 | Forum
Reply | Harrison Miles
at 11:34 28 Sep 2024
Dibling is a complete one-off that's unlikely to be repeated. By rights he should be at Chelsea now with Jimmy Jay. The only reason he isn't is because he got homesick. That's hardly a basis to build your youth policy around.
The reality is that it isn't worth developing these kids these days. The good ones will be pinched, leaving you with basically nothing. Brentford did the smart thing and scrapped their academy. They switched to bringing in 16 to 18 year olds who didn't quite make the very top or those who are attracted by an early chance at the first team (like we did with Sam Amo, Meghoma or Nathan Tella). It hasn't done Brentford any harm. If you lose them at least you get a decent fee and you haven't wasted years developing them. |
| Forum
Reply | Corners, why do teams bring all 10 players back for a corner?
at 11:03 28 Sep 2024
Personally I agree that usually it's a bad idea to bring everyone back, particularly when you have a speedster who is a real threat on the break, but there are a number of reasons it might be done, depending on circumstances.
One reason it's done is to deny space to the opposition. Basically it's a lot harder to score in a crowded penalty box than when there are only a few players in it. If it's crowded, it's harder for an attacker to peel off their marker without bumping into someone else and harder to get an unobstructed run up to jump for the ball. Even a midget can obstruct a jump or cover space.
It's a bit like defending in open play. If you left 5 players up field when you're defending in open play, that might occupy 6 or 7 opposition players right? But no one does that. Everyone brings back nearly all of their players even in open play (or even all of them sometimes).
Also, at a corner you have a number of specialist jobs to do. In an ideal world, you want to have enough defenders to man mark, some to cover dangerous spaces, one to cover the short corner, maybe one on the post and maybe one protecting the goalkeeper. You need a lot of players to do all of that, so the temptation is to bring everyone back. Even then, you will struggle to do everything you want to.
Even if you left one player up field, that may not help you. If the opposition respond by having one man marker and one marking the space between that player and your box, then you haven't really reduced the threat, particularly if the opposition players they use to cover aren't really an aerial threat from corners.
In the 95th minute it sort of makes sense to bring everyone back. The thing that Saints really got wrong against Ipswich was not so much bringing everyone back as having everyone doing the same job, which was overkill and left some jobs undone. All they needed was one marking space either on the penalty spot or on the edge of the box where there were 3 Ipswich players. It was bad discipline from a standard set piece that cost us that goal - not the first time that's happened. |
| Forum
Reply | Why We Should Not Fear Bournemouth
at 14:48 27 Sep 2024
Certainly we shouldn't fear them, but we often struggle against teams that press hard, particularly when we are under instructions to tippy tap at the back. Bournemouth are a team that can press very effectively, so Rusty needs to put his pride aside and tell our defenders to hoof it when under pressure. Otherwise there will be plenty to fear. |
| Forum
Reply | Bournemouth
at 11:27 26 Sep 2024
My dad was a Cherries fan, but he got me hooked on Saints by taking me to the Dell from a young age. How different my life would have been if he could have been arsed to drive over to Bournemouth. |
| Forum
Reply | Southampton To Go Back and Make 3rd Bid For Striker In January
at 10:36 26 Sep 2024
It's a bit fekkin late to sign him in January. Why didn't we get our act together sooner?
Apparently we first tried in January this year, so we knew we wanted him back then. So when we got to the summer window we surely must have known that a centre forward was a top priority and we knew we wanted this guy, so how can we have allowed it to happen that Corinthians "didn’t have enough time to bring in a replacement."? That sounds very much like we didn't make an offer until late in the window.
I've said before that our priorities this window were stupid and this is more evidence that was the case. We spent an enormous sum and signed loads of players but ended up without a centre forward. How stupid is that? Clearly in this case it was nothing to do with the money if Corinthians thought the offer was good. [Post edited 26 Sep 10:42]
|
| Forum
Reply | 'Martin Out' fans are clueless!
at 23:03 23 Sep 2024
I guess you could say I was "moaning" about RM since he was appointed (am I part of this "cult" you mention? Sounds thrilling). As I've said since the beginning he's not the right long term choice because trying to play an even more possession heavy approach than Man City is not the right long term choice if we want to survive in the PL. We don't have the money to make it work and we never will.
Everything I've seen since we've been promoted has confirmed that view. RM's successes at the business end of last season, and this season (such as they are), have come when he has backed off from his purist possession approach. He's said that he won't compromise his principles, but the truth is that he has, and the further away we've got from his preferred style, the better we've done.
Could he compromise his style enough for us to survive in the PL? I guess it's possible, but we know that if that happens, he'll revert back as soon as he gets the chance. That's what he did at the start of this season. As soon as he felt he had a bit of breathing room it was back to telling McCarthy to play with his feet, even though we all knew that was ridiculous.
So, long term he is not the answer and I think a lot of people now share that view. These people then say, if he isn't the long term answer, then we should change manager now. Perhaps you could explain why you so confidently say this view is stupid and clueless, and maybe you could do it in a less aggressive way than you have so far. |
| Forum
Reply | 'Martin Out' fans are clueless!
at 21:40 23 Sep 2024
Why is RM "everything this club should be about"? What does that mean, if it means anything?
Edit: oops duplicated joidevivre [Post edited 23 Sep 21:42]
|
| Forum
Reply | Benefits - essential safety net or invitation to abuse?
at 17:54 23 Sep 2024
Bitcoin, for example, has value because it is widely accepted as a "means of exchange" (money) and "store of value" (digital gold), similar to what gold was in prior centuries. Some of this acceptance may have a dubious origin (it is untraceable so is widely used in criminal activity and the black economy) but the fact remains that it is widely accepted and so has value. It's value is also underpinned by other factors e.g. there is only a certain amount will ever be "mined" (produced) so it is "scarce" and the fact that it can't be manipulated or forged due to the "blockchain" technology.
A Govt could create its own crypto as you outline, but the economics of what you describe would be very different to bitcoin. Creating an endless supply of currency (to pay benefits in) is very different to the limited supply of bitcoin, so it would lose any value it had. It would also struggle to gain the acceptance of bitcoin because part of the attraction of bitcoin is that no government can trace it.
However, many countries are considering introducing "Central Bank Digital Currencies" which are crypto versions of their national currencies and about 10 already exist. The value is fixed to the same as their national currency and a digital £ would be worth the same as a £ coin. For the UK, a decision might happen in 2025:
https://news.sky.com/story/britcoin-digital-pound-decision-to-be-made-by-2025-12 |
| Forum
Reply | Some Great PR From Saints Media
at 16:28 23 Sep 2024
Lots of legal products pose a health risk including alcohol, tobacco, vapes, mars bars, e scooters and social media. It all depends on how they're regulated and how they're used. |
| Forum
Reply | Southampton Monitoring Another Championship Manager
at 13:26 23 Sep 2024
So "sources" have told Football Insider that RM has 2 games to sort it out. Note that 1 of those is away against Arsenal so a bit tricky, so if they're right (big if) then it all comes down to the next game.
I'm no fan of RM, but if this is really how the board go about managing the club then they are total dicks. They give him a new 3 year contract and then ditch him 6 games later and only 3 games after the end of the transfer window? W*nkers. |
| Forum
Reply | A huge sense of entitlement
at 12:56 23 Sep 2024
I hate Arsenal and the way they played yesterday (anti football) but I think this is just a typical manager reaction moaning about every decision. Also yesterday Gibbs White had a deserved sending off but Nuno can't see it and gets sent off himself. The week before a certain manager saw his beloved captain do the same as Gibbs White did yesterday but worse (studs up) and get sent off too, and this certain manager also gets booked for moaning.
It's not just the entitled managers. |
| Forum
Reply | Southampton V Ipswich Town The Verdict
at 12:46 23 Sep 2024
Just listened to RM's interview where he spoke about "fundamental problems with the way we defended first the throw-in and then the corner... and that's people getting out of position which must be out of anxiety and desperation to hang on".
So, sounds like we didn't intend that mad defensive shape, but one or two people didn't do the job assigned to them. Very avoidable. |
| Forum
Reply | Southampton V Ipswich Town The Verdict
at 10:21 23 Sep 2024
Yes you're right. Blocking shots is part of defending and sometimes it just comes down to the question of whether you're fully committed to stopping the shot or not. |
| Forum
Reply | Southampton V Ipswich Town The Verdict
at 10:02 23 Sep 2024
"we conceded a goal that we really could have done little about"
I don't think that's right. We just needed one defender on the penalty spot, or on the edge of the box where there were 3 Ipswich players, instead of everyone being within six yards of the goal. Morsy had time to bring it down and set himself. You can't give someone that much time on the edge of the box. If he'd been hurried he probably wouldn't have struck it nearly so well.
But, if that is our chosen defensive shape for the corner, however mad, then we can't make a clearing header straight up field. Looking at the replay it was Diaz who headed it clear and he had the control to head it where he wanted. The players should be told that, if that is our chosen shape, then we don't head it straight upfield, we head it back to the wing where we had Armstrong covering. As it was, we set that strike up for them just as well as if they'd won the header.
We either had a bad plan for the set piece or we executed it badly, or both. Either way this goal could have been stopped on the training ground. Our set pieces often look a bit ragged as if we're not spending the time working on them that we should. |
| Forum
Reply | The only way Saints will win today
at 12:26 22 Sep 2024
I watched the highlights of that Fulham game earlier. It's only highlights but it's really noticeable how quickly they get the ball forward. That's the main difference with us. We should be getting the same results as Fulham, we are similar sized clubs.
Their side are mostly odds and ends (Harrison Reed anyone?) that could be playing for us, though most would have considered not good enough. Traore was the one picked out on MOTD. He cost £5m. They made one big money signing in Smith Rowe, having sold their best players to Bayern Munich and Saudi. The main reason they do well is because Marco Silva is a good coach. |
| | Ifonly
|
Site Scores| Forum Votes: | 111 | | Comment Votes: | 367 | | Prediction League: | 10 | | TOTAL: | 488 |
|
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.