The9

Seems purely to have been the "Lowe won't sell" issue - tends to be backed up by the complete lack of any investor/investment sought commentary on the OS when he was in charge compared to the (failed) efforts of the others.

That's the first thing I thought as well. Along with "dammit, I wish I hadn't decided to warm up without my shinpads on and ended up at the back of the line"...

Um, that doesn't include anyone keeping a clean sheet and getting a loser's medal. Is that what the last sentence is about ? If so, why post it at all ? Hell, this just got confusing.

Check the scorer's stats to see if penalty-shoot outs count towards their tallies.

Um, and whoever the Man U keeper was when they lost on pens to Arsenal in the 0-0 a couple of seasons later... Roy Carroll : http://www.soccerbase.com/results3.sd?gameid=452114 You could also add the keepers on the eventually losing side in 1886, 1911 and 1912 too, when the FA Cup Final was a 0-0 draw and required a Replay, if you were going to be superpedantic (like wot I iz sometimes). That was West Brom, Newcastle and West Brom again respectively. Ha, that's sucked all the fun out of THAT.

It doesn't get THAT much simpler than being asked to hit an area vaguely in front of goal in the penalty area with a pass from 20 yards away though does it ? If players can't cross and don't create much down the middle either, and you don't have a decent goalscorer, well, you get relegated. My point was that we did have wide players and they were in the right positions to do things mostly, they (or in many cases the person they were aiming the ball at) just generally weren't up to the task.

You mean a move BACK to Stoke ? : http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/s/stoke_city/4114830.stm Shall I stop Googling now ?

It's not like there's no evidence of him trying to agitate a move either : Today : http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/s/sunderland/8059012.stm

Interesting that your "he didn't go on strike" comment isn't in line with about a week's worth of OS reporting on the situation : 22nd indicates we were intending on keeping Kenwyne and weren't selling him to Derby in exchange for Darren Moore. http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/news/?page_id=8898 24th August 2007 "Jones Wants to Go" indicates a Transfer Request http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/news/?page_id=8908 25th August 2007 Saints v Stoke match report begins "With Kenwyne Jones refusing to play"... http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/news/?page_id=8912 29th August 2007 "Transfer News" inc the line that "Jones refused to play against Stoke" : http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/news/?page_id=8922 Now yes he might have been negotiating with Sunderland once we'd realised he was going to force a move, but he clearly DIDN'T play against Stoke, nor was he injured, and too much of that OS reporting is logical and supported by what we know to be true for it to be completely fabricated. Rumour from BBC on Sunday 26th August about Jones to Sunderland and John to Saints though, that's pretty early in the process considering the Transfer Request was only 24th... http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/gossip_and_transfers/6964361.stm Long and short of it was that we rushed a sale as the player was making himself unavailable, and in that situation with our arm forced we weren't in any position to be adding resale clauses.

Nope. Well, I don't, anyway.

Umm, really ? Despite us playing with 3 up for most of it ? No-one other than Holmes doing it effectively beyond September, no, but numerous occasions where we had plenty of width from the likes of Smith and Lallana and Skacel overlapping before the usually ineffective crosses. It wasn't position, it was execution. I won't be arguing about McGoldrick's failings though. I've never seen a pass bounce 20 times over 10 yards before.

That's extremely arguable. I would imagine that as the League has decided to penalise Saints 10 points and claims the FC is in Admin, they may have already invoked the removal of our Golden Share as part of the "other administration regulations" that were mentioned after the -10, so it'll be interesting to see if they think we've got one and how we'll get it back without going through their usual processes. More to the point, even if we survive we don't have the time to take this through the courts to prove it before the June cut-off for being part of the League, and being in Admin come the start of another season is -15. Anyway, I thought it would be useful for people to know how that bit works as it MIGHT affect us.

I'm more interested in the spin on the OS designed to make us all think the manager is informed about the division and we're going to be more prepared for a physical battle next season, even though 1) I wouldn't say Lge 1 was that much more physical anyway, just slightly less skilful generally 2) We're clearly not going to be any more prepared given the current situation and the handicap of preparing late. In terms of Wotte carrying on regardless, he's already said that he has a contract with Saints as manager until July, and if that's not renewed he's still got his original role. Unlike the players, for whom rest from physical exertions is integral to their summer break, he doesn't get a tangible rest as such, so why wouldn't he carry on - he'd breach his contract otherwise?

I'd never actually understood it to have had any relevance to former glories, though on reflection there's an obvious link to recuperating on laurel wreaths like those the Romans presented for success. I'd just assumed your laurels were an antiquated term for a bodily area!

Nicked, of all places, from ThePompeyChimes.net, a link to Luton's takeover group from last summer, with a succinct explanation of the Golden Share and CVA procedure they entered. If we're lucky enough to get that far, this might help clarify things for people. http://trustinluton.org/2020mission.aspx I'd like to post the text but there's a sticky about that kind of thing...

There's a face in that picture?

Another simple question, is that the odds "with a run", or would we get a refund on our stupidly wasted bet at frankly weak odds if the worst happens and we don't even get to the starting gate ?

Funnily enough I saw them as a symbol of a fresh start in our battle against relegation as they went up (I think) before the Charlton game. I'm starting to get a bit sick of seeing them around now there's a chance they might actually outlast the club.

I actually can't remember, but probably because a lot of the "spending" was cemented in the wages of newly accepted multi-season players' contracts which, whilst a millstone in the long run, were regarded as unavoidable costs to a certain extent - and I should think that with a playoff season under their belt the incumbents probably thought we were well-placed to have another go at promotion as well, which would of course have solved everything.

Hey, *I'm* the bloke that says "show me a quote from Kevin Phillips where he actually said anything bad about us when he left" - and also the one saying "I'll take anything" - ironic that the Jackson stuff is Pepsi, no ? I hope he doesn't set his hair on fire pushing it.

Hey, YOU introduced me to him... But yeah, I couldn't be bothered to type that again.

Ooh look, some facts rather than conjecture (or FACT!!!s) - what a novel way to conduct a discussion. :smt041 Its getting to the point now where I'm starting to think everyone's location on this Forum should state their "Blame Quotient" (BQ) and who they think is most responsible for the current predicament, just to save the arguments. We could also then round up all of the different matters and how people feel about them into a questionnaire to be completed and appended to their user information, which would save all of us regurgitating the same arguments over and over and over again. If I get a spare few minutes (years?) I'll put one together, it'll probably be chronological from 1996 barring maybe a few Branfoot questions and some Lawrie Mac background and will say things like 1) Rupert Lowe is evil (Y/N) [if Y go to Q3, N go to Q2] 2) Rupert Lowe is a posh git who doesn't know anything about football and nothing he does could ever be right (Y/N) 3) I believe in Class War (Y/N) through 133) Lowe should have persisted with Sturrock (Y/N) onto 795) I believe the Rasiak loan to buy deal was completed in January '06 under Lowe (Y/N) and finally 3424) I believe someone will buy us and we won't cease to exist whilst still squabbling like a bunch of kids (me included) about stuff that really isn't relevant any more. (Y/N) From that we can probably assign points and create one of those charts which shows your Saints Political Orientation. It won't save the club but it'll save some bandwidth.

I don't think people arguing on Forums makes the blindest bit of difference to The Real World, to be honest, and due to people not tending to want to have complex discussions on the nuances of the problem it rarely manifests itself at matches either - the hilarious "early walk-out" shouting match against Charlton aside... I'd take anyone as owners at the moment, except maybe that Jackson bloke cos I think I could cr@p a better plan than the one with the Monkey Dinosaur Petting Zoo or whatever it was. Hell, maybe HE'D re-unite us... behind "anything else".

The thing with Wilde is that his manifesto claimed investment was being sought, and though other media outlets claimed he'd "promised investment" and some people took this as gospel, when investment wasn't forthcoming he resigned. That, at least, seemed like the actions of a noble man. When he then came back with Lowe in tow there was a ready-made stalking horse with worse crimes than "recklessly spending money to try and get us promoted" and his low profile keeps him out of most mud-slinging threads... until someone decides to start one to even things out, at least. I've got no time for any of them, but hell, we're certainly going to fade away arguing about it to the death, aren't we ?

Cos the moaners were too busy slating Burley, and it only became a problem when we lost in the play-offs.