um pahars

I too didn't agree with sacking Pearson, but I also appreciate that as the man in charge it is his right to do what he sees fit with regards the managerial position. However, like you I would rather he had been more honest with this appointment, rather than treating us as fools and trotting out the "we couldn't afford him" excuse (then again some fools still seem to believe we got rid of Pearson because of his salary, but fortunately it would appear that only a minority take in the OS & Lowe spin).

A very succinct point. I didn't go on the pitch after the Sheffield United game, because quite frankly I wasn't overly enamoured at celebrating escaping the drop to Division 3. Similarly, I'm not convinced that we should be thankful we're not in the bottom three of the second division.

But the longevity of their career after those 10 games is irrelevant in this analysis. This was solely looking at their first ten games (and even Wigley and Gray managed 10 games, 10 games too many mind). Aha, but you've included Pearson and he only had a short career. One inherited someone elses demoralised squad midway through a season, the other had all of pre season (and 8+ signings) and a revolutionary coaching set up to work his magic. Hardly comparable. And in all honesty, that's where this debate should have ended, as it is impossible to do any comparison worth it's salt. Opinions are one thing, but trying to wrap them up in "statistical analysis" is another thing entirely!!!

And when those players are sold, I do hope you add the income to your tally of money pis5sed up against the wall over recent years, and then also add Lowe and Wilde to those who you think presided over the aforementioned pis5sing up the wall.

It's all very similar to long lost LongLifeMilk who was being used and abused by Lowe & Cowen on a regular basis. How I long for those outbursts where he was fed ****** and bullshtyit and used to shoot from the hip on here:D

And from those 13 games, Pearson earned us 16 points. That was despite inheriting a right mess from Dodd/Gorman/Burley. In that context, a points ratio of 1.2 per game doesn't look that bad (he was no Ferguson mind). Jan needs to pick up 5 points from the next three games to equal that record (and he's had the whole of the close season to prepare and mould his squad!!!). Will Jan measure up to Pearson's 13 game record???

Guaranteeing a starting place may not be the right terminology, but I certainly don't think that the Chairman should be anywhere near team selection issues. So is our Chairman involved, to any degree, in team selection???

nickh, do you think it is right for the Chairman to tell any player that they will be the first name on the team sheet??

Fair play to the lad and I think his cultured style of play will look even better at U21 level.

You cynic you!!!!!!!! I'm sure there's a valid reason for not including 40% of our recent managers (it's just that I'm struggling to think of what the reason would be).

Problem is, McGoldrick isn't a flair player, but instead needs to work hard at creating and scoring chances, something he does not look like he is capable of doing at the moment. Is it confidence, is it arrogance, is it motivation or is it simply that he is not up to the grade required??? I don't know, but I do know from the games I have seen, is that he is not delivering and he is certainly not living up to the billing given to him by many at the Club and on here.

Absolutely And who is alledged to have told McGoldrick this???? Jan or Lowe???

Some interesting stats and I also wonder why Gray, Wigley and Sturrock were omitted. Was it perhaps that because both Wigley and Gray only managed 7 points, whereas Sturrock managed 12 (not 14) and it would have perhaps highlighted those appointments and sackings as being unsound?????? You then have to question the validity of such comparisons, because sadly there is no control test here, with each manager playing different teams with different resources. Therefore it is a fairly meaningless and arbitrary comparison. Furthermore, I'm not sure it is fair to include the first ten matches of those managers (or Head Coaches) who came in part way through a season. Although they have a chance to motivate the team and rejig the squad, to a certain degree their hands are tied and their choices somewhat limited. Additionally, what this also doesn't show is the context behind these points. In that, I don't just mean the manner in which we have played (i.e. I have only seen one good performance out of five so far this season), but instead how everyone else is doing and what it means in the league you're in. Most of those managers were in the top flight where the points ratio per game for teams is generally lower, particularly in the relegation battle. For example when we got relegated from the top flight you only needed something like 34 points from 38 games to survive (0.9 points per game), whereas last season it was something like 53 points, from 46 games (1.2 points per game). Therefore just looking at those managers who had the important pre season to mould their teams, then only Souness would come up above that basic level. Jan himself would fall below it along with Jones, Merrington, Branfoot & Nicholl. I had time for Nicholl, so you could argue he turned the corner after 10 games, but as for the other three (Jones, Merrington & Branfoot), I think it is safe to say that those three did not distinguish themselves after their initial start. Will Jan go the way of Nicholl, or the way of the other three who continued to stumble along?

I think you're spot on. The problem as I see it is that the powers that be have put Ollie and others under immense pressure by dumping so many youngsters in at the deep end all in one go. Rather than bring them in gradually and allow them to adapt, we have adopted a cruel policy of throwing them all in the deep end at the same time. I just hope it doesn't affect the development and confidence of some of these youngsters. He looks a good prospect and certainly has decent attributes, but I have no idea if he'll make the step up to be a decent player.

I said something similar a couple of weeks ago. You can't turn this into an entertainment business, owned by a PLC, call the supporters customers, treat them with contempt, serve up 5hyite and then expect supporters to remain in the past and just turn up as loyal cannon fodder. Football has changed and Southampton Leisure Holdings PLC has certainly changed this CLub. Ultimately you reap what you sow. You can't have it both ways.

Not sure I agree, primarily because I doubt they have that amoungt of dosh to do just that. Secondly, I don't think it is actually a fair ask.

I'm sure we may have saved some money on not appointing Pearson, but his wages were not excessive and if we had wanted to, then I'm sure we could have afforded him. The manager is (or at least should be) the most important person at a club. To me it would be a false economy not appointing someone just for the sake of a few grand. Finances didn't dictate that we had to release Pearson, it was more down to Lowe believing Poortvliet & co would be a better footballing option. It is impossible to judge whether that was right or wrong, as we would never know what Pearson would have achieved, but I'm sure that won't stop many from hypothesising though!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yeah, he left it so healthy that we lost £9,000,000 cash out he door, and that was even after receiving £7m from the parachute payments. He left a Club with a cash deficit of something like £16,000,000 per annum. A Club whose income had fallen so much, that after the last years parachute payment, income would go down from £45m-£50m to something like £14m!!!!!! He left a busted flush. I have no doubt that some of the financial decisions by the new regime were poor (particularly not attempting to cut back last summer), but the idea that he left a stable Club is pure fantasy.

But in pulling the plug on the two of them, isn't there a danger that we pull the plug on the Club???? And therein lies the dilemna. I either hope that it does all come off and we're left eating humble pie, or someone else steps up to the plate with some cash, or alternatively these two go and someone who can reunite the Club and get us all pulling in the same direction comes in and takes us forward. One thing is for sure, and that is in the absence of success on the pitch, these two have not got the ability to get us all pulling together.

Some have already said enough is enough, our attendances say more than I ever could on here!!!!! I can understand that sentiment, many felt the same way when Branfoot was here and felt the only way to bring about change was to boycott matches, but I'm not sure I agree with it in the current circumstances. Just as many disappeared during the Branfoot era because the football was terrible and it might be more a case of that happening this time around. Once again, I'm not convinced that a phoenix would definitely rise from the ashes, and my worry is that instead we would end up as dead as a Dodo!!!!!

The problem is that whilst many will still support the Club come what may (and many of them post on here), there are very many who will not turn up having witnessed another 4-1 drubbing on the box. Results, and dare I say peformances, aren't enticing people back and Lowe & Wilde don't engender that "We're all in this together" spirit, so I think our support will suffer. But that will not be a crumb of comfort to anyone, because that will mean the Club we love will really be in the mire. I don't think there will any time for crowing or shouting told you so, because we will be more concerned with our Club being thrown to the Wolves. I personally would rather be out doing a bucket collection to pay the bills, as opposed to getting off on saying how prophetic I was!!!!!!!!

And on the other side of the coin, the three wins we have managed have been against teams in the early season relegation battle!!! We also failed to beat another at home who currently reside in the relegation places and we've also played a further three games teams who are in our "comparative" position. The season is not all over by any means, btu 10 games starts to give you a feel and in that period you would normally have played a range of teams.

After yesterday I have now seen 5 matches, and in those games only one has rated above average which was the very good performance against Norwich. The other four have ranged from poor to dire. I'm not overly enamoured with a 20% strike rate, nor are the missing thousands of others!!!!!!!

I do agree that we need to try and be careful about these massive swings from salvation to oblivion after a win or a loss. Its obvious people will be more upset and vociferous after a loss, but we need to be even handed in our responses.

You can put Shearer in there if you want, as I thought he missed too many one on ones when he first broke on to the scene. But as long as posts on here don't manifest into booing and non support when he plays, then I think we're all being a little too sensitive. Being a supporter is all about having and espousing your own opinion. Some you will agree with, some you won't, some will be justified, some won't, but for time immemorable fans have always had differing opinions of players, and after a loss it's obvious it might be more negative than normal.