The refusal to sell a season ticket at Southampton FC

[georgeweahscousin]

Honestly couldn't care less.

 

Maybe the question of why is relevant. But that it's that Illingsworth character removes any sympathy I could have held.

 

My stance exactly.

[Hatch]

Childish from the club.

I can't see what they gained by not selling him a season ticket.

 

In fact, in the long run, they have lost.

[Noodles34]

I know Nick, and i echo what one or two other posters have said. You wont find a more loyal and committed Saints fan, and he isn't in it for the attention, the press need someone to talk to, if not him, then who should it be? Come on you PC hidden slag off merchants, quick to critisise but unable to offer an alternative, eh?

As for Wembley, if i could count on my hand the number of times i have been to something and paid good money, and then realised it was a load of crap, well.... Jesus, it was only a tenner, hardly a cancelled holiday to the Maldives or a Spanish home knowcked down. No doubt it was ****, no doubt poorly organised, but i can guarantee that it was not done like that on purpose and i am sure NI wont be doing it again.

[georgeweahscousin]

I know Nick, and i echo what one or two other posters have said. You wont find a more loyal and committed Saints fan, and he isn't in it for the attention, the press need someone to talk to, if not him, then who should it be? Come on you PC hidden slag off merchants, quick to critisise but unable to offer an alternative, eh?

As for Wembley, if i could count on my hand the number of times i have been to something and paid good money, and then realised it was a load of crap, well.... Jesus, it was only a tenner, hardly a cancelled holiday to the Maldives or a Spanish home knowcked down. No doubt it was ****, no doubt poorly organised, but i can guarantee that it was not done like that on purpose and i am sure NI wont be doing it again.

 

Do the press need someone specific to talk to? Can't stand "self appointed" fans spokesmen. They are the same for every club, and tend to not represent the majority of fans views.

 

Wembley, wasn't about it being crap, it was about it not providing the things it had promised.

[aintforever]

Retarded decision by the club, I think Illingsworth is a complete nob but it is still wrong.

[croydonsaint]

Hi Nick.

 

10,000 or so others had no problem. Including those who are far more prominent in fans circles. So why him? He will have crossed the line somewhere.

 

Our current administration may be occasionally haphazard with their PR but as proven since they have taken over the actions they do commit to are for good reason.

 

He's not been banned from the stadium, just from purchasing a seaon ticket. There will be a damned good reason I'm sure.

 

Morning Colinjb

All I was tyring to say is the club seem to have acted in a petty and arrogant way. I do not know the person involved, although clearly he is a keen supporter. If there was good reason then surely the club could explain that reason. Anyones opinion of the complainant is totally irrelevant in my opinion. I have no axe to grind regarding the management of our club, infact in many ways I am quite impressed with it, but in this case I am not happy with how a fellow supporter has been treated.

[trousers]

My GUESS is that the new owners were keen to start with a clean slate which meant severing all links with previous regimes at the club - including those organisations that held said regimes to account.

 

I would venture (again, pure guesswork) that the club made it clear to the people running The Saints Trust that it was a link with the past and that they wanted to use different communication channels to communicate with the fans (e.g. More emphasis on 'official' announcements via the OS and more personal 'dinner with Cortese' events).

 

The Saints Trust probably disagreed with this stance and thus things headed down the 'tit for tat' route...(SFC: "please remove affiliation with club from your website"; Trust: "we're complaining through the press about your season ticket plans"; SFC: "if you don't like it we won't sell you one then"....blah, blah, blah...

 

If the above is anywhere close to the gist of it then I'm pretty sure NI would have had a season ticket if heels hadn't been dug in to keep a (some would say) 'without mandate' organisation going...

 

None of this is my opinion nor is it observation of fact. Just putting a theory out there which may or may not be near the mark.

 

For what it's worth, I tend to agree with the club in principle (i.e. That the Saints Trust served a purpose when the club was a plc, but not now) but also tend to agree that the way they apparently handled it was poor (I believe Cortese admitted in his December BBC interview that all communication last summer wasn't up to scratch, for obvious reasons)

[trousers]

P.s. I jolly well hope none of my taxes pay for this IFO quango... ;-)

[aintforever]

My GUESS is that the new owners were keen to start with a clean slate which meant severing all links with previous regimes at the club - including those organisations that held said regimes to account.

 

I would venture (again, pure guesswork) that the club made it clear to the people running The Saints Trust that it was a link with the past and that they wanted to use different communication channels to communicate with the fans (e.g. More emphasis on 'official' announcements via the OS and more personal 'dinner with Cortese' events).

 

The Saints Trust probably disagreed with this stance and thus things headed down the 'tit for tat' route...(SFC: "please remove affiliation with club from your website"; Trust: "we're complaining through the press about your season ticket plans"; SFC: "if you don't like it we won't sell you one then"....blah, blah, blah...

 

If the above is anywhere close to the gist of it then I'm pretty sure NI would have had a season ticket if heels hadn't been dug in to keep a (some would say) 'without mandate' organisation going...

 

None of this is my opinion nor is it observation of fact. Just putting a theory out there which may or may not be near the mark.

 

For what it's worth, I tend to agree with the club in principle (i.e. That the Saints Trust served a purpose when the club was a plc, but not now) but also tend to agree that the way they apparently handled it was poor (I believe Cortese admitted that all communication last summer wasn't up to scratch for obvious reasons)

 

Whatever the club's views on the trust I don't see what SFC has to gain through not letting an individual buy a season ticket?

 

Petty, childish b@llocks.

[Secret Site Agent]

We'll perhaps if he explains why he caused a lot of distress to other Fans at the JPT debacle, then NC would explain why he and the club are being vindictive and downright mean over his season ticket.

 

None of it bodes well, or shows them in a decent light.

 

Reminds me a lot of when my nipper was always being Banned from the local Alldays/Co-op because the security guard didn't like him. He would just waddle out and point at him in the middle of a crowd of twenty and tell just him he was banned, although they we all as bad as each other. he even once reported him tio the local anti-social team for a stream of events that I had to go and sit in front of local police, council types and hear of his crimes on these particular days, only to get up and start to leave and when the type from the council told me about putting him in care etc. I produced evidence that he was on holiday for two of them, and away in a residential school for the remaining three. After complaining I didn't get any apology from the council or Alldays, but the police did winge that i was being unfair when I suggested the local beat copper had not acted under PACE and had been lazy in his indightments. Not that my nipper was an angel by no means, and I had to punish him several times for what he did. But I do has some sympathy for NI. But if you put your head above the parapet, expect it to be shot at. If you put yourself in the public eye, you have to make yourself as squeeky clean as possible, as someone will always look to find a way to put you down, and as we see in the press regularly these days, having dodgy expensis, or sleeping with someone not your wife, or being caught making Sexist comments, and someone will come and find out and put it into the public domain, for trial by press, no matter the truth of the matter.

 

So, in conclusion:

 

My son, when he was a lad, was a little **** who had the biggest mouth in his little gang and would get picked on and banned for life from ALLDAYS, at least once a month. (Now he is much older he delights in driving for 15 minutes to buy things from there and complaining about it's quality, value, and has learnt the Consumer Act so that he can be a pain to a company that no longer exists and against assistants who no longer work there ).

 

Illingsworth was involved in something that caused people grief and disappointment on a day that should only have happy memories. He was 'banned' for reasons only SFC can name from having a season ticket, but he was still able to attend game, so they only made his life a bit more awkward for him. And NI can claim all he want that he doesn't want to speak on behalf of the fans, but appearing under a headline of 'Nick Illingsworth, Voice of the Southampton Supporters wishes to not be known as the Voice of the Southampton Supporters' is a bit of an oxymoron in my opinion. Keep telling the no comment and not talking to them, and they will soon find another rent-a-gob to go too, (and another target for us to knock down. As we are spineless and gutless as a whole when we are in a gang and have anonymity.) I don't know NI, I was introduced to him once, I engaged him in some inane chatter and didn't find him either way, tbf. I am sure that he comes across as a decent bloke to some, and probably is, but as the saying goes, Hitler was loved by his mum, (and by 60 million Germans at one stage) and Mussolini made the trains run on time, (don't jump on me please, I am not comparing NI to either of them, it is just an expression to prove the duality of man, that we all have the capacity for good and bad inside of us, and we are liked by some and disliked by others. Me, I am quite popular and have a large number of people who like me, but I am a sarcastic **** also who sometimes over steps the mark and hurts peoples feelings).

 

And No-One is the winner in this, everybody looses, apart from the IFO, who get the chance to get some much needed publicity, as I don't know about you, but until this thread I though it was an early acronym for Flying Saucers.

Edited 2 February, 2011 by Secret Site Agent
As I mentioned, I sometimes overstep the mark. Accidently. No hard felings.

[trousers]

Whatever the club's views on the trust I don't see what SFC has to gain through not letting an individual buy a season ticket?

 

Petty, childish b@llocks.

 

That may be so but until we have both sides of the story (if we ever do) we've no idea how "childish" the other side were. Without being in possession of the full facts I'm reserving judgement.

[aintforever]

That may be so but until we have both sides of the story

 

Is that not what Adjudications do?

[dubai_phil]

Again, people keep flying into battle.

 

So obviously you all know something as to why this is wrong?

 

Again, nobody has actually told us WHY he cannot buy a ST.

 

There is much blame giving and outraged indignance in positions, but why?

 

For ALL we know of the FACTS, he could have been banned because he was one of the ST installment payers from last year who decided NOT to pay for his ST.

 

Were any of them banned?

 

Did some fans complain to the club about the Wembley Fiasco and the club are supporting their stance?

 

Nick COULD put his side of the argument, but I haven't seen it in print, anyone know where it is? Any links?

 

So, this remains a storm in a teacup, Nick enjoys (ed) talking to the media, we know that because it is very easy to i) not answer the phone when they ring or ii) to say sorry, I have no comment. or iii) which would gain back some respect to start every quote with "It is the opinion held by the Saints Trust that"....

 

But he doesn't.

 

But, in his defence we had a lengthy debate some time ago about who WOULD like to be the spokesperson for the fans, and none of us wanted or are qualified for that position.

 

So, again why?

 

 

So get us some facts and I'll pick up my pitchfork and cross to the Dark Side

[trousers]

Is that not what Adjudications do?

 

They came to their judgement in the absence of a full explanation from the club. It was quite clear from the tone of their "judgement" that they were hacked off by the club playing their "we reserve our commercial right to sell our product to whom we choose" card.

 

The IFO seem to be playing the same tit-for-tat game that we're accusing the club of playing..,

 

I will continue to reserve my own judgement until I know the full facts.

[trousers]

Again, people keep flying into battle.

 

So obviously you all know something as to why this is wrong?

 

Again, nobody has actually told us WHY he cannot buy a ST.

 

There is much blame giving and outraged indignance in positions, but why?

 

For ALL we know of the FACTS, he could have been banned because he was one of the ST installment payers from last year who decided NOT to pay for his ST.

 

Were any of them banned?

 

Did some fans complain to the club about the Wembley Fiasco and the club are supporting their stance?

 

Nick COULD put his side of the argument, but I haven't seen it in print, anyone know where it is? Any links?

 

So, this remains a storm in a teacup, Nick enjoys (ed) talking to the media, we know that because it is very easy to i) not answer the phone when they ring or ii) to say sorry, I have no comment. or iii) which would gain back some respect to start every quote with "It is the opinion held by the Saints Trust that"....

 

But he doesn't.

 

But, in his defence we had a lengthy debate some time ago about who WOULD like to be the spokesperson for the fans, and none of us wanted or are qualified for that position.

 

So, again why?

 

 

So get us some facts and I'll pick up my pitchfork and cross to the Dark Side

 

I agree with Phil

[aintforever]

They came to their judgement in the absence of a full explanation from the club. It was quite clear from the tone of their "judgement" that they were hacked off by the club playing their "we reserve our commercial right to sell our product to whom we choose" card.

 

The IFO seem to be playing the same tit-for-tat game that we're accusing the club of playing..,

 

I will continue to reserve my own judgement until I know the full facts.

 

OK, I agree. Based on the information we have, this looks like petty, spitefull, childish b@ll@cks from the club.

[Secret Site Agent]

I agree with Phil

 

Yeh, and I agree with trousers, although it pains me to do so. (just Kidding)

[trousers]

Yeh, and I agree with trousers, although it pains me to do so. (just Kidding)

 

Blimey. That's twice this year already that someone's agreed with me. I'll be hitting double figures by Boxing day at this rate....

[um pahars]

Couple of boring opening gambits.

 

I've now read the report three times (I do find these things a tad long winded and all in the same kind of "lawyer" speak. Additionally, as I have stated before I have utmost respect for Liebherr, the Liebherr legacy, Cortese and everyone else for rescuing our Club and hopefully turning us around. I certainly support their vision.

 

However, on this occasion it is my belief that the Club have acted unreasonably and most annoyingly, unnecessarily. It smacks of pettiness and vindictiveness. We're not talking about a report by The Echo, instead a report by the IFO. In additionto the petty act, the Club's unwillingness to discuss the reasons with the IFO does not bode well.

 

I missed the furore first time around, but have to say this really should not have got to this stage. As with some of the other scrapes we seem to be getting ourselves in, I have to say some banging of heads is required and a quiet word in Cortese's ear wouldn't go amiss.

 

It's just all so unnecessary.

[Jonnyboy]

TBF, it doesn't look good.

 

As much as I don't like Illingsworth, and he is a 'self appointed' voice of the fans, he HAS been treated unfairly.

 

When this came up before i said that we shouldn't discuss it before we have reason to, now we have, and it is wrong IMO.

 

Yet another section of the football world NC has ****ed off.

[oldsarum]

How sad that at the end of a ground breaking transfer window and an away win tonight, such bitter and illinformed posts like this one are back on the board.

 

Just for the record I have met Nick, don't know him in any other than to say hi to, with the exception of a converstaion I had with him, when our ref didnt turn up and someone phoned him short notice to fill the gap, which he duly did (And gave a very harsh penalty against me). The conversation was about his media work.

 

You will not ever find a quote from him, claiming to be the voice of the fans or indeed to speak on behalf of all Saints fans (Despite the 20 posts already saying he does - You are all lying or are just sheep)

 

He loved the limelight so much he offered on numerous occassions to pass it over to others (Some on this board I believe) but there were no takers. My understanding is that offer still stands, although you will need to check with him.

 

Whether I think he is a nice guy or not is irrelevant, but one thing beyond question is he is Saints through and through and whilst you character assainate him on here, he is probably on his way back from Exeter, whilst you cyber warriors put the boot in.

 

He is a ******* Saints fan, home and away, rain or shine and has been treated very very badly. What if one of you lot shout something at a player or a sing a song that the Cortese doesn't like and he takes away your Season ticket ( Not relevant for 99% posters so far on this thread). This is flip side to the brilliance he showed in the transfer window and at a time when it seemed it was picking fights with everyone. But just as the photographic ban was stupid so is this and lets hope he can back down gracefully as he did with that.

 

Oh and Nick your wrong, the IPO is sanctioned by the footballing governing bodies, so the club can ignore but will be fined by the FL and just for good measure, the IPO have reported us to the FL for being in breach of our own charter....... Very professional.....NOT.

 

We owe Cortese alot, but on this occassion he owes Nick.

 

In passing, the IFO requests that the Football League explores whether the Club is in breach of League regulations by not having its Charter available on its website

 

Totally agree with your views, especially regards the comments of people claiming Nick has claimed to be fans spokesman

 

many of the comments on here regarding Nick are to say the least i'll informed.

 

The findings of the report are basically that Nick was denied a season ticket because he dared to to question Saints decision to stop supporters being able to buy season tickets in installments.

 

So much for free speech in this country

 

He was trying to help other supporters, but it seems many of you don''t seem to understand that and think he had some self interest.

[NickG]

Blimey. That's twice this year already that someone's agreed with me. I'll be hitting double figures by Boxing day at this rate....

 

when is boxing day?

[trousers]

when is boxing day?

 

Monday 26th December this year

[trousers]

The findings of the report are basically that Nick was denied a season ticket because he dared to to question Saints decision to stop supporters being able to buy season tickets in installments.

 

I read it (between the lines) slightly differently....my GUESS is that the ticket purchase was denied because of the channels that were used to question the policy (i.e. Saints Trust / Echo) rather than the fact it was questioned per se.

 

For example, I'm sure if I'd written to the club asking them to explain their policy, and they replied to me to explain, then I wouldn't have been denied a season ticket (whether I agreed with their reasoning or not).

 

Yes, on the surface it looks "petty and childish" but we don't know what happened, from the club's perspective, leading up to this dispute....

[SaintRichmond]

Financial Times running with it as their main story this morning.

 

SFC GOES GLOBAL

 

 

The Shanghai and Bankok Humping Manual ( Paperback edition) carries it on a middle page spread

 

(That's if you can prise it open )

[wild-saint]

For all the ****** about Saints and the way it has been run over the years I tend not to offer much sympathy to be fair. He acts like he is some trade union leader FFS. No i don't know the real reasons for why he has been reused a season ticket but to be fair no else other than NC and NI if the truth be known. But one thing is for sure Childish / petulant action by saints or not NI has clearly said / done something that has irritated the Shyte out of NC. So for that reason say to NI FV(k you ane next time hold your tongue wee man.

[angelman]

Whether you like NI or not (either personally or via his role with the Trust) is frankly irrelevant. It is overly petty of the club to bully an individual who is a loyal supporter who voices his thoughts which are often critical of the Club. What would you all say if somehow the Club got your detail and matched them up to criticism posted on here and then stopped your season ticket? Are we not allowed to be critical of the Club at all? And if anyone from the Club wants to know my details, I'll give them a call and tell them over the telephone.

 

But on the other hand, the Club has said that he is not barred from matches and can buy on a match by match basis. So he can go to games. Which makes it even more petty - they don't like what he says so they punish him by making him buy more expensive tickets. Pathetic and a lot of self-aggrandisement going on (from all sides, although my sympathies are with NI on this one).

[Weston Saint]

Quite simple really - Nick paid for a season ticket for this season - money returned - Nick asked for an explanation - club ignored - club refused to give an explanation o various football bodies - did say he was not banned from the ground and could buy a match day ticket whenever he liked.

 

This was a prejudice against one person with a refusal to give an explanation, even up to the date of the report.

 

Whatever posters might think of Nick he has been treated badly by the club and I suspect Cortese in particular.

 

Refusal to give an explanation to Nick or any investigating body taking it up on his behalf suggests there is no explanation. That is not Nick's fault.

 

Let us hope the club agree to him having a season ticket again next year and this sorry business can be put to bed.

[up and away]

Now I HAVE met Nic,and spoken to him on a couple of occasions - Sure its annoying when the media add the 'voice of fans tag' - ****es me off no end, but It does not stem from Nick. He obviously cares deeply about Saints and has in the past been prepared to get involved when others have not... not saying i agree with everything he says, or believes, but I do think he is a decent bloke with his heart very much in the right place.

 

However, we do not know the reasons for the ST ban. iIs it just vindictiveness on part of the club because of negative things said on his web site UI? Did he break the ST rules in some way? Has he infringed copyright on his site? I dont know and untilo I do, I wont pass judgement on either.

 

Was this ban not put in place by previous owners? dont recall.

 

I like Nick, think he is very fair minded and treats events and actions on there merit, irrespective of who it is. I don't like to see this happening and the only rumour that gives this any validity, is if he went over Cortese's head and emailed Liebherr directly

[JackanorySFC]

Personally I'm embarrassed but not suprised by the lack of solidarity amongst our supporters. "I'm alright jack", what if it happended to you or one of your mates (if you've got any which I doubt by the joyless, antaganistic sellfish responses on here) eh? As far as fellow saints fans are concerned - "one in all in" I say!

[EastleighSoulBoy]

Could anyone confirm that Nick Illingsworth asked pertinent questions of the club, the Echo and the Police with reference to issues surrounding the policing of the Pompey game?

 

Others, away from this forum, are quite resolute that he did so and unveiled various discrepancies. One regarding a person being summoned to Bitterne Police for charging, this person 'mooned' at the Skate fans, then subsequently dropping the charge when further evidence, in a Police video, showed the same person stopping Saints fans from trashing a car full of Skate fans. Accordingly NI questioned various aspects and, at the time of doing this, had his season ticket payment credited back to his account.

 

Are the two instances linked?

 

Otherwise I cannot begin to understand why Nick's payment was refused. I don't know him and I have no grudge with either him or the club but a little clarity, even if in private between the two parties, would not go amiss.

[trousers]

Quite simple really - Nick paid for a season ticket for this season - money returned

 

Were there any discussions as to the future of The Saints Trust between Nick and SFC prior to this event? If there was, do we know how amicable those discussions were?

[trousers]

Personally I'm embarrassed but not suprised by the lack of solidarity amongst our supporters. "I'm alright jack", what if it happended to you or one of your mates (if you've got any which I doubt by the joyless, antaganistic sellfish responses on here) eh? As far as fellow saints fans are concerned - "one in all in" I say!

 

I don't see a huge number of people leaping to the clubs's defence TBH. I see plenty of people criticising the club (quite rightly in terms of how they seem to have handled the communication side of things), plus there's some of us sitting on the fence until we know what happened on both sides.

[Jonnyboy]

FFS, why do people actually care when no one knows what even happened. I'm judging NC on whether we achieve promotion or not and that is all.

 

You are naive if you think the way the club chairman interacts with local people, local organisations, local and national press, staff at the club, ex-players, national media, supporters organisations and others will not get a reaction in some way.

[dune]

I have agreed with some things nick has said, disagreed with other things (especially when he called for fans to get behind Rupert Lowe).

 

I don't have a problem with Nick giving his personal views to the press, but I do have a problem when he is described as "Saints Trust Chairman Nick Illingsworth". The Trust has no members - it's just another SISA - yet Nick has stated that once a member joins he or she is an inactive member for life i.e he or she is a number - 978 numbers if memory serves me correctly.

 

To this end I think the club have done the right thing because Illingsworth is conning people by using a title that implies he has a mandate. If NI drops the false title then of course he should be allowed back.

[alpine_saint]

Couple of boring opening gambits.

 

I've now read the report three times (I do find these things a tad long winded and all in the same kind of "lawyer" speak. Additionally, as I have stated before I have utmost respect for Liebherr, the Liebherr legacy, Cortese and everyone else for rescuing our Club and hopefully turning us around. I certainly support their vision.

 

However, on this occasion it is my belief that the Club have acted unreasonably and most annoyingly, unnecessarily. It smacks of pettiness and vindictiveness. We're not talking about a report by The Echo, instead a report by the IFO. In additionto the petty act, the Club's unwillingness to discuss the reasons with the IFO does not bode well.

 

I missed the furore first time around, but have to say this really should not have got to this stage. As with some of the other scrapes we seem to be getting ourselves in, I have to say some banging of heads is required and a quiet word in Cortese's ear wouldn't go amiss.

 

It's just all so unnecessary.

 

How can judge it is uncessary if you dont know the reason ?

 

The only thing NI annoys me about are the pre- and post-match pious sermons about attendance on his site.

Edited 2 February, 2011 by alpine_saint

[dune]

Refusal to give an explanation to Nick or any investigating body taking it up on his behalf suggests there is no explanation.

 

I disagree. Of course there must be a explanation, but clearly the club don't want to give it. I think Nick using the title "Chairman of the Saints Trust" to add weight to his views is a good enough reason for the club taking their stance for example, but imo the club don't want to open themselves up to the possible consequences of being honest.

 

Or maybe they see him as threat to the travel club given the overwhelming sucess of the silverspoons JPT party.

Edited 2 February, 2011 by dune

[Dellman]

NI is self-important and sets himself up as a fans spokesman-what a cheek-thank goodness we now have a strong enough management to stand up to him. If he is such a big supporter why doesn't he get on with supporting, like the rest of us

[Papa Shango]

Illingsworth is an absolute tool. Some of the stuff he comes out with is hilarious. He compared the current regime at the club to the crooks at Portsmouth a few weeks ago. He also said at the start of the season we shouldn't have got rid of Lee Molyneux as he is better than Dan Harding (swear to god I'm not making that up).

[theyin]

NI is self-important and sets himself up as a fans spokesman-what a cheek-thank goodness we now have a strong enough management to stand up to him. If he is such a big supporter why doesn't he get on with supporting, like the rest of us

 

you need to read on beyond the first couple of posts.

 

Don't know the guy, not been in the area to hear him comment on all things Saints in the media and wasn't mugged at Silverspoons. What I can tell you is that the media will have given him the tag of fans spokeman. He could have refused requests but I can assure you the media will have been persistent when calling him.

[Brussels Saint]

Completely not ITK, and just conjecture, but was NI not the person who put out a statement to the press demanding information about who was in charge of the club after Markus passed (I'm not 100% sure it was him, maybe someone can confirm)

 

I remember, some on here commented how insensitive that was considering how recently Markus and been buried.

 

Perhaps the Liebherr Family were upset with that and instructed the club to refuse his season ticket and as is their way also instruct not to make any further comment.

 

Just a wild guess.............

 

Apologies Nick if it was not you who made the statement.

[dune]

you need to read on beyond the first couple of posts.

 

Don't know the guy, not been in the area to hear him comment on all things Saints in the media and wasn't mugged at Silverspoons. What I can tell you is that the media will have given him the tag of fans spokeman. He could have refused requests but I can assure you the media will have been persistent when calling him.

 

He could quite easily have told them not to drop the flunkery of the title "Chairman of the Saints Trust".

 

http://www.langridge.co.uk/ST/

 

It hasn't existed for a long time, yet long after memberships expired he continued to use the title to give his personal views false weight.

[Papa Shango]

Completely not ITK, and just conjecture, but was NI not the person who put out a statement to the press demanding information about who was in charge of the club after Markus passed (I'm not 100% sure it was him, maybe someone can confirm)

 

I remember, some on here commented how insensitive that was considering how recently Markus and been buried.

 

Perhaps the Liebherr Family were upset with that and instructed the club to refuse his season ticket and as is their way also instruct not to make any further comment.

 

Just a wild guess.............

 

Apologies Nick if it was not you who made the statement.

 

Think that was Perry McMillan wasn't it?

[manji]

Couple of boring opening gambits.

 

I've now read the report three times (I do find these things a tad long winded and all in the same kind of "lawyer" speak. Additionally, as I have stated before I have utmost respect for Liebherr, the Liebherr legacy, Cortese and everyone else for rescuing our Club and hopefully turning us around. I certainly support their vision.

 

However, on this occasion it is my belief that the Club have acted unreasonably and most annoyingly, unnecessarily. It smacks of pettiness and vindictiveness. We're not talking about a report by The Echo, instead a report by the IFO. In additionto the petty act, the Club's unwillingness to discuss the reasons with the IFO does not bode well.

 

I missed the furore first time around, but have to say this really should not have got to this stage. As with some of the other scrapes we seem to be getting ourselves in, I have to say some banging of heads is required and a quiet word in Cortese's ear wouldn't go amiss.

 

It's just all so unnecessary.

 

How do you know it is "all so unneccasary" and still you manage to get in a dig at Cortese by stealth.

[theyin]

He could quite easily have told them not to drop the flunkery of the title "Chairman of the Saints Trust".

 

http://www.langridge.co.uk/ST/

 

It hasn't existed for a long time, yet long after memberships expired he continued to use the title to give his personal views false weight.

 

he could have but there's too many lazy journalists out there and the title is easy for the viewer/reader to take in. As I say, not around to comment on your closing statement. Can you prove this?

 

Simply devil's advocate here

[COMEONYOUREDS]

Surely this is all down to the 'COYR' business adventure Nick and others went into????

 

Remember, the one that used the clubs name & badge to rip off fellow saints fans and sell tacky merchandise outside the stadium - thus taking potential business away from teh megastore

 

Whilst I dont agree with the club's actions i'm not so sure NI is as innocent as he or that report makes out?

 

I could be wrong

[yateleysaint]

I don't know what Nick's done to deserve all this grief. Saints fans can't agree on anything so there's no such thing as a majority viewpoint. Nick just expresses his personal opinion and wants the best for the club just like anyone else.

 

An independent body has carried out a thorough investigation and found that Nick was unjustly treated by the club. You'll never get the club's take on it because it knows it was in the wrong all along and had no justification for preventing Nick from holding a season ticket, other than vindictiveness over his criticisms of the running of the club.

 

It seems that certain people at the club are overly touchy and that doesn't bode well as anyone of us could be punished for airing a grievance.

 

The club's actions are indefensible in this case.

[um pahars]

How do you know it is "all so unneccasary" and still you manage to get in a dig at Cortese by stealth.

 

After reading (and re-reading the report) I am more than happy to accept the findings of an Independent Third Party who is obviously more privy to the facts (and both sides of the story) than anyone on here, including myself. With this Ombudsman concluding that the Club should apologise and allow Nick to purchase a season ticket, I don't think it's unreasonable to agree that the Club has acted in an unwarranted manner and that it was a therefore an unnecessary incident that should either never have arisen, or been resolved earlier.

 

Of course we could adopt an attitude of denial or ignorance & ignore a ruling by a third party and adopt an attitude of "No one likes us, we don't care", but I would prefer us to be a little bit mature and accept that sometimes we as a Club have got things wrong.

 

As for the dig by stealth, then I'm afraid you're tilting at windmills. I have been unequivocal in my praise for Liebherr, the Liebherr legacy and all those that came to the rescue of our Club (including Cortese who obviously played a major role in the pre and post purchase era, and continues to push us onwards).

 

It is eminently possible to be supportive of someone (or the Club) and yet be mature enough to accept that sometimes it is possible that they have made mistakes.

[PokingFun]

I know Nick, and i echo what one or two other posters have said. You wont find a more loyal and committed Saints fan, and he isn't in it for the attention, the press need someone to talk to, if not him, then who should it be? Come on you PC hidden slag off merchants, quick to critisise but unable to offer an alternative, eh?

As for Wembley, if i could count on my hand the number of times i have been to something and paid good money, and then realised it was a load of crap, well.... Jesus, it was only a tenner, hardly a cancelled holiday to the Maldives or a Spanish home knowcked down. No doubt it was ****, no doubt poorly organised, but i can guarantee that it was not done like that on purpose and i am sure NI wont be doing it again.

 

Easy enough to wander down to SMS for any fans view or wander into Soton High St and find any Saints fan for that purpose.

 

Having said that, personally, I am happy to have my own opinion on all things Saints and really don't care what he (or any other fan) says to the press either as this guise of fans rep or not as surely football is simply a game of opinions and each individual has theirs and can easily put their own views forward including if there is a need to put someone straight should they be asked if they agree with the view of NI or any other fan, press report, and so on.

[NickG]

but wasn't their ruling (only scan read it) based on saints refusing to give info about the reasons?

 

Therefore the group would have to find in NI's favour -as only info available.

 

I wonder if the club weren't that interested?

 

Does seem churlish to refuse a customer - but without full story hard to judge.