mrfahaji

In fairness not many players produce every week. It's easier to criticise 'show ponies' when they have a bad game but they are also the ones who more often than not can win the match. I'm not actually sure we should be starting with Djenepo and Boufal just because they did well when they came on today, it's a simplistic view. However I think these players should also be cut some slack if they have one or two ineffective games - but it seems some people will be waiting for their opportunity to slate them if that happens.

I was thinking about how one of the refreshing things about Hasenhuttl when he arrived is he seemed to make decisions that most fans had been eager for. But recently that has changed. Of course when you do that and win the fans are willing to trust your judgment but by the sounds of it the first half performance was not in any way a vindication of his team selection!

Can only really comment on second half, sounds like Brighton were much better than us in first. Wouldn't go as far to say Brighton were much better in the second, but there wasn't much in it, and they had 10 men. Our defence is so dodgy, every time the ball goes in our penalty box there seems to be someone lining up to make a hash of it. However this game is a good example of why many of us have wanted to see the likes of Djenepo and Boufal in the team. You can run all day but sometimes you need someone who can produce a bit of magic. Although... odds on Djenepo getting a 2-yellow sending off at some point for a combination of a rash challenge and a dive?! I'll take three points however it comes though - woo!

Wouldn’t say he messed up the pass, he only had Redmond to find and Redmond was being marked. I thought it was a reasonable try. I was more concerned that he chose to take someone on in his own half - it came off but could have put us in trouble

Yep, not intentional but under the new rules should be a penalty (I think...) For someone so tall Vestergaard seems to spend a lot of time avoiding heading the ball.

Credit to Ings- I was screaming at him to lay in Adams but he picked out a great ball instead. Obviously there was a still a lot to do...!

When the team was announced I thought that if Pellegrino had picked that team I would be unhappy, convinced it was going to lead to defeat. But after so much good that Hasenhuttl has done I am more willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. Unfortunately it seems like the concerns were justified. Do you think he has been working on this formation but wanted to save it for this 'more winnable' game? And now in practice it isn't working? Or is it more due to the personnel? I haven't seen enough of the first half to judge.

http://www.livetotal.tv/c/football/england-premier-league/24-08-2019/brighton-hove-vs-southampton/1/ try this one? it has foreign commentary but only one that works so far for me

Funnily enough I just tried a cricfree site and ended up turning PC off because it started loading pages that I couldn’t shut down. Doesn’t sound like our performance warrants getting a virus on my computer but I’ll keep trying...!

At least it sounds like I'm not the only one struggling for streams. All the sites I've used in the past (vipbox, soccerlegacy, ripple) aren't providing anything.

Hmmmm ok. The other link is also struggling for me too (great picture but instantly buffers). I have a new PC, might be something up on my end. Frustrating...

Soccerlegacy has always been pretty good but mine isn't loading this time. Also didn't load vs Liverpool but there was a note saying there were having issues for the new season. Is everyone else finding it plays ok?

Finally some Brexit positives

Poker? Does that count? (sorry just seen tisspahars has replied already)

True, it was actually worse (although still not sure I'd say it was a foul, but Romeu's DEFINITELY wasn't!)

Wasn't a foul from Mane but not sure how it was any different from Romeu's.

Easy to say in hindsight, no one could have predicted this...

I know what you mean, but in this match you'd expect Liverpool to be attacking and looking threatening. Perhaps Saints would be doing a 'backs to the wall' job to stay in it. But that hasn't been the case. We have looked the better side and they just have a few world class players who only need half a chance. It's sickening.

He was playing too well, not fair that Liverpool players aren't getting the time to play.

You can be as facetious as you like if you think that being a well-run club can triumph over Manchester City's £1bn in 10 years net transfer spend. Certainly makes you more optimistic than me!

As someone who works in Hammersmith, this is a great draw for me - was disappointed Fulham went down in the sense that it meant one less away day, not so much now!

I still don’t think that’s the point he’s making...! It doesn’t matter about Saints particularly, nor about the here and now. It’s just that ANY team had a chance of competing at the top of the league over the medium/long term if they go about things the right way.

I'd be quite happy for them to go, but in reality they're not going to gamble on it. Instead, which sounds more like what the article is saying, is that they'll find a way of having a super league without having to cut ties with the domestic league. So rather than things being more competitive, it will just be more futile. Marsdinho - I don't think Barsiem is saying we WOULD be best of the rest, but at least that we COULD be if we did things well. Just like any other club. A bit like the Championship now to be honest - you have big clubs and small clubs, but Brentford and Luton do have a chance of finishing above Leeds and Derby. The biggest danger for me with the big clubs leaving is that teams like Everton, West Ham and maybe Saints too would suddenly see their opportunity to BE the 'big' clubs (not just in terms of winning, but also finances) and to fill the void, and the cycle could just repeat. I'd hope that any breakaway would cause the football league to have a rethink about financing and ways to keep the league more competitive, but it's so easy to imagine a scenario where that doesn't happen.

Just out of interest, why would a 4 be good against Burnley AND Liverpool? Aren't they completely opposite in terms of how they play? Fair enough if you think 4 is always better, but if you're going to change it from match to match I'm intrigued to know why those two games require a back 4 I'm not sure a back 5 was the wrong decision against Burnley, but I am a bit perplexed why Stephens was one of the CBs when everyone knows his heading skills are non existent.

By going with five instead of four, the implication is that we're giving up more of the ball in the middle to improve our 'last line of defence', especially if it is a 5-3-2 (not a 5-4-1). Against Burnley that is perhaps understandable, because they are a side known for bypassing the middle anyway (assuming the reasoning is based on thwarting the opposition). With three CBs, there are certain things you would expect to see less of due to the extra man for either marking or covering - two obvious examples are unmarked attackers from crosses and strikers getting behind the defence and having a clear run on goal. Unfortunately yesterday it seems the goals came from these exact situations, so you have to wonder what the point is if we're still going to give away chances like that. Of course it could be due to personnel too, I can't believe Stephens still gets a game - he seems to be in last chance saloon (according to most of the fans at every week!