Lawrie Mac's Centre For Football Research

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

Have to laugh at this very emotive subject - reminds me of the Diana effect - for some reason even though we dont know the person some folk begin to believe they can do no wrong because of the good that they have undeniably done... my question to those who say - 'he won us our only trophy and the 84 season etc therefore he can do what he likes in my book' I ask a simple question, what would he have to do for you to chnage that opinion? be spotted being way too friendly with a goat?

 

Without doubt he gave us some excellent football and great memories for which he was undeniably given praise and affection. I dont believe we should lose sight of these relative triumphs whatever happened later, the same way as questioning some of his later actions and public debates in no way undermines his history in my book.

 

I have never met teh man so cant judge his personality or criticise the man. I can only form an opinion on what is in the domain and for me its quite simple. if asked what i thought of him as a manager of saints and what he achieved for us, i would wiothout hesitation say he was our best, someone who gave this provincial club its greatest moments and someone who built on the foundations liad down by Ted to elevate us to heights we have yet to repat and for that he should always be fondly remembered.

 

If asked what I think of him since he left, I would say its more difficult - its obvious those that dispised Lowe will say he was great because he also dispised Lowe... but really that should be irrelevent - he should be judged on is actions perhaps more than his opinions.

 

He was with his shares given an opportunity to continue to have an influence in teh direction the club went. Some folk resign when they disagree with teh way a board is running the club and walk away... others if they truely believe in the club and their way being teh right way, will saty and fight (or better still not get frustrated and try and work constructively) to showly shift the thinking and thus be clever in their influence.. LM cashed in and left... make of that what you will.

 

When it comes dow to it the arguments in football always seem to boil down to money. The biggest criticism of Lowe whether from fans, managers or ex managers such as LM, always ultimately come down to money. A board and Chairman, can be as conceited, arrogant, vindictive, or just plain stupid as anyone but if they keep ploughing cash into teh side and give teh manger the freedom to spend as they please, you wont hear or see any complaining - you might see a bankrupt club, and then fans blaming teh board for stupidity, but the manager wont complain... thats the point.. LM and Lowe fell out about money first and foremost and the way it would be controlled with 1st team spending - The club either before being a PLC or after has never had teh financial resources to support managers as they would like - just pre premiership the amount needed to compete on if not an equal, then certainly a similar footing to all other clubs was within our budget... when the premiership reared its ugly head... the rich got richer and the gap created simply meant that managers of teh smaller clubs were always going to start whinging about the budget - especially the likes of LM, Souness etc who were used to success - recognising that teh new era would need big money if they were going to be able to repeat those successes.... and with teh premiership risches fast dissapearing into the pockets of the new Ferrari driving millionnaires, for a small club such as ourselves the transfer kitty was never going to be enough for managers used to having the best...

 

So its easy to see why successive managers and LM slung this back at the board... but what has never been satisfactorily explained by any fan on here, or LM or ex managers is where these sorts of funds would come from.

 

We had no sugar Daddy, nor the gate resources etc. We just had a budget and a boardroom mandate to live within our means... ironic that we now have exactly the same thing.... and IMHO the lack of spending freedom is too often the excuse used to justify poor performance. Most fans can recognise if a team is well organised, hard working and comitted - that is all we can expect - and if we see that but lack the skill, then at least we can accept that if we lose its not down to effort or manager skill, but down to a limited budget.... but too often our poor form or results has been as a result of bad attitude, disorganisation and ill discipline on the pitch in doing the simple things right.

 

Sh*t gone off topic a bit, but therat is really that there has been and continues to be so much hyperbole surrounding Lowe, or LM, hatrad and blind effection, emotional extremes that are simply in the real world unjustified because teh roots to it all stem form a simple difference of opinion on the value of taking financial risk.

 

My gripe with Lawrie, has not been what he has said, he is entitled to his opinion as is everyone else, but the simple fact that he had shares and the backing of fans... he could have been in a powerful position of influence to work with or against the board to influence when he could for the beterment of teh club... he cjhose the easier option of lselling up and leaving - again his perogative - but to then come back and sit on teh outside and criticise seems churlish, because it contributed to the disintergration of any unity of purpose when we needed unity more than anything... and IMHO it smacked a bit too much of self interest

 

Clappy face thing...

[miserableoldgit]

Never mind the free lunch, he was taking money out of the club when we could least afford it. Every time LM has been to St Mary's he has been invited into the directors box, which I am sure will continue.

 

How can he justify not paying when Liebherr, Cortese, etc all have to pay. I think Liebherr has got this spot on in removing all politics from the situation which plauged us previously. LM won us the FA cup 30 years ago, Liebherr stopped the club from going out of existance this year, not that difficult a choice.[/QUOTE]

 

Not a bad epitaph to draw a line under LM's involvement in the club if he refuses to continue to pay the price of a ticket and watched his allegedly beloved Saints. Perhaps the beligerant and blinkered few should lead a protest and a boycott in his honour in recognition of the fine example he is setting to other stay away fans.

As a matter of interest, do you think that Ted Bates, if he were still alive, should have paid for tickets, or is it your ongoing hatred of LM that drives you?

[Lord Duckhunter]

As a matter of interest, do you think that Ted Bates, if he were still alive, should have paid for tickets, or is it your ongoing hatred of LM that drives you?

 

You're right.

 

If Terry paine comes back or Big Ron, should they pay for tickets?

 

Or is it just people who were anti Lowe?

[INFLUENCED.COM]

My gripe with Lawrie' date=' has not been what he has said, he is entitled to his opinion as is everyone else, but the simple fact that he had shares and the backing of fans... he could have been in a powerful position of influence to work with or against the board to influence when he could for the beterment of teh clubs ... he cjhose the easier option of lselling up and leaving - again his perogative - but to then come back and sit on teh outside and criticise seems churlish, because it contributed to the disintergration of any unity of purpose when we needed unity more than anything... and IMHO it smacked a bit too much of self interest[/quote']

 

Good post FC and for me this part echo's my view.

 

I am sure the current board are mindful of our history and will welcome players of the past periodically, to suggest any one manager or player has entitlement to the boards hospitality week in week out is not practical nor economically viable based on ML's statement.

I would suggest if AO, NC or anyone at the club were made aware Ron or Terry were in this country for a period they would receive the hospitality fitting of their contribution to our club, as no doubt LM would but EVERY home game ??

I guarantee if LM marketed himself, say, "Lunch with Lawrie", to all box and suite table holders he would not have to pay for one home game in a season, would that extend to every season or would those box or table holders start to think he's taken advantage ?

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

 

You're right.

 

If Terry paine comes back or Big Ron, should they pay for tickets?

 

Or is it just people who were anti Lowe?

 

What the hell has it got to do with Lowe. Why does everyone still let him be decisive in what we think of others. Can't people just understand that opinion differs independent of whether or not they were a fan of Lowe or not.

[miserableoldgit]

 

What the hell has it got to do with Lowe. Why does everyone still let him be decisive in what we think of others. Can't people just understand that opinion differs independent of whether or not they were a fan of Lowe or not.

What is going on with the "Quote" thingy? That was not my quote. This has happened a few times.

[ottery st mary]

Why do so many of the Lowey Luvvers hate and despise Sir Lawrie, Sir Crouchey and Sir MLT and continually rant on about these Saints Legends.

 

Even I don't despise dear old Mr Lowe.......Hate what he did to this great football club.

OK I admit Lowey is not my cup of tea.

 

Some of you Lowey twirlers above..should grow up ..Like what I have done.HE ..HE.. HE.

 

Onwards and upwards.

 

COYRS

[chi saint]

It's a minority of at least 2 if that's any consolation. Personally, I think the man lacks any humility and believes he is the equal of some of the great managers of his time which of course he wasn't. He was a good manager for us and yet for some reason that elevated him up with some of the greatest managers that have ever lived who happend to be around during his era.

 

McMenemy is a classic example IMO of a man who believed the hype. The day he cashed in his meal ticket given to him by SFC PLC and forfeited any future right to have a direct influence on the direction of club was the day he basically undermined any future commentary he unwelcomely provided. Didn't stop him though did it which is arrogant / ignorant in the extreme to moan about something he gave up the right to influence. Wasn't that why he went to shareholder meetings with his wife?

 

Just my opinion as always and thanks Dibden wasn't aware I needed to get that off my chest.

 

He does a lot for charity and I assume, rightly or wrongly, he doesn't get paid for showing up, he wouldn't would he??

 

However I imagine he goes to bed at night thinking how lucky he is that SFC still indulge him. The man walked away from us for so called bigger and better and has somehow managed to get back on board the gravy train that was SFC.

 

I have no objection to him being some sort of figurehead but no money should be going his way from the club if it has been these past years.