itchen

Makes sense to me - there is no point depending on wingers if the players who are best in that position are injured. Clearly JP thought BWP could do a job there only to be shown on Saturday that he couldn't (I'm not sure where he can do a job). I said on another thread that we were missing Holmes and that this had had an effect on the exciting passing game we'd seen in earlier games.

While we're talking about our neighbours, this is from today's Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2008/sep/23/portsmouth.premierleague The Premier League is to seek clarification from Portsmouth about who owns them after reports in Israel appeared to list the club among assets belonging to the controversial business and political figure Arkadi Gaydamak rather than his son, Alexandre. Since Portsmouth were sold by Milan Mandaric in January 2006 the club have always said they are owned by Alexandre, known as Sacha. Sources close to Sacha, 32, said then that he had paid with his own money, which he had made in property deals in Russia, and that his father, reputed to be a billionaire, had no share in or influence over the club. At the time, Arkadi was the subject of an international arrest warrant issued by Paris magistrates who were seeking to question him about alleged illicit arms trading to Angola in the 1990s. A Russian who made his fortune in France then moved to Israel, he was also questioned by the Israel police's national serious and international crimes unit as part of an investigation into alleged money-laundering. The 56-year-old has denied any wrongdoing, denounced the investigations and become a prominent figure in Israel. In August 2005 he bought the Beitar Jerusalem football club, who won the Israeli championship last season. He has since founded a political party and is currently preparing to stand in the Jerusalem mayoral elections. Reports in Israel have suggested recently that Arkadi was selling assets, which he denies, and last week an Israeli newspaper published what it described as a "declaration" by him of everything he owns. Valued at a total of 10.1bn Israeli shekel (£1.6bn), the list included two "executive aircraft", two yachts and a fleet of cars including two Mercedes, two BMWs and five Bentleys. Several villas in Israel were listed and "a luxurious penthouse overlooking the Kremlin" in Moscow. The "declaration" showed Gaydamak Sr owning large shares of companies in Russia and Israel, Agrosoyuz, an egg-marketing company, and a 50% share in the Russian Regional Development Bank. The newspaper, the tabloid Yedioth Aharonot, also cited Beitar Jerusalem among the assets, and "Soccer Abroad: Portsmouth FC, in England's top league ... managed by Gaydamak's son, Sacha". That sparked concerns about the assurances given since the 2006 takeover, that Sacha owns the club. Portsmouth's most recent accounts, for the year ended May 31 2007, state that he is the outright owner: "The [club's] parent undertaking, Miland Development (2004) Limited, is controlled by a company registered in the British Virgin Islands, which in turn is controlled by Alexandre Gaydamak." A Portsmouth spokesman this week stated that that was still the position and that Arkadi had nothing to do with the club. "Alexandre Gaydamak is the 100% owner of the club and his father has never had any dealings with it," he said. A spokesman for Arkadi echoed that. He said the list in Yedioth Aharonot was accurate but some of the assets were owned by members of the family, not Arkadi. "It is a list of his family's assets and it is correct," the spokesman said. "However, there is no connection between Arkadi Gaydamak and Portsmouth Football Club, which his son owns." The report has, however, prompted the Premier League to ask Portsmouth to confirm who owns the club. It follows the revelation by this newspaper's Digger column that the league asked the government a year ago for help in discovering who was really behind some of its clubs. Several, like Portsmouth, are owned via companies registered in offshore tax havens, where shareholders can remain anonymous. "In light of recent media reports from Israel," a Premier League spokesman said, "we shall be seeking further clarification from Portsmouth FC in regard to the identity of their beneficial owner." At the time of the 2006 takeover Portsmouth are understood to have supplied the Premier League with documents demonstrating to the league's satisfaction that Sacha, not his father, was the new owner. Portsmouth's spokesman said the club would comply with the latest request and that the report in Israel had given no cause for concern. "We are happy to provide the Premier League with all documentation," he said. "It will show that Alexandre Gaydamak is still the 100% owner of the club and nothing has changed."

It improved my situation.

He doea have a point tough. How many people were seeing Leicester, with the same chairman, as a role model at the end of last season? And, of course, didn't they manage to have their debts reduced by some method which now means anybody else going into administration gets hit with a huge points deduction?

I didn't see a flag go up. I looked because I thought he was offside.

You're probably right. But it doesn't answer the question: with large debts, expenditure exceeding income and no realistic investor willing to plough millions into the club with no real prospect of a return, what would the whingers do if they were in charge?

Actually they're 5th, not heading the table. But I accept the point that they are doing better in their league than we are in ours - as you'd probably expect. But we're still in the early days of the season and we could start doing better and they could start doing worse. Or we could get worse and they could get promoted. But why would we want to drop a division if we don't have to? And if we'd dropped down to League One wouldn't some (no names) of our fans be complaining that we should not be losing to the likes of Millwall at home (as I notice Leicester did last week)?

Nobody is obliged to go to a football match if they don't want to for whatever reason. They might be too poor, they might not like the sort of football we're playing, they might not like the chairman. It's their decision and they need feel no moral responsibility should the club go bust or be unable to keep the few good players we have. What I don't like is the air that some (not all) give themselves that they are somehow doing it because they love the club so much. Less money on the gate means less money for paying debts and for paying players. You may have good reasons for staying away but please don't pretend it's helping the club.

will get better

Yep, it seems only a couple of years ago that we were as good as Arsenal.

The logical contortions we get into on this board never cease to amaze me. So, on a thread detailing how poor McGoldrick is, we get a post saying that he only plays every week so we can make a profit when we sell him. If he's that bad, who will want to buy him? Or perhaps he's not that bad in which case it would be perverse not to play him. Or perhaps, like all the other players, he's for sale if the price is right but meanwhile we'll play what JP thinks (rightly or wrongly) is our strongest team. I'm all for discussion of a player's ability but please can we get away from the idea that everything is part of some huge plot to maximise the amount going into Rupert's back pocket?

The best thing for me about yesterday's game was that I got to make the most of the sunshine sitting in the Itchen. I was very disappointed with our play. We seemed to lack shape and the crisp fast passing I saw earlier this season was largely absent. Far too often we were hoofing it out of defence or from Kelvin's drop kicks instead of building from the back. Granted our building from the back has not produced the points we all want but I thought it was worth sticking with as it showed great promise once our team had a bit more experience. What we had yesterday was neither one thing or the other. Surman was ineffective, Gillett tried hard but seemed tired and likely to get sent off for badly timed challenges. BWP showed one moment in the first half where he did more than I have ever seen him do before in his determination to get into the box but, that apart, seemed fairly ineffective. Was McGoldrick actually playing? On the positives, Wotton and Lallana were good and I thought Mills did enough to keep Campbell Rice from getting too many good crosses in. And Cork was excellent. I think we need to decide what style we're going to play. I prefer the passing game we started the season with but, if we're going to play hoof ball then we need John to start, possibly with Peckhart. I think we are greatly missing Lee Holmes.

I get your general gist but would quibble a bit. Lowe and Wilde were quite clear that they were coming back to cut costs. In fact that was the only reason they gave for coming back. JP was not an amateur manager in Holland but I agree it was at a lower level than the Championship. Our so-called better players were largely absent last season (even if they were on the pitch). Promotion has got to be the aim even though Wilde is saying it's a long-term strategy. If they were to say we have no chance of getting promoted people on here would be castigating them for their lack of ambition. The first team (as opposed to a Saints XI) played Hereford, Cheltenham, Celtic, West Ham and Stoke City. Most of these are not non-league teams and we did pretty well. Apart from that, I agree with you. We just have to be patient. I think we'll get better as the season goes on and our players gain more experience.

OK he can't sell players if they're any good, he can't play a team of cheaper young players because people won't pay money to watch them and the ticket prices are too high anyway so that he can't put those up. How do YOU suggest he stops us from being broke before the bank pulls the plug?

Adrian, you have summed up my thoughts perfectly. Suppose I accept we're all doomed, what should I do differently and will it stop us being doomed? BTW, I don't accept that we are all doomed.

He's a touch typist. That must help.

I think even if Leon were still in charge, or the mythical investment had happened, we would still be playing Barnsley on Saturday.

2- Saints. Let's face it, I have no more clue than the rest of you but I can go through today hoping for a 2-1 win or worrying about a 2-1 defeat. The first option makes me feel better.

Can't go tonight. But I'm not boycotting and I'm not put off by our league position. It's combination of having a regular commitment on Wednesday evenings and not being able to afford two games in a week. And it's a school night so couldn't take my son.

From today's Guardian DUBAI, Sept 17 (Reuters) - English second-tier soccer team Burnley are looking for an investor from the oil-rich Gulf states to develop the club and steer them to the Premier League. Majority owner and property developer Brendan Flood admitted he was seeking to bring Middle Eastern funding and players to the humble northern England team, which competes in the Championship, the second tier of English soccer. "It's a club with super-sized ambition and we need an investor with a super-sized cheque book," Flood told Dubai-based magazine, Arabian Business. "It could help fulfil a lot for us." The move comes after the recent takeover of Manchester City by Abu Dhabi investors and media reports of interest by United Arab Emirates businessmen in Newcastle United and Liverpool. Flood said he was seeking $50 million to renovate Burnley's 126-year-old Turf Moor stadium and was also keen to take players from the Gulf on loan to boost the club's performance. Burnley are 12th in the Championship table on eight points, having won two of their six games this season.

I think that shows how little the bookies know then. Poortvliet is Lowe's man and I think Rupert will stick with him for the season. And quite right too.

OK I've removed the blinkers. What do you want me to do now?

Do you know who really will be caring we are bottom? Our players. And that's not something I could have said confidently for most of last season. It's not agreat position and I won't try to pretend it is. But these are early days for a young team that I am confident will get better as the season goes on. Having said that, I wish JP would play Mcgoldrick with John as central striker. We look better going forward.

Do you know, I don't think we could tell you anything.

I quite like our current manager but I can see that after a few weeks it's certainly time for a change. It's served us so well in the past.