Lowe - one of the UK's worst ever chairmen?

[Thedelldays]

He did very very very little right and alot wrong.

 

SMS was not all his work. An FA Cup final defeat is still a defeat... what's more he then lost the real architect of the FA Cup period - WGS - who to this day thinks he is a complete prat.

 

give it up ffs

 

you will never admit that lowe did some good stuff so what is the point in going over this utter turd of a subject again and again and again...

 

 

it is sad that even now, in what could be a a great season with a (very fortunate) brand new start we all go over the cretin that is lowe...

 

no one ever changes their opinion on this subject..

 

waste of bandwidth

[Thedelldays]

I guess it is so we never find ourselves in the same position again. Lessons are only lessons learnt if you remember them.

 

...and I suppose the pain Lowe brought to all of us at this club is so deep that it will be hard to forgive and forget.

 

 

how can we learn...what the hell can fans do other than go to games or not..

 

jesus

[sadoldgit]

He did very very very little right and alot wrong.

 

SMS was not all his work. An FA Cup final defeat is still a defeat... what's more he then lost the real architect of the FA Cup period - WGS - who to this day thinks he is a complete prat.

 

So much so that they still dine together? How is that that everything that goes wrong is down to him and everything that goes right is down to other people???

 

THis is where your arguement falls apart. Lowe put the structure in place for WGS to do what he did, just as he did when Redknapp took us down. A lot of people were horrified when Lowe chose WGS after his time at Coventry but it didn't work out badly dd it? Yep, other appointments not so good, but you really can't have it both ways mate.

 

I would also suggest that Lowe had the players at the club to beat Arsenal at Cardiff but WGS bottled it and paid Arsenal too much respect (in fact they effectively beat us at Highbury) but that is for anothe thread!!!

[sadoldgit]

I guess it is so we never find ourselves in the same position again. Lessons are only lessons learnt if you remember them.

 

...and I suppose the pain Lowe brought to all of us at this club is so deep that it will be hard to forgive and forget.

 

You know what, I think that I suffered more "pain" during the Branfoot era, but each to his own. At the end of the day it is only football and words like "hate" and "despise" are ridiculous in a world where rapists and murderers exists and such negative energy is directed to the Chairman of a sporting institution.

[Weston Saint]

What a load of total tripe.

 

The only thing I will agree with you is that it is all now in the past, and thankfully due to Lowe's mis-management (couldn't even go into Admin the right time) he is and will all ways be the past as with new owners, no shareholders there is now back for Lowe!!!

 

Weston Saint, if as you say we were already as good as in Admin when Lowe came why did he so royaly fook up by taking us into Admin only days after the cut of point meaning an automatic 10 point penalty?? Also if again as you say admin was inevitable was Lowe given permission to sign Scheriden, Pulis etc? I realise Schneriden could will work out to be a shrewd investment but why would Barclays allow a company on the brink of admin to spend £1m???

 

The future is bright, the future is red & white!!

I am not going to reveal my sources, yes there were more than one who had access to what was going on and were on the inside, but I can understand you questioning the same in view of the £1m spending (see I am not saying you are writing a load of tripe) but could it be the sale of Davies, the hope of offloading a few more expensive earners as well as the potential investment spin off might have been enough to convince the bankers short term.

 

As for the Admin call, they were still hoping to limp over the line (no one WANTS to put their business into Administration but Barclays pulled the plug making it impossible to continue to trade legally)

 

Question: why did Barclays not pull the plug a week earlier? Admin would have happened then and we would have suffered the 10 points last season.

 

So many unanswered questions?

 

It is not all as black and white as many assume it was. But then it does not fit some of the hate agenda.

 

I am far from a Lowe supporter but I am able to take a rational look at the facts. Lowe, in my opinion, was an egotistical poor communicator who was not prepared to listen or ignored advice openly given to him by experienced football minds. But he did not fail from day 1. He was openly praised by Deliotes in the early years and respected by other Premier league Chairmen for his executive skill and inovation. He was the first to put relegation clauses into contracts, now the norm in football, I am told, and was a tenatious negotiator in the transfer market.

 

His legacy in history, however, will still show he failed to keep us solvent.

[sadoldgit]

I am not going to reveal my sources, yes there were more than one who had access to what was going on and were on the inside, but I can understand you questioning the same in view of the £1m spending (see I am not saying you are writing a load of tripe) but could it be the sale of Davies, the hope of offloading a few more expensive earners as well as the potential investment spin off might have been enough to convince the bankers short term.

 

As for the Admin call, they were still hoping to limp over the line (no one WANTS to put their business into Administration but Barclays pulled the plug making it impossible to continue to trade legally)

 

Question: why did Barclays not pull the plug a week earlier? Admin would have happened then and we would have suffered the 10 points last season.

 

So many unanswered questions?

 

It is not all as black and white as many assume it was. But then it does not fit some of the hate agenda.

 

I am far from a Lowe supporter but I am able to take a rational look at the facts. Lowe, in my opinion, was an egotistical poor communicator who was not prepared to listen or ignored advice openly given to him by experienced football minds. But he did not fail from day 1. He was openly praised by Deliotes in the early years and respected by other Premier league Chairmen for his executive skill and inovation. He was the first to put relegation clauses into contracts, now the norm in football, I am told, and was a tenatious negotiator in the transfer market.

 

His legacy in history, however, will still show he failed to keep us solvent.

 

Well put Weston. He did some great deals for us and was not as bad as many people wish to believe. But is personality failings and relegation will mean that balanced discussions will be few and far between. I read somewhere that his opposite numbers saw him as a visionary. Maybe his vision would have worked if more money had been available, we shall never know, but with failure comes blame, such is the way of the world.

 

I don't recall a lot of flak going his way when we were doing well (although I agree he was never liked).

 

Hockey and his red cheeks plus the fact that he was deemed to be a "toff" marked him out as a target from day 1.

[Thedelldays]

anyone who thinks he never did anything good for us at all or refuses to acknowledge that are mindless mongs..

 

he clearly did some good but in the end...he did alot more harmful acts...not on purpose im sure..

[sotonjoe]

At least Lowe had a lot of respect for the ordinary supporter ... it's a shame it was rarely reciprocated.

[70's Mike]

Basically Rupert was tolerated by the majority when we were doing ok, never really liked or respected, as soon as things went tits up on the pitch the majority showed their real feelings for him by either verbal abuse or even worst not going to games.

he wasjust never really accepted by the supporters/customers

[70's Mike]

At least Lowe had a lot of respect for the ordinary supporter ... it's a shame it was rarely reciprocated.

 

what

[Wopper]

Basically Rupert was tolerated by the majority when we were doing ok, never really liked or respected, as soon as things went tits up on the pitch the majority showed their real feelings for him by either verbal abuse or even worst not going to games.

he wasjust never really accepted by the supporters/customers

 

I doubt his family like him much

[WealdSaint]

In the early years I respected Lowe for some of the acheivments but never liked him.

 

In the later years I think he made a huge C**K up of everything. The second coming was a HUGE mistake

[sadoldgit]

In the early years I respected Lowe for some of the acheivments but never liked him.

 

In the later years I think he made a huge C**K up of everything. The second coming was a HUGE mistake

 

I never got that. What did he really think he would achieve? He was on a hiding to nothing, although the alternative was not fantastic either. I did read somewhere that the bank wanted him and Cowen back to sort things out but then you wonder why they pulled the plug when they did? Perhaps Lowe didn't make the savings that he was expected to do, although it is hard to see how much esle we could have saved, the expenditure was cut to the bone as it was...perhaps it was his failure to ship out more high earners?

[Gorgiesaint]

I never got that. What did he really think he would achieve? He was on a hiding to nothing, although the alternative was not fantastic either. I did read somewhere that the bank wanted him and Cowen back to sort things out but then you wonder why they pulled the plug when they did? Perhaps Lowe didn't make the savings that he was expected to do, although it is hard to see how much esle we could have saved, the expenditure was cut to the bone as it was...perhaps it was his failure to ship out more high earners?

 

Probably failure to ship out the high earners & combined with a drop in income from customers not attending games - caused by results on the pitch and 'apathy' (insert whatever you feel) towards Lowe

[Fan The Flames]

He was the first to put relegation clauses into contracts, now the norm in football, I am told, and was a tenatious negotiator in the transfer market.

 

One of his biggest mistakes imho and will fail any club that enancts them. You are more likely to bounce back first or second attempt without the relegation clause. With a relegation clause the chairman takes on none of the risk of going down, but win wins rarely exist and ultimately the relegation clause will kill any morale left in the camp and just result in a lot of unhappy low motivated players that you have to shift on. It wastes a years of parachute money.

[Nineteen Canteen]

From what I have been told we were as good as in Administration at the end of the season before Lowe took over. We could not afford the wages of Pearson or the high paid individuals let alone their appearance and win bonuses.

 

It was a last gasp effort to keep us afloat by sidelining them and going for the cheap Dutch alternative. Why not a cheap English alternative? Because Lowe & Wilde had already decided they wanted to rely on a continental style of total football.

 

They thought our young players (whose wages we could just afford) would take the division by storm.

 

Once they had made up their mind, despite reservations from many experienced football brains in and outside of the club, there was no turning back for Lowe. That was his mistake, the not trying for a blend of cheap experience and youth.

 

Would we have survived if he had worked it differently and listened to experience? Who knows but I have it on good authority that we were as good as gone before Lowe stepped back in and at that time he told others around him that it was an almost impossible task, financially. The damage had been done during the previous regime.

 

Would Lowe have kept us solvent in the Championship had he not been pushed out? Who knows but his past record on financial stability was good. We might have been an average Championship side for a long while due to the stadium debt.

 

Still, it has all worked out well in the end despite the severe pain in the meantime.

 

Time to look forward but let us not forget the past. There were a lot of mistakes and we must make sure they do not happen again.

 

Very erudite post and sums up most of my personal thoughts about the whole situation. To congratulate Barclays is juvenile in the extreme and I don't believe any sensible fan would have wanted or be willing to run the risk of putting the club into administration at the time, considering the state of the economy, the credit crunch and general apathy towards football club investment.

 

As it transpires administration at this moment in time is the best thing that could have happened to us but at the same time my guess is that a lot of creditors (not just past directors and other shareholders) did lose a lot of money that they could ill afford to lose.

 

We are going places but we need to increase our support to those levels achieved by the likes of Norwich and Derby (in their troubled times) to reward Mr Liebherr and encourage further expenditure on the club. We should never forget that we are now a club that is owned rather than managed and as fans or shareholders have very little direct influence over the whim of a very wealthy owner as Portsmouth have found to their recent costs.

 

Do we gloat over the mistakes of Lowe and lost public ownership and rejoice in being at the mercy of own man who IMO wasn't exactly chomping at the bit to buy us without the obvious influences of his right hand men. Probably a more considered approach is called for and the positives from both public and private ownership understood and that we learn from the pitfalls of the past and those that could present themselves in the future if we become complacent or impatient with the very considered approach of our new board.

 

Excellent post once again Weston.

[sotonjoe]

what

 

I said...

 

At least Lowe had a lot of respect for the ordinary supporter ... it's a shame it was rarely reciprocated.

[Nineteen Canteen]

He did very very very little right and alot wrong.

 

SMS was not all his work. An FA Cup final defeat is still a defeat... what's more he then lost the real architect of the FA Cup period - WGS - who to this day thinks he is a complete prat.

 

A complete prat who gave WGS the opportunity to salvage a very badly damaged managerial reputation following his spell at Coventry. Since his Saints day WGS has managed a club in an annual two horse race with a far bigger budget then the blue noses and the felt the need to leave such easy pickings? I don't think WGS will be troubling the top 100 let alone the top 20 post war British managers. Robbie you could manage Celtic and achieve a similar record of success to Strachan. Ergo, I think we can discount his jaundiced and somewhat ungrateful opinion of Lowe that you have stated.

[SaintRobbie]

I find the whole pro-Lowe propagandists simply pathetic.

 

Defending the undefendable usually comes with a strong motivation or strong personal denial that ones own previous judgements were humiliatingly wrong. It's probably a psychological condition to be honest.

 

Fact: Lowe led us down two leagues and only left when Barclays Bank humiliatingly forced him to.

 

Fact: Morale at Southampton has never been so poor except during Lowe's tenure.

 

Move on? Yes... but NEVER FORGET.

[SaintRobbie]

A complete prat who gave WGS the opportunity to salvage a very badly damaged managerial reputation following his spell at Coventry. Since his Saints day WGS has managed a club in an annual two horse race with a far bigger budget then the blue noses and the felt the need to leave such easy pickings? I don't think WGS will be troubling the top 100 let alone the top 20 post war British managers. Robbie you could manage Celtic and achieve a similar record of success to Strachan. Ergo, I think we can discount his jaundiced and somewhat ungrateful opinion of Lowe that you have stated.

 

I think my opinion reflects the countless majority of all but 2-3 posters including you that vocally feel they must defend the undefendable. Why is that? Pompey fan causing division? Or... just living in denial?

[70's Mike]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 70's Mike

what

 

I said...

 

 

Quote:

At least Lowe had a lot of respect for the ordinary supporter ... it's a shame it was rarely reciprocated.

 

And you really believe that?

[SaintBobby]

I never got that. What did he really think he would achieve? He was on a hiding to nothing, although the alternative was not fantastic either. I did read somewhere that the bank wanted him and Cowen back to sort things out but then you wonder why they pulled the plug when they did? Perhaps Lowe didn't make the savings that he was expected to do, although it is hard to see how much esle we could have saved, the expenditure was cut to the bone as it was...perhaps it was his failure to ship out more high earners?

 

Hmmm. Not so sure. I had a small, residual modicum of sympathy for Lowe until the 2nd coming.

 

I think he then made bad footballing decisions (i.e. Poortvliet rather than Pearson....or indeed delete the "rather than" part of that).

 

The collapse into administration was just ridiculous though - especially as it was 24 hours after the deadline. My strong impression was that Lowe was just caught unawares by Barclays and it was a bolt from the blue.

 

He and Wilde were also utterly hopeless at finding an alternative buyer. Once we'd finally gone into administration, we cut it fine, but ended up being bought by a billionaire. Again, my impression is that whilst the club was always technically for sale, this meant little more than SLH being publicly listed. I dont think Lowe and Wilde were actively and aggressively seeking an alternative buyer. If they were, then they were very bad at it.

 

Lowe's first period in charge was a very mixed bag. Some real highs, but plenty of woeful lows too.

 

His second spell was lamentable. He played a weakish hand catasrophically and appallingly badly.

[Foxstone]

I always remember the quote from the magnificent Mr Brian Clough when asked for hios opinion on football hooliganism in the early 80's..

 

" Football hooligans ? Well there are 92 league chairmen for a start" !

 

Everybody has had them, and we have had more than our fair share - Thank god we now have a really good one!

[Wes Tender]

At least Lowe had a lot of respect for the ordinary supporter ... it's a shame it was rarely reciprocated.

 

This would just be so funny if it wasn't tragic. Lowe treated the fans with disdain and contempt. He dished out the same treatment to his fellow board members too. There have been enough incidents over his decade to illustrate that perfectly, but if you didn't notice them, I'm not about to rake over old ground now that the tyrant is gone. You just believe what makes you happy.

[ottery st mary]

Rupert was a spoilt little overgrown schoolboy....A pudding in the business arena and a disaster in football..He was up there with Chairmen who were considered right idiots and in my opinion ..Rupert gets first prize.

 

He was a waste of space and a NASTY little piece of work.

But I will not dwell on this horrible man and his close group of Ra Ra girls.

 

I am only too pleased that we have sensible peeps running the club and we will gradually rise again.

 

As for some of the sad old gits in the canteen who support this cretin...Good luck.

[Weston Saint]

Hmmm. Not so sure. I had a small, residual modicum of sympathy for Lowe until the 2nd coming.

 

I think he then made bad footballing decisions (i.e. Poortvliet rather than Pearson....or indeed delete the "rather than" part of that).

 

The collapse into administration was just ridiculous though - especially as it was 24 hours after the deadline. My strong impression was that Lowe was just caught unawares by Barclays and it was a bolt from the blue.

 

He and Wilde were also utterly hopeless at finding an alternative buyer. Once we'd finally gone into administration, we cut it fine, but ended up being bought by a billionaire. Again, my impression is that whilst the club was always technically for sale, this meant little more than SLH being publicly listed. I dont think Lowe and Wilde were actively and aggressively seeking an alternative buyer. If they were, then they were very bad at it.

 

Lowe's first period in charge was a very mixed bag. Some real highs, but plenty of woeful lows too.

 

His second spell was lamentable. He played a weakish hand catasrophically and appallingly badly.

 

I like this quote, it was a weak hand, if fact from what I know a very weak financial hand but he played it very badly with catastrophic results.

 

Could he have played it better with the limited finances? Yes seems to be the majority opinion.

[Weston Saint]

At least Lowe had a lot of respect for the ordinary supporter ... it's a shame it was rarely reciprocated.

I think your judgement on this matter is very flawed or naive. It was his disrespect for the ordinary supporter, or at least his poor communication skills in that respect, that led to the ordinary supporters disrespecting him. It was not like that in the beginning (apart from a few who never forgave him for the way he and others undertook the reverse takeover)

[The9]

As it says on the tin. Can anyone think of a worse chairman than Lowe during his last year in office?? Is Lowe the Fred Godwin of football??

 

Lets play Nineteen Canteen at his own game.

 

There are plenty worse around, mostly only because we found a buyer though. If we'd gone to the wall he'd have been in the top 5.

 

And much as he was useless, there weren't too many dissenters in 2003.

[Shandy_Top_89]

Lowe had some big negatives, but to say he was the worst chairman ever is a tad strong, hell id even say Wilde was more instrumental in our recent near-liquidation......... but avoiding that sh*t storm.

 

Peter Ridsdale - Where Saints downfall was caused by a varitable circus of idiots, Ridsdale was the sole destroyer of Leeds, he overspent with the knowledge that if they didnt win basically EVERYTHING they wouldnt recoup the funds to exist essentially.

 

Ken Richardson - Ex-Doncaster chairman personally burnt down the main stand at Belle Vue in an attempt at insurance fraud.

 

Pete Winkelman - Killed Wimbledon to create US SPORTS ETHICS 'franchise' FC (otherwise known as MK DONS), where part of the spirit of the game is denied, moving a team away from its home and rebranding it in aid of one mans (or a groups) 'project'.

 

George Reynolds - Built an unnecessarily large stadium for Darlington FC (25'500 for a current avg attendance of 3000 although i know part of this is due to current performance), they are failing to recoup the costs and came considerably closer to liquidation in the summer than we did. On a side note he was also charged with tax evasion, after he was found to be storing £500,000 in the boot of his car and has since been declared bankrupt.

 

These are just four examples in this country alone, im sure there are worse than this too.

[Lord Duckhunter]

I wouldn't say Lowe was the worse Chairman we've ever had, but he's in the top one.

[Foxstone]

Lowe had some big negatives, but to say he was the worst chairman ever is a tad strong, hell id even say Wilde was more instrumental in our recent near-liquidation......... but avoiding that sh*t storm.

 

Peter Ridsdale - Where Saints downfall was caused by a varitable circus of idiots, Ridsdale was the sole destroyer of Leeds, he overspent with the knowledge that if they didnt win basically EVERYTHING they wouldnt recoup the funds to exist essentially.

 

Ken Richardson - Ex-Doncaster chairman personally burnt down the main stand at Belle Vue in an attempt at insurance fraud.

 

Pete Winkelman - Killed Wimbledon to create US SPORTS ETHICS 'franchise' FC (otherwise known as MK DONS), where part of the spirit of the game is denied, moving a team away from its home and rebranding it in aid of one mans (or a groups) 'project'.

 

George Reynolds - Built an unnecessarily large stadium for Darlington FC (25'500 for a current avg attendance of 3000 although i know part of this is due to current performance), they are failing to recoup the costs and came considerably closer to liquidation in the summer than we did. On a side note he was also charged with tax evasion, after he was found to be storing £500,000 in the boot of his car and has since been declared bankrupt.

 

These are just four examples in this country alone, im sure there are worse than this too.

 

Now theres a roll call of lunatics that even made Old Rupes look sane..

 

Add to that Bellotti at Brighton who sold off the Goldstone for gain without finding anywhere else for the Seagulls to play - Other than Gillingham !!

Unbelievable !

 

Did Knighton ever become Manure's chairman for a short stint - Can anybody imagine Rupert doing Mr Woo style "keepy Uppys" in front of the Northam ! LOL..........

[Tamesaint]

Can anybody imagine Rupert doing Mr Woo style "keepy Uppys" in front of the Northam ! LOL..........

 

I bet he practised hard and if he had been any good he would have been out there at half time in his kit!!

[Gorgiesaint]

I think my opinion reflects the countless majority of all but 2-3 posters including you that vocally feel they must defend the undefendable. Why is that? Pompey fan causing division? Or... just living in denial?

 

SaintRobbie,

 

Whilst I also disagree with 19C's viewpoint of Lowe, I also disagree with yours. I sit in the middle ground - Lowe made lots & lots of mistakes and showed arrogance & contempt for the fans but in no way is he worst football chairman in this country.

 

So please do not make the assumption that because I don't support Lowe that I agree with your viewpoint.

 

Let's move on from this - this season is far too exciting to get dragged down by puerile debates about Lowe.

[St. Jason]

anyone who thinks he never did anything good for us at all or refuses to acknowledge that are mindless mongs..

 

he clearly did some good but in the end...he did alot more harmful acts...not on purpose im sure..

 

As I've said many a time Dell Days, I openly acknowledge that Mr. Lowe did some things right, quite a few things right. He helped us move from the antiquated Dell to our fantastic new home, he squeezed massive transfer deals for our outgoing players and he was also head of the club when we went to the FA cup final, probably one of my proudest days as A saints fan. The problem I have/had is that for every good thing there seemed to be 2 really bad things Gray, Wigley, Sturrock, Jan, Wotte, Scw, Clifford, Eye gyms, relegation, relegation, Admin and probably most damning was not backing Strachan after the cup final.

 

So on balance, yes, he did plenty right but way to much wrong, nothing to do with his name, nothing to do with his hockey days and nothing to do with his education, my opinion of his tenure ship is he failed!!!!

[wightman35]

History, I am told, is written by those who win the war.

 

 

 

Rupert Lowe (twice relegated :mad: ) lost.

 

 

For the rest of us, we are on our way up.:D

[Whitey Grandad]

I was just getting round to erasing him from my memory when he gets dragged up again. Deal with it, move on. Life's much too short.

[Frank's cousin]

Hello!

 

Been away a while - work and all that... and hey ho, I come back and its just like old times! ;-)

 

Its a shame that even though we are now in a position to regrow, put down solid foundations under a new and although 'inexperienced' non footballing person (heard that before somewhere) the outlook is looking good... but we still cant leave the past alone - and thats good as its my favourite topic!

 

But as its still 'lets go round in circles time' with pros and cons being argued as to whether the pros are actually pros or luck etc... Thought i would try a different tack... here goes:

 

I think if we had to 'build' the ideal chairman - what would it be? Loadsamoney? happy to spend big to bank roll success, sits with and in touch with fans, gets 'behind' the manager however much he wants to spend? then puts up a stature of himself and names a stand?

 

Would we all be happy with that, or would some feel we had bought success in a kind of vulgar way? I think you would get both, those really happy just to be successful, and those who felt uncomfortable with the way it had been attained.

 

So relevent to this thread? A lot has been made that Lowe was in effect pretty much disliked from the start - an upstart who knew nothing about football seen as someone who saw money to be made from the Sky Sports premiership model, a chance to massage his ego and surround himself with the great and the good of the game - perhaps not far from the truth. Thing is I think this kind of thing only becomes negative in fans eyes if what is happening on the pitch is poor.

 

Had we had success year in year out, I think alot of what we deem as negative about a chairman as written on 3 pages here, becomes irrelevent to most, as with Chelsea fans and the fact that most dont concern themselves with the morality of Abramovics' business success.

 

Lowe, simply does not have personality to be loved - his arrogance and lack of communication skills come across as almost distain for any one challenging his approach. But its quite simple - Had his approach worked this would have probably been seen as some kind of eccentric irrelevence, the fact it contributed to failure means there are no holds barred in the response he is given. We may wish to deny this 'two-facedism' (Can I get away with that as a word?) but I do think its fair to say for most fans. We think of what happens on the pitch first, not the reasons why.

 

The only thing I would say in defense of the evil one is that it is disingenuous to believe he was somehow always determined to feck us over, or somehow too stupid to ever give us long term success. There was method in the 'madness'- which i know most will never acknowledge, be it the need to move grounds, the importance of a good academy even if for something as cynical as a revenue stream (which I dont believe by the way - look how livid he was about the Bridge sale?) etc... But whilst concentrating on these reasonable things, we took the eye of teh most important ball, the one on the hallowed turf on a saturday (or sunday or Wednesady depending on Sky's whims) - the first team that needed investment to support a sustained development and improvement.

 

Where that investment was coming from has never been made clear, but it was an obvious contributor to our decline and as chairman he needs to take that responsibilty.. ultimately.

 

As an aside, reading Full Time at the DELL - gives a more factually accurate account of teh whole Stoneham V St Mary's thing and its a bit different from the the perpetuated gossip on here that has become an urban myth - Sure mistakes were made, but ultimately these things happen with many such projects as the various interested parties hold back their ammo to ensure the biggest impact... How many sites and proposals did the new national stadium go though or look at Pompeys mythical new ground....

 

Ultimately, I cant say I would ever like the man, Cant agree with much of what he did, but could see some logic in the approaches taken...even those that failed, but it always got me wound up when there was simply so much rubbish and bull spread and perpetuated by those with other agendas - and it spreads so quickly to become 'fact' in many eyes. The beauty of propoganda :-)

 

A good example is Saint Robbie above - I have absolutely no way of knowing the source of the 'WGS thinks Lowe is a ****' FACTUAL statement he makes, it may be true, it may not, but it is at odds with the FACT that even after he left he still had dinner with Lowe now and then... so who knows, but it just adds so little to any real debate apart from winding folk like me up - which is maybe the plan? ;-)

 

Anyway enough of my drivel, just think we should maybe all look at some of the home truths in all this 'chairman assessment' - which for the vast majority is simply down to success - had lowe brought us the title 3 years in a row and a Champions league trophy, there are without doubt some fans who would have let him **** their wives! and there might even have been a few more Ruperts on birth cirtificates in Southampton - or maybe not - but we should acknowledge our fickleness really.

Edited 20 October, 2009 by Frank's cousin

[Wes Tender]

Welcome back Frank.

 

Fair comment, but what was your conclusion as to whether Lowe could be considered as one of the UKs worst Chairmen? You make the reasonable point that had he brought us success he might have been viewed differently, but ultimately he didn't bring us success, did he? In fact, he presided over our decline from the Premiership through two relegations and administration, that is the long and short of it. So why not just assess his performance based on that alone and not on his fan unfriendly personality, inability to attract investment, poor judgement, etc.

[Frank's cousin]

Welcome back Frank.

 

Fair comment, but what was your conclusion as to whether Lowe could be considered as one of the UKs worst Chairmen? You make the reasonable point that had he brought us success he might have been viewed differently, but ultimately he didn't bring us success, did he? In fact, he presided over our decline from the Premiership through two relegations and administration, that is the long and short of it. So why not just assess his performance based on that alone and not on his fan unfriendly personality, inability to attract investment, poor judgement, etc.

 

Hi Wes

 

Fair request. I think though the answer is likely to stir up a further hornets nest and I am not sure I have the energy left for the debate TBH. It wont change anyones mind so why go to the trouble.

 

...but hey you asked so nicely ;-)

 

Well there are plenty of chairman who have ben relegated from the premiership, so he is in good company - and taking the eye of the first team ball and manager feck ups had a major impact on that first relegation so perhaps he is worse than some. BUt the dreadful morale, player form and redflaps are not blameless either... but yup he took us down so scores on the doors there.

 

The second relegation is tricky. Simply put I still do not know what the real situation with teh bankns was determining policy when he returned. BUt yes he made two big erros that compounded any financial problem - getting rid of pearson and keeping on JP when it was clear he and the kids were struggling.

 

Cant blame him for administration though - by that time we were fecked financially and his mistake was probably believing he could fight it off untill the ST monies came in at season's end - that meant the -10 - which has set us further back... thankfully ML was tempted and things looking up...

 

So worst chairman ever? no because whatever we like to believe with the wonderful insights provided by the retrospectoscope we were well run financially when in the prem - within our means - teh problem was at teh time we were competing against clubs prepared to gamble and risk increasing debt to keep them there, we were not. For me any chairman who wants to club to live within its means is on the RIGHT track - even though at the time most were calling for him to spend and spend big... without acknowledging where this cash was coming from.... and funny how times change and now we once again desire such financial stabilty.

 

Crap Chairman who made mistakes would sum it up for me... but not the figure of hate that he is for so many - life's too short for that and I am lucky I have so much more to worry about than his status in the crap chairman stakes ;-)

 

(TBH, I dont think I would like many of teh current league chairman - except Nicola and Markus of course! )

[Fitzhugh Fella]

Welcome back Frank

 

As a renowned anti Lowe poster I will say one positive thing about him.

 

I think he actually cared about Southampton FC.

 

He just wasn't capable of thinking he was ever wrong.

 

A lot worse chairmen than him have graced football however - Wilde for one. Also football is littered with Chairmen in it for themselves with an eye to make money out of their clubs. For all his faults Lowe was not one of them.

 

I am still very grateful he is no longer involved however.

[John B]

I think Lowe did a lot of good for Southampton FC like Garside at Bolton.

 

However a lack of money to invest in the club and his perceived personality caused his eventual downfall.

 

He is now gone and the new regime should with major financial resources behind them make the club successful

Edited 20 October, 2009 by John B

[Frank's cousin]

Welcome back Frank

 

As a renowned anti Lowe poster I will say one positive thing about him.

 

I think he actually cared about Southampton FC.

 

He just wasn't capable of thinking he was ever wrong.

 

A lot worse chairmen than him have graced football however - Wilde for one. Also football is littered with Chairmen in it for themselves with an eye to make money out of their clubs. For all his faults Lowe was not one of them.

 

I am still very grateful he is no longer involved however.

 

Hi Duncan

 

Hope all is well mate. Think we are all grateful he is history, and we have a new era. BUt I agree with you there have been worse out there. I think the perfect chairman is extremely rare, because its so difficult if passionate about something and bank rolling it NOT to get over involved in areas that are not your expertise - I know If I owned saints and was a billionnaire, how difficult woudl it be not to try and get involved with footballing decisions? ;-)

 

Or I'd be skint and accuse of not spending enough or 'risking enough' which i would refuse to do if it were not in the bank... So from that I suppose you cans ee why I could at least empathise with Lowe on those accounts...

 

Sadly, my match attendance is going to be very sporadic as I'm moving to Scotland in a coupel of weeks time so hopefully meet up for a pint befor I go... will be in touch

[Frank's cousin]

.... Sat in the foyer of The Hyatt in Birmingham at the moment... and STeve Macanananannman is sat opposite reading the Racing Post horse paper thing - guess he is here given his connections to Jung at BCFC?

[Weston Saint]

Welcome back Frank

 

As a renowned anti Lowe poster I will say one positive thing about him.

 

I think he actually cared about Southampton FC.

 

He just wasn't capable of thinking he was ever wrong.

 

A lot worse chairmen than him have graced football however - Wilde for one. Also football is littered with Chairmen in it for themselves with an eye to make money out of their clubs. For all his faults Lowe was not one of them.

 

I am still very grateful he is no longer involved however.

On 16th May 1999 Graham Souness was at the Everton game and was pleased to see that Rupurt Lowe had "changed.....He now understood what was at stake for Southampton. He has become a passionate football man...."

[The9]

.... Sat in the foyer of The Hyatt in Birmingham at the moment... and STeve Macanananannman is sat opposite reading the Racing Post horse paper thing - guess he is here given his connections to Jung at BCFC?

 

Dunno, is the Register Office still across the road from the Hyatt ?

[Topcat]

Is there a Chairman with a worse record? Two relegations and administration takes some beating. Lowe must be in a very small group of useless pillocks. Only upside is those pillocks who backed him with their shares.

[Verbal]

Is there a Chairman with a worse record? Two relegations and administration takes some beating. Lowe must be in a very small group of useless pillocks. Only upside is those pillocks who backed him with their shares.

 

If you take the rest of professional football into account, then probably. If you take the rest of all chairmen of any kind of business, throughout the universe, running companies known or yet to be created, then no.

 

Obviously.

[SaintRobbie]

anyone who thinks he never did anything good for us at all or refuses to acknowledge that are mindless mongs..

 

he clearly did some good but in the end...he did alot more harmful acts...not on purpose im sure..

 

What exactly? Do enlighten me?

[SaintRobbie]

Welcome back Frank

 

As a renowned anti Lowe poster I will say one positive thing about him.

 

I think he actually cared about Southampton FC.

 

He just wasn't capable of thinking he was ever wrong.

 

A lot worse chairmen than him have graced football however - Wilde for one. Also football is littered with Chairmen in it for themselves with an eye to make money out of their clubs. For all his faults Lowe was not one of them.

 

I am still very grateful he is no longer involved however.

 

See, I actually am inclined to agree with this line. Although, he did take out £3million of course.

 

He probably did love Saints and he probably tried his best... I agree with that. But, goodness me it shows how poor he was if his best was relegation by 2 leagues and administration.

[Dark Munster]

Welcome back Frank

 

As a renowned anti Lowe poster I will say one positive thing about him.

 

I think he actually cared about Southampton FC.

 

He just wasn't capable of thinking he was ever wrong.

 

A lot worse chairmen than him have graced football however - Wilde for one. Also football is littered with Chairmen in it for themselves with an eye to make money out of their clubs. For all his faults Lowe was not one of them.

 

I am still very grateful he is no longer involved however.

 

That may have been true at some time, but I think it was no longer true when he came back the second time. Getting rid of Pearson showed that he cared more about getting back at his arch nemesis Crouch than he did about Saints. And I certainly don't buy the argument that he had no choice in the timing of administration. If he cared about Saints he would have clarified the situation with Barclays earlier (knowing we were on the brink), and then (knowing it was inevitable) ensured it happened a few days earlier. I have my theories why he let it happen after the deadline, but I don't want to be libelous.

 

In an interview afterward Saints came out of administration, Fry said that RL and MW wanted to stay on during administration, and he (Fry) had difficulties convincing them otherwise. I wonder how long that took, and if these discussions started before the 10 point carry-over deadline?