ratio_decidendi

The initial problem is practicality: would referees find it easier or harder to punish divers if a red card is compulsory? I think that on balance they'd find it harder - diving is particularly subjective and easy to mistake, so the added pressure of being forced to hand out a red for what could actually be a genuine foul only increases the pressure on the referee. Therefore, they might be more reluctant to reprimand offenders at first blush. I don't think the problems end there, either. One must consider whether the introduction would reduce diving despite the above practical problem - so, would an automatic red act as an effective deterrence? Again, I don't think it would at all. As already stated, the risk wouldn't necessarily be increased, so the benefits from 'acting' would be superior. This doesn't mean players are going to spend the whole game diving, just that we'd be likely to see just as many dives as we do today. I'd like to ask whether there are really that many dives in today's game anyway? I'm not sure of the stats, but I can't imagine it's really that many. To me, it's similar to playing with a dodgy ref - when every decision goes against you, the ref is utterly bias and shocking, whereas when it happens to the other team it's a lot harder to notice or acknowledge. To link this back in with diving, consider Jay Rodriguez diving at Aston Villa last season and getting away with it - I don't seem to remember many fans admonishing him. In fact, a lot seemed to think it was a genuine foul (think again, it wasn't). Ultimately, it's watching your team play with rose tinted glasses that makes the issue of diving so controversial. Finally, what can be done? In my opinion, it's fantastic to see diving being condemned by managers - Moyes and Mourinho have criticised their own players, and that open shift in attitude will do more to change player behaviour without brining in arbitrary rules that, in my opinion, wouldn't even work.

Then that must include me then, who bought a ticket for my brother-in-law. And you're right, we sat in the Northam the whole match and didn't shout once! What an idiotic, inflammatory generalisation. Think about why people in other parts of the stadium might not have been chanting - probably less to do with whether they're true fans or not, more to do with the weather, the way the Saints were playing yesterday, and the actual day. Arguably, newer fans might chant more considering that they want to be part of an atmosphere they don't normally associate with - the phrase more Catholic than the Pope comes to mind.

I think you're right that Holt is definitely comparable to Lambert. Like Rickie, Holt rose from the lower leagues, though I'm not so sure about your other assertion. Players are never, ever going to be identical. They will have differences - for example, throughout their time in the Premier League, the two players' goal tallies have been quite similar whereas their assist tally is very different, with Lambert the superior player. On top of that, I think there is some argument for sporting attitude, work ethic, and team conscientiousness. However, does that make them entirely unique? Well, no. Or at least not so different as to warrant comments such as "To suggest Holt is the same player as Lambert is an insult." The players do share a lot of undeniable similarities. This leads to the necessitation of a more nuanced argument or, in other words, we need to change our perspective a bit. It's wrong to say that the two players are identical, but it's also wrong to say that they're polar opposites. I'd argue that there are few players as similar to him in so many ways, and for all intents and purposes, the two can be measured quite effectively against each other in a way that, for example, players like Aguero and Benteke can't. I feel Southampton fans have difficulty in swallowing this last statement, though not unreasonably at all. Rickie Lambert has done phenomenal things for the club throughout his career here, and it's a natural reaction in football to cherish such players to the point of idolisation, for lack of a better word. A comparison to Grant Holt tends to rankle as you are basically saying that this legend is not unique. This feeling is exacerbated by the fact that Lambert is still playing - it wouldn't hurt quite as much if you were to say Le Tissier was comparable to another player (or any other Premier League legend for that matter). So, what can be taken forward from this? Understand when the other person has a point - don't be so stubborn as to ignore perfectly valid, well reasoned argument. Change your own perspective accordingly - often things aren't black and white and the answer is a shade of grey like the conclusion I reached above. Finally, don't be so sensitive or delicate when it comes to criticising or analysing players. Football is very different from the days of past and, although it frustrates to say, players like Lallana who are loyal to their club (for the foreseeable future, at least) really are outliers.

Woops! How could anyone resist transferring when that majestic bedstead is on offer?

As I said in an earlier thread, it's unlikely that Saints will sell unless West Ham make an extraordinary bed. £8m is really at the lower end of 'extraordinary', but that doesn't make it impossible. A very tantalising offer, if true.

Except for the Southampton game, I haven't seen them play this season so can't account for present playing style. But I did see them at Villa Park last season, and they certainly weren't counter attacking then - which was what my post was referring to - the fact that the team had in fact learned it's lesson from last season when playing the Saints.

But we have? We lost to Aston Villa at home this month despite doing the double over them last season. If anything, they'd arguably changed their tactics against us by solely employing counter attacking football instead of actually trying to 'play us at our own game'. In other words, they did get the hang of us. Though that doesn't mean that we've taken a step back. It's really a reflection upon our impressive home record this season (or at least how it was when they played us in early December), the progressive style of football we play (it's very difficult to play against us in the conventional sense i.e. Spurs, Liverpool), and the regard with which lower teams hold us.

A quick look at the table shows that anyone up to Norwich is in close proximity of the drop, so predicting who will actually go down is pretty difficult. The question of who will get promoted from the Championship is similar - any of four teams could go up automatically, and anyone up to Blackpool might sneak into the play-offs. Then, who knows what can happen. Predicting these type of things is almost a lottery. For what it's worth, here are my own predictions: To get relegated: 20. Cardiff 19. Sunderland 18. Fulham To get promoted 3. Burnley 2. Leicester 1. Derby So, not that different from other members' posts really. But, again, anything could happen.

Did you actually read what I wrote? I agree with you that Lambert and Holt do differ on many points, and that Lambert is probably the better player as evidence by his call up to the England squad and the denial of Holt (although, admittedly, was there a striking crisis when Holt was 'eligible'?). Anyway, just to repeat one more time for you, can you name another player who in recent seasons is as similar to Lambert as Grant Holt? I'd struggle, though I'm sure you can find a suitable name. I'm happy to change my mind if so.

This wasn't a prediction I'd made public, though I'm happy to PM you a copy of what I'd written at the time if necessary. Yes, I realised that the comparison wasn't the most accurate after posting that. Accordingly, I corrected myself later on by qualifying the statement. I'd recommend reading that subsequent post as you might find it more fitting with your own analysis. It's important to remember that when comparing players, you're never going to get a perfect fit. Nevertheless, I'd be hard pressed to find another player who followed Lambert's development from the lower leagues to the Premier league, and who also possesses strikingly similar playing and physical characters, as Grant Holt.

With regards to the Lamert/Holt comparison I really am inclined to agree with you, though I can't shake the feeling of Southampton bias. It's funny because I did see them at Carrow Road last season, and besides Holt's blatant dive towards the end of the match, the two were pretty much the same. However, that whole match was pretty dire with neither team gaining a substantial foothold. Is there really that much difference between them? I've looked at my stats and Lambert's assists to starts ratio (0.26) is considerably more than Holt's (0.08 ) in their respective maiden seasons in the Premier League. Perhaps there is some objective truth to what you're saying. I really should have qualified what I meant - in terms of physical ability and playing style, I believe the two are very similar. But when it comes to team play and mentality, Lambert is certainly more preferable - though that doesn't factor in the team around them and playing style. Anyway, good reply! Edit: fixed accidental smiley

I'm not sure how this is Saints related, but what it's worth the news isn't too surprising judged on the untenable relationship between Mackay and Vincent Tan. Is it possible to characterise Malkay as the embodiment of the traditional values of Cardiff City, but a manager who simply didn't possess sufficient quality to make it in the Premier League? There seemed to be plenty of Tan Out chants yesterday, but not too many in support of Malky Mackay. Nigel Adkins, on the other hand, was cheered on right until the bitter end. I would love to hear the perspective of a Cardiff City fan.

This isn't, in my opinion, such a bizarre story. I predicted at the beginning of the season that Lambert wouldn't have such an outstanding run this year. In terms of playing ability, he's already peaked and is unlikely to improve in the way that Jay Rodriguez or Dani Osvaldo will. On top of that, Rickie isn't going to get any fitter. If anyone's watched his recent performances, he is playing far deeper than normal and struggles to keep up with the game after half time. For all intents and purposes, I think he's directly comparable to Grant Holt whose quality quickly declined after a more than decent maiden season in the Premier League. He was quickly moved on to Wigan in the most recent transfer window. However, does this mean that Lambert will be sold this January? Not necessarily. Holt's departure to Wigan came during the summer and, as we know, the Southampton board are generally adverse to making big name moves during the halfway point. Also, Wigan were a Championship club by this point. Should Lambert go to West Ham, he'll be directly competing against Southampton thus reducing the board's incentive in selling him. This is debatable however considering that the Hammers and Saints are competing for different spots in the table. Would Lambert's departure in this sense really have much of an impact on Southampton? Also, does the club really need the money? Holt was sold for around £2 million, apparently. If a similar bid should be lodged for Rickie, I can't see it being accepted. We're not desperate for that amount of cash and he is unlikely to depreciate within six months. Finally, would his departure actually have much impact upon the team itself? Well, as stated above, his goal tally is far from stellar. Though I'd argue that his overall contribution to the club away from the pitch justifies his continued presence. Lambert is an important character who reinforces mental stability - a consequence of his steadfast loyalty since League One. On a sort of side note, something might be said about his recent on-pitch behaviour though he looked fine to me at Cardiff. So, what incentive do the club have for selling him? Not really much of one. They're unlikely to bring in anyone to replace him in January, and although his contribution in terms of goals is clearly waning, he would remain a helpful presence for the team. His 'value' is pretty much negligible at this stage, so unless West Ham bid something ridiculous for him (not entirely unlikely - think about their desperate need for a proven striker - supply and demand etc. - and also their past history in making outrageous bids) then the board wont let him go. Overall, it's unlikely that he'd leave in January - the story might be completely different in the summer, however.

Absolutely torn between Lallana and Davis on this one. Both were simply outstanding in the centre of the park today. I thought that despite Lallana's class and high standard of play, David edged it on account of his consistency throughout the entire game. There wasn't much between them in reality. Edit: And with regards to the actual game itself, it wasn't easy to see much of the tactical side of things from Row F at Cardiff City Stadium, but I thought the team were almost unplayable in the first half. They put their foot off the pedal in the second half though I feel that was a natural reaction to going three goals up within half an hour. Also notable was the sheer hubris of Gazzaniga who actions after the final whistle were far from necessary. Although he did have a decent game, it wasn't as if he won it for us. Save your showboating for when you actual make more than one decent save, pal.

Am I being a bit naive here? Is it likely that he's going to get repeat injuries between now and the end of the season? Edit: Won't he be content on getting 9th? I mean, second season back in the Premier League - we ascended faster than expected - now is the time for consolidation, surely?

You're still fixated with my third point? Let me put it this way because it's really a two part point and might be difficult to grasp: Relative to the introduction of any new backup player at this stage of the season, both Jos, Fox and co. are doing an adequate job. Should the board decide to bring in a new player, they will not see an improvement on the pitch, nor will they see any financial benefit. Therefore it would be wiser for them in this sense to wait till the summer meaning its unlikely we'll see anyone new this January. I understand, and most definitely agree with you, that the two aren't Premier League quality - but it doesn't logically follow that we should rush buy new players! This is where the two other points come in. Consider where we are in the table. The club is adverse to signing in January in the first place. It's highly unlikely we'll get someone.

I feel like we are both making an assumption here in guessing whether players from our first XI like Lovren or Shaw will continue to get injured throughout the rest of the season. The fact is that we simply don't know. So, the question boils down to whether we should invest now to protect ourselves in case such an event does occur. In my opinion, I believe we won't. As I have stated before, there are three reasons why: 1) The board will probably be more than happy with our current position in the league. 2) History shows that the board is adverse to signing during January. 3) Our backup players are doing an adequate job at the moment - we won't see any substantial returns of investment this season. Now, these are really in a nutshell - I'd recommend seeing my earlier post for a fuller argument. The point is, however, that is that the board is highly unlikely to invest even though Jos and Fox aren't good enough because of these three reasons. I don't believe you've shown me that investing in a backup player now will provide the club with adequate dividends at this stage of the season. I am definitely sure you haven't tackled my other two points. This leads me to conclude that, on balance, the club will not invest and we will still do well this season. It's difficult to swallow with regards to recent form, but be realistic - look who we've been playing against and with whom. Don't make knee jerk reactions!

I'm afraid you seem to have missed my point. Despite the lack of quality, and trust me I'm not the pair's biggest fan, it's unlikely that a replacement will do any better at this stage of the season. One must consider just how much they'll actually play considering that Fonte and Shaw are very close to full fitness on return. What's the likelihood that the pair will get injured again? Will the board therefore see any proper returns? These factors negate the need to panic buy. Much better to wait and see where we are in January which is entirely what I suspect the board will do. Ultimately, I accept that you're right in saying the pair aren't Premier League quality on the whole. However, they are doing an adequate job for what is expected of a backup players, and buying a replacement at this stage of the season would be foolhardy.

This has been pointed out before, and I don't mean to flog a dead horse but: "Terrible keeper Will never make it at the top flight in England" Not only is the OP's language, to put it lightly, entirely unproductive and negative, how can such a judgement be made with regards to a 21-year-old goalkeeper? It's not uncommon that goalkeepers tend to peak later than others, so they need time to grow and develop. It is, of course, unfortunate for us that he has this opportunity in Southampton's first team, but he will be all the better for it in the future. This may benefit us immensely if he turns out to be worth a bit of dollar. Negative comments do not help - especially when they're worded as such and are completely devoid of any reasonable lines of argument.

I presume therefore that you are among the crowd that believes chanting negative comments towards Paulo Gazzaniga is a positive, motivating thing?

Same with Ronaldo et al. And United really suffered as a result, I'm sure.

1-1. One decent goal away from home against a team energised by the continued tenure of Malky Mackay, and one poor defensive error from a Saint (most likely Gazzaniga). Not expecting fireworks with this one judging on our recent form and style of play. Cardiff are, understandably, not amazing but there's reasons why they're not in the bottom three (and it's not like we've struggled against teams around that area *ahem* West Ham and Sunderland).

Hmmm - it's hardly the best way to help your fellow player out, right? Further, it's not up to Lambert to choose which players to sub; no player should see themselves as substantially better than their peers or the club, for that matter. This is a policy that worked effectively for teams such as Man United, and I'm sure it should work with the Saints.

Funny, he's gone down in my estimation (though not by much). Notwithstanding the situation and pressure on the pitch, it's always ugly seeing that kind of behaviour among team members. And as one poster above me has already said, Lambert is hardly in a position himself from which he can criticise others.

Hang on. Are you saying that Pochettino realistically had a choice between playing the pair? Shaw and Fonte were both unavailable, and the alternatives to Fox and Jos would have been a lot worse. Also, how can you question Pochettino's ability in the future should he be forced in similar situations to play them both again? Sure, if our 'best' back four are available, but then why he do that? Are you not being slightly too quick to criticise the manager here? It's also wrong to say that we "blew it" just because those two were playing. There were other factors involved including lack of a first team goalkeeper, overall fatigue within the team, and a slight naivety in tactics reminiscent of Adkins early days in the Premier League.