SaintRichmond

I could not agree more Why should a person who takes a life be allowed to keep his ? That is not justice in my book Because he still retains what he has taken away ..... a LIFE that cannot be brought back

SFC are concentrating on the Prem obviously....... so I've just concentrated on saving myself £18 ..... Simples

"We want to be the best. In the coming decades the clubs with the biggest fanbases and the best infrastructure will be challenging. It might take 20 years to get halfway there, but that is no reason to be defeatist, it's a reason to get on with it " So, as a conservative estimate ...... that'll be 40 years then ?? Oh Joy

As opposed to a "live wire" of which they have none

Yes, it's amazing really. How young, superfit Footballers of today can only manage one match a week. Not like the days of Saints very own Charlie Wayman, when Two matches in seven days was the norm. Perhaps it's because they didn't have those cumbersome multi thousand pound pay cheques to struggle to the Bank with

That's pretty much it though isn't it ?? I'd be amazed if he plays Sunday So you can't begrudge someone bemoaning the fact that our £12M "Sub me at 70mins" Cortese Superstar, by comparison to others, hardly ever plays for us, let alone "stars" for us An expensive luxury only Cortese can afford apparently

With respect, you are missing my point Only Prem Clubs can afford Prem wages. "Allegedly", (and a strong one), a Prem Club were interested in Sharp But, as is alleged, the Club "veto'd " a move to a Prem Club, that only leaves CCC, D1 and D2, and they CANNOT afford Prem wages In that context, the Club ARE wrong by their "you go where we want you to go " stance, because they would be virtually forcing him to take a pay cut, or not play football at all. which is wrong

Allegedly, there was an offer/enquiry from a Prem Club, which (allegedly) was vetoed by the Club. If true, would that not constitute a "wrong" by the Club ? Ie "you can go anywhere you like, as long as it's where we tell you to " "Forcing" a player to seek a Club lower than the Prem is NOT etiquite IMHO

Because, IMHO, he is caught between a Rock and a hard place. A) He's on Prem wages, which the Club Authorised in the first place B)The Club no longer wants him, because they deem him NOT Prem Quality after all. C) He now finds himself STUCK, because no CCC, Div 1, or Div 2 Club can , or will pay Prem Wages for him I therefore think, in effect. he is being prevented from getting work, ie PLAYING FOOTBALL, by the actions of his present employers. ie SFC Finally, I agree with an earlier poster. NC would look really stupid if Sharp were ever be allowed to at least show whether he could play in the Prem. Much rather have Ramirez, the "70 minute man" run around looking pretty trying to justify Nic's £12M outlay eh

OK, I understand that bit. What I don't get is what (another) poster mentioned. ie IF, in your present job, you had an opportunity to go to another job (Employer), under what legislation could your present employer STOP you leaving ?

Is that Fact, or Speculation If it is Fact, then someone at SFC is short of a few brain cells., because IF Saints do NOT think he is a Prem Quality player, then why prevent him from joining another Prem Club ?..... In Saints eyes, he's NOT a Prem Quality player, so he wouldn't do any damage ........ unless of course he comes good at another Prem Club Surely, if SFC "blocked" such a move, it would come under the "freedom of work" act, or whatever it's called

A couple of things to note re Meridian Sport 1) Fred Carnage is a Skate 2) He hates SFC

Yes, but the crucial point you are missing is ............. He's proving he's not good enough for the "small" leagues either.

Kindly advise how to send a perfect one then, Oh Great One

I had a recent "conversation" with the Ticket Office. Afterwards, I sent the following to the Club. I'll let you know if I get a reply or am punished for daring to criticise. "To Whom It May Concern I am an existing Season Ticket holder - "Customer" No ******* - Kingsland, Block ** Row * Seat *** I rang the ticket office earlier re getting a ticket for the Bristol City Match, only to be told that the Kingsland Stand would not be available for that match. When I asked why not, I was told "It's only the 3rd Round of the Capital One Cup, and we are only expecting circa 10-120000 ". With such a negative attitude as that, I am not surprised. Have you not thought it might have something to do with the £18 being charged ?? I mean, it's “only the 3rd Round of the Capital One Cup” Once again, Loyal ST holders in the Kingsland are, in my opinion, being treated unfairly. Why do I say this?? Because, I know from past experience, nearer the date of a (past ) match, as it became obvious that more areas needed to be opened up, Kingsland was made available. But, by then, I had BOUGHT a ticket in another part of the ground, the Club would not change it, and I sat in the Itchen, looking across at someone else in my Kingsland seat. WHY do you think I paid good money for my ST in the Kingsland ? Because that is where I want to watch matches from. Not Chapel, Itchen or Northam, but Kingsland. I am also advised that the Itchen Stand will never be closed because of "that's where the cameras focus" I am also told that closing the Kingsland for such matches is done for economic reasons, ie it would cost too much to open it up and let people sit where they like. RUBBISH When the Club is employing many Prem Quality players at many THOUSANDS of pounds per week, the cost of opening up Kingsland would, by comparison, be a pittance. You don't tell the players "Well it's only the 3rd Round of the Capital One Cup, so we're only paying you half your salary" do you ? One of the "perks" of being a Season Ticket holder used to be that your seat was "reserved" for Cup matches. Nowadays the Club cares very little whether you are a ST holder or not. Think yourself lucky that you are not working for the likes of Accrington, Hartlepool etc who are only too pleased to welcome every fan into ANY part of the ground. For teams such as those, covering their overheads is far harder than it is for SFC I am absolutely furious at the Club's attitude re such matches. I am but ONE "fan", so I carry no weight, but I do know for a fact that nine other "regular" Kingslanders will not be attending the game because their seat(s) are unavailable, and, like me, they don't want to sit anywhere else..(why is that bit so hard for the Club to understand ? So, Congratulations on the positive marketting attitude presented. I doubt whether this moan will reach much further than the Waste Paper Basket, but I do wonder whether the "Powers That Be" are aware that Fans in the Kingsland actually want to sit in ...... THE KINGSLAND. I doubt if they care at all. "They'll still turn up "" Well, some won't, and THAT will be the reason why you "only get 10-12000." **** ****** (name supplied) Kingsland ST Holder" I echo the earlier comment about David Luker. Efficient, knew his job, and would always listen and help. The current lot are Robots controlled by the Big Cheese, with no real thought or CARE about the people who go through the turnstiles Regarding my call to the Club re the Bristol City match, I ended up thinking that they could not give a monkey's whether I bought a ticket or not. In that respect, they got their wish ... I didn't

After they have submitted the "Revised" Bill of £ 5000.99..............(plus VAT)

I heard it was a new Skate board ..............

Crazy logic from MP IMHO. So, if a les than a 100% fit Clyne / Shaw end up coming on, and AGGREVATE their suspect fitness/injury, then we would lose them LONGER than if they were allowed to recover 100% fitness

But that's my point. In this modern game, only the fit should play. Players whose fitness would be "at risk" should not even travel, let alone be on the bench

Then why do you think he plays them ?? He MUST think they are better than Clynne and Shaw ...... unless their crutches and foot casts are well hidden on the subs bench

This isn't against you Bearsy, but the philosophy you outline. Having "unfit" or "not quite fit" or "carrying a knock" players on the bench makes no sense at all to me. IMHO If you are "unfit", or "not quite fit", or "carrying a knock", then IMHO, you are UNFIT . End of. You are NOT fit to play Only FULLY fit players should be on the bench. Come to that, in this modern professional game, only fully fit players should be in the starting eleven I don't understand the "he's on the bench in case he's needed" cobblers. The days of "carrying a passenger" have long since gone If a player's fitness IS suspect, then play him from the START, then if he breaks down, he can be subbed. What is the point of having a half fit player on the bench, bring him on at 70 mins, then he fully crocks himself after 71mins I did not expect miracles from Pochettino, but I am of the opinion that, given the players we have aquired, I expected, and expect us to be better than we are With a vastly superior squad, and now 20 odd games in charge, MP is achieving LESS than NA did IMHO. No good in saying how good we are to watch, if we don't get the points on the board

Surely you mean Pink ??

Put a pipe in her ? mouth and it would be Popeye

Does that mean tha Kara's naval base was full of discharged seamen ??

Bit strange though ?? Stoneham - What Lowe (allegedly) wanted ... New Stadium, 4* Hotel, Bowling Alley, Planet Hollywood stylr restaurant, Ice Rink plus various other things Lowe did not have as much "clout" or influence as some on here seem to think. In reality, he was more of a hindrance than a help, and not just with the Stadium scenario. St Marys - What we ended up with .... New Stadium, 2 Gasometers, Train line of no benefit to the Club, very poor access from Chapel area.