stevegrant

0-0

Only by those with absolutely zero perspective. Branfoot, Gray, Wigley and Redknapp would feature before Burley even registered on the scale.

The season is played out over 46 games. We had a similar run to Preston in March that season, Sunderland had it at the start of the season, Birmingham had a terrible run at one point as well. Burley's target was to get in the play-offs (whether that target was too low is another debate, but it's clear that that was the target) which he achieved. How he did it is fairly irrelevant, IMO. That's like saying "I passed my driving test but I'm ****ed off that I got 6 minors on the marking". The end goal is the important factor. Given a bit more luck (Leon Best could attempt that clearance from the corner 10,000 times and he wouldn't find the far top corner again once, for example) and a bit more bottle from 12 yards, we'd have been at Wembley and then who knows what might have happened.

Especially given that there's a European Championships that summer as well, and the 2012 Olympics will probably be slightly earlier in the year to coincide with the warmest part of the British summer, so it'll mean that players who are called up to both the Euros and the Olympics won't have either a summer break or a pre-season!

From those: Blackpool: must win - they look poor this season, and have sold Kaspars Gorkss and Wes Hoolahan, who were two of their best players last year QPR: draw - they look a bit inconsistent, but have been well-backed to be there or thereabouts Ipswich: draw - Ipswich have gone full circle over the summer, last season they were unbeatable at home, this season they've lost all their home games and won their away games. They've got a decent-looking side, particularly with Richard Wright in goal. Barnsley: win - the fact they're relying on Darren Moore to marshall their defence shows where Barnsley are likely to be come the end of the season. Brian Howard's obviously one to watch, but apart from that they don't seem to offer much. Doncaster: draw - they've had a decent start, which isn't unexpected given the momentum they had from last season Norwich: win - sounded like they were utter ****e away at Coventry on the opening day, but then recovered from 2-0 down at Cardiff yesterday. We owe them for last season's robbery... So basically, yes, I agree, 12 points from 18 would be fine. I'd accept 9 or 10 as a minimum, injuries and dodgy decisions dependent.

A quick flurry of wickets has reigned Middlesex in from 132/3 to 136/6, Dawson with two of them and Tahir the other. Udal's at the crease now...

A good knock by Dawson (again) as well, 45 in a partnership of 100 with Ervine. To recover from 61/4 to 228/6 is a decent effort.

Sorry, my bad. Fixed now.

I should be there.

Odds (from Ladbrokes): Derby 10/11 Saints 3/1 Draw 12/5 0-0 8/1 0-1 8/1 0-2 16/1 0-3 40/1 1-0 6/1 1-1 11/2 1-2 12/1 2-0 7/1 2-1 7/1 2-2 14/1 2-3 40/1 3-0 14/1 3-1 12/1 3-2 25/1 3-3 50/1

Considering we've drawn 2-2 there on 3 separate occasions, I'd probably put money on that scoreline again. I'd certainly take a draw, just so that we're not the team who are the first to lose to Derby in the league for nearly a year.

Match drawn. We'd got to 196/1, with Carberry and Lumb unbeaten on 88 and 83 respectively. 10 points for us, 12 for Somerset. A couple of other games going on in division 1, but they've got an extra day to play. However, the first innings have been completed in both so we know the bonus point scores already, which leaves the table looking like this: 1. Somerset 12 146 2. Nottinghamshire 12 137 3. Durham 11 136 4. Lancashire 11.5 126 5. Sussex 11.5 121 6. Hampshire 13 121 7. Yorkshire 12 116 8. Kent 11.5 119 9. Surrey 11.5 102 Barring a lot of rain tomorrow, Kent will beat Lancashire, and Surrey will probably draw with Sussex, which would put Kent onto 133, Lancashire unchanged on 126, Surrey on 106 and Sussex on 125. We play Durham next week, but the key game starts on 9th September at the Oval against Surrey. Interestingly, Surrey only have a day's break before that game, as they have a game against Kent starting on the 4th.

Not much danger of that, to be honest, particularly if Ian Blackwell and the number 9 are hanging around for a 100-run partnership. We've got 11 overs to take 2 wickets to get us the third bowling point and then it'll be played out as a comfortable draw IMO.

I seem to remember reading that the ticket office has changed its e-mail address as well... if you tried tickets@saintsfc.co.uk, try ticketoffice@saintsfc.co.uk (or vice versa)

He was offered a deal at Wolves but he rejected it. They only offered him a monthly rolling contract.

Given Harte's injury record at Levante (who he left a year ago to join Sunderland), I'd be surprised if he wasn't offered a pay-as-you-play deal, assuming we offer him anything at all.

Based on performances, Lampard is the one who should be dropped, without question. Last night, I can't remember Lampard being involved in anything at all, not even a little one-touch layoff in the centre circle, whereas at least Gerrard was trying to get things going in the first half. I turned off after an hour so missed anything that happened after that, although somehow I doubt Lampard suddenly upped his game and put in a man-of-the-match performance... Rooney plays that way even on the rare occasions we've got a balanced midfield. It wasn't anything to do with the tactics/performance last night.

Rectifying his own scandalous mistake. That decision must have cost the FA millions in revenue and sponsorship.

I think you answered your own question there. Gerrard's the only one who's looked remotely likely to create anything so far, apart from set-pieces. We're screwed if we're having to rely on free-kicks and corners to score goals. Good to see Lampard, Terry and Rooney backing up what I said yesterday about them. Lampard has been entirely anonymous, Rooney isn't a striker and Terry got turned in the penalty area by Milan Baros, a player who hadn't scored in 24 games.

Better late than never.

You're not suggesting that Jouls fouls people a lot, are you?

Does he? Feel free to point to an article where he states this.

Lumb gone for 107. 226/6 from 91.1 overs. Can we get another 74 runs to give us 3 batting points? Ervine looks in surprisingly good nick, currently unbeaten on 40, and Mascarenhas has just joined him at the crease.

From more angles than I think you're suggesting. After all, many people on here claimed (and still claim, despite mountains of irrefutable evidence to the contrary) that Lowe refused to spend any money when he was chairman the first time around.

http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/search/?page_id=6853