hectors house

Best Saints performance for some time, finally. At last we look like we actually want to win rather than not lose. And why are people having a dig at JWP - totally unwarranted on today’s showing.

Only one team deserved to win and they did. In the circumstances I'll forgive Saints for being so defensive and I guess not losing by too many was the objective, so mission accomplished and not without a great effort from everyone - so well done for that. But as others have suggested effort alone will not get us up the league table, IMO next weeks game is a big indication of how our season will evolve. Plus it's still very early but I agree that Djenepo looks the business.

I'm sure lots in the Northam fans go there because they are next to the away fans, it's part of the atmosphere to be so close. Move the away section and lots of the Northam fans will just move to the section next to it.

Everything I have read, apart from a few posters on here, suggests Gardos is RIGHT footed but happy to play left side - including the link below. I was at the match on Saturday but did not notice his preference, did anyone else? http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/florin-gardos/profil/spieler/57423

I think Toomer was responding to another poster who suggested we could "bin" him? I agree with Toomer in that it's just as easy to say we could give him a move to get first team football, which is what he deserves after giving us good service. That's respectful (IMO) whilst still making it clear that you reckon he is not good enough for us. Mind you I do appreciate that the "bin" type comments are generally from the troll community so probably best to just ignore them.

A few people suggesting wehave an option to buy but this link suggests he is a free agent next summer ... http://www.chelseatrueblue.com/2014/07/bertrand-chelsea-career-over-southampton-loan.html? If true then he has effectively left Chelsea and the £10 million fee being mentioned is nonsense. Of course if he does do well (and I mean really well) then even less likely to stay, unless we have some kind of option agreed with him to sign for us (not sure if that would be legal?)

Dead right, he has a blinder and signs for a top 6 side next summer - Saints! Welcome Ryan, I'm looking forward to seeing you play and hope this is the beginning of an exciting fresh start for you.

I wouldn't be disappointed with that but I don't think you should disregard Vlaar's premiership experience - especially in such a critical position. Despite his age I think we may end up with a few/lot of players with no PM experience which worries me.

"makes no sense to anyone"? I think it makes sense to Saints. An experienced (both in age and premiership) CB (we need CB's) and also a top signing that may convince others that we are serious (even if you do not rate him a WC semi finalist has to seen as a positive sign of intent?). From Vlaar's perspective it's a good pay rise or signing on fee (I assume), an extended contract (which at his age must be a plus) and a chance to work with RK again (I have no idea if that is a positive but will assume for now that it is).

I agree with the sentiment that he was happy to sign a contract and has been well paid for doing so - he should honour that contract. Crikey I imagine - for example - when he negotiated his contract he could have taken 10K less a week and included a 10 million buy out clause. However I like the guy and he seems to be of good character and I think we should (for now) cut him some slack regarding his reaction - we've probably all reacted badly in the past when we don't get our own way only to reflect later and regret it. If he has got any sense he will buckle down and do his job, maybe over the next few weeks/months (this is very optimistic) the new signings and the manager will change his mind about wanting to be here but if not then I am sure he will get a move in January - he just has to see the bigger picture and realise that at some point the madness had to stop and he just missed the last (I hope) train out of the station.

No Dave, I have no reason to doubt your integrity - I was referring to the post I quoted. Like yourself (I think) I do question whether Koeman is totally on board with all that is going on but I just sometimes (make that often) doubt the motives and alleged sources of some. I guess I am just a bit sensitive to the WUM's at the moment.

So the very day that someone starts a thread asking if Koeman is happy someone else gets a facebook message suggesting his brother is about the jump ship? What a surprise. I can understand people questioning if Koeman is happy, it is certainly a concern of mine, but please don't be influenced by these WUM posts - my ignore list has just gone up by 1.

A couple on hear have said they do not rate Gnabry but on the occasions I saw him last year (admittedly only MOTD highlights) he looked really useful and certainly offers some pace that we lack. However I would be disappointed to only see a loan, especially as we hold a great bargaining card in Chambers.

It looks as if this alleged Chambers move has pushed a few people over the edge. I'm as "down in the dumps" as most but determined to stay in the "let's be patient" camp. Chambers leaving (if it happens) just might be a battle we have to lose so we can win the war - surely it is only when the transfer window finally closes that we can truly judge the situation. My main concern at the moment is that Koeman is on board with all the outgoings and so far there is nothing to suggest he is not content, if he did suddenly leave then it would be time to panic.

What about Chambers out and Gnabry in? It's not ideal but we do still have a top class right back starter (Clyne) and maybe Koeman also sees the other lad who played a few pre season games at right back (McCarthy?) as promising. I reckon we need more attacking options so maybe this could be a footballing decision where overall Koeman reckons the squad will end up stronger even if we have less depth at right back.

I may be a childish 51 years old but I'll boo him ... nothing too vindictive, more of a pantomime boo but a boo all the same. Crikey, this is football - proper grown up emotions don't come into play.

"People" probably means me as I think I am no only one who is questioning the tactic. If so then I do not think that it is black and white, having Lallana on the bench yesterday just in case he was needed very much proves the benefit of "trying" to rest a star player but keeping him in hand just in case. It's Fonte on the bench that I question and personally I think we should have played/risked him from the start as we already have a weakened defence.

I am also damn glad we use MP's tactics and not mine, I think it's safe to say that he knows a bit more than I do ... all the same ... you could argue that if they had started and lasted 90 minutes then we might have won the game? Of course the big question is "if they had lasted 90 minutes" and I absolutely agree that it is best to be cautious with Lallana as he is so critical to the team. My point was really more about Fonte and that I thought it was a risk worth taking, especially considering the inexperienced keeper situation. Just an opinion and it's easy to be critical with hindsight, I was just interested to see if anyone else shared my thoughts, but I guess not.

Logically I cannot argue with your point and I can see some logic in having a not match fit Lallana on the bench to come on only if absolutely necessary ... as was the case today. But I am not so sure about Fonte? If he is first choice (I am assuming from MP's selections so far this season he is) then I reckon when the 3rd choice keeper is playing (who is generally considered to be lacking in confidence) then playing Fonte is worth the risk .. surely you can always bring on Hooviled if Fonte breaks down? IMO an unconfident keeper does not help Hoovield and even more so a dodgy centre half only exposes the keeper even more.

I did hear the interview this afternoon and the mention that Lallana had a knock but missed the refrerence to Fonte but all the same if you are fit enough to be on the bench then you should be fit enough to play (IMO) ... certainly having 3 players on the bench (Lallana, Schneiderlin & Fonte) who are not fit seems a bit risky to me.

I have not read the post-match thread so apologies if already covered but for the very first time today I was frustrated with Pochettino. To start with I was amazed that he left Lallana on the bench, in my opinion one of the best players in the league right now, certainly a shoe in for Brazil on current form? On reflection I have managed to convince myself that it we want to be a top 6 side then we have to rotate the squad and we have to occasionally rest players … and to be fair few players work harder than Lallana in my opinion. However there might be easier games (on paper) to rest him? The decision that I cannot understand is “resting” Fonte for Hoovield. I am not wanting to beat up on Hoovield but on the assumption that Fonte is the mangers first choice (?) I assume he is resting him and I cannot get me head around he will “rest” a first choice centre half at a time when we are needing to play our third choice keeper, Is this not a time when the defence needs some consistency, why not rest a centre half when our the keeper is back. On the other hand it makes me wonder if Fonte is in fact not highly rated by Pochettino so maybe this is a January signing. What do you think? BTW. Don’t take this is an anti Pochettino rant as I love the guy and reckon if he stays at the club we really might (only might) make the champions league . But that is no reason why I should not document my frustration occasionally.

Panic over because less than 3 hours later and we are now 11 points off 6th place with a game in hand so 8 points off the playoffs. A point better than December and and improvement of around 11% - Pardew is a god (at least until the next match). The only time to judge and use the league table as "FACT" is (IMO) at the end of the season.

I think the problem with the thread is the insistence of some to refer to a "singing" area rather than "standing" area. I suspect most fans have no problem with the idea of a dedicated "standing" area but the implied suggestion that you have to stand in order to sing and support the team is bound to wind people up. Also as suggested by someone else I would be amazed if the club or the Echo publicy endorsed the idea as it is against the law.

What you say is partly the point I was trying to make. It's like the boy who cried wolf, I suspect that lots who criticise James do it just because he is an easy victim so when someone genuinely does not rate him it's difficult to know if they are just towing the popular line or have a formed opinion. The very fact that he seems to be the latest target just snow balls as more and more people jump on board as they keep hearing that "James is ****", often from people who have only been listening to the radio. We will all have different opinions otherwise life would be pretty boring but I just feel that quite a few people tow the popular line with regard to James rather than form their own opinion. I have been to most home games and I still reckon that James is a young professional making his way in the game and doing a steady job for the team. Like a few others he was probably introduced to first team football before he was ready and on top of that he is being asked to play in a position that until 18 months ago he had never played (I'm only guessing at that but he was certainly a midfielder coming through the junior teams). He's improving (IMO) and he is flexible within the squad and whilst nobody should be immune from criticism he deserves better that what he receives on the message board.

If the basis for a correct opinion is how many games you have been to then Alan Pardew has been to every game (including Luton) and every training session. Add to that he has played and managed at the top level and I guess he is fairly qualified? And he seems to rate the lad. That aside you stated that you have been to most games so your thoughts are based on some experience and are worth listening to but then you come out with a line like “For anyone to think there is not a lot between them simply doesn't know a lot about football” - that seems a bit arrogant to me and is not likely to bring anyone around to your point of view? My feeling is that Harding is a better fullback but he is not above criticism. After all he has been playing as a fullback a lot longer (all of his career as far as I am aware), plays there every game for Saints and also has an established left side midfielder (AL) in front of him. James is new to the position, keeps being moved to midfield and then back to RB and it seems most games has a different player in front of him in right midfield. Personally I expect a message board to have its fair share of critics but I just feel that it is not a level playing field. James has to be outstanding otherwise every mistake is analysed but Harding can have a poor game but hardly be mentioned. If I thought every player was treated fairly then I may be more open to criticism of James but I reckon many people on here just jump on the bandwagon. I have been to most home games and IMO whilst he is not a superstar the lad is okay and will only get better with experience. I think the whole debate started because many feel we need to sign a RB but with James/Murty/Thomas (and I believe Perry played RB for Luton) I reckon we have plenty of cover at the moment. Murty first choice without question and then debatable between Thomas and James as both have their strengths and weaknesses but for me both are good enough at this level.