St_Tel49

Yes - applying fatuous labels is always a good substitute for reasoned debate

As so often Alpine you deliberately miss the point by coming back with smart-ass comments.

I wonder how many of the "I'll never come to St Mary's again while Lowe etc etc etc...." will sneak back without admitting to it?

Sounds just the right age for us ;-)

No - I think that it is a decider of how much character the team has. I think that there is plenty of evidence that he is a good coach. The fact that the team has not always got the results they deserve has had as much to do with their inexperience and over enthusiasm as anything. Our results this year are basically no worse than last year but the football has been a damn sight better to watch and hasn't cost anything like as much in wages. I call that some sort of win. HE has the character to go out and face fans when things are not hunky dorey and to defend his philosophy. I repeat what I have said before - I do not believe that we will be relegated but we have to kick on next year.

Yep - five experienced football men are so dumb as to award it for a fluke. They should have consulted you instead. Silly that they didn't.

DD - we have been in this league long enough now for you to realise that any team can beat any other team. Apart from their brief soujourn in the premiership, which seems to have given them ideas that they are better than they are, they should know that too. If have have forgotten that and it has jumped up and bit them on the @rse then LOL at them. Coppell was well aware of the danger. And apart from anything else it is far to early to call us a relegation threatened team. The time to say that is if we were in this position with three or four games to go. I have a sneaking feeling we won't be - providing we keep the team together.

Yep - I can see that working. "Board needs Patsy to take flack for its incompetence. Previous applicants need not apply. With regard to salary please state how much money you can bring to the post"

I thought that initially but it gradually dawned on me that they might actually have been serious. I really hope that it is me that is red-faced in the morning.;-)

Sorry - I pre-date that even!!!. I have nothing against Crouch as such - its just that I feel that yet another change of regime and management without solid funds to back it is just pointless and even more damaging than the status quo. And I happen to like the football we are playing - even if it does not always get the results it deserves.

Good answer -NOT

Fine - if the board matters to you more than the football - don't go.

They clearly have their whingers too. They have over-inflated opinions of their status in life after a couple of seasons in the premiership but they have forgotten how crap they were for much of the last 30 years. The fact that some of them are querying Coppell's decisions when they are in the top three and after what he has done for them beggars belief.

And there is the rub. The kid's performance today deserves support - not to be ignored. I wish people would ignore bloody Lowe and concentrate on what really matters.

I am now totally convinced in my opinion that many posters do not actually read the posts that they are commenting on or perhaps the post that the comment is commenting on - if you see what I mean!!!!!

Wes, I am with you in thinking that Pearson would have done a good job with the youngsters and I would have been happy to see him continue. But, as you say, it is entirely speculative that he would have done a better job than Portvliet. However, I cannot agree with your "bizarre experiment" comment. The fact is that there have been times that the football produced by this young team has been breathtaking. The fact that results have not necessarily reflected that has as much to do with that fact that youngsters are still learning the discipline required at this level and this is something that NP would have had to contend with too. (I also think that there has been a learning curve for JP) but from what I have seen there is adequate evidence against Sheffield Utd away (which I attended), Preston away, the second half of the Wolves game and today, that this team can play against anybody. There seems to be a disagreement between those who attended today as to whether we really did play 4-4-2 or whether we simply played JP's system properly for once. Whatever really is the case I still do not want to see JP replaced because I think what is happening is still a work in progress. I will stick my neck out and say that we will not be relegated and I will settle for that for this season. If we did not then move on and up next season then - yes, then I would be bothered. As to removing Lowe and Wilde - well you do not necessarily have to like them to think, as I do, that I do not want further regime and managerial changes for the sake of it unless the incomers could show that they have the resources and the will to actually improve things. Much as I would love to see it there has been little more than hot air emanating from the aether.

You are conflating two separate arguments. Are the crowds down because of Lowe/Wilde or because results have not been as good as the standard of play the youngsters have been producing? I should imagine that if we manage to follow up today's win with wins against Plymouth and Charlton then we will begin to get a clearer answer to that question.

Personally I would rather watch Saints than either but Chris is perfectly entitled to his opinion.

It wouldn't be on a Friday by any chance?

Why? There is nothing that I have seen of the two that suggests that Saga would be better for us than John. Purely on goals scored/ game John surely wins out.

And there are none so blind as those whose dislike of Lowe make them produce a completely perverted view of what actuall happened. If Euell were to go off so should the Wolves guy because his challenge was equally wild.

His fundamental point remains valid though. Oust Lowe by all means but there has to be something in place that is recognisably better. Experience from last time suggests that saying that "anything is better than..." is not a sound way to go forward. Lowe is copping the flack because he is in place at the moment but to me there has been a considerable measure of shared incompetence over the past three years.

Except people, yourself included, believe the bits they want to believe. This whole thread is pointless because it doesn't PROVE a damn thing one way or the other so people sift through it for stuff to support their own particular prejudice - in whatever direction it lies.

Let me understand your point - are you saying that he should let the club go insolvent???

Probably the same people who dismissed Oakley.