FloridaMarlin

Mellon added: "I'd love to have millions to spend. We all would. But this is football. The other way is cheating.[b/] So it's not just bitter, jealous scummahs who think this?

If Danny appoints his son Daley as captain of the Pranje does that constitute the Blind leading the Blind? I say, cloakroom attendant, are you busy?

One things f'sure, if we do lose Schneiderlin and we don't do as well as last season it gives the pundits a nice easy shot. I can almost hear Gary Neville saying now: "Losing Schneiderlin was a big blow for Southampton and they've never really recovered from that." Those words will then be picked up and recycled by Lawro/Lily Savage/Jamie 'I never finish a sentence' Carragher/Ian 'no matter what game I am commentating on, I always manage to shoehorn in a mention of my beloved p****y' Darke/Danny 'I once played for Liverpool, you know' Murphy and the others who love an easy truism.

I don't know one way or another whether the Metro report is true, but it could be a clever tactic by Saints if they have accepted Liverhampton's £15m bid. They have basically said to him that without signing a new contract he is not much use to them long-term, so they will be happy to sell him for their asking price and realise his value. If he doesn't fancy Liverpool it throws the ball firmly into his court to either sign a new deal or they sell him to Liverhampton, or he gambles on waiting for United to come in.

That survey was not carried out by the club, but by The Snooze to ask fans what they would like more of in the paper. It's a way of putting pressure on the club. The paper can say: "This is what fans are asking us to provide more of so can you co-operate please?" In other words, despite it being the bestest, biggest fan-owned blah-blah-blah, the so-called community club's relationship with its local paper doesn't appear to be great.

I liked this bit in the same report: "However, another target – Jimmy Ryan –is reportedly closing in on a move to Fleetwood Town." Now they get beaten to targets by the mighty Fleetwood Town. Surely that can't be right? Why would any player pass up the chance to play in front of the loudest, bestest, biggest, etc, etc, to play in front of a bunch of fishermen who spend their time trying to catch skates? Fleetwood: home of the Lofthouse company which created the Fisherman's Friend.

I found this intriguing: "A number of seats in the North and South stands are being removed to help with supporter access and drive the club towards satisfying safety criteria." Is this The News way of saying 'we know the place is falling down and is struggling to gain a safety certificate, but we can't say it as the truth would ruin our relationship with the club.'?

Really? £11m for an international striker who scored 12 goals in his first season in the Prem? I would like to see somebody prise Mirallas away from Everton for £5m.

I wonder if this was the same ex-Saints manager who took part in a Q&A at a pub with three prominent and well-loved former players. At the end of the evening the ex-manager went up to the players, said he had managed to get a few quid for them and handed them £50 each. The players were surprised and pleased as they were happy to do the Q&A for nothing and really hadn't expected any money, so the £50 was a bonus. A couple of weeks later, one of the players returned to the pub on his own for a drink and got talking to the landlord who as a big Saints fan, was reliving the glories of the Q&A night and how much he enjoyed it. He explained that he was happy to raise some money but what a bit concerned that the £700 he had raised might not have been enough. Anyway, back on topic. Among some of the biggest a-holes I have met - Linford Christie, Daley Thompson (complete arrogant bumwipe who always tried to humiliate the same journalists on whose publicity he relied for his sponsorship), Howard Wilkinson (who accused me of being a "fookin smart-arse", Vernon Kaye whose personality changes like Dr Jekyll into Mr Hyde once the cameras are off him, and likewise one of TV's Mr Nice Guy's, a celebrity chef who owns pretty much all of a Cornish seaside town. Jeremy Clarkson is a plumsack who seems to entirely forget the humble beginnings to his journalistic career with the way I have seen him treat and dismiss reporters from the same type of paper. Sorry to dispel any childhood notions but two of Blue Peter's most prominent male presenters (OK, possibly THE two most famous) are both short-tempered grumps at the best of times. Pleasant surprises? A friend was ghosting a former Man Utd player's autobiography and knew that an anecdote or two from Sir Alex Ferguson would help sell the book, but had been given the run-around by United's media office for about a year. On a day when United were playing Saints down here, my mate's phone trang and a gruff voice said: "It's Sir Alex Ferguson, i gather you want to talk to me about the book." My mate thought it was one of his friends taking the pish and told him so, but the voice insisted it was Sir Alex (and he was by now convinced) and that if he got to the de Vere hotel, he could have 30 minutes. He did so, and Sir Alex was as good as his word. But he's like that when it comes to dealing with football folk. He knew this former player needed the book to sell, so was happy to help him out (not sure he would have dome the same for Jaap Stam) and Nigel Adkins is among the numerous managers who will tell you the first phone call they got after being fired was from Sir Alex, offering words of support and encouragement. John McEnroe was one of the nicest people I have met. He had no reason to, but gave me 40 minutes of his time and was charming, funny and honest with every question he was asked. But for the ideal dinner-party guest, it would have to be Shane Warne, who is completely unpretentious, down-to-earth, blokey and friendly, with a fund of good stories and anecdotes. Apologies if you can hear the loud 'clang' of what appears to be name-dropping.

I would hardly think an organisation that has allowed a feckless manager to spunk the thick end of £200m during his three years in charge for no trophies and no more this season - other than a slightly higher league position - than the Europa League spot Saints have got, would be adopting the Moneyball approach. I could be wrong, but my reading of the book and Oakland's approach was to use innovative and previously untried data to build a competitive team for as little outlay as possible. I believe FSG hired Theo Epstein to try and develop the A's successful approach (am I imagining it, or did Billy Beene turn them down?) and in fairness they did win the World Series under him. Perhaps with Liverpool it's a reverse Moneyball. Instead of using previously untried data to find talent other clubs were overlooking to develop and move on, they have hit on a new method of paying way over the odds for established players, and then using a magic formula to coach all the talent out of them, requiring the signing of more to keep the cycle going.

Not so much a Portsmyth, but Portsmouth has always pleaded it is a special case economically, and constantly sucks at the government teat. "The loss of jobs in the dockyard means thousands of jobs will disappear. We need special help from the government to cushion the blow" Fair enough, nobody likes to see people put out of work. However, it is worth considering all the industrial and manufacturing jobs that have disappeared in recent years in the Southampton area. In the docks alone, the likes of Harland and Wolff, Vospers, AC Delco and Pirelli have all gone with loss of jobs. Not to mention a huge scaling down of operations at BAT and the Ordnance Survey. Within the SO postcode and just up the road (as Gosport is to Portsmouth) Fords at Eastleigh has closed, along with the rail works. At no time has Southampton gone to central government with the begging bowl (perhaps it should have done), probably in the realisation that none of those jobs were in the public sector but in private business. Portsmouth has relied on government funding for the dockyard and when that is reduced, they get their own special minister for Portsmouth. In the meantime, Southampton just gets on with it and is now the second biggest container handling port in the country, and the biggest cruise port in Europe - bits of which businesses which Portsmouth is trying to nick There is also the phenomenon known as The Portsdown Hill Flat Earth Syndrome. This is a condition whereby those born and bred on the Septic Isle believe that if they climb the big hill which overlooks their city, they will fall off the end of the earth. To that end, they tend to stay cowering on their island, not wanting to move away. A mate of mine, who owns a business in Portsmouth, is constantly amazed and hugely amused at how many apparently intelligent and talented people who could make their way in the wide world, have no desire or enthusiasm to leave the island.

Sky just repeating what's in The Mirror, no new information.

There are some tasty teams in it. It might be the second tier competition but it's still tough and a trophy worth winning. Am I the only one that suspects European clubs take it more seriously than English ones? I suppose with the money on offer and the price of failure PL clubs know where their priorities lie.

Like PMQs, I would refer you to my earlier post. Fifa is a discredited organisation, especially while Blatter is at the helm, and this scenario does seem tempting. But you always have to be careful what you wish for. Without the controlling hand of a global governing body, football will devolve into rich man's anarchy. Pulling out of the World Cup or acting unilaterally will hand power to the clubs; club who do not like international matches or tournaments because they have to release their players for them. If the countries affiliated to Uefa (and remember, Uefa is a confederation and while its members can form a voting block, Uefa itself has no votes at the Fifa table) pull out, Uefa will kow-tow to the powerful clubs who play in its prime competition - the Champions League. Football will then be run by the most powerful clubs, for their own benefit and with the backing of TV to fund a Kerry Packer circus- style breakaway competition. Would you like to take the risk that Saints will be one of top clubs on the inside of the tent peeing out, instead of on the outside of the tent trying to pee in? Never mind, the billions of scarfers and shirt-buyers in the Far East will love it.

Most footballers and celebs use two signatures; one for signing autographs (which is normally an undecipherable squiggle of a pen on a scrap of paper) and their official 'real' signature, which they use for signing documents.

Except, of course, when it suits them. Those same big clubs who complain about the travel their players have to undertake for international duty are the first to jet off on lucrative tours to far-flung places to raise their profile. If anything brings Blatter down and spells the end of Fifa as we know it, it will be the clubs. Clubs are gaining more confidence in the power the hold with their control of players. For some time now the England manager has had to kow-tow (or work with, as some might say) to clubs' demands to restrict the use of their players in friendlies and we all know that players are pulled out of international duty on the flimsiest of pretexts. The clubs will need little encouragement to play an even tougher brand of hardball if they sense they can wrest control of the game and it could be they take advantage of which ever way the vote goes tomorrow. Should Prince Ali win, they could sniff fresh blood and test out the new boy, if Blatter wins, they can throw up their hands in mock disgust and despair at how the game is being run and convince a disillusioned public that they are going off and doing their own thing for the good of football.

Thanks for the plug, Phil. I should have posted this on this 'ere thread, instead of on the 'Fifa about to implode' thread in The Lounge. All I will say, is be careful what you wish for. It's an awful comparison to make and I expect to take some stick, but as we have seen in the Middle East, when you create a power vacuum, something will fill it. "Meanwhile, up in the penthouse of News Corp towers in New York, Rupert Murdoch is doing his best Monty Burns impression, rubbing his hands together and breathing; "Excellent." Fifa might be as hooky as hell, but football needs a global governing body. Without one, football will descend into anarchy. With no global governance the game will fragment, and the likes of Murdoch will cherry-pick the best bits for their own ends. I've blathered on before that Murdoch would love to do a Kerry Packer and set up a rival circus in association with top clubs who hate the fact that Fifa rules dictate they must release player for international duty to play in Fifa sanctioned competitions like the World Cup and Confederation championships. Up until now, clubs have always fought shy, but if Fifa fragments, there will be nothing to stop the game's biggest clubs sticking two fingers up and going off to form their own TV-backed European/World league. All it requires are the four top clubs from England, Germany, Spain and Italy, a few other big clubs from France, Holland, Portugal, a couple from Russia (now that they have money), mix in some Asian clubs, a few from the Americas (north and south), and Australasia and you've got a world league to rival the World Cup. Actually, it won't rival the World Cup, because without Fifa's controlling hand, the clubs won't have to release their players for that, and can retain them to play in the World League, or whatever you care to call it. The World Cup as we know it will cease to exist. I did speculate the 2022 tournament in Qatar might be the straw the breaks the clubs' backs, and could be the last World Cup as we know it. I might amend that forecast. If Fifa implodes as a result of this, we might have already seen our last World Cup. Think this is too far-fetched? I bet even now feelers are being put out among the G20, or how many clubs are in the elite group these days. And it's certainly a scenario that was war-gamed among the BBC corridors of power several years ago.

Meanwhile, up in the penthouse of News Corp towers in New York, Rupert Murdoch is doing his best Monty Burns impression, rubbing his hands together and breathing; "Excellent." Fifa might be as hooky as hell, but football needs a global governing body. Without one, football will descend into anarchy. With no global governance the game will fragment, and the likes of Murdoch will cherry-pick the best bits for their own ends. I've blathered on before that Murdoch would love to do a Kerry Packer and set up a rival circus in association with top clubs who hate the fact that Fifa rules dictate they must release player for international duty to play in Fifa sanctioned competitions like the World Cup and Confederation championships. Up until now, clubs have always fought shy, but if Fifa fragments, there will be nothing to stop the game's biggest clubs sticking two fingers up and going off to form their own TV-backed European/World league. All it requires are the four top clubs from England, Germany, Spain and Italy, a few other big clubs from France, Holland, Portugal, a couple from Russia (now that they have money), mix in some Asian clubs, a few from the Americas (north and south), and Australasia and you've got a world league to rival the World Cup. Actually, it won't rival the World Cup, because without Fifa's controlling hand, the clubs won't have to release their players for that, and can retain them to play in the World League, or whatever you care to call it. The World Cup as we know it will cease to exist. I did speculate the 2022 tournament in Qatar might be the straw the breaks the clubs' backs, and could be the last World Cup as we know it. I might amend that forecast. If Fifa implodes as a result of this, we might have already seen our last World Cup. Think this is too far-fetched? I bet even now feelers are being put out among the G20, or how many clubs are in the elite group these days. And it's certainly a scenario that was war-gamed among the BBC corridors of power several years ago.

I think you might be getting a little confused with cricket. The laws (they aren't rules) of the game are sanctioned by the International Football Association Board, which was actually founded in 1886 for the express purpose of ensuring one codified set of rules across the game. Although not technically part of Fifa, they are recognised by them as the body responsible for sanctioning and adopting any changes to the laws of the game, and any changes have to go through a voting process for Fifa's approval. Fifa itself cannot change any of the laws of the game, but no changes can be made to the laws without Fifa's sanction. The laws of cricket are still administered by the MCC, who are the guardians of the laws and effectively own the copyright, despite attempts by the ICC to wrest control away. Now that is a strange set-up, where what is effectively a posh, privileged private members club can dictate the laws of a sport.

Nothing to see here, just Paddy Power trying to create a book on something that's not going to happen. And who are these 'renewed calls' for the 2018 and 2022 tournaments to be re-allocated coming from? For some reason, we seem to think we have a divine right to be a world soccer power who should be staging every tournament. Even if Russia and Qatar are stripped (which won't happen), there are plenty of countries more deserving than England for a chance to stage the World Cup, especially if you ascribe to the view that as a global game, the game's prime tournament should be taken all over the globe. Australia probably have a stronger case than us and there are probably a couple of countries ahead of us when it becomes Europe's turn in the rotation.

Allardyce won't be out of work for long. Love or loathe him or his style, any club appointing Allardyce knows he will guarantee their Premier League status. West Ham have acted pretty crassly, but what more do you expect from a club which has displayed an incredible smugness in mugging off the taxpayer in getting the Olympic Stadium for a relative song? They are more likely to land Jurgen Klopp's lesser-known brother Klippity than the man himself, but there are some pretty decent managers out there looking for a job, and the law of averages says they are likely to recruit somebody half decent. A propos of the footballing genius Rodgers, I see bookies are already chopping their odds for Klopp to succeed Brenda. It's clear he has lost dressing room and the players, who look as though they gave their support to Sterling with today's effort. That was a real two-fingered salute to a manager who they have lost faith in. Having made a complete hash of last summer's rebuilding (thanks for the dosh, Brenda!) are the owners prepared to trust him with the money this summer? For all their bluff and bluster, Sterling will not fetch as much in the market as Suarez, so he might have less money to do an arguably bigger rebuilding job with the need to replace Stevie G. Gerrard, meanwhile,, will go off to The States, and just sit and wait patiently for the call to return from across the sea like Bonnie Prince Charlie (and if you don't know what happened to him, look up your history books), having played a blinder this season in just tugging the rug enough at the optimum times to unsettle the dressing room, at the same time reminding everybody how much weight he carries at the club. That smug look could be wiped off Rodgers face and their meltdown could make our supposed one look like a tub of ice cream you haven't got back from the supermarket quickly enough.

Of course, that will be kissed off as typical Manc, anti-Scouse bias and bile. But he's right.

I was told by a boar member today the playing budget for the coming season (including Cook's salary) is £2.5m. Not sure how that compares with other clubs in the division. He also said that Awford is returning to the club after a holiday, to run the academy. It seems as though they have little choice. They were so desperate to get Awford in post that they agreed to his condition; "I'll only take the job providing you can't sack me and kick me out of the club like you did Guy Whittingham." So it appears they are saddled with each other for some time

Meanwhile http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/32773155 Perhaps not directly Saints related, but not for the first time, it looks as though Spurs might have acted in haste. If my memory serve me, didn't Christian Gross win a league title not long after Spuds ditched him? Despicable club which deserves everything it gets.

James rinsed Gazzaniga before the game. Some might say 'fair enough' but he appeared to take an ex-Skate's devilish delight in it. If he is setting himself up as a media pundit It is unprofessional to allow your allegiances to affect your objectivity.