KelvinsRightGlove

Haven't been on a great deal over the weekend. Sorry for delayed response. These are both fair points, well made. Perhaps I did underestimate it. I stand corrected. Edit: I think I explained poorly to start with - I get why David has his advantages, I do think he would definitely have been tarred by the New Labour association though, and how close he was to Blair. Please don't read that as me trying to wriggle out though. Jackanory and CB do indeed both make good points.

If the quoted fee of £6m(ish) is correct I'd say him. I can't imagine that many other CBs of his quality would be available at that price. Bertrand has been brilliant so far though, would like us to sign him also.

I'd take a 1-0 win in any game.

Yep same for me.

sportsnationhd.tv works but you need a subscription (I use this it's pretty decent) or a flash player app for your iPad. Photon for example.

Does that then not apply equally to David? I'm actually unsure he would have done much better than Ed personally. Maybe he is a bit slicker PR wise, but I think one of the fundamentally problems underpinning reluctance for people to back Labour wholeheartedly at the moment (other than perceived incompetence) is the link to New Labour of those still at the top. If David was leader, I think that would be much worse, he was even more central to Blair & NL than Ed. This is ofcourse, just my opinion.

Yes I never totally understood this attack of Ed. Surely this would be equally true of David? They clearly both had political ambitions, why should Ed just bow to David? I don't think many Labour politicians do, to be honest. Most likely true of all the parties in all probability.

The thing is, I do believe he is in essence a good bloke that wants to do good. He's just utterly useless at it, and somehow manages to make himself look bad even when trying to do good. It's almost impressive.

I just want to give Ed a hug. I almost feel sorry for the bloke. He literally cannot get anything right.

that's the only place it goes, isn't it?

I don't argue this point, but I kind of love the way he is though. Rodgers on the other hand, I wish that slimey Blobfish c*nt all the failure in the world, absolutely loathe the man.

Yeah you're not wrong my feline friend. It's effing epic.

The problem with this argument is it's false equivalence. African countries, US, Australia etc do not pay into the EU - and therefore do not get back from the EU (whether or not we do as well as we put in is a separate, but valid discussion). The reason people often (not saying you, or all people) oppose immigration is that they feel that immigrants are benefitting from systems they do not or have not paid into. Members of EU do pay into the EU and therefore contribute. So you cannot compare Non-EU and EU migrants as such. I don't really see the difference between someone moving from a less affluent part of the UK to somewhere more affluent - look at these people from Middlesborough coming down here and take all the jobs away from the Londoners. At what point do you stop this ridiculous argument? It is not a direct comparison to say that the treatment of Non EU and EU migrants is that straightforward or tantamount to racism. As I've said before it is a thinly veiled attempt to shift the blame away from accusations that UKIP are racist (or at least pander to racist people or ideologies). Also, yes Bletch. That is one of my major beefs (yeah, I have plenty of them) with UKIP. It is a bunch of people from very good backgrounds wanting people to punch down and those that can do little to fight back (basically those that want to work for a better life) instead of punching up and those like Farage and his buddies. The idea that UKIP are any different to the establishment is just utter crap.

Love this. Going to give it a go now. I do love those guys.

This seems pretty plausible to me. I wouldn't be surprised if Kane was indeed a target (personally think he'd be a good signing - though perhaps not that likely), which in turn may be used to fan the flames a bit.

I can't comment on JackanorySFC, but a good friend of mine was previously a sports writer at Daily Mail - he tells is a similar story that the sports desk is totally independent to the rest of the paper - and he never saw any pressure to fit the overall narrative of the paper. I also made accusations about stories being falsified and again, his responses were pretty similar to those given. They can actually get into trouble for printing stories that are demonstrably false/made up (though this is obviously hard to prove). He said many similar things that a lot of the stories are indeed brinksmanship - angling for new contracts, more playing time etc., also often attempts to flush out potential interest, or to pressure other targets(/or their clubs - i.e. Saints want to sign player x, but player x is messing around - so saints put out a story about being close to signing player y) and myriad other reasons. He also told me that actually, getting transfers over the line is effing hard for many clubs so often the stories are true but for one of countless reasons the deals just don't happen. Clubs often have areas they wish to strengthen and will actively seek a number of players to fill gaps in that position. Sorry, I know this was unsolicited and I don't mean to 'sea lion' - but I did hold a similar view to you but feel reasonably assured that what my friends tells me is close to the truth.

I've said it before, the fact Labour are not streets ahead at this point in the election cycle with the current govt. is a damning indictment of the leadership. I predicted in 2010 that Ed would be made leader but David would lead them into the election. Clearly the second bit won't happen, but I still could see Ed being ousted. Can't really see any viable alternatives though? I'd be willing to bet that Tristram Hunt would be all over it, guy loves himself.

I find it strange too. I will confess to having some concerns over the summer. I didn't get as hysterical as many. I never bought into the asset-strip ideas (it was nonsense, you don't get in someone of RK's stature and spend nearly £20m replacing £30m of players - ie Tadic & Pelle for Lallana & Lambert) and I said several times I thought we would finish somewhere between 9th-15th). What the summer has shown to me, is that the systems this club has in place show we are stronger than any individual players. All the talk of the Southampton Way has proven justified, all that effort put in to ensuring the club is more than just the XI players on the pitch came true. I feel that last season wasn't a fluke, we have a demonstrable model that we can follow. It may not work everytime, but we give ourself the best possible chance for success with a long term vision. Not flitting between ideas dependent on whatever is the flavour of the month (I'm looking at you Tottenham) and hoping it may just come good once.

Fair points. I'm just playing devils advocate, as I said I do largely agree with you.

I do agree. But, if we were say Stoke/Swansea fans (for eg), how would we feel about a man that isn't even a guaranteed starter at a team like Saints getting in the squad. I love Corky, but I feel perhaps him being here and not a nailed on starter may harm his England chances. I don't want him to leave though, of course.

Ok sure. I'm not getting into of these with you Pap.

See, making up hypothetical future scenarios. If we keep all our players and manager and sign 3/4 quality players we could win the league It was a challenging summer, do you think maybe the scenario came around as the foundation built by NC (I'm not a basher of NC, I think he did a very good job. Even if he did do some crappy things) was not sustainable? I highly doubt anyone at the club will look at this summer and see it as a model to repeat moving forward. But, it sure as hell suggests that when players do move on - which is inevitable - we are able to handle it. RK has already shown more commitment to his future than MP ever did (I'm not one for knocking MP either, I've frequently defended him from the revisionism of his time here), so that is at least somewhat reassuring. The stated aim is to attempt to hold onto players longer, but that is easier said than done. FFS Man Utd, Arsenal & Liverpool struggle to hold onto their players - it's obviously going to be harder for Saints to do that. There will be more players to go, I strongly suspect Morgan will be off next summer (I'll be gutted, he's long been my favourite player and imo is our best player by some distance) but the club will carry on and they probably already have a list of potential replacements for him.

I think it's a bit disingenuous to paint the break up of the empire as solely being down to the States making us give it up.

Wonder where they will look to try and source their replacements?

Crikey. For someone that's not a UKIPper you get mighty upset if someone dares criticise UKIP. I never specifically called you a UKIPper - it's that line of argument that is regularly used by them, and it's as transparent as f**k. Also, yeah my overt dislike for a party that thinly veils its racism and spouts political populism for the masses and harks on about how anti-establishment (which is absolute nonsense) is absolutely what is wrong with politics. I should just lap up every word Nigel says. Not question him. That would be wrong, right?