jonah

Good on ya bjk, I think we will win too - a couple of early goals, then the usual sending off, dodgy pen and nail-biting finish!

I agree, even sitting through that dreadful 5-0 defeat they were crap. But there is a difference between being crap supporters at a match and being a bit unbalanced and viewing everything their chairman does as an evil deed. Did you read the list above, it looks like something you'd see posted on here doesn't it... you can almost imagine them having an alpine_addick and Um Parker on their message boards.

It's just as easy to paint a negative picture of Richard Murray, the only difference is that Charlton have more balanced supporters. If they were Saints fans they would talk about Murray like this: * Bought into the club on the cheap * Was on the board when they returned to the Valley, but the council did all the hard work * Sought power so made sure he became chairman * Couldn't resist weilding the axe and changed manager straight away, but made the stupid mistake of appointing from within by appointing the coach - everyone knows that is a recipe for disaster * Despite gaining a fortuitous promotion from Curbishley's excellent management skills, he then oversaw the club's relegation as he failed to push us onto the next level by getting investment * Didn't apologise for relegation or accept his share of responsibility * Never offered to resign as he was more important than the club * Despite getting promoted again, failed to learn his lessons and got the club relegated AGAIN * Completely mis-handled Curbs who then left * Has public spats with Simon Jordan, a generally top bloke of course * Was so unprofessional that he poached Dowie from Palace, bringing further negative press on the club * Ends up in court, enjoying the spotlight no doubt, yes he was proved right but it's the negative PR on the club that is more important * After the Dowie disasater, went for Les Reed, the cheap option which was ANOTHER disaster * Then went for another cheap option in Pardew, another disaster, has this man learnt nothing? * Can't give his grubby paws off the football side, and stops just short of appointing himself Director Of Football by maknig himself the chairman of the football club board. * With us plummeting down the league what does he do? Does he appoint an experienced English manager? No, he appoints from within AGAIN. Parkinson FFS, what has he ever done? * Despite a terrible start as caretaker, he then gives Parkinson the job full-time. * FFS no wonder this club is in a mess, I'm starting a march after school, who's with me? And that sums up why we have *some* of the worst fans around.

What is the relevance of young Connor's age? Well let me see. When my 4 year old tells me she's a fairy and can fly I laugh at her beautiful naivety, ruffle her hair and tell her to go wash her hands before she has her tea. When young Connor says he's going to hold a march in protest at someone called a "CEO" who runs something called a "PLC", I expect his mother to call him a scamp, ruffle his hair and tell him to go wash his hands thoroughly with soap before he comes down from his bedroom for tea. What I don't expect is for grown ups to start jumping out of windows because they believe my daughter and think they are fairies. Or to march behind a spotty teenager who thinks an Open Offer costs a bag of chips and 2 fish fingers.

I'm not sure what's worse, the thought that a march is being organised by a 16 year-old living at home with his parents, barely past the age of legal responsibility, too young to even drive a car and with bugger all experience of life beyond going to school, let alone the first clue of what's involved in running a multi-million pound company.... or those people who are standing behind him and looking up to him in awe. And God only knows how he's finding the time to do his homework too.

Whereas on the eve of a big game having some kids organise another march is a bloody smart thing to do? As part of his role as manager Wotte will have done his press conference yesterday. Not surprisingly, given the bloody smart idea of having a march tomorrow, he was asked about the McDonalds March. I imagine he doesn't live on this forum 24 hours a day and hence will have just heard there are a few kids runing a Facebook petition, so he gave his own opinion on it which is that it seems like a stupid idea. Seems like a fair comment from someone focussing on trying to win 3 points, or would you rather the team manager backed the march and turned up a bit late in the dressing room?

Thanks for replying on Duncan's behalf, Wes, very public spirited of you. It's just a simple question in response to this: "I am not going to elaborate on why MC felt threatened by Lowe except to say that's how she told me she felt. I do not have her permission to say anything further. Sorry." That clearly implies he had her permission to say the first bit. And "threatened" is a strong word to use if you're not going to expand on the details. Since Duncan leaves it hanging by saying he doesn't have Mary's permission to expand upon it I wanted to know whether he had her permission to make that public in the first place or whether he chose to make it public without her knowledge. It only needs a "yes" or a "no". I would have thought you'd be keen to hear more about it, it can only harm Lowe's PR right?

Don't really get the joke, but anyway - I'll swap the generous Xmas gift gesture for an answer to the question of whether MC said you could reveal that she felt threatened by RL?

If you're going to call him Lord Lowe then it's only fair to call Leon Crouch Potato. I thought closing the corners was sensible - if it was Crouch's idea well done him. Of course when it's Crouch's idea it's sensible and great on here, when people thought it was Lowe's we had Primary School mathematics trying to show how it would cost the club money (LOL) and he had done it to "gain revenge" on the Itchen corner. As SJ just said, it's mob mentality. NU are in no position to withdraw their support, I don't know why you would claim that - unless there is a trigger clause about change in board members which certain people have assured us isn't the case (count to 3 and wait for UP to appear), otherwise we make our payments on time end of story. Re the bank support, the AGM was delayed whilst they tried to secure their support - clearly not something sorted out by Crouch (or disputed at the AGM when stated). Oh so that's why you were on the pitch - there I was in the stands celebrating scraping to survival by 20 minutes (hoorah) and you were celebrating Leon Crouch.

Wow, so now not only did Lowe convince 2 other major shareholders to disrupt the AGM on his behalf (How did they disrupt it? A show of hands and a walk-out? Shouting down the board?), but apparently you can even recognise Lowe's hand-writing and identify the questions as his own. Curse that man for having questions, will we ever be rid of his evil plotting?! Having a list of questions written down seems like an eminently sensible thing to do when attending an AGM. Perhaps if LC, LM et al had done the same they wouldn't have been "thrown off course" for the entire meeting by hearing a 5 second snippet from a letter? Another lesson on professionalism to be learned there I feel.

I'm not sure which point you are referring to? MC feeling threatened by RL? Or RL having never attended an AGM whilst not chairman?

Oh right, so even though RL wasn't even there it's all his fault again! There's a surprise!

Duncan, I'm sorry but I don't believe that - I have responded to you claiming that before and I know we've had this conversation before on other lists. I even remember you trying to claim in 2006 that Lowe's offer to resign and acceptance of his share of the blame had not made it into the board minutes (which back then you claimed were always 100% accurate! ;-)) - so this has certainly been gone over before and it makes no sense to me why it was relevant or why you would drag it up again at the 2008 AGM. Secondly, you ignored the question of whether MC gave you permission to reveal that she apparently "feels threatened" by Lowe given that she didn't give you permission to elaborate on the details. It comes across as a very underhand thing to post here, I would just like to clear up whether you revealed this without MC knowing or whether she said you could mention it without giving any more details? That seems a fair question in the circumstances. Hack what? No, I have never met or even spoken to RL. Of all the main shareholders and Directors, the only one I have ever met is LM when I was a kid - even that I'm not sure of, I know I met Ted Bates, but I'm not 100% sure LM was there. And I've met you. So tell us all how he behaves - caveat one, not your phone call story again; caveat two, factual events, not rumour or innuendo where you're not allowed to tell us any more details. I might well be shocked, so it's a good chance to help change my mind. I'm sure for balance you won't miss out similar stories of Crouch, McMenemy et al? You know, things like LM shouting at LC to "F*ck off" in the middle of a Southampton restaurant, etc. But I would genuinely be interested to hear *factual* stories. I don't know what world you go about in every day Duncan, everyone has character flaws and I'm sure we could all have a lovely time identifying each others and exaggerating them to make our points - I get that directed at me every time I don't follow the sheep on here and I'm sure I'll get another lot in response to this! I'm sure he has flaws aplenty, whether they are as big as those of LC, LM etc is another matter of course if it's a competition. However I learnt a long time ago not to judge someone's professional ability by their personal flaws - it's not a popularity contest. Oh sh*t, I've got that wrong haven't I, it's alway a popularity contest at Saints... Calm down Duncan, as I've said before you are very good at dishing it out (criticising me over using the minutes, stating RL didn't attend AGMs), yet don't seem able to handle anything you get back. When the red mist clears, you might read up above how I've said I'm perfectly happy if RL and the rest all left SFC - provided we have someone good enough to come in. You will probably also remember from other lists that I said I wanted RL to step down as chairman after relegation - my idol indeed (and an insult to Jimmy Page). As we know from the last Anyone-But-Lowe episode, that's easier said than done - certainly choosing people who apparently were "thrown off course" by Lowe reading out 5 seconds from a letter is not my idea of a sensible alternative!

Duncan, did you have her permission to reveal that she felt threatened then? Or was it just too good an opportunity to miss? I think I will contact her to ask what she meant given it's now in the public domain. You don't need to apologise for it, however I pointed it out given that you took umbrage with my reliance upon minutes despite me ensuring I acknowledged up front that I was assuming they were accurate. As for missing the next 2 AGMs (assuming that is correct), I don't understand your point? Do you feel he should have attended? He didn't barrack the board when he did attend, and didn't disrupt future AGMs trying to get democratically elected board members removed by shouting them down as a minority. Given you think it's outrageous for him to take a holiday when we had Wilde as chairman living in the Channel Islands, then Dulieu as chairman living in Portugal, are you suggesting he should attend every AGM as a shareholder? What about Trant, Wilde and Thompson not even bothering to attend when they were Directors? If you said that, great, not sure it quite offsets comments such as "you're not welcome" as if your minority view should be considered above those of the majority, but anyway. You still didn't answer the question about the apologies though - you already knew he had apologised and accepted his share of the blame didn't you? So why did you ask about it again?

I think Leon Crouch has already applied for that position: "The plan we are working on now is my plan but there is a difference. I would have had experienced players, loan players and free transfers." Or is that more of a team manager position?

That is easy - get the club back on an even keel... fix the finances, stabilise in the CCC and get the share price back up to a higher level. Then you have something people might want to buy into and a price at which the main holders might want to sell. Nobody wants to buy into a struggling company no matter how cheap the price. Lots of people want to buy into a company which is stable and well run. Hence, although it probably goes against your anti-Lowe instincts, your best bet to get rid of him is for the club to do well - remember, he only came back because Wilde & Co had messed it up... if they had built the club up he'd have had no reason to return and we might even have found a buyer for his or all the shares.

:-) To be honest it's just a case of having more to my life than trying to argue the toss against a mob mentality 24 hours a day. It's only football, and there really are more important things in life than villifying someone trying to do their best for a football club. Some of the "arguments" on here are so juvenile it's worrying just how poor our education system has become, whilst others just prove that our Care In The Community program is failing badly. I see Duncan also disappeared even earlier after incorrectly trying to claim Lowe had never attended an AGM when not chairman, and again not answering the question about why he keeps demanding personal apologies after 4 years. But of course, no balance here to question that is there (and none expected either). Funnily enough, I don't keep a list of such incidents to hand - if you want examples of bizarre behaviour from Directors then get off your backside and go and have a read of some AGM minutes. Try looking at companies like Panther, Meldex, Minmet for starters. There are plenty of quirky Directors, you show me a balanced, normal millionaire chairman. But as usual, the majority on here will continue to focus on a 5 second quote from a letter rather than the bigger picture... which is why the club is in such a mess, it's obviously far more important to worry about the letter than it is to worry about the club's finances. The one thing which is different about a football club over other listed companies is that normally people hold shares in the company because they like the way it is run and its prospects - if not, they sell up. With us it's obviously different and hence the AGM is viewed differently by those fans who don't agree with how it's being run, or who think the democratically elected Directors and Chairman should resign simply because they ask them to at an AGM - frankly, they're the ones who are unprofessional (and stupid really) to do such a thing. Hence when the Chairman reads out a letter supporting the direction the company has taken, there are people present who don't agree - that doesn't make it unprofessional... it's not fan-friendly rhetoric in the eyes of those who oppose Lowe, but why should it be? For those who think he *is* doing the right thing, they were in agreement with that letter (like the first person who spoke) - and as they have democratically elected that board, they're the majority too. So it's just sour grapes from the minority, and as I've said before if they don't like it they need to shut up or put up - there is nothing to stop LM spending the £150k he earnt from the last 2 seasons on Saints shares is there - that would be 882,000 shares which is half as many as Lowe. Corbett could also buy some to swing the balance her way if she was that incensed with the club's direction - but has she ever bought a single share?

I don't blame Crouch directly for the mismanagement, it was achieved by a whole host of people who voted in Wilde and his hired helps. Of all the things you can throw at RL, like reading scurrilous letters the fiend, I don't think you can honestly say he wouldn't have got a proper grip on the finances over the last 2 years - there is no way in the world we'd have been having to delay our AGM whilst we begged lenders to keep us a going concern. As far as shareholders being in power, yes that is generally the idea - hence why Crouch was the kingmaker for Wilde, and an arse for trying to remain in power when a majority asked him to leave. And why he was an arse stomping about at the AGM asking Lowe to resign when the shareholders have voted him in. If he doesn't like it, he should buy some more shares and save the stomping for the Preston match ;-)

Let me get this straight - despite *knowing* that he had accepted the blame more than once, the problem was that his apologies were nearly 4 years old and not to you personally? So you wanted a newer one just for you?! Come on, you can't be serious? When do I get my one? A little inconsistent bearing in mind threads you have started recently beginning with "I get the impression...". And how do you explain this: I hope your books are more accurate Duncan - AGM November 2006, this was the one where neither Trant nor Thompson, having helped bring Wilde to power, bothered to turn up or even offer their apologies. Rupert Lowe was there, as was Andrew Cowen and David Windsor-Clive. Did he shout down the chairman? No.

I'm sorry, are there 2 Um Pahars in the room? Where is the one who deliberately lied about share proxies in order to help remove Lowe? Credibility indeed! I guess it's about expectations - when I see RL holding an AGM what do I expect? Do I expect fan-friendly rhetoric? No, I expect a generally (there's that word again) professional chairing of a formal meeting with a guaranteed "oops" moment somewhere. What on earth did people expect differently? As another example, when I see a discussion about an AGM of our club at a time when we are on the brink of administration, thanks to the financial mis-management of a bunch of no-hopers brought to power by the fans, what do I expect from the failed bean-counter? Incisive analysis of the finances and the roles of those who ran the club for the previous 2 years? No, I expect a completely OTT reaction to a completely inconsequential and meaningless 5 second quote from a letter read out by a part-time chairman. That's a bit more than an "oops" moment. The only thing that's missing is alpine or ottery popping in to nod sagely.

No it wouldn't be, but I don't for one minute think he did do it for that reason - I think he just genuinely thought it followed on as a "rallying call" that he was coming in to try to stabilise the club financially. He was hardly going to read out a letter from Duncan was he? :-)

As you have fairly stated, you were there at the AGM and I was not - I am indeed only going off the minutes so am happy to be corrected if you think the details are wrong: Well from the minutes I have, he had just explained the club had only just reached agreement with its lenders and he was trying to resolve the issues which he thought was best achieved through unity - to which end he read: "it says keep the faith in your head coach and his staff, keep the faith in your team and in your youth policy and yourself… Seriously, unless that's not what he read out I can't see the big deal. Crouch interrupted him by heckling which led onto the first speaker/question (not you) who actually asked a sensible question about selling players. Asking him when he was going to accept responsibility (and "some of the blame" according to the minutes) is something you've asked before isn't it? And you've had the answer before because I know I've replied to your insistence over this before: So my question to you stands (ignoring the interpretation of my use of the word "apology") - why did you ask the same question again when you already knew the answer(s)? Again, as I've acknowledged, I wasn't there but the minutes make no mention of you saying "with respect", only that you said: "You are not welcome, you don’t unite the club and the sooner you are gone the better. " ...which is not quite the polite point you would have us believe is it? That is because an AGM is not a soapbox for the former chairman. Did RL shout down MW or the board at previous AGMs? No. Not really, according to the minutes Lawrie said "With respect, to the club that is, I’m pleased you know my name – you must recognise me from the picture!" Neither polite nor professional based upon the exacting standards people appear to be demanding from Lowe. He even complained "In the ten years you had ten managers", presumably without realising that in *his* time on the board of SFC he managed 7 managers in just 5 years!! As for the picture of him holding the cup not being in the boardroom - it's just so petty, really, it's not like it's a fans museum or a public area even. LM has been the biggest albatross around the club's neck since he returned in the early 90s (?) because he tries to control everything - which is a terrible shame as I like many others I'm sure was in complete awe of him in the 70s and early 80s, and those days at the Dell were the best by a mile. But sadly that was then, this is now. Fancy charging your own club £75k pa to be an ambassador. And as for your anti-Lowe meeting before the AGM, well it doesn't surprise me but it does sadden me.

See actually you're not even right about that. He first act was to apologise for losing his voice, and then to apologise for the late date of the AGM. Specifically he said: "As the going concern note says it has taken this long to get all the various parties lending money to the club to agree and move forward. " Let's just check what he's said there - the club's lenders had only *just* agreed how to move forward as a going concern. In response to that dire situation he then responded by saying he was coming back to resolve the issues and gave an example of someone saying "keep the faith". How about forgetting one sentence he read out from a letter and concentrate on the important details for a change. Who on earth is more concerned over a letter saying "keep the faith" than the fact the club had just been driven by other people to the brink of administration? What on earth are your priorities? And you base that on what experience exactly? The rest of your post is back to your normal level and barely makes any sense, I really can't bear to attempt to respond to it.

I can't believe what a bunch of whingeing bl**dy women there are on this site - RL reads out a complimentary letter to start the AGM and you're all aghast. So he's a bit of a prat to read it out, so what, it was a letter and he wanted to read it... it's his perogative actually. It wouldn't surprise me if he did it on purpose to rub Crouch's nose in it - it's a shame you didn't get so uppity about having a chairman who couldn't spell the name of the club, who didn't even have the bottle to attend the AGM! And still you see nothing untoward in the antics of Crouch & Co? This is exactly why I think (some) fans are ruining the club. Do you know where Newcastle United hold their AGM? Is it at their stadium at a convenient time for fans and local shareholders? No, they hold it first thing in the morning in the City. You think RL indulging himself by reading one piece of one letter at the AGM is outrageous? Try looking at some other companies where the chairman uses the AGM and annual report to give their thoughts on the world and politics.

I did not attend the AGM, I am going off the minutes - I have experience of hundreds of AGMs relating to dozens of companies, and IMO the way Lowe handles the baying mob is professional. I am not talking about a fans forum, I am talking about a company AGM which is for company business - personal squabbles and fights are a different matter. There is hardly any comparable with other companies, the closest you might get is a hostile shareholders rebellion but even then the floor acts with dignity and asks questions based on facts, there is no shouting and stomping and using the floor as a soapbox [and how many were even shareholders?]. Quite how you think a PLC chairman would react faced with that I'm not sure? What did you expect him to do differently?