LM and LC box has gone

[Wes Tender]

Pretty much agree with your views on McMenemy, Crouch and Le Tissier.

 

As for Lowe and Cowan (I know you did not mention him) whatever you might think about the releasing of Pearson, the employment of the Dutch, the use of inexperienced kids in the first team you are wrong to say they ran and hid and did nothing to help the club when it was in danger of going out of business. They busted a gut to try to save the club from Administration. There is a lot I know from the inside at that time and the frustration they found at every investment corner but I am not able to repeat it on here. You will have to take my word for it.

 

Am I glad Lowe has gone? Most certainly, for all the reasons I have given in the past on other threads. Was he the sole reason for us finding ourselves in Administration? Certainly not, in my opinion.

 

As for posters winding others up, why not ignore them? You and Wes Tender (and a few others) are getting as obsessed with Nineteen Canteen as he is with the failings of McMenemy, Crouch and Le Tissier. Just my opinion you understand!

 

You might indeed know some of the inside background to how hard Lowe and Cowan tried to avoid the club going into administration, but ultimately the measures that they took with dismissing Pearson, recruiting the two Dutch jokers and playing the kids, virtually guaranteed the relegation and administration that you claim they tried to avoid. With the benefit of your inside information, can you state categorically that the path that they trod was the only one available to them, or would you accept that there were other alternatives which they chose to ignore because Lowe had his heart set on this outside of the box crazy experiment?

 

Because, ultimately, that is the crux of the matter. Unless you can convince me otherwise, I will accept that Lowe and Wilde had inherited a difficult financial position, but having had an entire season to to try and remain afloat, he was the architect of our demise that season because of his strategy from day one. He shouldn't have appointed Poortvliet and then having done so, he should have sacked him by Christmas. By the time JP was sacked, it was already too late, not that I would have had faith in Wotte to have fared much better.

 

As for you claiming that I might be becoming obsessed with Nineteen, I enjoy crossing swords with him. But in this particular thread, I have offered the option for posters to take the wind out of his sails by declaring that their opinions and memories of LM, Le Tiss are not diminished by his snide remarks.

 

I note from your first line that your memories of them has not been diminished, so I'll take that as an AYE to my earlier post.

[Weston Saint]

You might indeed know some of the inside background to how hard Lowe and Cowan tried to avoid the club going into administration, but ultimately the measures that they took with dismissing Pearson, recruiting the two Dutch jokers and playing the kids, virtually guaranteed the relegation and administration that you claim they tried to avoid. With the benefit of your inside information, can you state categorically that the path that they trod was the only one available to them, or would you accept that there were other alternatives which they chose to ignore because Lowe had his heart set on this outside of the box crazy experiment?

 

Because, ultimately, that is the crux of the matter. Unless you can convince me otherwise, I will accept that Lowe and Wilde had inherited a difficult financial position, but having had an entire season to to try and remain afloat, he was the architect of our demise that season because of his strategy from day one. He shouldn't have appointed Poortvliet and then having done so, he should have sacked him by Christmas. By the time JP was sacked, it was already too late, not that I would have had faith in Wotte to have fared much better.

 

As for you claiming that I might be becoming obsessed with Nineteen, I enjoy crossing swords with him. But in this particular thread, I have offered the option for posters to take the wind out of his sails by declaring that their opinions and memories of LM, Le Tiss are not diminished by his snide remarks.

 

I note from your first line that your memories of them has not been diminished, so I'll take that as an AYE to my earlier post.

 

I do know that money was so tight we were in danger of going under from day 1.

 

It cost nothing to release Pearson but would have cost a lot more to employ him rather than the Dutch failures. In my opinion, at the time the decision was made, Pearson had proved nothing. He nearly got us relegated. I liked him and think he could have achieved something the dutch could not. He proved that with Leicester. Definately a mistake by Lowe, with hindsight.

 

Could we have bought in players rather than play the youngsters? They were on low wages and the high earners we could not afford were still burning a big hole in the finances. Free transfers and loans is one thing. Paying signing on fees and salaries of experienced journeyman was just beyond the finances.

 

The damage was done when we were first relegated and failed to get back up. That damage was hightened during the Hone era. Crouch was left with nothing although he did try.

 

My comment to Daren was that they did try to get in investment. They were frustrated at every corner. They did not just sit there and let the club die.

[Daren W]

Pretty much agree with your views on McMenemy, Crouch and Le Tissier.

 

As for Lowe and Cowan (I know you did not mention him) whatever you might think about the releasing of Pearson, the employment of the Dutch, the use of inexperienced kids in the first team you are wrong to say they ran and hid and did nothing to help the club when it was in danger of going out of business. They busted a gut to try to save the club from Administration. There is a lot I know from the inside at that time and the frustration they found at every investment corner but I am not able to repeat it on here. You will have to take my word for it.

 

Am I glad Lowe has gone? Most certainly, for all the reasons I have given in the past on other threads. Was he the sole reason for us finding ourselves in Administration? Certainly not, in my opinion.

 

As for posters winding others up, why not ignore them? You and Wes Tender (and a few others) are getting as obsessed with Nineteen Canteen as he is with the failings of McMenemy, Crouch and Le Tissier. Just my opinion you understand!

 

I have the man on ignore and stated I had him on ignore, I can't help it if people quote him....

 

Trust me, the less I hear from him the better....

 

So anyway, looking forward to Orient? I know I am...

[Foxstone]

A rousing "Aye" from me towards Le Tiss and Lawrie - Our most gifted and loyal player and our most successful manager to date.

 

My opinion towards Crouch though is net neutral - He did financially support the club through its most dark spell for which he has my gratitude, but I cannot forget that he was a major player during the past 3 or 4 sh1te seasons where the leadership, positive decision making ( or lack of it) and direction from all the top people we had the misfortune to oversee our club was shockingly bad - And therefore he was a contributor to our slide around the "U-bend".

 

In Markus we trust !

[Weston Saint]

I have the man on ignore and stated I had him on ignore, I can't help it if people quote him....

 

Trust me, the less I hear from him the better....

 

So anyway, looking forward to Orient? I know I am...

Not going but looking forward to following it. Hopefully we can keep the momentum going and get another win. 2-1 to Saints is my feeling. Orient brings back great memories of the past Saints success.

[Wes Tender]

I do know that money was so tight we were in danger of going under from day 1.

 

It cost nothing to release Pearson but would have cost a lot more to employ him rather than the Dutch failures. In my opinion, at the time the decision was made, Pearson had proved nothing. He nearly got us relegated. I liked him and think he could have achieved something the dutch could not. He proved that with Leicester. Definately a mistake by Lowe, with hindsight.

 

Could we have bought in players rather than play the youngsters? They were on low wages and the high earners we could not afford were still burning a big hole in the finances. Free transfers and loans is one thing. Paying signing on fees and salaries of experienced journeyman was just beyond the finances.

 

The damage was done when we were first relegated and failed to get back up. That damage was hightened during the Hone era. Crouch was left with nothing although he did try.

 

My comment to Daren was that they did try to get in investment. They were frustrated at every corner. They did not just sit there and let the club die.

 

You haven't acknowledged whether the path that Lowe took was the only one available to him or not. I accept that things were difficult and that therefore he was hampered, but whereas you accept that getting rid of Pearson was a mistake in hindsight, I thought that it was a mistake from the moment it happened and said so at the time along with others. As you also say, free transfers and loans were an option and Pardew has shown some considerable flair there, as I'm sure that Pearson would have. A more balanced team containing a blend of youth and experience would have been more effective and capable of producing the wins that would have kept us up with bigger attendances also assisting the finances.

 

And here is the point at which I am in accord with Nineteen (shock/horror!)

We both had agreed at the time that Lowe and Wilde were taking over again, that the best interests of the club would be served by the three main investor groups working together. That would not only benefit the club, but also protect the investment that the three groups had tied up in the club. But because of the arrogance and egotism of the three, that was never going to be something that they could achieve, so they all lost their money and good riddance too. The problem was that one or the other of them would want to be chairman to prove that they had the biggest ****, but the solution was that an independent chairman be appointed such as Salz.

 

Happily, it never worked out anyway and it must be said that as a result we are much better off than we would have been had they managed to keep us afloat, so I'm delighted that they failed.

[Foxstone]

I disgaree Nick. I think if AP achieves promotion to the Premier Leaque I think that will be on a par with anything McMenemy has acheived and many of his peers. Without huge financial backing it will be impossible for Saints to achieve a 2nd place in the league and even WGS's achievement of finishing 8th in 2003 is probably a greater achievement than McMenemy who achieved his goal on a much more level playing field where money wasn't the only motivator. There is an irony in there if you look for it.

Great memories don't necessarily make legends and McMenemy's record of achievement relative to todays world is actually unspectacular and if Pardew continues as we hope then he will easily usurp McMenemy as the club's greatest manager and LM can jump on the next gravy train probably destined for Grimsby as that is who our 'legend' would prefer to watch for the sake of a free lunch and the price of a Saints ticket. Shame on you McMenemy - you don't deserve the reverence of this club's fanbase.

 

 

And there lies the answer !

 

Back then money was not really a major contributor to success and neither was the ability to attract some of the better players - Or Man Utd, Spurs and Arsenal would have had greater success than they actually enjoyed !

 

The key to success was great management - As witnessed by Shankly/Paisley at Liverpool where they pretty much engendered a dynasty, and the likes of the great Brian Clough, Bobby Robson and Lawrie Mcmenemy who took their "poor" provincial sides to heights that could not be imagined now in these days of "money buys all".

They did it by great leadership, passion, astute management and an eye for a "hidden gem" of a player!

[Weston Saint]

You haven't acknowledged whether the path that Lowe took was the only one available to him or not. I accept that things were difficult and that therefore he was hampered, but whereas you accept that getting rid of Pearson was a mistake in hindsight, I thought that it was a mistake from the moment it happened and said so at the time along with others. As you also say, free transfers and loans were an option and Pardew has shown some considerable flair there, as I'm sure that Pearson would have. A more balanced team containing a blend of youth and experience would have been more effective and capable of producing the wins that would have kept us up with bigger attendances also assisting the finances.

 

And here is the point at which I am in accord with Nineteen (shock/horror!)

We both had agreed at the time that Lowe and Wilde were taking over again, that the best interests of the club would be served by the three main investor groups working together. That would not only benefit the club, but also protect the investment that the three groups had tied up in the club. But because of the arrogance and egotism of the three, that was never going to be something that they could achieve, so they all lost their money and good riddance too. The problem was that one or the other of them would want to be chairman to prove that they had the biggest ****, but the solution was that an independent chairman be appointed such as Salz.

 

Happily, it never worked out anyway and it must be said that as a result we are much better off than we would have been had they managed to keep us afloat, so I'm delighted that they failed.

To your first paragraph Wes, I honestly do not know. The free transfer and loans would come at a price. I said that. It was a price Saints could not afford whilst senior players were still drawing wages.

 

One thing I was told recently by someone very close to Lowe at the time was that his mistake was insisting on using all youngsters rather that the expensive players he was trying to offload. There was the cost of appearance fees and bonuses though. It was all about saving anything they could.

 

There was even a school of thought that Drew Surman had the penalty taking role withdrawn because McGoldric was on cheaper bonus.

 

Still, all water under the bridge now. The future looks rosey. Long may it continue

[trousers]

If Lowe's happy with the way he handled things, and from what you say Weston, it's sounding like he didn't have a lot of choices and his hands were largely tied by the bank etc, then wouldn't it make sense for him to formally give his side of the story in an interview some time soon?

 

Otherwise some people will continue to believe that he had some kind of vindictive hand in bringing the club to its knees.

 

Or perhaps he feels that people simply wouldn't believe him so he's thinking "what's the point"?

 

I agree that this is water under the bridge, but there again, all human history is. If we never tried to understand the past then the future wouldn't be as rosey....

[Weston Saint]

If Lowe's happy with the way he handled things, and from what you say Weston, it's sounding like he didn't have a lot of choices and his hands were largely tied by the bank etc, then wouldn't it make sense for him to formally give his side of the story in an interview some time soon?

 

Otherwise some people will continue to believe that he had some kind of vindictive hand in bringing the club to its knees.

 

Or perhaps he feels that people simply wouldn't believe him so he's thinking "what's the point"?

 

I agree that this is water under the bridge, but there again, all human history is. If we never tried to understand the past then the future wouldn't be as rosey....

Lowe's arrogance would make it a waste of time. Lowe's communication skills leave a lot to be desired. Lowe's incapability of seeing he is in anyway to blame for any of this would likewise make it a waste of time. His hands were financially tied but as Wes says, he never explored any alternative. It might have made no difference. It might have hastened Administration and left us with the points deduction last season instead of this but it might just have worked. It was not put to the test and no one can really know the outcome.

[dubai_phil]

If Lowe's happy with the way he handled things, and from what you say Weston, it's sounding like he didn't have a lot of choices and his hands were largely tied by the bank etc, then wouldn't it make sense for him to formally give his side of the story in an interview some time soon?

 

Otherwise some people will continue to believe that he had some kind of vindictive hand in bringing the club to its knees.

 

Or perhaps he feels that people simply wouldn't believe him so he's thinking "what's the point"?

 

I agree that this is water under the bridge, but there again, all human history is. If we never tried to understand the past then the future wouldn't be as rosey....

 

 

Which brings us neatly back to something I said needed to be done a few months back and was greeted with a hail of bullets... The story must be written

 

But, it is an incredibly difficult task to be able to sit and listen to all the "spins" and be neutral in order to produce something that tells us about our recent history objectively and allows our past to be placed where it belongs - which is in the musuem so we can look back fondly or unhappily and so we can take future generations there to see it as we move to a new future.

 

I would not be at all surprised in the current climate of "Kiss & Tell" in England to see Rupert, My Story coming onto the market next year.

 

That wouldn't work as it just one side and even IF we found out all the ways that hands were tied, we'd STILL argue as to whether the decisions taken were the best ones.

 

One point to note though, once again, a poster started off goading others, but the wiser old heads than me, have carefully pulled this debate back into something of value and interest

[Wes Tender]

If Lowe's happy with the way he handled things, and from what you say Weston, it's sounding like he didn't have a lot of choices and his hands were largely tied by the bank etc, then wouldn't it make sense for him to formally give his side of the story in an interview some time soon?

 

Otherwise some people will continue to believe that he had some kind of vindictive hand in bringing the club to its knees.

 

Or perhaps he feels that people simply wouldn't believe him so he's thinking "what's the point"?

 

I agree that this is water under the bridge, but there again, all human history is. If we never tried to understand the past then the future wouldn't be as rosey....

 

He probably reasons, quite correctly probably, that nobody cares either way, so as you say, what point is there in bothering? Does anybody seriously believe that he brought about our downfall for vindictive reasons? It happened through his incompetance, not his vindictiveness IMO.

 

Most of us dyed in the wool fans have our own understanding of the past that we are comfortable with. Even if the main protagonists were to come out and give their explanations as to events, they would undoubtedly end up being contradictory and dismissable as their own opinions. Is there genuinely anybody out there who could believe that if they knew the precise details of the past decade, that our future would be any rosier than it is under Markus Liebherr and Nicola Cortese? Most accept that we had come within days of going out of existence as a club and therefore our survival itself would have been something. Ownership by such a wealthy individual is almost beyond our wildest dreams, so difficult to know what could be better.

[OldNick]

Being a football fan, all laws of normal logical thinking goes to the wall.

Is it stupid for me still to dislike Everton with a vengence , all because they deemed to beat us in a cup semi final 25 years ago?

For me still to be narked that LM crushed my dreams of us still tugging at the coattails of the Liverpools and Man utd as he walked from us?

Toi never forgive GH for getting us to believe that we were going to go places again but for him not to give second glance as he left?

I have many wonderful memories of LM's time as manager but his actions post then I havenever been able to stomach.

MLT never walked form us and i find it hard ever to criticise him, he has been shown to be too trusting with associates but is on a different level to many other of the clubs icons IMO.

RL's deeds do not match up to LM's managerial exploits for us but I will not accept he did nothing for our club and I wonder how many who hate him so much were there at the testimonial cheering him as he played, and wanting him to score?

Thankfully we have new owners and the slate is clean, LM and LC are respected by I would suggest the majority but they also played thier parts in our downfall.

[Frank's cousin]

NIce to see passionate, yet fair poinst from both sides of the debate here. I think Weston makes several good points - I think there is an interesting philosophy here to think about as well.

 

In life we are as they say 'far more forgiving of the beautiful people' - its human nature. Those who have personalities and looks that please us will bemore sympathetically dealt with. CRouch is an obvious one here - (not the looks thing ;-0) - he endeared alot of support by his practical support he gave to the club - the cash injections the statue etc , his heart on sleave passion as a fan...and even if totally cynical and of the belief this was calculated as a PR excerise -(which would be disengenuous) the fact remains he still did what he did, so his mistakes or naivety is not treated as such a crime....

 

I wonder whether if Lowe had done exactly the same, but had a) been an obvious empassioned fan, been communicative at a strong level with fans andhad hidden his ego, whether the mistakes would have been seen more sympathetically? I think they would have.

 

The one thing that makes me struggle with all 3 is simply that the only time they were prepared to issue a joiunt statement - or come together to fight together, was when I think SISA came in for us and they joined forces to tell shareholders and fans it was the wrong deal - eg when it came down to their investments, they were happy to forget their differences - despite many fans calling for them to show unity and act together for teh best of the club...

[Daren W]

NIce to see passionate, yet fair poinst from both sides of the debate here. I think Weston makes several good points - I think there is an interesting philosophy here to think about as well.

 

In life we are as they say 'far more forgiving of the beautiful people' - its human nature. Those who have personalities and looks that please us will bemore sympathetically dealt with. CRouch is an obvious one here - (not the looks thing ;-0) - he endeared alot of support by his practical support he gave to the club - the cash injections the statue etc , his heart on sleave passion as a fan...and even if totally cynical and of the belief this was calculated as a PR excerise -(which would be disengenuous) the fact remains he still did what he did, so his mistakes or naivety is not treated as such a crime....

 

I wonder whether if Lowe had done exactly the same, but had a) been an obvious empassioned fan, been communicative at a strong level with fans andhad hidden his ego, whether the mistakes would have been seen more sympathetically? I think they would have.

 

The one thing that makes me struggle with all 3 is simply that the only time they were prepared to issue a joiunt statement - or come together to fight together, was when I think SISA came in for us and they joined forces to tell shareholders and fans it was the wrong deal - eg when it came down to their investments, they were happy to forget their differences - despite many fans calling for them to show unity and act together for teh best of the club...

 

You know Frank, if i wasn't deliberately not looking to start an argument I swear you were veering towards the old "You don't like Lowe because he's a toff" debate....

Surely not!

[Wes Tender]

The one thing that makes me struggle with all 3 is simply that the only time they were prepared to issue a joiunt statement - or come together to fight together' date=' was when I think SISA came in for us and they joined forces to tell shareholders and fans it was the wrong deal - eg when it came down to their investments, they were happy to forget their differences - despite many fans calling for them to show unity and act together for teh best of the club...[/quote']

 

And looking back on it, how grateful are we that they didn't take up SISA's offer for the club? Many looked with envy towards Coleman as their manager too. So where is this team with their great new owners and super manager? Mid-table obscurity, that's where. Hardly setting the world on fire are they?

[dubai_phil]

And looking back on it, how grateful are we that they didn't take up SISA's offer for the club? Many looked with envy towards Coleman as their manager too. So where is this team with their great new owners and super manager? Mid-table obscurity, that's where. Hardly setting the world on fire are they?

 

Think the key point is, how badly DID we want to be rescued?

 

In reality as I keep mentioning, a "leveraged buy out" was very easy to do before the whole Lehman thing. Hell even I could have done it without upsetting the divorce lawyers!

 

Now, at that TIME, such an act would have been "heroic" as all the 3 Musketeers would have been gone in a flash and the club would have been "saved".

 

Of course, the reality would have been that come the crash, since I had no more than the dirhams down the back of the sofa, we would have been left theoretically with a club saddled with 30 mil of debt on top of the debt we already had - ie totally screwed and still with the horrors of admin to come.

 

Hedge Funds have taken a pounding as we know, and leveraged buy-outs have been shown up as a nightmare by Liverpool.

 

So, how do we REALLY feel, and what would we prefer? A few months ago CCC mediocrity was dreamland, today, right now?

 

I think we are probably happier than could ever have been possible considering the ride we took to get here.

 

Finally we have a team playing football and getting results that will go places. Hell it's League 1 but I've had a bigger grin on my face after a game for the last few weeks than at any time in the CCC.

 

Sure it's ML & NC's train set right now, but I feel a part of it again and I feel we will look to improve each transfer window rather than survive.

 

Wonder if Coventry fans do?

[Wes Tender]

Think the key point is, how badly DID we want to be rescued?

 

In reality as I keep mentioning, a "leveraged buy out" was very easy to do before the whole Lehman thing. Hell even I could have done it without upsetting the divorce lawyers!

 

Now, at that TIME, such an act would have been "heroic" as all the 3 Musketeers would have been gone in a flash and the club would have been "saved".

 

Of course, the reality would have been that come the crash, since I had no more than the dirhams down the back of the sofa, we would have been left theoretically with a club saddled with 30 mil of debt on top of the debt we already had - ie totally screwed and still with the horrors of admin to come.

 

Hedge Funds have taken a pounding as we know, and leveraged buy-outs have been shown up as a nightmare by Liverpool.

 

So, how do we REALLY feel, and what would we prefer? A few months ago CCC mediocrity was dreamland, today, right now?

 

I think we are probably happier than could ever have been possible considering the ride we took to get here.

 

Finally we have a team playing football and getting results that will go places. Hell it's League 1 but I've had a bigger grin on my face after a game for the last few weeks than at any time in the CCC.

 

Sure it's ML & NC's train set right now, but I feel a part of it again and I feel we will look to improve each transfer window rather than survive.

 

Wonder if Coventry fans do?

 

Amen to that. I feel exactly the same. There was the lengthy debate, our position or Pompey's. Our position or Coventry's is really no contest at all.

[Nineteen Canteen]

'He that wrestles with us strenghtens our nerves, and sharpens our skill. Our antagonist is our helper'

[Roger]

How about start writing posts that don't upset people?Nc I am just about to leave to go to orient! COYR!

[Gemmel]

Our antagonist is a first class pr ic k '

\...

[Nineteen Canteen]

\...

 

Very eloquent. The sort of reponse that allows me to take a 1 nil lead in Canteen vs Gemmel game. Have you ever read Catch 22, Gemmel? You even make Major Major look less mediocre. Insult me by all means but don't insult me by your lack of wit and originality.

[Fowllyd]

'He that wrestles with us strenghtens our nerves, and sharpens our skill. Our antagonist is our helper'

 

Nietzsche by any chance? Or maybe Giant Haystacks?

[Weston Saint]

Nietzsche by any chance? Or maybe Giant Haystacks?

Actually it was said by a Burke.

[Fowllyd]

Actually it was said by a Burke.

 

Ah yes, how right you are!