-back clauses cannot be activated before a set term that forms part of the contract. The term is based on "transfer windows", and is commonly set to 2 years (4 transfer windows). There are apparently examples of 18 months. So to allay your fears unless Saints have agreed to a ridiculously short clause (1 transfer window) there is no way City could do what you suggest. I would suggest the earliest they could do what you fear is during the Summer transfer window of 2024.

Unless he was on a moped he wouldn't have been driving.

Don't think the compo is an issue, it often takes months or even years for that to be resolved unless the teams agree it up front which they seldom do. I would imagine as he is only 16 and not yet on a prom interact that transfer rules do not apply and that it is relatively easy for him to switch back. Will be interesting to see when he reappears in the Saints squads.