RobM

This sort of thing did cross my mind. Or perhaps waiting to see if we are able to keep hold of Cork for the season? Do we need both? I'd say yes for cover, but it does make you wonder what's being discussed behind the scenes.

Nothing is being dismissed out of hand, but I still don't believe it's totally representative of all fans. As per another thread on this forum, there were many happy fans at St.Marys for the last home game, all supporting the team and cheering them on. These are the people who just want to watch their football team play. The vast majority of these people will join in chants and will say what you want to hear, but when push comes to shove they will still be sat in their normal seat when those who are boycotting are marching up and down outside the exec's office window. But in any case, the fact still remains that even if 60% (current figure in favour as per poll) of Saints fans vote yes they would boycott, it's extremely unlikely that you'll get those 9000+* people to not go to watch the football on a Saturday when their team is playing at home. As I've stated before, I'd be happy to be proven wrong and have even said I'll put my money on the table should it happen. But take the emotion out of this and realism says it's not going to happen. We're not in the playground anymore where name-calling and mob-mentality gets results. We're talking business and shareholders now where votes and politics win or lose battles. Focus the combined efforts of everybody interested into that area and we may get somewhere, but it wont be easy. (* assuming 15'000 supporters each home game)

Utter rubbish to you too. What basis do you have for believing that this poll represents the 15k+ fans who attend St.Mary's on a regular basis? And how can you be so sure that a boycott would make Lowe and Co. leave? Think about it... firstly, how are you going to convince 15K people that not going to watch the football on a Saturday is a good idea? How are you going to reach and sell your story to them all? Even if you got somebody like the Echo to support you, you'd never in a million years get that level of support. Let's pretend you had good success in this though and got, say, 5k people to boycott a game. Would that make Lowe leave? No. Not unless this level of people stayed away for the next game and the game after that. Anything less and Lowe would rubbish it as being down to the financial crisis, recession, weather, performances or any other reason you could think of. You know as well as I do that, unfortunately, Lowe will not come out and say the reason these fans stayed away is because of him. And even if snowflakes in hell are reported and he did say such a thing, he wouldn't stand down because of this. A mass boycott is not a practical suggestion. The numbers you are likely to get in support are simply not enough to make Lowe stand down. You had more chance the first time, but now he is back it's going to take much, much more effort to oust him. The sooner people understand that Lowe will only stand down if he has no choice the better. The only people who can oust Lowe are those with enough shares to ensure an EGM vote goes against him. Or, possibly, the bank if they made a public statement saying they will not continue to support the club while Lowe is in charge. And that's less than likely, when have you ever heard of that happening in football before? By all means prove me wrong. In fact, I promise here and now that if you get the number of fans needed (thousands, not low-hundreds) to boycott enough games to make Lowe leave, I will donate £1000 to a charity of your choice. Feel free to quote me on this.

It shows how far BC have come on in the last few years... but also how far we have fallen

I don't understand why it's such a short term loan though? Unless there is a rule that were trying to work our way around, I don't understand why we haven't either signed him until the end of the season or just said thanks but no-thanks now?

Just goes to show that for the vast, vast majority football is just a sport. These people go to St.Mary's to watch football, cheer their team on and hope for some good entertainment. Fortunately the majority of our fan base is like this, just fans of football, not wannabe business experts or boardroom analysts.

Do we actually think JP is managing the team? Does he have full control over the players available to him each week? If not, I don't think he is any more than a head-coach who picks the players he is told are available to him.

A very interesting point really, as we are still a business at the end of the day. The other big difference is the assumption that if we go into administration we will immediately bounce out of it unscathed. Football clubs are a horrendous black hole for money, so you have to be incredibly wealthy or incredibly stupid to invest your money into one even during the good times. Businesses like the shops listed above are all about making money. Yet when we talk about a business like those listed above going into Administration, it's more often than not the last we will ever see of them. Who would have thought Woolworths and MFI would disappear completely? Yet as soon as Administration is mentioned it's game over, cheerio, goodbye. But when we talk about Saints going into Administration, we blindly assume that we will bounce straight back out of it stronger than before. Why? A troubled club with huge debts surely can't be a better investment than a highstreet shop with a household name? It does all come down to emotions I guess. People have a passion for their club, but no passion for where they buy their DVD's or flat-pack furniture. This is a bigger influence to some than the potential money to be made from snapping up a failing highstreet shop and turning them around.

I know where you're coming from, but we have this problem with the vast majority of our squad. Young players with little experience will always be inconsistent.... but then some of our senior players are the same! Look at (the soon to be departed) Wotton, who has had some really good games followed by some shockers. Inconsistency isn't a special reserve of the young, but do have a ready made excuse for them.... they aren't ready.

Fairly typical of our season so far really. Didn't expect much, performed well, expectations rose, ended up with a result that was better than most expected but feels like a disappointment. If we were offered a 1-1 draw before the game we would have taken it gladly. But a decent performance against one of the top sides in the league makes this same result feel disappointing. Meh. (edit) This result is probably just enough to convince those in power to keep JP.

I'd conclude no more than if we won with them. We have plenty of good players, but no experience or consistency. I don't want to see Surman or Lallana leave because I believe the longer we play with the same squad, the better we will become. I also think they are two of our better players.

What happened to Stoke then?

Indeed. Same story as we've seen many times before really... protecting our investments in case of an injury stopping any agreed or potential move. Shame, but we expected it.

Snap http://saintsweb.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=7181

Last game before the new year and the transfer window. Guess which two players are missing with an 'injury'? Same old story, cheerio lads, done-deal I guess.

I agree with NickG entirely. As per my previous post, 241 (as it stands now) fans in favour of a boycott of some form does not represent the entire fan base that can be found at St.Marys each home game (15k+ on an average week). It doesn't even cover the travelling away fans who follow Saints around the country every other week! I also agree 100% with NickG's point about what really made a difference last time around. It was not the protests, nor the chants, nor the fly-by protests, nor the negative thoughts posted on an internet forum. This achieved no more than some defensive words in the press and OS and a branding of 'the lunatic fringe'. The only thing that made a real difference was somebody buying enough shares to oust Lowe. Lowe went when and only when it was clear he would lose the vote at the AGM. Had Judas two-faced Wilde not done this and had Crouch not done the same, Lowe would have not been removed. So the morale of the story is if you want Lowe gone, you (we!) need enough shares to call an AGM and enough shares or enough support to out-vote Lowe. The only other way is a total buyout including all debt's being wiped, which is what it would take for Lowe to voluntarily stand down.

As I type this only 282 people have voted of which 54 voted they would not boycott. So how much impact are the other 228 missing people going to have? Bad weather or a week day game would have more impact. This is the problem that many need to realise... This forum does not represent the whole fan base, not even a small percentage. There are 15k others out there who will still be there each home game. I'm all for some sort or demonstration, but it's going to take hard work and people extracting themselves from their keyboard to be effective. It needs publicity and support away from this forum BEFORE any action. Otherwise it will be branded the minority lunatic fringe all over again. This forum does not represent the fan base. Get out there and do something if it really matters to you!

Out of interest, where is this confirmation?

Lowe may only have a small amount of shares himself, but he has 'control' over a huge amount more. There are a number of shareholders who he has in his pocket and who will back him regardless of what we may think or feel. Lowe controls a much bigger stake in this club than 6% The only two people who have any chance of a decent say in things are Wilde and Crouch. Neither speak for anywhere near a majority, but they do hold a decent amount of weight.

I see a common theme here.... Lowe :smt078 I stand by my point though. If JP goes I absolutely bet that he will appoint a similar manager (perhaps this new coach of ours?) and his reasoning will be he can step in and work with everything we have put into place recently. I can almost hear it now...

Funnily enough, the exact same comment was made in an Echo article this week! Hard to disagree with, to be fair.

http://94.102.148.26/forum/showthread.php?t=6821

If we had money, a proven goalscorer like Stern John would not have been forced to go out on loan. If we had money, we would not have had to appoint JP. If we had money, we would be able to strengthen our squad in Jan. If we had money, we would not be forced into selling our best players in Jan. I'd say this has a lot to do with money.

It's not him coming back that I hate, it's what he did when he was here the first time. He's ruined the clubs finances by putting the shoody board in place, which in turn was replaced by Crouch. All this caused massive financial problems which is directly responsible for our problems now. Without these financial problems, we would not have had to farm out our best players to save cash. If Wilde had never come onto the scene, we may not be promoted by now, but at least we'd have a club in 5 years.

He's a *unt