Sidney Fudpucker the 3rd

Exactly. The first sensible response to this thread.

I'd love to see GH back at Saints. I still believe that RL should've just employed him instead of bowing to pressure from the fans. He got us playing decent football. He was the best manager England have had in recent years and would still be in the job if he'd kept his mouth shut.

It's all becoming clear now. That's why he turned down Liverpool in the summer. He was obviously hoping for an approach from Saints.

Was just thinking the same thing.

Mate, you're wasting your time. My view was the same as yours and when I voiced that opinion I got a right slagging from certain people on here. Funny as 10 days later they're saying exactly what I said which was that we've addressed the wrong areas of the team.

I was worried the day we got Promoted as I had a sneaky feeling that we wouldn't invest in the way that's needed to stay up. I became even more worried when I saw our activity in the transfer market compared to other similarly sized clubs. The highest level of worry was when we lost the Wigan game as that was the one fixture I felt we could possibly pick up points in our first 6 games.

Let's not forget tha Adkins has let Hammond & Sharp go witjout so much as kicking a ball in a premier league game. Did we really need Mayuka when we had sharp? S. Davies looks no better than Hammond to me. He's done a amazing job for saints but he's out of his depth. He's made some awful decisions & looks tactically naive at this level.

Exactly! ;-)

Adkins. He's got his tactics wrong in every game this season. He's also failed to land players in areas that needed attention and signed crap like J-Rod. Although I suspect the board are also very much to blame for our poor transfer activity. £7m for J-Rod when Fulham signed Berbatov for just over half that amount. I've said it before & i'll say it again. When you go up into the Prem you need players who've been there, even if you only get a season or two out of them. Its all about staying up to start. **** all this building a young squad for the future. Yes, young players are important but you need a good mix of youth & experience. Adkins also said at the start of the season that he felt we had a squad capable of European football. If he honestly believes that then the man is deluded. Ultimately Adkins.

I'll ask the question again. Could the £12m spent on Ramirez have been better spent elsewhere? From what I've seen it could've been spent pretty much anywhere and it'd be better than what I'm watching. The back 4 and the keeper look ****ing awful. We all knew we needed to strengthen in these areas. We haven't and now we're being punished for not doing so. Adkins has got his tactics wrong... again! He's out of his depth in this league.

What were people saying about the defence being ok?

Actually, I think the two roles are very similar.

Hmmm, I see what you're saying but not sure Silvestre is the right player. People seem to write players off because of age which doesn't make any sense. Sherringham & Larsson were still playing great football in their late 30's. Let's not forget our very own, Jaidi who did a excellent job despite his age.

The Feds. As in, Federal agents. "Quick, it's the feds."

At Old Trafford in the late 80's I heard a kid say to his dad, 'daddy, is this the game we watched on TV last week?'

This pretty much sums up life in the premier****e. Fixtures getting moved all the time. It's a joke. Football should be played on a Saturday afternoon at 3pm. 4pm on a Sunday is not ideal when you've got young kids to get ready for school the following day. It makes taking them to away games almost impossible and makes me think twice about taking them to home games as I don't get back until gone 8pm.

Any game where we've been leading with 10 minutes to go and then lost. That accounts for quite a lot of Saints games. Tranmere away when we led 3-0 at half time and lost 4-3 was particularly disappointing.

It just doesn't look like Saints. Every time I watch us I'm reminded of Liverpool in the early 80's... Although, not in the way we play. It wouldn't be as bad if we kept the lack shorts & white socks but the all red just isn't Saints.

And now to answer the OP: 1. I am amazed that any Saints fan could have felt 'annoyed' over the signing of such a highly rated player. Why? Everybody is entitled to an opinion. It's annoying as I believe that we could've signed other 'players' who would have added more depth than adding one player. 2. Yes, there were, and still are, other areas that needed attention. In particular goalkeeper and defence. However, we did sign two goalkeepers (admittedly one was for the development squad), an England U21 international RB and a full Japanese international CB. So we didn't exactly ignore those areas. No, fair comment. But do you feel that either of those are capable of stepping up should Davies get injured? Now, I'm not saying that they're not good enough, just that it's the Premier league and it's a tough place for a young, inexperienced goalkeeper. Look at teams like Villa, Spurs and even QPR. They've all got 2 keepers fighting for the No.1 shirt. I don't believe we have. 3. You state we ignored those areas in favour of 'unknown' strikers and attacking midfielders. I presume you mean 'unknown to you' as I had certainly heard of all our signings before they were recruited. In fact, I am sure the majority of posters on here had heard of Ramirez (the prime 'annoyance' of yours) and Mayuka before they were linked with us. I'd never heard of Mayuka. I'd seen Yoshida & Ramierez play. I wonder just how many people can hand on heart say that they had heard of Ramirez prior to him being linked with Saints? You say that the majority of forum users would have been familiar with him. I have to disagree. My guess is that less than 50% would have known who he was. I say this because I work with a huge number of Liverpool supporters and when they we're linked with him only 1 or 2 knew who he was. You'd have thought he'd be better known to Liverpool supporters as they've been playing european football more than saints? The reality is that we'll never know as I doubt anybody is going to admit it now. 4. Why do people still think that the signing of any and all new players at football clubs, and particularly at Saints, is all down to the manager? That sort of thing went out of the window many years ago at most clubs. It has been widely stated that Saints have a committee for the recruitment of new players. I am sure Adkins does have a high degree of say in that committee but it is not all down to him to identify players, negotiate with them and their agents and hen to get them to sign on the dotted line. This does not mean anyone is a Cortese signing either; it is a group effort. And, in any case, Adkins clearly admitted, on a number of occasions, that he wanted to bring in 2 CBs; it is also pretty clear that he would have also liked to bring in a new LB, so any criticism of him 'not buying enough defenders' is well off IMO. 4. Sadly, I don't think all signings are down to the manager. Personally I believe they should be as he's the one who is in direct contact with the players and knows the team better than anyone else. I don't recall saying that we hadn't signed 'enough defenders' as you put it. I'm disappointed that we've not strengthened in those areas and I think that the performances and results show that we do have an issue. 5. I have kept the most pertinent answer to your post until last......... Where has anybody said that Ramirez was signed at the expense of signing other possible options, especially in other positions (i.e. CB and LB). How do you collate, and justify, our signing of a fantastic young creative attacking player as being the reason we didn't sign any other defenders apart from the full international CB and the U21 international RB? Please find me a statement from Adkins or Cortese that says this is so. Also, please give me a list of all the players we asked about or negotiated with and the reasons as to why these deals didn't come off, particularly indicating those that were scratched solely because of the funds being used to purchase Gaston! I don't believe that his signing was at the expense of other possible options (CB & LB). I also don't recall saying that it was the signing of GR for £12m that led to us not signing defenders - That is how people have chosen to interpret what I asked. I asked if the £12m could've been better spent elsewhere. For example, Phillips & Ince maybe? £12m on one player in a squad like ours is a lot and if he can't settle or gets injured then we're back to square one. Had we signed 2 or 3 players then maybe we'd be in a better position to cover this kind of event should it occur.

No. Read what I said. This talk of it preventing the potential signing of a CB has been generated as the thread has progressed. I asked if the money could've been better spent elsewhere. ie, on the signing of 2 or maybe 3 players rather than 1. As I said, it could've added more depth to the squad. I admit that I think the defence is an area that could've been improved but the point I'm trying to make is that would we have been better signing the likes of Phillips and Ince with that mone? And before people start, I'm using Phillips and Ince purely as an example.

I did try and send you a PM but I got a message saying that my message could not be sent. FYI I've had a death in the family so I'm sure you can understand that I've got more important things to be dealing with at this moment in time.

That could work. I Thought Richardson did a good job at RB last season so if Clyne can play at LB and things with Fox don't improve then I see no harm in switching Clyne to the left. That said, he's done a great job at RB, far better than I expected, so I don't think I'd want him to be over on the left as a long term solution.

Well if there's no point to this thread why have you and plenty of other replied to it? I think I'll reply to Minsk via a PM. That way I won't have to endure anymore of this nonsense. :-)

When exactly did you become the spokesperson for 'many others'? I don't see a list of people demanding a response. This isn't a court room where users are put on some kind of trial. It's a Internet forum for discussing topics relating to Saints. The purpose of this thread was to get people talking, which unless I'm mistaken, it has. Amongst all the petty name calling there are some good view points. Minsk's post is excellent - Well written, concise and raises some valid points. I don't have to respond to every post on here just to satisfy you and your 'ner ner, ner ner ner, told you so' attitude. My original post asked the question, 'could the money spent on GR have been better spent elsewhere?' my opinion (and it would appear the opinion of some others) is that it could. I gave my view on why I felt this was the case. I accept that may not be everybody's opinion but that's no reason to start ridiculing people. Minsk obviously feels differently and has given his reasons why. He's gone about it in a sensible and well reasoned manner without trying to hang people out to dry.

You know when I referred to people on this forum who don't like it when people say things that are of a different opinion? Well you fit the mould perfectly. I started this topic as a point for discussion, not to get into tit-for-tat arguments but seeing as that's the way you seem to operate I've duly obliged. FWIW. I apologise for my error with regard to the Jose thread. Unlike your perfect self I don't have a photographic memory for everything I've posted. I don't believe that Yoshida is the answer at this level and I think he's a huge gamble. I hope he proves me wrong, I really do, but he played for a team with one of the worst defensive records in the league and that is a fact.