sadoldgit

It is the same with the England team. I have been saying this for a while now, it is no coincidence that our home form is poor. The team need support, it is as simple as that. Given the choice between 30,000 supporters who get behind the team and 14,000 who don't, what do you think would produce be best results?

Sounds like our support was awesome yesterday so here is a question for the "I pay my money so I have the right to boo" brigade. At 2-0 down at half time, do you think we were more likely to turn it around if a) the team were booed? b) the team were supported? A bit more of that support at home and perhaps the fear will go and the team will put in more of those second half performances at St Marys? England too seem to play with more fear at home. Why is that? Levels of expectation higher and tolerance lower from the stands? An interesting theary.

So long as he kept it to "give it your best shot lads" and avoided any references to Klingons, I don't see what the fuss is all about.

Jez, what on earth is the point on harping on about the negatives? Everybody makes mistakes, yes, even Alpine. Some are bigger than others. So what? The way some people crack on you would think that our Chairman/CEO or whaetver he is is the only person in football who makes errors of judgement. It happens every day at every club in the world. So what is the point exactly in harping on about the c*ck ups that go on here? Couldn't we just have a week when we dwell on the postives? Here is a thread that you could start Alpine - what was Lowe's greatest achievement? Or you might find this one easier, MLTs greatest goal? Or don't you do "positive"? Negativity breeds negativity, and in your case it breeds like rabbits.

How many days ago? You might like to recheck with him. By the way, how old are you?

You still don't get it do you? Every time you use those stupid rolley eyes things it makes you look like Alpine ( and trust me, that is not a good thing). If you don't want to check with Throbber fine. It just proves that you will only believe what suits your agenda.

Weren't all you wrist slitters telling us that Strachan was leaving us for Leeds? If someone tells you that they have taken a club as far as it can go, what does that tell you about their managerial ability? There are plenty of managers who will tell you they could do better if they had some cash to spend. Look at dear old Harry, the pot is empty at Portsmouth so he is off to Spurs. What we need is a manager and coching staff who can take what we can afford and make it better. Remember how poor Jones was? Burley and Snodin managed to get more out of him. Strachan was the manager of the same side that tore Spurs apart as was trashed by Arsenal at Highbury....or was that Lowe's fault too? You keep telling us that the team was dropping like a stone under Burely last season. Go take a look at Strachan's record after Christmas. After a bright start he was going backwards (with the same players) so why aren't you slagging him off? Tell me, are you happy that he left Davies and Fabrice out of the team for the final? On the few occasions we attacked Arsenal they looked frail at the back, but after the hammering at Highbury WGS bottled it and played safe. Are you happy about that? If Burely had picked that team you would have slated him. Or did Lowe pick the team? LOL

Those players would have cost over £10m. When has this club ever had that kind of cash to splash (and don't forget the wages too)?

So Wayne Bridge would have stayed here rather than to have gone to Chelsea then? Yes Alpine, of course he would. Just and Walcott and Bale were desparate to stay. So then, say we had matched Chelsea's wage offer to keep him , how do you think that would have sat with every other player in the squad? Strachan had money to spend on players but let's face it, he brought some dross. Where is McCann for example, at Real Madrid by any chance?

And I remember Harry Redknapp saying we would definately go up. People say things all of the time for whatever reason. Go talk to Throbber.

Isn't it just. I suppose he didn't go the the Cup Final in Cardiff either as Lowe was in charge then too.

I do not think this is an experiment. I think that it is a long term plan, agreed with the bank, to keep the club going. I doubt if we have had much choice about letting the senior players go and can't really see what else we can do. If Lowe goes the next bloke will have the same problems and constraints. Whilst things are not working right now, whose to say whether it will not eventually work? There were glimmers at the start of the season that it could work well. The thing about long term plans is that they take a long time. We need people at the club who want to be here and want this to work. Sadly I am not sure if some of the senior pros buy into it, which isn't helping. I am not going to pretend that everything is great when it is clearly not, but given the serious financial position we are in, I don't think we have many other options.

It may well be, but I can come on and makes all sorts of claims and say they are fact, but without proof why should anyone believe them? Probably over 95% of stuff that is printed on these message boards is conjecture and is cobbled togther from alleged hearsay. If what you say is fact, provide the proof.

Let's see where they are next season and the season after that shall we Alpine, or is your famous crystal ball fired up again? The harsh reality is that you need more than a good manager and chairman to sustain a lengthy challenge in the Prem. They have had a great run so far but I would hardly call a good start to the season breaking the monopoly of the big 4. If they are still up there in a few years time you have a point, frankly I think they are more likely to do a Reading (who also had a good Chairman and a good manager).

See what? You might like to believe third hand gossip on an internet site, I don't. You'd think after all the rubbish that was posted about the supposed take over some people would be a bit more circumspect about who and what they believe. Find me hard proof that Pearson wanted to stay and then, if I don't believe it, feel free to call me blind. You are another one who has a set agenda and spoon up whatever gossip is posted here in support of that agenda. Let's face it Snowballs, we are a bunch of cyber geeks who spend far too much time than is healthy pontificating on a web site. None us has sat in the boardroom, none of us know what conditions have been laid down by the bank, none of us know exactly what transpites between people and why they stay or go. It is all conjecture but some people hoover up all of the "negative" conjecture and spew it back as fact to suit their purpose. I am not happy that John has gone, but is that because Lowe is the Devil or because we had not choice but to get shot of his wages? Who agreed his wages in the first place? There are lots of factors that go to make up our decline, it is not all down to one person. If that makes me blind then I can only think that those who still want to believe that our troubles will be over if we get rid of one person must be even more badly afflicted.

His greatest moment..."I am not going to be pushed around by a bunch of North London Yobbos."

It is all very well coming on and saying this stuff but where exactly is the proof? Does your mate's plumber share his hairdresser? I have seen things that contradict this, so who is right? Frankly unless I hear an interview from Pearson himself confirming what you say I shall take it with a pinch of salt.

Please provide proof that he was desperate to stay. Or are we supposed to believe you because you are ITK?

I don't believe anything. I make some assumptions but they are only assumptions. I don't sit in the boardroom, I am not privvy to the converations that these people have so I don't know. Good for you, you obviously have a hotline to all of these private discussions so well done. (PS go talk to Throbber about Pearson). Oh yes, and keep on using those rolley eyes things because they work so well in backing up your arguements Steve.

That's the trouble with plans, they don't always go to plan!!! Confidence plays such a huge part in all of this. If some players had stayed fit and if we had won some of the games we played well in, who knows...but as you say, the wheels are falling off big time now and there seem to be precious few answers. We do have some good players and I don't see why things can't be turned around in time, but the defence looks like and area where we have to throw money at, whare is that money going to come from? Not a pretty sight, but I don't think those who feel the need to find scapegoats are helping the situation.

So then that proves that he wanted to stay does it? People say all sorts of things and do the opposite. I don't see anywhere where he says that he actually wanted to stay, do you? I see you are still using the rolley eyes things, yep, really adds to your argument.

We shall never know, but I do think that Pearson would have struggled too with what we have here to work with currently. If you are going with growing your youth team you need someone who buys into that philosophy. I am making an assumption here but I would not be surprised if the strategy was put to him and he decided that he did not want to work under those conditions. We can criticise JPs tactics but if you have good enough players they should be able to make a decent fist of most systems. I haven't seem much football this season but, from the sound of it, we are just too lightweight in too many areas of the pitch. I really doubt that Pearson could have made much of a difference.

Oh dear, the rolley eyes thing again. No Lowe was not soley to blame for relegation (remind me again, how many games did he play?). No Lowe is not soley to blame for the state we are in now (great idea of Wilde and co to blow all that cash wan't it?), but if it makes you feel better to believe that one man is repsonsible for everything (just like it is Gordon Brown' fault that the economy is in a mess) then good for you. {ps, If Lowe gets the blame for relegation how come he does not get the credit for the cup final, our best Prem finish and a taste of European football? Oh yes, that's right, it does not fit in with your flexible aganda does it?} Oh, and if you are going to try and continue to score cheap points, please respond to what I actually said. I actually said in hindsight I would have stuck with Wigley over Redknapp as he could not have done much worse and would probably have spent that cash more wisely/ As for the OS. Did they actually say anything about winning the league? How do you make the leap from revolutionary coaching set up to beating everyone in site (feel free to add rolley eyes here if it helps you understand my point). You and Alpine make great bedfellows. You are both steeped in the blame culture and you are so busy finding fault with others you don't actually know what to do about the problems yourself do you? As for being in a bubble, probably preferable to being wedged up my own back passage. Come on then, I have given up with Alpine coming up with any postive suggestions but how would you take the club forward given the current financial situation? Any fool can critisise, let's hear your master plan Steve. And by the way, I am not excusing any poor performances. But then I have seen them under managers like Bates and McMenemy too, so perhaps I have a bit more patience? The way that you take people's posts apart and try and make out you have a superior grasp on things by the childish insertion of those stupid rolley eyes things, anyone would have thought that you were bright enough to see the situation for what it is. Even under the people you hitched your wagon to (yay, we got our club back) the OS was full of spin. Of have you conveniently forgotten that period? Surely to anyone with an ounce of common sense this season and the next two or three are going to be very tough indeed (no matter what spin the OS gives it). Not because of Lowe, as you would have us believe, but because no one can be found to come in and inject the funds we need to compete at a decent level.

You still don't get it do you? It is not what you say it is the way that you say it that gets up people's noses.

I would imagine that the players mentioned are on far less than the likes of John, BWP excepted, Mike.