mrfahaji

Agree, it also shows the problem with clubs being able to have such massive squads, they just hoover up everyone who might have some ability, even the ones form lower divisions. I thought there would be competition for him but wasn't expecting it to be Manchester United... I remember a sesaon or two ago I was looking through stats in foreign leagues to see if there might be some players at smaller clubs who could be a target for us - I found someone I'd never heard of before, googled him and he was already linked with Chelsea. The rules (or lack of them) just makes everything harder to compete with the big clubs now unfortunately.

To an extent but I hope that we don't go with a betting company.

No actually, I didn't realise that. Must have been quite recent. Although on one hand that's disappointing, I suppose at least that removes another piece of hope - it's the hope that kills you after all. I don't really follow the European football to be honest - partly because I can't stand the big clubs but also because I don't have BT so it's totally inaccessible. Quite a few things now that I would like to see more of but don't get the chance because it's all on Sky/BT. I can just about put up with buffering streams to see Southampton play but not for anything else!

Haha, a nod to a certain tweet, even down to the spelling mistake

Same, one fewer spot means one of the big clubs missing out. It was pretty close to happening a few years ago but last couple of years have turned around again. Shame. The best thing is that they all bugger off to their European Super League Utopia and leave the rest of us to it (with caveats of how the league should respond to such a breakaway of course).

I actually do feel a bit sorry for myself to be honest. These last two days have been sickening for me, and instead of being able to revel in the drama of 'football' (even though I don't BT, surprised at how many do!), I've been trying to take my mind off it because I cannot bear either of the teams playing. On a slightly more rationale note though, I don't see how the big clubs doing well in Europe is helpful for the English game at all. The Premier League is already the richest and arguably best in the world, so it's not like their success is going to have any positive effects for the rest of the pyramid - no additional coefficients for lesser teams, no increased money and exposure for the rest of the league to help sign players etc. As aintforever says, the only thing it achieves is driving an even bigger wedge between the big clubs and the rest. With the exception of Portsmouth, this is my worst nightmare of a final, and to rub salt in the wounds it's taking place on my birthday! Fortunately I'll be on holiday so can turn the phone off and try to forget it's even happening. But when it comes to picking a winner, I'll have to go with Spurs - quite an unthinkable scenario really. Reason is that for all their whining, I do find Tottenham fans to be a bit more self deprecating and likely to appreciate the occasion as a once in a lifetime moment. Maybe that will change afterwards, but for now at least you'll probably find their fans are more in the vein of "wow, we got to the final, can't believe it! We'll probably find a way to lose it in the last minute or something now though" rather than Liverpool fans who will be thinking "we are the greatest, this is the start of our dominance - and we so deserve it, everyone in the country is rooting for us!" Oh and also Pochettino might leave if they win it. Every cloud.

Not even sure I'd go that far to be honest. I always had faith that he could be a good player when he was being widely slated, and I may have even voted for him as Player of the Year (either him or Redmond), but while he's had lots of good performances this season, I haven't been thinking that he's different class and that he's destined for a top team. Sure, he still has potential to improve and seems a good character too, but "at any cost" is pushing it. Yoshida might not be to the standard we'd ideally like to have but as things stand he is the only centre back that offers any pace, so we miss him if he doesn't play. I'd probably go as far as saying he is our best central defender. Not by much, and indeed that is not saying a great deal, but surely we'd be silly to let him go at this point, even if we just extended by 1 or 2 seasons - if we do manage to sign someone to replace him at least he will probably be happy being on the bench too.

I tend to agree (both with the theory we don't need one and the theory that we won't think we need one), but it did sound like Maehle was pretty close to coming here in January, and didn't because his club didn't want to sell mid season. Someone else has also said that Hasenhuttl likes to rotate his full backs, so not out of the question he might bring another one in. If Valery is playing half the games that still helps him develop, and if we have two who are both good we might be able to make a profit on one like we did with Clyne & Chambers.

In the ultimate twist, maybe Redmond IS Mosin

a) Maybe not in terms of what they CAN spend, but that's hypothetical. Unfortunately when fans complain about money other teams spend what they normally mean is "I want my club to be able to spend that as well", rather than "spending that amount shouldn't be allowed". I'm definitely in the latter, but probably the minority. b) Is it not also about how they got that money in the first place? So they might both have £500m to spend, but if Liverpool got that from selling £500m worth of players and Man City got that because their owner gave them £500m, those are surely different?

This. Although I don't generally subscribe to 'trickle down' economics, at least there is some element of that with transfers. But agents and wages is the end of the line in terms of money in the game (sure maybe players spend more money in the wider world, maybe). I'm not convinced the quality has improved massively recently to reflect those increase in wages either. As soon as one club uses the extra windfall to chuck at a new player in wages, everyone else has to do the same, or risk being the ones left behind (relegated), and no-one wants that. All that happens is the same players (or same quality players) get bigger pay packets. Thoroughly depressing really.

Or, let's suppose we sold van Dijk for £75m and spent the money on Armstrong, Ings, Carrillo and Vestergaard. Surely we deserve to go down for spending more money than all the other clubs around us? To be honest, I wasn't trying to justify how deserving they are or how good a job they are doing, but I suppose it's inferred. The key point is that Manchester City have extreme levels of spending compared to the money they have generated and Liverpool's isn't on the same level. It's the equivalent of someone selling a house in order to buy another one, and someone just buying a second or third house because they can. They've both bought a new house but clearly not the same situation. As for the Stephens example, it doesn't really matter who the players are, it's the numbers that count. But I would, if push came to shove, take Coutinho and Suarez over Jack Stephens.

I actually thought the game was better for it. Naturally when your team are the victims of a tough tackle you want to see a free kick, but I found the game more enjoyable in general when anything close to 50-50 was allowed to play on. Obviously the Kabasele challenge at the end was a different matter.

True for Chelsea. United have spent a lot recently but they do also have massive revenue. When it comes to Liverpool, this is what counts (I hope this is accuate but don't know for sure, but it should at least be a decent indicator of my point): I am desperate for City to win the league this year, but I can't understand how you can't see the difference between spending and net spend (especially as a Saints fan), and also how while it's true that everyone spends a lot to win the title, there are also extreme cases like Chelsea and Man City which are basically having unlimited money simply from a rich owner. I don't really get how their fans can feel a genuine sense of pride from that to be honest.

Too right! It'll be enough for me that they hope and believe for 37 matches and 10 minutes of the season, no need to drag it out any longer.

But they did sell Coutinho for a lot, and Suarez before that. I agree with warsash, I normally can't stand City because they basically have unlimited money. Liverpool have spent a lot but they have also sold players to partly fund it. As I say though, I normally can't stand City, but I've been rooting for them for most of this season

Fair point, but the two can be exclusive events can't they? Playing the wrong formation doesn't mean players weren't being advertised. As I have said, I didn't see the game, but could it be a case that Hasenhuttl used this game to try out multiple things (shop window, last chances, new formations)? Trying to experiment with so many things at once tends to lead to failure.

Would you rather have £2m extra from prize money, or £5m extra from selling Elyounoussi? Of course it's fair to argue that we all knew he would play badly and it won't make anyone more likely to sign him, but I can at least see the rationale of giving these fringe (or unwanted) players a run out, even if it's not great for the travelling support.

A like for like swap

I think it is just as likely that some of these players were being put in the shop window. With any luck someone out there won't bother to watch the games and think "this Elyounoussi chap has played a few times in the Premier League, he can't be too bad". Pretty sure the club have done similar things before when Reed was around (Rodriguez, Forster new contract), though at least this time the game didn't count for anything and could at least double up as Hasenhuttl giving them one last chance to prove themselves, even if he had probably made up his mind on them already.

Probably a good thing (edit - just seen the score, maybe not!)

Broadly agree with that assessment. I'd be tempted to play Devil's Advocate and say that maybe Forster and Elyounoussi struggled because they're rusty, but even if that's true it's not like they've ever shown anything (for the past couple of years) to suggest they can ever be good. I genuinely think they played today to put them in the shop window. Ings - he's been disappointing lately but for a while many people were saying we can't win unless Ings plays - and now suddenly he's sh1t (not you saying this). Obviously his injury proneness is a concern and means we definitely need another option, but we have to hope he gets a full pre-season without setbacks and then I think he will still be an asset. Boufal - I am one of the more optimistic ones about his ability, but my concern is that while 'rotation' might be ok, I'm not sure he'll be happy with being a back up/impact sub. So I feel like either Hasenhuttl needs to really rate him or he'll go. Bednarek - he's been decent this year (with some superb displays) but I struggle to identify what his strength is. But same with weaknesses. Whereas Yoshida brings pace but gets pushed off the ball a lot and Vestergaard is a tower (although not actually as commanding as I was hoping) but ridiculously slow, Bednarek is just "all round ok". I don't worry when I see his name on the teamsheet (like Stephens), but it also doesn't fill me confidence. It's not a bad thing, I just hope he's able to continue to improve if he's to be anything more than a capable back up.

In the grand scheme of things this is not a bad result - it hopefully demonstrates to Hasenhuttl (and the board) that some of our players are not up to it. The ideal scenario might have been that Forster, Elyounoussi play well and persuade someone to pay money for them, but doesn't sound like that happened, so at least there is less chance of anyone mistakenly thinking they are good enough now. Having said that, I didn't even watch the game never mind attend, so can appreciate why people who spent their day travelling and paying money for what sounds like a shambolic performance would be frustrated. Would be nice if there was even a token gesture from the club, say £5 off a game next season, for those who made it. Sometimes teams don't play well (Saints especially!), but today sounds inevitable with the team selection and even though I don't think it's a bad thing in the long run, that's probably worse for those at the game than if the first choice XI had an off day.

Same! I think their League Cup win under McClaren was their first ever trophy.

I go to St Mary's to watch Southampton play, not the other team, so it doesn't bother me too much about category A prices. In a way you could argue that all this does is increase the income that the club takes from fans of the top 6 ;-)