Le Saux backing Saints to avoid drop heartbreak (From Daily Echo)

"If you shy away from responsibilities your team comes under a lot of pressure" - That is so spot on!! When all 11 are up for it, we can match any team in this league. Finish our chances, concentrate for evey second and we can win this game!
.
I think Rickie is due a goal as well. COYRs

See the latest in The Telegraph on line about Nigel Adkins and Nicola Cortese.

A great shame the dispute over severance pay will be decided by an FA court headed by a QC after what Nigel achieved for us. As a club we should rise above situations like this. But perhaps I am just old fashioned.

The downside of Cortese. At times he reminds me of a secretive version of Ken Bates.

So, basically this is just an ad for Barclays? Where's Bill Hicks when we need him!

Ex-players comments usually bore me witless with their lack of substance and depth.They are usually just seeking a bit of attention.

The article a few weeks back about Jim Steele was an exception.

However,this article is worth reading and is a cut above the more recent ones.

I remember the pain of relegation too. I remember 1974 when McMenemy took the blame (but wasn't sacked) and 2005 when Voldemort drowned the club in debt and high wages. You have to put it behind you and move on though.

I really don't think it's going to happen this season, but we must win at least four more games. I think we have a team that will do better than that so come on, heads up people, we are simply too good to go down !!

This latest story brought to you by the Daily Echo, sponsored by Barclays.....

Oh dear. Shameful advertising and rubbish story.

The Final Countdown

Twenty Eight

They're leaving together

Bill Hicks trying to plant seeds...

https://www.youtube.
com/watch?v=gDW_Hj2K
0wo

george chivers wrote:
See the latest in The Telegraph on line about Nigel Adkins and Nicola Cortese.

A great shame the dispute over severance pay will be decided by an FA court headed by a QC after what Nigel achieved for us. As a club we should rise above situations like this. But perhaps I am just old fashioned.

The downside of Cortese. At times he reminds me of a secretive version of Ken Bates.

Did avb take chelski to court for the same reasons??? No. He wanted to work.

If Cortese can save money for our club then good. Adkins has been paid well at saints for doing his job and got paid some decent bonuses! Now he wants the rest of his contract too? All about the money!! Nigel Adkins, do one!!!

StevieSteve wrote:

george chivers wrote:
See the latest in The Telegraph on line about Nigel Adkins and Nicola Cortese.

A great shame the dispute over severance pay will be decided by an FA court headed by a QC after what Nigel achieved for us. As a club we should rise above situations like this. But perhaps I am just old fashioned.

The downside of Cortese. At times he reminds me of a secretive version of Ken Bates.

Did avb take chelski to court for the same reasons??? No. He wanted to work.

If Cortese can save money for our club then good. Adkins has been paid well at saints for doing his job and got paid some decent bonuses! Now he wants the rest of his contract too? All about the money!! Nigel Adkins, do one!!!

What a stupid comment.

Nigel actually just wanted his job but the club decided to dismiss him. It's really quite straightforward employment law. If the club or it's lawyers were clever they would have covered this eventuality in the contract in the first place. Let's face it very few managers actually survive until the end of their contract.

Must admit, as the battle resumes to avoid relegation from the Prem, I didn't need the Echo to remind me of the last time it happened.

I needed to e mail Mauricio early this week re the weekend match so I can't reveal the details on here as usual since Liverpool would have time to consider and respond.

I have, however, advised Mauricio to remove his hub caps before parking. Also, Rodgers has said re qualification for the Champions League that they are definitely not "beating a dead horse." As Mauricio's colloquial English is limited, I've advised him that this does not mean they have denied being sadistic necrophiliacs with a penchant for ****.

My e mail was sent early as I have also written to the Queen volunteering to cover for the hard-pressed Royal Bumwiper on Thursday and Friday this week. As Her Majesty has been troubled with the Tijuana Cha Cha, the official wiper must have been on exhausting 24/7 duty.

The job involves sitting in a tiny dark cubicle next to the Royal Throne and then putting the working arm through a tiny trap-door when needed. I gather Her Majesty's ring has to be cleaned with a baby-wipe; then dried with cotton wool and then polished with a special skin sheen. I think this could be over the top and too abrasive if done with high frequency during a Turkish Fox Trot spell.

Mind you, I'll not dare offer an unsolicited opinion to the "all powerful one". As I wrote in "Walter Wallace - William's Wiper", my moderately successful autobiography of William III's wiper, Walter was executed for allegedly leaving a clinker on the King's rim.

He had not done so in fact. The King, who was of course the Dutch William of Orange, was, like Mauricio, short on the local lingo and he completely misunderstood at the Battle of the Boyne in 1690 when the Irish Catholic horde shouted: "Begorra, it's that William the TUrd!"

It's the kind of thing that reminds us how important it is that Mauricio takes no chances and uses a skilled interpreter for TV interviews.

DONT MISS NEXT WEEK

Bob Diamond says Rickie should Pingit and run.

ONLY IN YOUR SUPER SOARAWAY DAAAAILY ECHO ECHO Echo

That 3-1 defeat to ManUre brings back bad memories. That was the last time I had a pint in The Three Tuns in Canterbury. Went back four years later and it had shut down :-(

Still, onwards and upwards. As Graeme says, we have greater confidence and are more capable of winning games than we were back then.

Keep the faith
COYR

Seedhouse the Unrepentant wrote:

StevieSteve wrote:

george chivers wrote:
See the latest in The Telegraph on line about Nigel Adkins and Nicola Cortese.

A great shame the dispute over severance pay will be decided by an FA court headed by a QC after what Nigel achieved for us. As a club we should rise above situations like this. But perhaps I am just old fashioned.

The downside of Cortese. At times he reminds me of a secretive version of Ken Bates.

Did avb take chelski to court for the same reasons??? No. He wanted to work.

If Cortese can save money for our club then good. Adkins has been paid well at saints for doing his job and got paid some decent bonuses! Now he wants the rest of his contract too? All about the money!! Nigel Adkins, do one!!!

What a stupid comment.

Nigel actually just wanted his job but the club decided to dismiss him. It's really quite straightforward employment law. If the club or it's lawyers were clever they would have covered this eventuality in the contract in the first place. Let's face it very few managers actually survive until the end of their contract.

One wonders how much AP would get if Newcastle decided to get rid, surely not the remainder of his eight year contract?

Seedhouse the Unrepentant wrote:

StevieSteve wrote:

george chivers wrote:
See the latest in The Telegraph on line about Nigel Adkins and Nicola Cortese.

A great shame the dispute over severance pay will be decided by an FA court headed by a QC after what Nigel achieved for us. As a club we should rise above situations like this. But perhaps I am just old fashioned.

The downside of Cortese. At times he reminds me of a secretive version of Ken Bates.

Did avb take chelski to court for the same reasons??? No. He wanted to work.

If Cortese can save money for our club then good. Adkins has been paid well at saints for doing his job and got paid some decent bonuses! Now he wants the rest of his contract too? All about the money!! Nigel Adkins, do one!!!

What a stupid comment.

Nigel actually just wanted his job but the club decided to dismiss him. It's really quite straightforward employment law. If the club or it's lawyers were clever they would have covered this eventuality in the contract in the first place. Let's face it very few managers actually survive until the end of their contract.

Agreed. It never ceases to amaze the comments that come out in apparent support of Cortese's every action on these pages. The man with his cut throat merchant banker business methods is clearly failing on the PR front (the media will have a field day if we do go down); and his judgement is highly suspect.

Seedhouse the Unrepentant wrote:

StevieSteve wrote:

george chivers wrote:
See the latest in The Telegraph on line about Nigel Adkins and Nicola Cortese.

A great shame the dispute over severance pay will be decided by an FA court headed by a QC after what Nigel achieved for us. As a club we should rise above situations like this. But perhaps I am just old fashioned.

The downside of Cortese. At times he reminds me of a secretive version of Ken Bates.

Did avb take chelski to court for the same reasons??? No. He wanted to work.

If Cortese can save money for our club then good. Adkins has been paid well at saints for doing his job and got paid some decent bonuses! Now he wants the rest of his contract too? All about the money!! Nigel Adkins, do one!!!

What a stupid comment.

Nigel actually just wanted his job but the club decided to dismiss him. It's really quite straightforward employment law. If the club or it's lawyers were clever they would have covered this eventuality in the contract in the first place. Let's face it very few managers actually survive until the end of their contract.

spot on, it just highlights that SFC do not know how to play properly with the big boys. One thing is certain, if we go down and the obvious then happens (ie MP leaves) its going to be almost impossible to find a half decent manager, no one will want it apart from the money grabbing redknapp-esque types.. regards Adkins, your point is right about initial contracts but its a kind of unwritten rule that sacked mangers are offered compensation and its usually mutually agreed so all party part in everyones best interest.

WE ARE SOUTHAMPTON.

WE FIGHT. WE WIN.

Every Saints Fan will be clambering for a Reading AWAY TICKET.

ADVANCE OPS :

We all know the score: Rail-Pub-Game.
Get on at Woolston ;o) if you can.

Pub by Station.

Regarding our HOME GAME.

Every Point gained between now and end of Season is worth FIGHTING FOR.

We know what happened at ... pool.

Overawed - no possession - long range shots - cheating handballs from Suarez and a lack of marking from Corners to give a soft goal.

MASSIVE IMPROVEMENT NEEDED.

SORT IT OUT MP !!!

RED ARRRRRRRRRRRRRMY.
WE FIGHT. WE WIN.

Confucious wrote:
Must admit, as the battle resumes to avoid relegation from the Prem, I didn't need the Echo to remind me of the last time it happened.

I needed to e mail Mauricio early this week re the weekend match so I can't reveal the details on here as usual since Liverpool would have time to consider and respond.

I have, however, advised Mauricio to remove his hub caps before parking. Also, Rodgers has said re qualification for the Champions League that they are definitely not "beating a dead horse." As Mauricio's colloquial English is limited, I've advised him that this does not mean they have denied being sadistic necrophiliacs with a penchant for ****.

My e mail was sent early as I have also written to the Queen volunteering to cover for the hard-pressed Royal Bumwiper on Thursday and Friday this week. As Her Majesty has been troubled with the Tijuana Cha Cha, the official wiper must have been on exhausting 24/7 duty.

The job involves sitting in a tiny dark cubicle next to the Royal Throne and then putting the working arm through a tiny trap-door when needed. I gather Her Majesty's ring has to be cleaned with a baby-wipe; then dried with cotton wool and then polished with a special skin sheen. I think this could be over the top and too abrasive if done with high frequency during a Turkish Fox Trot spell.

Mind you, I'll not dare offer an unsolicited opinion to the "all powerful one". As I wrote in "Walter Wallace - William's Wiper", my moderately successful autobiography of William III's wiper, Walter was executed for allegedly leaving a clinker on the King's rim.

He had not done so in fact. The King, who was of course the Dutch William of Orange, was, like Mauricio, short on the local lingo and he completely misunderstood at the Battle of the Boyne in 1690 when the Irish Catholic horde shouted: "Begorra, it's that William the TUrd!"

It's the kind of thing that reminds us how important it is that Mauricio takes no chances and uses a skilled interpreter for TV interviews.

You might have more chance of a similar job with Puncheon. With his new contract he could probably afford you,of course it would mean you sitting pitch side in a toilet tent.

Anyone going to Telegraph online to read the piece about Adkins and Cortese would do well to read the piece about Roy Keane's coming of age as a football pundit as well. very funny.

Le saux says he wants saints to win the premier league? yes please! does he mean stay in it?

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

Seedhouse the Unrepentant wrote:

StevieSteve wrote:

george chivers wrote:
See the latest in The Telegraph on line about Nigel Adkins and Nicola Cortese.

A great shame the dispute over severance pay will be decided by an FA court headed by a QC after what Nigel achieved for us. As a club we should rise above situations like this. But perhaps I am just old fashioned.

The downside of Cortese. At times he reminds me of a secretive version of Ken Bates.

Did avb take chelski to court for the same reasons??? No. He wanted to work.

If Cortese can save money for our club then good. Adkins has been paid well at saints for doing his job and got paid some decent bonuses! Now he wants the rest of his contract too? All about the money!! Nigel Adkins, do one!!!

What a stupid comment.

Nigel actually just wanted his job but the club decided to dismiss him. It's really quite straightforward employment law. If the club or it's lawyers were clever they would have covered this eventuality in the contract in the first place. Let's face it very few managers actually survive until the end of their contract.

One wonders how much AP would get if Newcastle decided to get rid, surely not the remainder of his eight year contract?

It depends on what is in the contract.

The law is one week per year served redundancy and one week per year served notice period. Employment contracts cannot go below this amount but they can increase it. If Pardew was given an 8 year contract without this being covered in the T's & C's then yes he would be entitled to the contract being paid up in full.

It is absolutely normal to specify in the contract what the severence conditions would be - infact I would say it would be madness not to, particularly in the football world. Poaching of staff, customers etc would also be in the contract. Surely it's the agents job to haggle these terms with the clubs lawyers as well as the £££?

If these so called pundits are correct in saying that Wigin and Aston Vil will not be going down can anybody name the 3 that will be?

I see it as the pundits want those teams to stay up

Villa - History, which you can't argue with

Wigan - Because they have done it before

Qpr - Because of Harry

Lets hope we can prove them wrong and something this weekend will go along way to proving that

george chivers wrote:
See the latest in The Telegraph on line about Nigel Adkins and Nicola Cortese.

A great shame the dispute over severance pay will be decided by an FA court headed by a QC after what Nigel achieved for us. As a club we should rise above situations like this. But perhaps I am just old fashioned.

The downside of Cortese. At times he reminds me of a secretive version of Ken Bates.

most are decided trubunial its quite normal .usual media stirring up a nothing story

StevieSteve wrote:

george chivers wrote:
See the latest in The Telegraph on line about Nigel Adkins and Nicola Cortese.

A great shame the dispute over severance pay will be decided by an FA court headed by a QC after what Nigel achieved for us. As a club we should rise above situations like this. But perhaps I am just old fashioned.

The downside of Cortese. At times he reminds me of a secretive version of Ken Bates.

Did avb take chelski to court for the same reasons??? No. He wanted to work.

If Cortese can save money for our club then good. Adkins has been paid well at saints for doing his job and got paid some decent bonuses! Now he wants the rest of his contract too? All about the money!! Nigel Adkins, do one!!!

not its not that .nigel wants a new job .but the football league wont let him work while being paid .its how much is he owed in a lump sum .these always go to a tribunal .nc as not refused to pay .he has been paid since the sacking .but it needs to be settled so nigel can work again.the man has intregity .has showed with scunny .it will get sorted .the media just made a story out of it .thats what they get paid for

mastershot100 wrote:
If these so called pundits are correct in saying that Wigin and Aston Vil will not be going down can anybody name the 3 that will be?

I guess they are saying QPR, Reading and Saints.

I doubt that very much to be honest.

Pundits are so fecking fickle anyway - would love to play back all their predictions at the end of a season and see how much teams are in crisis one moment and spectacular the next.

You only need look at Barcelona - apparently they are on the downward slide, oh, hold on, they are the best team of all time again this week.

business-guru wrote:

Seedhouse the Unrepentant wrote:

StevieSteve wrote:

george chivers wrote:
See the latest in The Telegraph on line about Nigel Adkins and Nicola Cortese.

A great shame the dispute over severance pay will be decided by an FA court headed by a QC after what Nigel achieved for us. As a club we should rise above situations like this. But perhaps I am just old fashioned.

The downside of Cortese. At times he reminds me of a secretive version of Ken Bates.

Did avb take chelski to court for the same reasons??? No. He wanted to work.

If Cortese can save money for our club then good. Adkins has been paid well at saints for doing his job and got paid some decent bonuses! Now he wants the rest of his contract too? All about the money!! Nigel Adkins, do one!!!

What a stupid comment.

Nigel actually just wanted his job but the club decided to dismiss him. It's really quite straightforward employment law. If the club or it's lawyers were clever they would have covered this eventuality in the contract in the first place. Let's face it very few managers actually survive until the end of their contract.

spot on, it just highlights that SFC do not know how to play properly with the big boys. One thing is certain, if we go down and the obvious then happens (ie MP leaves) its going to be almost impossible to find a half decent manager, no one will want it apart from the money grabbing redknapp-esque types.. regards Adkins, your point is right about initial contracts but its a kind of unwritten rule that sacked mangers are offered compensation and its usually mutually agreed so all party part in everyones best interest.

but nigel, agreed the monthly payments at the time .what he did not realise was the football league will not let him manage another club while doing so .so now he has to take a lump sum to finish off the contract ,.nearly all of these go to a tribunial as i quoted in a thread yesterday .its quite normal to get settled in this way .cortesse wiill save money in a lump sum.to paying monthly tax wise .there is no announcement that he is refusing to pay .the only problem i have with cortesse is the timing a week before the window opens .given maurico no time to make changes to the squad .however he has just about managed a point a game .with 9 left 37 looks possible but he has now got the back 5 back and with adam lallana regaining match fitness i would say think were be ok .wigan need to win at home reading look doomed i believe who ever wins the villa qpr game wiill decide the other spot .i think qpr will win there .im going for reading 20th wigan 19th villa 18th

Why does everyone presume that Nicola is trying to sh a ft someone again? Its not his own money its the clubs and he has the bottom line at heart. As Kenny pointed out its pretty standard that this goes to a tribunal, Ive done the same and not thought badly about my ex-employer its only business. And I was 'awarded' thousands.
Im not condoning sacking anyone if they have done an OK job, but in this league OK doesnt cut it I am afraid, too much money at risk.

saintkenny wrote:

business-guru wrote:

Seedhouse the Unrepentant wrote:

StevieSteve wrote:

george chivers wrote:
See the latest in The Telegraph on line about Nigel Adkins and Nicola Cortese.

A great shame the dispute over severance pay will be decided by an FA court headed by a QC after what Nigel achieved for us. As a club we should rise above situations like this. But perhaps I am just old fashioned.

The downside of Cortese. At times he reminds me of a secretive version of Ken Bates.

Did avb take chelski to court for the same reasons??? No. He wanted to work.

If Cortese can save money for our club then good. Adkins has been paid well at saints for doing his job and got paid some decent bonuses! Now he wants the rest of his contract too? All about the money!! Nigel Adkins, do one!!!

What a stupid comment.

Nigel actually just wanted his job but the club decided to dismiss him. It's really quite straightforward employment law. If the club or it's lawyers were clever they would have covered this eventuality in the contract in the first place. Let's face it very few managers actually survive until the end of their contract.

spot on, it just highlights that SFC do not know how to play properly with the big boys. One thing is certain, if we go down and the obvious then happens (ie MP leaves) its going to be almost impossible to find a half decent manager, no one will want it apart from the money grabbing redknapp-esque types.. regards Adkins, your point is right about initial contracts but its a kind of unwritten rule that sacked mangers are offered compensation and its usually mutually agreed so all party part in everyones best interest.

but nigel, agreed the monthly payments at the time .what he did not realise was the football league will not let him manage another club while doing so .so now he has to take a lump sum to finish off the contract ,.nearly all of these go to a tribunial as i quoted in a thread yesterday .its quite normal to get settled in this way .cortesse wiill save money in a lump sum.to paying monthly tax wise .there is no announcement that he is refusing to pay .the only problem i have with cortesse is the timing a week before the window opens .given maurico no time to make changes to the squad .however he has just about managed a point a game .with 9 left 37 looks possible but he has now got the back 5 back and with adam lallana regaining match fitness i would say think were be ok .wigan need to win at home reading look doomed i believe who ever wins the villa qpr game wiill decide the other spot .i think qpr will win there .im going for reading 20th wigan 19th villa 18th

dont know how to play with the big boys we gave man city and utd tough games home and away .alex ferguson said southampton was the best team to play at old trafford .you dont saints reports i think we have another skunt wum on are hands .which one whitelines kent141 .whos going to be the next manager to resign after the last 3 .we sack managers they dont quit .but i must say i cant blame any manager for quitting that corrupt club .i think avram grant summed up the club well to the media .peter storrie the conmerchant

according to lawro with all seasons preditions qpr should be 7th .so it shows you what pundits know about football .hes so far forcast saints to lose 20 games and qpr to win 14 there 6th now .he forcast saints to win 7 so 1 more to be fair bottom 3 is norwich villa and reading

right back in the bar wrote:

Seedhouse the Unrepentant wrote:

StevieSteve wrote:

george chivers wrote:
See the latest in The Telegraph on line about Nigel Adkins and Nicola Cortese.

A great shame the dispute over severance pay will be decided by an FA court headed by a QC after what Nigel achieved for us. As a club we should rise above situations like this. But perhaps I am just old fashioned.

The downside of Cortese. At times he reminds me of a secretive version of Ken Bates.

Did avb take chelski to court for the same reasons??? No. He wanted to work.

If Cortese can save money for our club then good. Adkins has been paid well at saints for doing his job and got paid some decent bonuses! Now he wants the rest of his contract too? All about the money!! Nigel Adkins, do one!!!

What a stupid comment.

Nigel actually just wanted his job but the club decided to dismiss him. It's really quite straightforward employment law. If the club or it's lawyers were clever they would have covered this eventuality in the contract in the first place. Let's face it very few managers actually survive until the end of their contract.

Agreed. It never ceases to amaze the comments that come out in apparent support of Cortese's every action on these pages. The man with his cut throat merchant banker business methods is clearly failing on the PR front (the media will have a field day if we do go down); and his judgement is highly suspect.

PR won't ensure us survival, careful management of the finances will do a lot more. The media will have a field day whichever way the wind blows, that doesn't matter to me at all. If we stay up I will be the first to offer two digits rampant at the Press and all the other doubters and that includes some numpties that post on here.

business-guru wrote:

Seedhouse the Unrepentant wrote:

StevieSteve wrote:

george chivers wrote:
See the latest in The Telegraph on line about Nigel Adkins and Nicola Cortese.

A great shame the dispute over severance pay will be decided by an FA court headed by a QC after what Nigel achieved for us. As a club we should rise above situations like this. But perhaps I am just old fashioned.

The downside of Cortese. At times he reminds me of a secretive version of Ken Bates.

Did avb take chelski to court for the same reasons??? No. He wanted to work.

If Cortese can save money for our club then good. Adkins has been paid well at saints for doing his job and got paid some decent bonuses! Now he wants the rest of his contract too? All about the money!! Nigel Adkins, do one!!!

What a stupid comment.

Nigel actually just wanted his job but the club decided to dismiss him. It's really quite straightforward employment law. If the club or it's lawyers were clever they would have covered this eventuality in the contract in the first place. Let's face it very few managers actually survive until the end of their contract.

spot on, it just highlights that SFC do not know how to play properly with the big boys. One thing is certain, if we go down and the obvious then happens (ie MP leaves) its going to be almost impossible to find a half decent manager, no one will want it apart from the money grabbing redknapp-esque types.. regards Adkins, your point is right about initial contracts but its a kind of unwritten rule that sacked mangers are offered compensation and its usually mutually agreed so all party part in everyones best interest.

Well seedhouse you must have somehow read Nigel's contract? By the sounds of it anyway!!

You don't know sh!t... LOL!!

No one knows what was in the contract apart from Cortese, Adkins and lawyers. So to say "What a stupid comment" is quite comical coming from someone who is pretty much guessing. StevieSteve has got a point about the AVB thing!! You don't think AVB wanted his job then?? HAHAHAHA!! He was on £100k a week!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!

george chivers wrote:
See the latest in The Telegraph on line about Nigel Adkins and Nicola Cortese.

A great shame the dispute over severance pay will be decided by an FA court headed by a QC after what Nigel achieved for us. As a club we should rise above situations like this. But perhaps I am just old fashioned.

The downside of Cortese. At times he reminds me of a secretive version of Ken Bates.

if he turns out to be another ken bates then we are in trouble.oh for the good old days of george reader.

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

right back in the bar wrote:

Seedhouse the Unrepentant wrote:

StevieSteve wrote:

george chivers wrote:
See the latest in The Telegraph on line about Nigel Adkins and Nicola Cortese.

A great shame the dispute over severance pay will be decided by an FA court headed by a QC after what Nigel achieved for us. As a club we should rise above situations like this. But perhaps I am just old fashioned.

The downside of Cortese. At times he reminds me of a secretive version of Ken Bates.

Did avb take chelski to court for the same reasons??? No. He wanted to work.

If Cortese can save money for our club then good. Adkins has been paid well at saints for doing his job and got paid some decent bonuses! Now he wants the rest of his contract too? All about the money!! Nigel Adkins, do one!!!

What a stupid comment.

Nigel actually just wanted his job but the club decided to dismiss him. It's really quite straightforward employment law. If the club or it's lawyers were clever they would have covered this eventuality in the contract in the first place. Let's face it very few managers actually survive until the end of their contract.

Agreed. It never ceases to amaze the comments that come out in apparent support of Cortese's every action on these pages. The man with his cut throat merchant banker business methods is clearly failing on the PR front (the media will have a field day if we do go down); and his judgement is highly suspect.

PR won't ensure us survival, careful management of the finances will do a lot more. The media will have a field day whichever way the wind blows, that doesn't matter to me at all. If we stay up I will be the first to offer two digits rampant at the Press and all the other doubters and that includes some numpties that post on here.

Agreed. trying to stay up in your first season in this league is a high risk game but we are fortunate in that we have a chairman who is used to the pressure.
Some decisions will come off, others wont.

saintkenny wrote:

business-guru wrote:

Seedhouse the Unrepentant wrote:

StevieSteve wrote:

george chivers wrote:
See the latest in The Telegraph on line about Nigel Adkins and Nicola Cortese.

A great shame the dispute over severance pay will be decided by an FA court headed by a QC after what Nigel achieved for us. As a club we should rise above situations like this. But perhaps I am just old fashioned.

The downside of Cortese. At times he reminds me of a secretive version of Ken Bates.

Did avb take chelski to court for the same reasons??? No. He wanted to work.

If Cortese can save money for our club then good. Adkins has been paid well at saints for doing his job and got paid some decent bonuses! Now he wants the rest of his contract too? All about the money!! Nigel Adkins, do one!!!

What a stupid comment.

Nigel actually just wanted his job but the club decided to dismiss him. It's really quite straightforward employment law. If the club or it's lawyers were clever they would have covered this eventuality in the contract in the first place. Let's face it very few managers actually survive until the end of their contract.

spot on, it just highlights that SFC do not know how to play properly with the big boys. One thing is certain, if we go down and the obvious then happens (ie MP leaves) its going to be almost impossible to find a half decent manager, no one will want it apart from the money grabbing redknapp-esque types.. regards Adkins, your point is right about initial contracts but its a kind of unwritten rule that sacked mangers are offered compensation and its usually mutually agreed so all party part in everyones best interest.

but nigel, agreed the monthly payments at the time .what he did not realise was the football league will not let him manage another club while doing so .so now he has to take a lump sum to finish off the contract ,.nearly all of these go to a tribunial as i quoted in a thread yesterday .its quite normal to get settled in this way .cortesse wiill save money in a lump sum.to paying monthly tax wise .there is no announcement that he is refusing to pay .the only problem i have with cortesse is the timing a week before the window opens .given maurico no time to make changes to the squad .however he has just about managed a point a game .with 9 left 37 looks possible but he has now got the back 5 back and with adam lallana regaining match fitness i would say think were be ok .wigan need to win at home reading look doomed i believe who ever wins the villa qpr game wiill decide the other spot .i think qpr will win there .im going for reading 20th wigan 19th villa 18th

he agreed that in the absence of a payment of settlement. NC was underhand to say the very least.... anyway SFC will loose out, NA will be awarded much more than he would have accepted from Saints. Its stupidity of the highest order.

Perhaps NC can work out what NA is due and just "Pingit" using his mobile?

What I can't work out is whether Saints should be thinking about pinging or passing on Saturday - what's best?

business-guru wrote:

saintkenny wrote:

business-guru wrote:

Seedhouse the Unrepentant wrote:

StevieSteve wrote:

george chivers wrote:
See the latest in The Telegraph on line about Nigel Adkins and Nicola Cortese.

A great shame the dispute over severance pay will be decided by an FA court headed by a QC after what Nigel achieved for us. As a club we should rise above situations like this. But perhaps I am just old fashioned.

The downside of Cortese. At times he reminds me of a secretive version of Ken Bates.

Did avb take chelski to court for the same reasons??? No. He wanted to work.

If Cortese can save money for our club then good. Adkins has been paid well at saints for doing his job and got paid some decent bonuses! Now he wants the rest of his contract too? All about the money!! Nigel Adkins, do one!!!

What a stupid comment.

Nigel actually just wanted his job but the club decided to dismiss him. It's really quite straightforward employment law. If the club or it's lawyers were clever they would have covered this eventuality in the contract in the first place. Let's face it very few managers actually survive until the end of their contract.

spot on, it just highlights that SFC do not know how to play properly with the big boys. One thing is certain, if we go down and the obvious then happens (ie MP leaves) its going to be almost impossible to find a half decent manager, no one will want it apart from the money grabbing redknapp-esque types.. regards Adkins, your point is right about initial contracts but its a kind of unwritten rule that sacked mangers are offered compensation and its usually mutually agreed so all party part in everyones best interest.

but nigel, agreed the monthly payments at the time .what he did not realise was the football league will not let him manage another club while doing so .so now he has to take a lump sum to finish off the contract ,.nearly all of these go to a tribunial as i quoted in a thread yesterday .its quite normal to get settled in this way .cortesse wiill save money in a lump sum.to paying monthly tax wise .there is no announcement that he is refusing to pay .the only problem i have with cortesse is the timing a week before the window opens .given maurico no time to make changes to the squad .however he has just about managed a point a game .with 9 left 37 looks possible but he has now got the back 5 back and with adam lallana regaining match fitness i would say think were be ok .wigan need to win at home reading look doomed i believe who ever wins the villa qpr game wiill decide the other spot .i think qpr will win there .im going for reading 20th wigan 19th villa 18th

he agreed that in the absence of a payment of settlement. NC was underhand to say the very least.... anyway SFC will loose out, NA will be awarded much more than he would have accepted from Saints. Its stupidity of the highest order.

Its all purely speculation.
How does anyone know the terms of NA's contract or what would happen if it was terminated.
People talking about employment law or accusing people of 'stupid' comments.
Nobody knows except for NA, his agent and Nicolas legal people and useless HR girl.

business-guru wrote:

saintkenny wrote:

business-guru wrote:

Seedhouse the Unrepentant wrote:

StevieSteve wrote:

george chivers wrote:
See the latest in The Telegraph on line about Nigel Adkins and Nicola Cortese.

A great shame the dispute over severance pay will be decided by an FA court headed by a QC after what Nigel achieved for us. As a club we should rise above situations like this. But perhaps I am just old fashioned.

The downside of Cortese. At times he reminds me of a secretive version of Ken Bates.

Did avb take chelski to court for the same reasons??? No. He wanted to work.

If Cortese can save money for our club then good. Adkins has been paid well at saints for doing his job and got paid some decent bonuses! Now he wants the rest of his contract too? All about the money!! Nigel Adkins, do one!!!

What a stupid comment.

Nigel actually just wanted his job but the club decided to dismiss him. It's really quite straightforward employment law. If the club or it's lawyers were clever they would have covered this eventuality in the contract in the first place. Let's face it very few managers actually survive until the end of their contract.

spot on, it just highlights that SFC do not know how to play properly with the big boys. One thing is certain, if we go down and the obvious then happens (ie MP leaves) its going to be almost impossible to find a half decent manager, no one will want it apart from the money grabbing redknapp-esque types.. regards Adkins, your point is right about initial contracts but its a kind of unwritten rule that sacked mangers are offered compensation and its usually mutually agreed so all party part in everyones best interest.

but nigel, agreed the monthly payments at the time .what he did not realise was the football league will not let him manage another club while doing so .so now he has to take a lump sum to finish off the contract ,.nearly all of these go to a tribunial as i quoted in a thread yesterday .its quite normal to get settled in this way .cortesse wiill save money in a lump sum.to paying monthly tax wise .there is no announcement that he is refusing to pay .the only problem i have with cortesse is the timing a week before the window opens .given maurico no time to make changes to the squad .however he has just about managed a point a game .with 9 left 37 looks possible but he has now got the back 5 back and with adam lallana regaining match fitness i would say think were be ok .wigan need to win at home reading look doomed i believe who ever wins the villa qpr game wiill decide the other spot .i think qpr will win there .im going for reading 20th wigan 19th villa 18th

he agreed that in the absence of a payment of settlement. NC was underhand to say the very least.... anyway SFC will loose out, NA will be awarded much more than he would have accepted from Saints. Its stupidity of the highest order.

no they wont nc will save a fortune in taxes .most tribunials work out fairly that what there therefore to work out fair to both partys within the law ,stop writting rubbish skunt give your pledge

Confucious wrote:
Must admit, as the battle resumes to avoid relegation from the Prem, I didn't need the Echo to remind me of the last time it happened.

I needed to e mail Mauricio early this week re the weekend match so I can't reveal the details on here as usual since Liverpool would have time to consider and respond.

I have, however, advised Mauricio to remove his hub caps before parking. Also, Rodgers has said re qualification for the Champions League that they are definitely not "beating a dead horse." As Mauricio's colloquial English is limited, I've advised him that this does not mean they have denied being sadistic necrophiliacs with a penchant for ****.

My e mail was sent early as I have also written to the Queen volunteering to cover for the hard-pressed Royal Bumwiper on Thursday and Friday this week. As Her Majesty has been troubled with the Tijuana Cha Cha, the official wiper must have been on exhausting 24/7 duty.

The job involves sitting in a tiny dark cubicle next to the Royal Throne and then putting the working arm through a tiny trap-door when needed. I gather Her Majesty's ring has to be cleaned with a baby-wipe; then dried with cotton wool and then polished with a special skin sheen. I think this could be over the top and too abrasive if done with high frequency during a Turkish Fox Trot spell.

Mind you, I'll not dare offer an unsolicited opinion to the "all powerful one". As I wrote in "Walter Wallace - William's Wiper", my moderately successful autobiography of William III's wiper, Walter was executed for allegedly leaving a clinker on the King's rim.

He had not done so in fact. The King, who was of course the Dutch William of Orange, was, like Mauricio, short on the local lingo and he completely misunderstood at the Battle of the Boyne in 1690 when the Irish Catholic horde shouted: "Begorra, it's that William the TUrd!"

It's the kind of thing that reminds us how important it is that Mauricio takes no chances and uses a skilled interpreter for TV interviews.

Regarding your last sentence...Indeed it is...

SaintMax wrote:

business-guru wrote:

saintkenny wrote:

business-guru wrote:

Seedhouse the Unrepentant wrote:

StevieSteve wrote:

george chivers wrote:
See the latest in The Telegraph on line about Nigel Adkins and Nicola Cortese.

A great shame the dispute over severance pay will be decided by an FA court headed by a QC after what Nigel achieved for us. As a club we should rise above situations like this. But perhaps I am just old fashioned.

The downside of Cortese. At times he reminds me of a secretive version of Ken Bates.

Did avb take chelski to court for the same reasons??? No. He wanted to work.

If Cortese can save money for our club then good. Adkins has been paid well at saints for doing his job and got paid some decent bonuses! Now he wants the rest of his contract too? All about the money!! Nigel Adkins, do one!!!

What a stupid comment.

Nigel actually just wanted his job but the club decided to dismiss him. It's really quite straightforward employment law. If the club or it's lawyers were clever they would have covered this eventuality in the contract in the first place. Let's face it very few managers actually survive until the end of their contract.

spot on, it just highlights that SFC do not know how to play properly with the big boys. One thing is certain, if we go down and the obvious then happens (ie MP leaves) its going to be almost impossible to find a half decent manager, no one will want it apart from the money grabbing redknapp-esque types.. regards Adkins, your point is right about initial contracts but its a kind of unwritten rule that sacked mangers are offered compensation and its usually mutually agreed so all party part in everyones best interest.

but nigel, agreed the monthly payments at the time .what he did not realise was the football league will not let him manage another club while doing so .so now he has to take a lump sum to finish off the contract ,.nearly all of these go to a tribunial as i quoted in a thread yesterday .its quite normal to get settled in this way .cortesse wiill save money in a lump sum.to paying monthly tax wise .there is no announcement that he is refusing to pay .the only problem i have with cortesse is the timing a week before the window opens .given maurico no time to make changes to the squad .however he has just about managed a point a game .with 9 left 37 looks possible but he has now got the back 5 back and with adam lallana regaining match fitness i would say think were be ok .wigan need to win at home reading look doomed i believe who ever wins the villa qpr game wiill decide the other spot .i think qpr will win there .im going for reading 20th wigan 19th villa 18th

he agreed that in the absence of a payment of settlement. NC was underhand to say the very least.... anyway SFC will loose out, NA will be awarded much more than he would have accepted from Saints. Its stupidity of the highest order.

Its all purely speculation.
How does anyone know the terms of NA's contract or what would happen if it was terminated.
People talking about employment law or accusing people of 'stupid' comments.
Nobody knows except for NA, his agent and Nicolas legal people and useless HR girl.

its only going the way of most payoffs its just if the media boost it up people will buy the paper say thet read it in the mirror or sun ect .cortesse has not anounced he will not pay .if he was paying the full amount monthly which nigel agrred with him.it would cost him more .after its over cortesse will save money .the tribunal works out how much .as with most cases .its normal standard procedure

SouthamptonLegend wrote:

business-guru wrote:

Seedhouse the Unrepentant wrote:

StevieSteve wrote:

george chivers wrote:
See the latest in The Telegraph on line about Nigel Adkins and Nicola Cortese.

A great shame the dispute over severance pay will be decided by an FA court headed by a QC after what Nigel achieved for us. As a club we should rise above situations like this. But perhaps I am just old fashioned.

The downside of Cortese. At times he reminds me of a secretive version of Ken Bates.

Did avb take chelski to court for the same reasons??? No. He wanted to work.

If Cortese can save money for our club then good. Adkins has been paid well at saints for doing his job and got paid some decent bonuses! Now he wants the rest of his contract too? All about the money!! Nigel Adkins, do one!!!

What a stupid comment.

Nigel actually just wanted his job but the club decided to dismiss him. It's really quite straightforward employment law. If the club or it's lawyers were clever they would have covered this eventuality in the contract in the first place. Let's face it very few managers actually survive until the end of their contract.

spot on, it just highlights that SFC do not know how to play properly with the big boys. One thing is certain, if we go down and the obvious then happens (ie MP leaves) its going to be almost impossible to find a half decent manager, no one will want it apart from the money grabbing redknapp-esque types.. regards Adkins, your point is right about initial contracts but its a kind of unwritten rule that sacked mangers are offered compensation and its usually mutually agreed so all party part in everyones best interest.

Well seedhouse you must have somehow read Nigel's contract? By the sounds of it anyway!!

You don't know sh!t... LOL!!

No one knows what was in the contract apart from Cortese, Adkins and lawyers. So to say "What a stupid comment" is quite comical coming from someone who is pretty much guessing. StevieSteve has got a point about the AVB thing!! You don't think AVB wanted his job then?? HAHAHAHA!! He was on £100k a week!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!

I employ 105 people.

I do not know what is in Nigel's contract, as I have clearly stated. What I have said is what the basic law is and what one would expect to be covered in a contract of this nature. I have drawn many up in my time.

The idea of have upmteen clauses in employment contracts is to cover all eventualities. Getting sacked/resigning is a fairly obvious one....

EricMartin'sHat wrote:
Perhaps NC can work out what NA is due and just "Pingit" using his mobile?

What I can't work out is whether Saints should be thinking about pinging or passing on Saturday - what's best?

Chill out guys, there's a game on Saturday we need to win: ping or pass?
:-)

Seedhouse the Unrepentant wrote:

SouthamptonLegend wrote:

business-guru wrote:

Seedhouse the Unrepentant wrote:

StevieSteve wrote:

george chivers wrote:
See the latest in The Telegraph on line about Nigel Adkins and Nicola Cortese.

A great shame the dispute over severance pay will be decided by an FA court headed by a QC after what Nigel achieved for us. As a club we should rise above situations like this. But perhaps I am just old fashioned.

The downside of Cortese. At times he reminds me of a secretive version of Ken Bates.

Did avb take chelski to court for the same reasons??? No. He wanted to work.

If Cortese can save money for our club then good. Adkins has been paid well at saints for doing his job and got paid some decent bonuses! Now he wants the rest of his contract too? All about the money!! Nigel Adkins, do one!!!

What a stupid comment.

Nigel actually just wanted his job but the club decided to dismiss him. It's really quite straightforward employment law. If the club or it's lawyers were clever they would have covered this eventuality in the contract in the first place. Let's face it very few managers actually survive until the end of their contract.

spot on, it just highlights that SFC do not know how to play properly with the big boys. One thing is certain, if we go down and the obvious then happens (ie MP leaves) its going to be almost impossible to find a half decent manager, no one will want it apart from the money grabbing redknapp-esque types.. regards Adkins, your point is right about initial contracts but its a kind of unwritten rule that sacked mangers are offered compensation and its usually mutually agreed so all party part in everyones best interest.

Well seedhouse you must have somehow read Nigel's contract? By the sounds of it anyway!!

You don't know sh!t... LOL!!

No one knows what was in the contract apart from Cortese, Adkins and lawyers. So to say "What a stupid comment" is quite comical coming from someone who is pretty much guessing. StevieSteve has got a point about the AVB thing!! You don't think AVB wanted his job then?? HAHAHAHA!! He was on £100k a week!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


!!!!!!!!

I employ 105 people.

I do not know what is in Nigel's contract, as I have clearly stated. What I have said is what the basic law is and what one would expect to be covered in a contract of this nature. I have drawn many up in my time.

The idea of have upmteen clauses in employment contracts is to cover all eventualities. Getting sacked/resigning is a fairly obvious one....

is it not true that since being sacked it has to be agreed in a written statement signed to recieve monthly payments .in this case it will go to a tribunal and not to the courts ,correct me if im wrong !!!!

NA deserves to be paid every penny owed on his contract , he served the club well from beginning to end with dignity and honour. NC decided to sack him even after 2 promotions for someone who he said could take them to the next level , well in that case pay NA the money he rightly has earn't .
We are looking bad in the eyes of the neutral supporters who would like us to be relegated because of how shabbily NA has been treated . I support my team through thick and thin but this has tarnished the clubs reputation and what we are doing on the pitch , attractive football, young exciting players is being tarnished by our off field activities . I think ML was a man we all trusted in and I don't think he would of allowed this to happen especially at such a critical time of the season .

I've lost the will to live. Who cares - we are where we are. I'd love to be given the sack by a football club, I'd probably end up with more money than I'll ever earn in a lifetime. Now - back to the football please?

I used the phrase "FA court" instead of tribunal to emphasize the need for a QC to settle a domestic dispute which should be done discretely between the two parties. Or simply by what is agreed in the contract between the two parties.

I have had my differences with Seedhouse in the past over a few issues, but he is absoluely correct in what he has said on this one.

There are some dumb remarks from divs on here today.

When a team pulls clear of or escapes the relegation zone at this time of season it is because they put a string of unlikely results together...

...unlikely because if they were beating the top teams consistantly they would not be in or very close to the relegation zone...

...ergo, we cannot pick and choose the games we win...we have just got to beat whoever is put in front of us...

..Wigan repeatedly do it, Swansea did it..now we must step up...rest assured someone is going to go on a run, QPR have won two on the trot...they get a third and momentum and belief is with them...

The solution is to beat whoever is in front of us..in the words of Rocky's trainer played admirably by Burgess Meredith.....'roll over them your a 200 Italian (Cortese!) tank'..

Up and at them from the off, win or die trying...

saintkenny wrote:

Seedhouse the Unrepentant wrote:

SouthamptonLegend wrote:

business-guru wrote:

Seedhouse the Unrepentant wrote:

StevieSteve wrote:

george chivers wrote:
See the latest in The Telegraph on line about Nigel Adkins and Nicola Cortese.

A great shame the dispute over severance pay will be decided by an FA court headed by a QC after what Nigel achieved for us. As a club we should rise above situations like this. But perhaps I am just old fashioned.

The downside of Cortese. At times he reminds me of a secretive version of Ken Bates.

Did avb take chelski to court for the same reasons??? No. He wanted to work.

If Cortese can save money for our club then good. Adkins has been paid well at saints for doing his job and got paid some decent bonuses! Now he wants the rest of his contract too? All about the money!! Nigel Adkins, do one!!!

What a stupid comment.

Nigel actually just wanted his job but the club decided to dismiss him. It's really quite straightforward employment law. If the club or it's lawyers were clever they would have covered this eventuality in the contract in the first place. Let's face it very few managers actually survive until the end of their contract.

spot on, it just highlights that SFC do not know how to play properly with the big boys. One thing is certain, if we go down and the obvious then happens (ie MP leaves) its going to be almost impossible to find a half decent manager, no one will want it apart from the money grabbing redknapp-esque types.. regards Adkins, your point is right about initial contracts but its a kind of unwritten rule that sacked mangers are offered compensation and its usually mutually agreed so all party part in everyones best interest.

Well seedhouse you must have somehow read Nigel's contract? By the sounds of it anyway!!

You don't know sh!t... LOL!!

No one knows what was in the contract apart from Cortese, Adkins and lawyers. So to say "What a stupid comment" is quite comical coming from someone who is pretty much guessing. StevieSteve has got a point about the AVB thing!! You don't think AVB wanted his job then?? HAHAHAHA!! He was on £100k a week!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



!!!!!!!!

I employ 105 people.

I do not know what is in Nigel's contract, as I have clearly stated. What I have said is what the basic law is and what one would expect to be covered in a contract of this nature. I have drawn many up in my time.

The idea of have upmteen clauses in employment contracts is to cover all eventualities. Getting sacked/resigning is a fairly obvious one....

is it not true that since being sacked it has to be agreed in a written statement signed to recieve monthly payments .in this case it will go to a tribunal and not to the courts ,correct me if im wrong !!!!

Employment issues are dealt with by tribunals, you are indeed correct kenny.

EricMartin'sHat wrote:

EricMartin'sHat wrote:
Perhaps NC can work out what NA is due and just "Pingit" using his mobile?

What I can't work out is whether Saints should be thinking about pinging or passing on Saturday - what's best?

Chill out guys, there's a game on Saturday we need to win: ping or pass?
:-)

Gonna have to be passing Eric. Don't think the players can take their mobiles on the pitch so pinging is out.
We might be in for a real tweet tough on Saturday!

STID

warrens 76 wrote:
When a team pulls clear of or escapes the relegation zone at this time of season it is because they put a string of unlikely results together...

...unlikely because if they were beating the top teams consistantly they would not be in or very close to the relegation zone...

...ergo, we cannot pick and choose the games we win...we have just got to beat whoever is put in front of us...

..Wigan repeatedly do it, Swansea did it..now we must step up...rest assured someone is going to go on a run, QPR have won two on the trot...they get a third and momentum and belief is with them...

The solution is to beat whoever is in front of us..in the words of Rocky's trainer played admirably by Burgess Meredith.....'roll over them your a 200 Italian (Cortese!) tank'..

Up and at them from the off, win or die trying...

Yep!

COME ON YOU SAINTS!

Where's RedArmy?

STID

george chivers wrote:
I used the phrase "FA court" instead of tribunal to emphasize the need for a QC to settle a domestic dispute which should be done discretely between the two parties. Or simply by what is agreed in the contract between the two parties.

I have had my differences with Seedhouse in the past over a few issues, but he is absoluely correct in what he has said on this one.

There are some dumb remarks from divs on here today.

...."there are some dumb remarks from divs on here today"..

and thats a prime example.

st1halo wrote:

warrens 76 wrote: When a team pulls clear of or escapes the relegation zone at this time of season it is because they put a string of unlikely results together... ...unlikely because if they were beating the top teams consistantly they would not be in or very close to the relegation zone... ...ergo, we cannot pick and choose the games we win...we have just got to beat whoever is put in front of us... ..Wigan repeatedly do it, Swansea did it..now we must step up...rest assured someone is going to go on a run, QPR have won two on the trot...they get a third and momentum and belief is with them... The solution is to beat whoever is in front of us..in the words of Rocky's trainer played admirably by Burgess Meredith.....'roll over them your a 200 Italian (Cortese!) tank'.. Up and at them from the off, win or die trying...

Yep! COME ON YOU SAINTS! Where's RedArmy? STID

ASPIRATION FOR MP AND THE FANS IS A MID TABLE FINISH.

We have a GOOD Team with goals in the side.

The Gaffer should be getting the lads working on the Training Ground on the Quality of their Finishing - after all the chances that went blazing wide last week.

TOP 8 PUBS FOR ...... POOL.

1. RED LION
2. PRINCE OF WALES
3. JOSH TREE + NORTHAM CLUB
4. WATERFRONT
5. CHAPEL ARMS
6. BRIDGE
7. ROYAL OAK
8. MAVERICKS

Keeping possession - a CLEAN SHEET and getting more points on the board in every game is a Priority.

WE ARE SOUTHAMPTON.

RED ARMY 2013. WIN.
WE HATE POMPEY. COYR.

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

right back in the bar wrote:

Seedhouse the Unrepentant wrote:

StevieSteve wrote:

george chivers wrote:
See the latest in The Telegraph on line about Nigel Adkins and Nicola Cortese.

A great shame the dispute over severance pay will be decided by an FA court headed by a QC after what Nigel achieved for us. As a club we should rise above situations like this. But perhaps I am just old fashioned.

The downside of Cortese. At times he reminds me of a secretive version of Ken Bates.

Did avb take chelski to court for the same reasons??? No. He wanted to work.

If Cortese can save money for our club then good. Adkins has been paid well at saints for doing his job and got paid some decent bonuses! Now he wants the rest of his contract too? All about the money!! Nigel Adkins, do one!!!

What a stupid comment.

Nigel actually just wanted his job but the club decided to dismiss him. It's really quite straightforward employment law. If the club or it's lawyers were clever they would have covered this eventuality in the contract in the first place. Let's face it very few managers actually survive until the end of their contract.

Agreed. It never ceases to amaze the comments that come out in apparent support of Cortese's every action on these pages. The man with his cut throat merchant banker business methods is clearly failing on the PR front (the media will have a field day if we do go down); and his judgement is highly suspect.

PR won't ensure us survival, careful management of the finances will do a lot more. The media will have a field day whichever way the wind blows, that doesn't matter to me at all. If we stay up I will be the first to offer two digits rampant at the Press and all the other doubters and that includes some numpties that post on here.

I didn't say that it had anything to do with survival. But is another aspect of a well run football club - look at Barcelona. Is that not the club Cortese is trying to model SFC on? I remember you - arch Cortese sychophant - wind your neck in.

right back in the bar wrote:

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

right back in the bar wrote:

Seedhouse the Unrepentant wrote:

StevieSteve wrote:

george chivers wrote:
See the latest in The Telegraph on line about Nigel Adkins and Nicola Cortese.

A great shame the dispute over severance pay will be decided by an FA court headed by a QC after what Nigel achieved for us. As a club we should rise above situations like this. But perhaps I am just old fashioned.

The downside of Cortese. At times he reminds me of a secretive version of Ken Bates.

Did avb take chelski to court for the same reasons??? No. He wanted to work.

If Cortese can save money for our club then good. Adkins has been paid well at saints for doing his job and got paid some decent bonuses! Now he wants the rest of his contract too? All about the money!! Nigel Adkins, do one!!!

What a stupid comment.

Nigel actually just wanted his job but the club decided to dismiss him. It's really quite straightforward employment law. If the club or it's lawyers were clever they would have covered this eventuality in the contract in the first place. Let's face it very few managers actually survive until the end of their contract.

Agreed. It never ceases to amaze the comments that come out in apparent support of Cortese's every action on these pages. The man with his cut throat merchant banker business methods is clearly failing on the PR front (the media will have a field day if we do go down); and his judgement is highly suspect.

PR won't ensure us survival, careful management of the finances will do a lot more. The media will have a field day whichever way the wind blows, that doesn't matter to me at all. If we stay up I will be the first to offer two digits rampant at the Press and all the other doubters and that includes some numpties that post on here.

I didn't say that it had anything to do with survival. But is another aspect of a well run football club - look at Barcelona. Is that not the club Cortese is trying to model SFC on? I remember you - arch Cortese sychophant - wind your neck in.

Steady on there, you mentioned the PR thing, you are also dissing a bloke I happen to support, it is my right to do so and I am not ashamed to say so, he can't defend himself so I will, using my opinion, it doesn't have to be the correct opinion. I am just expressing it as I see it. NC walks away, no money no future, and we might be lucky enough to have a series of dodgy Sheiks and Russian crooks to run the Club instead.

The new Pope is Argentinian, but it is not Mo Po! Pope Francis 1st.

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

right back in the bar wrote:

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

right back in the bar wrote:

Seedhouse the Unrepentant wrote:

StevieSteve wrote:

george chivers wrote:
See the latest in The Telegraph on line about Nigel Adkins and Nicola Cortese.

A great shame the dispute over severance pay will be decided by an FA court headed by a QC after what Nigel achieved for us. As a club we should rise above situations like this. But perhaps I am just old fashioned.

The downside of Cortese. At times he reminds me of a secretive version of Ken Bates.

Did avb take chelski to court for the same reasons??? No. He wanted to work.

If Cortese can save money for our club then good. Adkins has been paid well at saints for doing his job and got paid some decent bonuses! Now he wants the rest of his contract too? All about the money!! Nigel Adkins, do one!!!

What a stupid comment.

Nigel actually just wanted his job but the club decided to dismiss him. It's really quite straightforward employment law. If the club or it's lawyers were clever they would have covered this eventuality in the contract in the first place. Let's face it very few managers actually survive until the end of their contract.

Agreed. It never ceases to amaze the comments that come out in apparent support of Cortese's every action on these pages. The man with his cut throat merchant banker business methods is clearly failing on the PR front (the media will have a field day if we do go down); and his judgement is highly suspect.

PR won't ensure us survival, careful management of the finances will do a lot more. The media will have a field day whichever way the wind blows, that doesn't matter to me at all. If we stay up I will be the first to offer two digits rampant at the Press and all the other doubters and that includes some numpties that post on here.

I didn't say that it had anything to do with survival. But is another aspect of a well run football club - look at Barcelona. Is that not the club Cortese is trying to model SFC on? I remember you - arch Cortese sychophant - wind your neck in.

Steady on there, you mentioned the PR thing, you are also dissing a bloke I happen to support, it is my right to do so and I am not ashamed to say so, he can't defend himself so I will, using my opinion, it doesn't have to be the correct opinion. I am just expressing it as I see it. NC walks away, no money no future, and we might be lucky enough to have a series of dodgy Sheiks and Russian crooks to run the Club instead.

NC tried to justify the change in an interview on Sky He failed IMO and now he refuses to make it easy for a man who gave US his all for a couple of years I've supported NC in just about everthing up to this but now I can never believe or trust anythig he says or does

Saintsayer II wrote:

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

right back in the bar wrote:

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

right back in the bar wrote:

Seedhouse the Unrepentant wrote:

StevieSteve wrote:

george chivers wrote:
See the latest in The Telegraph on line about Nigel Adkins and Nicola Cortese.

A great shame the dispute over severance pay will be decided by an FA court headed by a QC after what Nigel achieved for us. As a club we should rise above situations like this. But perhaps I am just old fashioned.

The downside of Cortese. At times he reminds me of a secretive version of Ken Bates.

Did avb take chelski to court for the same reasons??? No. He wanted to work.

If Cortese can save money for our club then good. Adkins has been paid well at saints for doing his job and got paid some decent bonuses! Now he wants the rest of his contract too? All about the money!! Nigel Adkins, do one!!!

What a stupid comment.

Nigel actually just wanted his job but the club decided to dismiss him. It's really quite straightforward employment law. If the club or it's lawyers were clever they would have covered this eventuality in the contract in the first place. Let's face it very few managers actually survive until the end of their contract.

Agreed. It never ceases to amaze the comments that come out in apparent support of Cortese's every action on these pages. The man with his cut throat merchant banker business methods is clearly failing on the PR front (the media will have a field day if we do go down); and his judgement is highly suspect.

PR won't ensure us survival, careful management of the finances will do a lot more. The media will have a field day whichever way the wind blows, that doesn't matter to me at all. If we stay up I will be the first to offer two digits rampant at the Press and all the other doubters and that includes some numpties that post on here.

I didn't say that it had anything to do with survival. But is another aspect of a well run football club - look at Barcelona. Is that not the club Cortese is trying to model SFC on? I remember you - arch Cortese sychophant - wind your neck in.

Steady on there, you mentioned the PR thing, you are also dissing a bloke I happen to support, it is my right to do so and I am not ashamed to say so, he can't defend himself so I will, using my opinion, it doesn't have to be the correct opinion. I am just expressing it as I see it. NC walks away, no money no future, and we might be lucky enough to have a series of dodgy Sheiks and Russian crooks to run the Club instead.

NC tried to justify the change in an interview on Sky He failed IMO and now he refuses to make it easy for a man who gave US his all for a couple of years I've supported NC in just about everthing up to this but now I can never believe or trust anythig he says or does

That's your choice, I cannot agree because I don't know enough either way.

Must be a certain time of the month. Lot's of bitchiness on this thread.
Let's face it, Nige has done just as well out of us as we have out of him. One way or another he will get some big bunce too so let's not all get the violins out too quickly.
And Nicola, sounds like it's all about the money. If he can save some to pay out a bit extra on a new player, then fair play to him, at least it's not going in his back pocket like the dark lord.
Whatever the personalities, the rumours, opinions or the reputations I will always love and support this club.

STID

st1halo wrote:
Must be a certain time of the month. Lot's of bitchiness on this thread.
Let's face it, Nige has done just as well out of us as we have out of him. One way or another he will get some big bunce too so let's not all get the violins out too quickly.
And Nicola, sounds like it's all about the money. If he can save some to pay out a bit extra on a new player, then fair play to him, at least it's not going in his back pocket like the dark lord.
Whatever the personalities, the rumours, opinions or the reputations I will always love and support this club.

STID

Thanks for bringing a little bit of common sense to the thread.

RedArmy what has Northam Social done to not be on your list any more?

Oh actually I have seen you mentioned it ignore me