um pahars

We should seriously be looking at Jurjen Streppel. He has achieved no end of promotions and is successful with clubs with small budgets and loads of youngsters.

You and anyone else who thought things might get better have no reason to apologise for anything whatsoever. Who cares if you were optimistic, who cares if you were upbeat, who cares if you wanted what ultimately we all want i.e. a winning side. You've done nothing wrong in wanting our side to win. And conversely no one who was unsure, pessimistic or whatever has no reason to gloat (not that they would) as ultimately it is our Club that is being fcuukced over here.

shyi7t competition anyway. Let's focus on the league. No ijuries please, and let's get the fook out of Yorkshire PDQ.

I certainly thought he looked the part and had a great future. Seemed to go off the boil after his injury and lost a bit of confidence, which I think is a massive factor for goalkeepers. Wouldn't write him off just yet and being honest I miht have lost my confidence with our defence in recent years. By contast Davis seems to have found is confidence and has improved immensely.

Because on one hand you're saying there was no alternative, then the next saying there were choices that were made. So which one is it? I'm not convinced it's all a massive mistake at all. I have always said that I will judge those involved on the results the set up achieves. And that may well take some time to decide one way or the other (on the other hand results and the implicationsmay dictate the time involved). If it all goes well then I would happily offer congratulatios to all involved (including Lowe). As we stand here today, I admit I have massive reservations, but I am not convinced one way or the other. We have spent some money on some youngsters (transfer fees, loan fess, wages etc). This could have been prioritised in another direction. There are other costs we could have saved (we could have let Webster go to Ipswich, we could have released Dyer, we could have pushed for selling some of the talented players - Lallana, Surman). This income could have been prioritised in a different direction. So even with a rather shallow pot of money it could have been prioritised in a number of differing ways. The results may be better, worse or similar, but the strategy could still have been different. Throughout my posts I have highlighted a number of ways of generating extra revenues, saving monies and maybe a strategy on the type of players who should have gone for to augment the youngsters we already had on our books. Asking for a mere supporter to come up with costings etc to back up an opinion on a message board is risable. I have no inside knowledge into the wage demands of players, nor our own budgets, nor our bank requirements. Maybe if you could furnish me with them then it might make it easier for me to come up with alternatives. But I think people have enough nous to relaise that there are/were different ways of procruing and moulding a squad. You don't have to provide business plans to justify espousing an opinion on here. And how do you know that? Please provide me with a detailed analysis on why something that has not yet happened can be so easily dismissed (see, it really is laughable to ask for justification of someone elses opinion isn't it?)

Nothing personal and I certainly wasn't pushing an agenda, just fed up with the number of people now suggesting there is/was no alternative (whereas when we were beating Farnborough and Winchester it was a fantastic coup/choice to get this "revolutionary coaching set up" playing all these youngsters!) which cropped up again on this thread. This was a considered and rational decision made by Lowe, not something he stumbled on and certainly not one forced on him as it was the only choice available. Of course there are limitations to which avenues he could have pursued due to our precarious financial position, but there were a number of avenues still open to him. And he will be judged on that decision. And going back to expectations, then you're right JP's play off claim was OTT, as was the stupid number of quotes and stories on the OS which built up people's expectations and which probably also put heaps of unwanted pressure on the youngsters (something that I commented on at the time when I said I hoep people can see through the propaganda and cut the lads some slack if it doesn't come off).

I think we'll concede, but we will score more than them. 2-1 or 3-2 morale boosting victory. (If we lose, I'll be saying it doesn't mean anything as it's Mickey Mouse and it will leave us to concentrate on the league!!!).

But it's a pretty weak argument when you consider Wotton is only getting a game because of injuries, Stern isn't the first choice striker and Svensson is injury prone. That's hardly a spine around which a team is being built!!!!!!!! And as for your earlier remark about me taking a degree of satisfaction out of Saints on pitch difficulties, then I have to say that comment says so much more about you than it does about me. That may be the way you think, but some of us are above such accusations. HTH.

Good. I'm glad we put the fallacy that there was no alternative out there to bed. Yes, money is tight, yes, some of our options are limited, but there are many, many, many ways of running a Club and assembling a squad that would fit within the financial parameters we find ourselvs in. And this is a good example of what I mean by choices. Lowe took the decision to go this way. There was an alternative of going with the incumbent manager, but instead he chose to implement this "revolutionary new coaching set up" and support it as it assembled it's own squad (allowing for some inherited deadwood) and played the football how the "revolutionaey new coaching set up" thought it should play. As it stands, of course I will support this set up, (it would go against everything I believe in not to give them my support), but that does not mean my support is unconditional. By that I mean they have to show that they are worthy of support (by showing signs of progress, making changes and learning from their mistakes). I would like to think they get a full season to show us what they can do, but I also would not rule out having to take drastic action if we continue to show no signs of progression (in much the same way as we finally had to call time on Wigley's tenure). I also agree on you definition of success for this season i.e. mid table, because I did not regard last season as a success,and you didn't find me on the pitch after Sheff Utd, because quite frankly just escaping relegation was nothing to celebrate in my eyes. However, that is only short term success and success for us should be promotion. Anything else is just accepting second best.

What do you mean here Phil?????? CEO's generally don't have the money to come in and take over, they are generally appointed executives who come in to run the company on day to day basis. I don't think there are any potential buyers out there willing to pay the amounts wanted by some of the larger shareholders, BUT that is a world away from having a different CEO/MD in place to run the Club. The problem is I don't think any of the large shareholders' egos would let that happen and you oly have to look at the Runnymede minutes to see that. Obviously the Dulieu/Hone episode didn't go down too well with them, but they never considered an independent Chairman or perhaps more importantly, an independent CEO. Instead were trying to share out all the top jobs for themselves (Richards as Chairman, Lowe as Director of Football etc etc etc). I personally would have gone for an independent, experienced and respected CEO & Chairman, empowered by the shareholders and free to get on to do the job in a professional manner. (Just because Hone and Dulieu turned out shy5ters, doesn't mean al CEO's are like that). This may have enabled the Club to issue a rallying call to supporters to get behind the team and forget past differences (soething which Lowe and/or Wilde are not able to do).

I can only assume you haven't read all the posts, have trouble understanding them or are perhaps being obtuse. I have posed a number of alternatives, a number of suggestions, but I think it is also fair to say that when in "opposition" and not in the corridors of power, it is rather hard to come up with a fully fledged alternative business plan. However, this season has clearly seen the emphasis being put on youth. From the signings of Forecast, Scheiderlin, Cork, Holmes, Pekhart, to the pre season friendlies which were mainly staffed with "youngsters" playing a style that suited them. For me, youth is important, but I believe it will only work if augmented by a number of senior players with experience to guide them along. So one of my priorities would have been to acquire a number of seasoned players on frees. Our finances are tight, but I am sure that there is some leeway to have been able to make this happen. My priority before I signed another youngster (Forecast, Holmes, Scheoderlin, Cork, Pekhart etc) would be to get some old heads in first. Then of course we come on to managers. I personally would have appointed someone with more knowledge of what he was letting himself in for. I don't believe that this was a season for letting our manaer learn "on the job". With enough problems around the place, we needed to hit the ground running. After that, there's tactics, motivation, loans, and a whole host of thigns that could be done differently. Lazy and naive. Pearson (or anyone) could have decided to go nuclear and put everyone on the transfer list. Not signed any of the 8 we did. Not given contracts to others (e.g. Dyer) etc etc etc. Of course, we would still be stuck with some of the deadwood, but to suggest we would have had the same team is rather naive. Additionally, a different manager can make such a difference to the same set of players (even without any personnel changes). That's what makes a good manager. If things "would ‘likely’ be much the same as they are now", the maybe we should have saved on JP's & MW's and got Ginger from Mottisfont in (managers can, and do, moake a difference). Wat did you inferring by "we had that last year" and "dross"??? By continually suggesting there is no alternative and whoever came in would have to work with the same squad is just accepting the roll of the dice. By being blinkered to the infinite amount of options we had suggests you are the one who is sugesting there is nothing we can do about it. I have continually said 7 games is too early to judge the manager (and indeed the players), but that doesn't mean that the alarm bells aren't gong off already. I also think some of these players can get better, but it is also clear that we're probably not in the best position to be learning as we go along. We haven't got the comfort of some hard nosed barstewards in there helping them learn their trade, nor have we the comfort of some wins to let them play without fear. P.S. I'll tell you specific thing I would have done which would have made a decent 6 figure saving, and that is let Webster go to Ipswich in the close season. I wouldn't have asked Ipswich for fee for him, which ultimatley backfired on us when they said no and went elsewere.

Of course there's an alternative. Finances may dictate that some routes that we may want to go down are blocked off, but there are many other routes we could follow. As for last year, well we had a manager who couldn't be ar5sed along with a bunch of players who then took his lead. Just because one set of experienced players couldn't be ar5sed doesn't mean they are all like that. Perry and Davis look up for it, and have to say Darren Moore looked his usual committed self on Saturday Additionally, I think you'll find that most people are asking for a balance of old wise experienced players (who still have some passion and a sense of professionalism about them) mixed in with some of the better youngsters. Just to say the dice have been rolled and that's it, is totally uninspiring, and rather naive. Tactics, motivation, signings, loans, fitness and a whole other myriad of things can impact on our performances.

But Lowe and Wilde must still be blagging it then, because they are still asking for a rather pretty price from everything I have been hearing. However, unlike with contracted players, who Lowe always played hardball with when selling, they have a pretty weak hand and any prospective buyer (including even mad old Dan Williams) knows that.

I don't think he has much choice considering that: a) recent performances have been poor and crying out for doing something different, and b) the personnel available to him. Hope we get a change in performance, if not a change in luck to getthis show back on the road. A couple of wins out of the next three games and we're off and running.

And how much did he cost (even factoring in wages etc)???? There's bargains to be had out there, and although he isn't going to set the world alight, he's probably better suited than some of our youngsters out there!!!!!!!

And were massively overpriced (particularly when you consider how much other comparable Clubs have been sold for e.g. Ipswich, Wolve, Leicester, etc etc etc).

When what you are trying to sale has a value of about 14p and the major shareholders are asking for something like 1400000000p (in other words £14m), then it's asking quite alot from your salesman!!!!!!! Even Marc Jackson couldn't manage that.

Have a look here for the top line figures: http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/news/?page_id=10348 "an operating loss before player trading of around £13m.", and then you have to add the £2m interest payments on to this.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! We lost £13m on normal operations (i.e. excluding player transfers) and a further £2m went out the door for the mortgage payments last year. We may have managed to defer some of the mortgage, shut the corners, cut back on buses, laid off some coaching staff & some admin bods and me may have shifted some players on good wedges, but I don't think we've cutback £15m!!!!!! We're still loss making at an operational level.

Exactly. Regardless of who is to blame, what is to blame etc etc etc, we have to face the plain simple fact that attendances are massively down (and no amount of whingeing on these boards will turn it around). The simplest way to get the crowds back is by winning (and preferably winning and enetertaining when playing home games). However, current performances at home might suggest that this might prove problematic. So is there any other way of getting the crowds back in whilst we're still struggling (and not winning)?????? So maybe there is, but would it really work???? Would a new board, free of the charlatans and vested interests galvanise the fans and perhaps engender some community spirit, some sense of togetherness??? Would they be able to get together with the local media and ask us to support this new regime that come with no baggage and get crowds to rise with a sense of "we're all in this together". Or would people still be more influenced by results on the pitch??? Wilde tried it in his Echo interview, but I agree with your second assertion in that I don't think either Wilde or Lowe can engender that spirit. They both have too much history to be able to stand up and say "rally behind me/us".

Which takes me back to that time when he was giving Crouch a moutful on here and wanted loads of questions answered. Crouch then steps into the public domain at Central Hall to face the punters, and our own Suntanned Priest suddenly announces he has a business trip up north somewhere, bless him.:smt005:smt037:D

Lowe's cabal consists of something like: Lowe = 5.6% Askham = 4.8% (if you include his wifes) Withers = 4% Richards = 3.1% Windsor-Clive = 1.7% Cowen = 1.5% That's about 21%, so there's about another 5% out there he has somehow managed to get control of (balance of his his fathers?? Marlands???? Whatever happened to Anthony Dye's??? etc etc etc). As all of these give Lowe his power, they are as responsibe as he is for this "revolutionary new coaching set up", along with Wilde of course.

In the Rights Issue that raised £3m for SMS, he did put in just over £100k.

Sadly, your suggestion is wrong. After 9 games they had 10 points. It was a blollox quote, surprised the OS has kept it up there.

You couldn't be more wrong Phil. Wilde is the figure head Non Executive Chairman of the Football Cub Board, he has no say in the day to running at the Club. Lowe has ensured that. Lowe lets him write his piece in the programme and butters him up now and then, but Lowe is pulling all the strings. The de facto DOF is Rupert Lowe ( a role he has aspired to for ages).