Joensuu

I'd love to see us re-affiliated with Southampton Saints. The only downside is the money, but quite simply it's a tiny proportion of our expenditure, and more importantly it's Markus' cash, not ours! In other words, any money invested in Southampton Saints wasn't necessarily going to be investing in the Southampton FC anyway...

It's not about the team are doing badly, or which division we are in; it's about watching a team who give a damn. I think we have a solid core of c. 23K supporters. I think these supporters would follow Southampton in whichever division they are in... However, last season we had significantly less than 23K for two reasons: 1) The spectre of Lowe hung over the club. 2) Half the time the team didn't seem to be trying. Frankly, who wants to spend hundreds each year to watch some overrated kids half-heartedly pull out of tackles and flatter to deceive? Having to watch BWP lose the ball, his head fall, with no attempt to track back and defend, gives me nightmares. It doesn't mean the supporters have deserted the club - quite simply they don't want to torture themselves every weekend, and be charged for the pleasure. Now that Lowe has gone, and if the team keep playing at 100% right up until the whistle, I would not be surprised to see us with 23K gates in League 1 (wherever we are in the table!)

http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=15093

If you consider Everton a 'top club'. But, surely ozzmeister's point was to offer a trial, not sign people up blindly! Perhaps with the right staff conducting a rigorous trial, we might just have avoided signing Molyneux...

Dunno? Somewhere between these two Chinese men I'd wager: http://blog.photos2view.com/files/tallest-shortest-man.jpg

Will that mean that “…our matchday and non-matchday catering is the envy of other clubs”?

Did I hear that 'Wayne Bridge says he is coming back' ?

Surely young players rejected by top clubs are worth a trial? Antonio Bryan, Godwin Antwi etc.. They must have shown some raw talent at some stage, and could find their feet in league one.

http://www.prweek.com/uk/news/922261/Square-1-advise-Southampton-Football-Clubs-new-owner/ I'm never a fan of PR & spin, but is this organisation resposible for the OS now being updated promptly, and the communications being so progressive? Edit - slight change to include ", but" as having two seperate sentances has obviously steered the converstation to only talk about spin -sorry!

It's all very strange, and I'm sure any sensible Pompey fan would be wanting answers to some difficult questions. It seems that Sulaiman al-Fahim has enough personal wealth to finance the takeover, and pay off the debt, but that after he's paid for all that it sounds like he will be running out of cash. Al-Fahim was probably always a middle-man of some description. Would the Guardian have put their neck out and suggested that Thaksin Shinawatra could be involved, rather than just saying 'someone' if they didn't have evidence? Obviously Shinawatra has plenty of money, but would be unable to pass the fit & proper person test (I guess due to vote rigging*). Perhaps this is an attempt to get him in via a different route? (Apparently he's got some form of surprise up his sleeve for his birthday on Sunday http://www.bangkokpost.com/breakingnews/149887/no-one-knows-about-big-surprise-of-thaksin ). It all sounds to me a bit like the Premier League have approved al-Fahim, but are watchin the situation closely to see if he gets money from elsewhere... This would all help to explain reappointing Hart... At first when you think you can get the money in, you are talking about Manchini et al. But once you realise the PL are scrutinising your finances, you realise you can't take over the club if any dodgy cash is handed over. However the new Chairman would be forced to make some form of appointment, simply to keep the team fit (and to prevent total chaos in Paulsgrove). So al-Fahim goes for a stop-gap appointment. If the minimum term Hart will agree to is 2 years you have to go with that; but al-Fahim is probably hoping the PL pay less attention in coming months and don't ask questions when millions start appearing in Pompey's bank account... Can anybody else make more sense of the strange noises coming from Fratton? Just something else of possible interest: http://www.eufootball.biz/Clubs/7350-premier_league_blocks_portsmouth_takeover.html *vote rigging alleged of course! Heard from a mate in Thailand, that what he acually was doing was paying people to vote, but 'not specifying who for'... as the majortiy of his support are based in the countryside, but rarely vote, his pay to vote scheme caused the countryside turnout to massively increase, hense he was elected.

It's certainly all sounding rather, ehem, fishy

Without doubt! Had we spent wisely we would have stood a great chance of promotion... Ignoring how well the money was spent, 7M was more than we could afford... (If income is X and outgoings are Y spending more than X-Y is taking a gamble!)... [hypochondriac -the stadium was indeed a millstone... (but should have been factored into the 'Y' category) ] I'm not placing blame btw: my heart wanted to see money spent on exciting players; my head doubted we could afford it if all went wrong...

I'd argue that we have overspent, and that has indeed led to our demise. In the 2006-07 season Burley was given c.7million to spend. Essentially this was a 'do-or-die' roll of the dice... It was a frustrating time, with Bagpuss/Burley having been given little to spend in the previous season, and most of the supporters were calling out for new players and investment. At that point we had a choice, we could either: Cut costs and stabilise ourselves in the Championship unhinkable to most supporters; but financially sensible). Throw as much money as we could gather together at Burley, and gamble on promotion (What most supporters wanted; but a huge financial risk). We all know what happened... and I guess you could argue that we would be here right now with so much optimism had we not gambled... but in all honesty I think we've been bloody lucky! So did overspending lead to our demise? IMHO without a doubt... NB - I've deliberately avoided words such as Lowe and Wilde in this post. I think both made mistakes, and I'm not taking sides... Mind you recklessness is more forgiveable than feathering ones nest IMO...

SoccerMum - any chance of providing us a quote?

But isn't this actually a 'perfect' scenario: "LEAGUE 1 Club" - meaning we will be up against relatively weak opposition. "with hardly any players" - a manager will see this as a perfect chance to bring in the players they want."5000 st's sold" - but with a 2003 fanbase which was 14th biggest in the English leagues (excluding Scotland); and with many fans waiting to see who is the new manager... Almost a exact description of a 'sleeping giant'... "-10 points and hardly any time to do anything about it before the season KO" - agreed, but I can't imagine it will be too long before a manager is appointed. And I imagine that they will be given one of the largest transfer budgets in league 1... (probably larger than most Championship clubs...) "Too big a risk for the CV" - not at all. As managerial jobs go, this would be relatively low risk, and very tempting to add to your CV... Big club, high profile, plenty of money, free choice of players, relatively easy league - this is almost the perfect job for almost any manager. Perhaps it's these rose tints, but you could be right, it could be the medication

istanbul... I think I've sorted those lists for you: 'Yes' list: Gordon Strachan Steve Coppell Aidy Boothroyd Christian Gross Paul Tisdale Darren Ferguson Kevin Keegan 'Unsure' list: Glenn Hoddle Alan Pardew 'No thanks' list: Tony Adams Graeme Souness Alan Shearer Dennis Wise Ian Dowie Kevin Bond Harry Redknapp (sorry, but MLT would be on the 'No' list for me too, I just didn't have the heart to stick him in a list with Bagpuss...)

I think that some of the 'unrealistic' names (WGS, KK, Gross, Klinsmann etc) are more realistic than some of the 'realistic' names (Coppell, Pearson, Adams, Wise etc). Assuming that there is financial backing, this job will be incredibly attractive to the more established names... Nothing's guaranteed, but I can't imagine there would be a simpler opportunity to prove your credentials... Imagine, for example, KK - this would almost be his perfect role, it's not too much of a challenge, but would be relatively high-profile, and would help re-establish his name and credentials. Whereas the more 'realistic' names fall into two categories. Firstly there are those like Adams and Wise, who should be dismissed out of hand by the new board. Then there are those like Coppell and Pearson, who have frankly already proven their worth at this level, they won't want to repeat themselves. If they move at all, they will want to move straight to the top... For me, the most realistic names are actually the ones some people are dismissing as 'unrealistic'... [Well either that or Leibherr will appoint some continental virtual unknown ala Wenger...]

A bit early to be on the lash IMO ! Personally the absolutely maximum I can imagine would be 2-3M in y1 (L1); 5-8M in y2 (Chmp); 10-15M in y3 (Prem) onwards... and that's being very optimistic...

Hmm... so: Friend of former shareholder in 'Administrators didn't recoup much/enough/any of my stock value' shocker... Or is it: Friend of former CEO in 'Administrators didn't let my bid win' shocker... All allegedly of course!

"The point is that any deeply religious person bases his/her actions on his/her beliefs. That is a good thing, IMHO. " hmmm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waco_Siege ; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades ; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_attack_on_Ayodhya etc... Religon is neither more nor less likely to be a "good thing" IMHO

Seen as many of the names suggested so far are off the wall... what would people think of a certain former Germany/Bayern manager (avaliable as of April 09)?

I just can't see one of the usual suspects being rolled out... I have a gut feeling that the next appointment will be someone young, ambitious, and well known on the continent. Some posters are talking about [insert big name manager here] are being unrealistic... Where are our realistic boundaries? For most managers this would be the perfect opportunity: possibly plenty of money to spend (possibly!) an upbeat atmosphere a lack of infighting (how good to say that!) great facilities large fan bas relatively weak league (I'm not saying easy!) relatively high profile (compared to league!) All in all I'd imagine 90% of managers would leap at the chance... and only the established few would turn it down. .

It's been four long years since we have last been able to debate this! Trousers, your idea is superb... different local beers at each game (I can't happening, but wouldn't it be excellent!). I can taste that Ringwood already... Now all we need is to get rid of the after goal music...

A bit yin/yang... their talents are like perfect opposites of each other. If only you could have both, WGS as manager in all respects except for in-game tactics, which would be Hoddles area (although Hoddle would obviously need to be keep a good distance away from both the players and the media... can't let him go saying anything daft and ruining the atmosphere...)

Loyalty eh... that much valued commodity Loyalty often has an inverse relationship with competence (as displayed by both club and staff). A less competent member of staff will often display a large amount of loyalty. A more competent member of staff will know they can find work elsewhere, and won't necessarily show loyalty (if they do it is rare and should be rewarded (cf. MLT)). A less competent organisation will often reward loyalty over competence (cf. Newcastle appointing Shearer as manager). A more competent organisation will judge staff by their competence (loyalty is a secondary consideration). [NB, no offence Mark, you have done yourself proud with your fight against the odds here. All the best with your next position]