L MAC and this forum

[Saint_clark]

I think it's pretty much a given that when we get back to the Prem ticket prices will be around the £40 mark.

And all those things you listed are very extreme - we haven't seen anything like that so far.

[Deppo]

Nothing personal Geneva (as I was going to raise a similar point with DellDays and a couple of others), but is success on the pitch the only thing that matters to you???

 

If so, would you be willing to pay any price for that success???

 

Being totally hypothetical, would you accept £40 for matchday tickets? £50? £60?

 

Would you accept Steve Grant being banned from St Mary's if the powers that be thought his criticisms were unwarranted? Would you accept this forum being shut down if the Club felt it was a hindrance to success?

 

What about banning all media sources (radio, TV, papers etc) and only allowing supporters to pick up stuff about the Club from the Official Site?

 

What about withdrawing all co-operation for any event outside the confines of the Club if they felt it hindered success(i.e. no other charitable work, engagement with the local community)?

 

I'm sure I could list loads more, but hopefully you get my drift.

 

Is success on the pitch really everything, or do we also want "something else" alongside it (ethics, fairness, history, a community spirit, togetherness)???

 

In which case, is it not a personal decision as to what level of success we would accept balanced against these "other issues"???

 

 

Or is everything up for scarifice on the altar of success???

 

Hyperbole is a pathetic way to try and win an internet argument. Why do you need to be hypothetical? Has Cortese not done enough wrong yet for your argument to work?

[um pahars]

And all those things you listed are very extreme - we haven't seen anything like that so far.

 

Perhaps you misunderstood my point (or alternatively I haven't communicated it very well).

 

If success on the pitch is all that matters, then surely it would be irrelevant how extreme these hypothetical concerns might be. If success on the pitch is the only thing that matters, then we should be prepared to accept anything thrown at us (no matter how extreme it is).

 

 

 

 

(PS The £40, £50, £60 tickets are for next season LOL).

[Deppo]

Perhaps you misunderstood my point (or alternatively I haven't communicated it very well).

 

Or it was a sh*t point?

[Saint_clark]

Perhaps you misunderstood my point (or alternatively I haven't communicated it very well).

 

If success on the pitch is all that matters, then surely it would be irrelevant how extreme these hypothetical concerns might be. If success on the pitch is the only thing that matters, then we should be prepared to accept anything thrown at us (no matter how extreme it is).

 

 

 

 

(PS The £40, £50, £60 tickets are for next season LOL).

 

Obviously not, but we haven't reached that point yet. Success at the expense of a couple of club legends not being as involved as they'd like to be? Absolutely. They're not innocent in this at all. The difference between them and Cortese is that Cortese has much more important things to worry about and hasn't got time to chase after them trying to make amends.

[um pahars]

Hyperbole is a pathetic way to try and win an internet argument. Why do you need to be hypothetical? Has Cortese not done enough wrong yet for your argument to work?

 

I think you're getting slightly emotional and misquoting me if you think this argument is based on the "Has Cortese not done enough wrong yet for your argument to work?" line.

 

Instead, I am merely countering the assertion that "success on the pitch is the only thing that matters".

 

I think it is eminently sensible to suggest you want success, but perhaps not at any price. However, I also accept that the "price" you are willing to pay is down to each individuals moral compass and outlook on life. I am therefore merely trying to ascertain at what point people might say, this is a price too far.

[benjii]

Perhaps you misunderstood my point (or alternatively I haven't communicated it very well).

 

If success on the pitch is all that matters, then surely it would be irrelevant how extreme these hypothetical concerns might be. If success on the pitch is the only thing that matters, then we should be prepared to accept anything thrown at us (no matter how extreme it is).

 

 

 

 

(PS The £40, £50, £60 tickets are for next season LOL).

 

I think it's a given that if Saints started testing football boots on animals a lot of people would find it somewhat off.

 

In the context of the minor, insignificant, trivial, irrelevant, insular, Usual Suspects, need-for-constant-self-affirmation, old boy's network, piffling incidents that get themselves airtime on here then success on the pitch is Messi to their Lee Todd.

[Deppo]

Instead, I am merely countering the assertion that "success on the pitch is the only thing that matters".

 

I think you are getting emotional and reading too much into that assertion. There was obvious ellipsis in that statement, as it was responding to the way that Cortese is acting over the 125 year activities. For the response (with the ellipsis added back in), read: "success on the pitch is the only thing that matters, not how Cortese is acting over the 125 year celebrations."

 

However, I am impressed at how naturally you were able to conjure up that picture of our future. Almost like you've had really vivid waking nightmares about it or something.

[um pahars]

I think it's a given that if Saints started testing football boots on animals a lot of people would find it somewhat off.

 

But success is eveything, so to complain about something (if it was legal) could well be classed as bedwetting.

 

In the context of the minor, insignificant, trivial, irrelevant, insular, Usual Suspects, need-for-constant-self-affirmation, old boy's network, piffling incidents that get themselves airtime on here then success on the pitch is Messi to their Lee Todd.

 

I certainly concur with your thoughts on this particular issue (and have said so elsewhere), but I also accept that for some it might be close to their "price too far" limit. I may not agree with that and think it's a bit of an over reaction, but (a) I respect their opinion and (b) I certainly cannot buy in to the mantra that success on the pitch is everything.

[Deppo]

But success is eveything, so to complain about something (if it was legal) could well be classed as bedwetting.

 

I don't think you are helping yourself much anymore.

[um pahars]

I think you are getting emotional and reading too much into that assertion. There was obvious ellipsis in that statement, as it was responding to the way that Cortese is acting over the 125 year activities. For the response (with the ellipsis

 

Thanks for your interpretation of what you thought the posters concerned meant and I think it is a perfectly valid interpretation. I too would have thought that the throwaway line of "success at any price" actually had its caveats and limitations, particular with reference to a football club.

 

I would be interested in how Geneva, DellDays and others perceive this interpretation.

 

But, if we accept that such a term has caveats or obvious ellipsis, then we have to accept that for each individual they have their own limit to what they will or will not accept in the quest for success and therefore berating people for espousing their own genuinely held opinion is somewhat arrogant.

[benjii]

But success is eveything, so to complain about something (if it was legal) could well be classed as bedwetting.

 

 

 

I certainly concur with your thoughts on this particular issue (and have said so elsewhere), but I also accept that for some it might be close to their "price too far" limit. I may not agree with that and think it's a bit of an over reaction, but (a) I respect their opinion and (b) I certainly cannot buy in to the mantra that success on the pitch is everything.

 

Nothing is everything (expect maybe the universe but that, arguably, is a moot point).

 

EDIT: Some further thoughts:

 

If the universe is "everything" then it seems to me that the predicate of "being everything" is likely to be something contained within the concept of "universe" itself. However, Kant has taught us that existence is clearly not a predicate and thus I'm left in something of an ontological tizzy as "being everything" seems to me to be somewhat approximate to the ultimate essence of existence. History has taught us that syllogisms attempting to build an argument on tautologous or pseudo-tautologous grounds are quiant and inticing yet logically suspect. Thus, I am not even sure that the proposition that the universe is everything will stand up to scrutiny.

Edited 20 February, 2011 by benjii

[um pahars]

Nothing is everything (expect maybe the university but that, arguably, is a moot point).

 

I bet the fees for that place are way above £9k!!!!!

 

(Only joshing - in a friendly manner, as I know intonation is lost on the net - as aware it was a typo)

[benjii]

I bet the fees for that place are way above £9k!!!!!

 

(Only joshing - in a friendly manner, as I know intonation is lost on the net)

 

It was indeed a typo - a rather weird one!

 

I have added some further thoughts to the post for those that care (a small subset of people, I suspect).

[um pahars]

However, Kant has taught us that existence is clearly not a predicate and thus I'm left in something of an ontological tizzy as "being everything" seems to me to be somewhat approximate to the ultimate essence of existence.

 

Did you see the programme on BBC4 (I think) earlier in the week called "lying Lessons or lessons in lying"???

 

Very good (although i do struggle with some of the audience!!!).

 

 

PS Just found it on iplayer.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00ymjkr/sign/Justice_A_Lesson_in_Lying/

[NickG]

I met with Lawrie on Thursday and spoke to him about the club and his relationship with it. He said that he wishes that NC would stop thinking that people are out to get him. I did point out that maybe things have come out from ex players / staff that make NC feel like this, of which he replied dont always believe what you read in the press but on reflection would have done things differently (didnt expand on this). Seemed to me that he just wants to get on with NC and watch us climb the leagues.

 

so another comment from LM criticising NC. Not been many in the other direction.

[JustMike]

so another comment from LM criticising NC. Not been many in the other direction.

 

to be fair the way he said it, it was not a dig, he was quite sincere and genuinely imo wants this sorted

[Graffito]

Nothing is everything (expect maybe the universe but that, arguably, is a moot point).

 

EDIT: Some further thoughts:

 

If the universe is "everything" then it seems to me that the predicate of "being everything" is likely to be something contained within the concept of "universe" itself. However, Kant has taught us that existence is clearly not a predicate and thus I'm left in something of an ontological tizzy as "being everything" seems to me to be somewhat approximate to the ultimate essence of existence. History has taught us that syllogisms attempting to build an argument on tautologous or pseudo-tautologous grounds are quiant and inticing yet logically suspect. Thus, I am not even sure that the proposition that the universe is everything will stand up to scrutiny.

 

Don't be in a tizzy. Follow a moral imperative...winning isn't everything.

[Fan The Flames]

I do like the way you have assumed the role of this forums moral guardian, pointing the way with your cryptic messages, like this one;

 

Or it was a sh*t point?

[Gingeletiss]

I think it's a given that if Saints started testing football boots on animals a lot of people would find it somewhat off.

 

In the context of the minor, insignificant, trivial, irrelevant, insular, Usual Suspects, need-for-constant-self-affirmation, old boy's network, piffling incidents that get themselves airtime on here then success on the pitch is Messi to their Lee Todd.

 

We have had a fair few donkeys play for us, does that count?

[Deppo]

I do like the way you have assumed the role of this forums moral guardian, pointing the way with your cryptic messages, like this one;

 

I like the way that you have assumed the role of this forum's moral guardian, pointing the way with messages like this one.

[manji]

Nothing personal Geneva (as I was going to raise a similar point with DellDays and a couple of others), but is success on the pitch the only thing that matters to you???

 

If so, would you be willing to pay any price for that success???

 

Being totally hypothetical, would you accept £40 for matchday tickets? £50? £60?

 

Would you accept Steve Grant being banned from St Mary's if the powers that be thought his criticisms were unwarranted? Would you accept this forum being shut down if the Club felt it was a hindrance to success?

 

What about banning all media sources (radio, TV, papers etc) and only allowing supporters to pick up stuff about the Club from the Official Site?

 

What about withdrawing all co-operation for any event outside the confines of the Club if they felt it hindered success(i.e. no other charitable work, engagement with the local community)?

 

I'm sure I could list loads more, but hopefully you get my drift.

 

Is success on the pitch really everything, or do we also want "something else" alongside it (ethics, fairness, history, a community spirit, togetherness)???

 

In which case, is it not a personal decision as to what level of success we would accept balanced against these "other issues"???

 

 

Or is everything up for scarifice on the altar of success???

 

or not letting a "fan on the board" or stopping someone being the "club historian" or allegedly refusing to pay a local comedian thousands of pounds a season to jabber at half time or stopping club legends from earning a fortune in "hospitality" possibly...................

[um pahars]

or not letting a "fan on the board" or stopping someone being the "club historian" or allegedly refusing to pay a local comedian thousands of pounds a season to jabber at half time or stopping club legends from earning a fortune in "hospitality" possibly...................

 

All valid and reasonable points and I think it's good that you won't be getting shouted down for offering them up.

 

Cheers

[Channon's Sideburns]

hiding behind the anonimity of an internet forum is on a par with planting mischievous stories in the press via your last remaining contact in the national media.

 

rl/cs

[Fan The Flames]

I like the way that you have assumed the role of this forum's moral guardian, pointing the way with messages like this one.

 

Well done.

[kpturner]

I am not anonymous

[OldNick]

Nothing personal Geneva (as I was going to raise a similar point with DellDays and a couple of others), but is success on the pitch the only thing that matters to you???

 

If so, would you be willing to pay any price for that success???

 

Being totally hypothetical, would you accept £40 for matchday tickets? £50? £60?

 

Would you accept Steve Grant being banned from St Mary's if the powers that be thought his criticisms were unwarranted? Would you accept this forum being shut down if the Club felt it was a hindrance to success?

 

What about banning all media sources (radio, TV, papers etc) and only allowing supporters to pick up stuff about the Club from the Official Site?

 

What about withdrawing all co-operation for any event outside the confines of the Club if they felt it hindered success(i.e. no other charitable work, engagement with the local community)?

 

I'm sure I could list loads more, but hopefully you get my drift.

 

Is success on the pitch really everything, or do we also want "something else" alongside it (ethics, fairness, history, a community spirit, togetherness)???

 

In which case, is it not a personal decision as to what level of success we would accept balanced against these "other issues"???

 

 

Or is everything up for scarifice on the altar of success???

i think you are taking Genevas comment a little far. We do worry more about success and dont care about the politics when the club is doing well. Not many Swing Lowes at cardiff and when the stadium was opened. NC is not fireproof ,and the man who is very intelligent will know there is only so far he can push the fan base.

I know many wont like this stance but i dont give a flying f### if we get back to the PL as i wont wish to pay 50-60 x 2 to watch Bolton Wigan or blackburn.

Ps i am pleased if LM does indeed offer the olive branch and it would be the sign of a true legend if he buried the hatchett

[The9]

In future, every time I slag off Cortese for springing the Season Tickets on us last summer, can someone please remind me that whilst he's around we won't have to listen to Mike Osman ? I've decided it's a fair trade.

 

I'd also like to point out that this thread has set a new Internet Record for illiteracy. Well done, everyone.

[Roger]

In future, every time I slag off Cortese for springing the Season Tickets on us last summer, can someone please remind me that whilst he's around we won't have to listen to Mike Osman ? I've decided it's a fair trade.

 

I'd also like to point out that this thread has set a new Internet Record for illiteracy. Well done, everyone.

Mike osman for me did a bloody good job on the pitch and at least is an out an out saints fan. The guy they have gpt at the moment is terrible, awful.

[Big Bad Bob]

In future, every time I slag off Cortese for springing the Season Tickets on us last summer, can someone please remind me that whilst he's around we won't have to listen to Mike Osman ? I've decided it's a fair trade.

 

More than a fair trade methinks.

 

Mike osman for me did a bloody good job on the pitch and at least is an out an out saints fan. The guy they have gpt at the moment is terrible, awful.

 

How on Earth does being an "out and out Saints fan" excuse his failed attempts at humour.

 

I'm an "out and out Saints fan" and a total ****, does that make me OK??

[Roger]

More than a fair trade methinks.

 

 

 

How on Earth does being an "out and out Saints fan" excuse his failed attempts at humour.

 

I'm an "out and out Saints fan" and a total ****, does that make me OK??

 

I think he was funny and half time was much better when he was there. I think mate it means he understand the fans passion.

[Big Bad Bob]

I think he was funny and half time was much better when he was there. I think mate it means he understand the fans passion.

 

I guess I could excuse your sense of humour, you do, afterall, think we wouldn't have shipped 4 goals had Jaidi been in defence against Posh

 

;) ;) (mass smileys to make the point that I'm joshing with you!!)

[Roger]

I guess I could excuse your sense of humour, you do, afterall, think we wouldn't have shipped 4 goals had Jaidi been in defence against Posh

 

;) ;) (mass smileys to make the point that I'm joshing with you!!)

 

Also cos I know mike quite well so am going to stick up for him. I stand by the jaidi comment though. Maybe we shouldnt have played a high line if they had pacey strikers?

[Big Bad Bob]

Also cos I know mike quite well so am going to stick up for him.

 

Oh ****, I take it all back, outstanding guy and a great comedian. How he hasn't made it to the pinnacle of the comedian mountain is a mystery.

 

Has me in stitiches everytime I hear him crack a joke...

 

 

I stand by the jaidi comment though. Maybe we shouldnt have played a high line if they had pacey strikers?

 

See Jaidi thread

[Frank's cousin]

The problem has always been quite simple - Lawrie has in the past aligned himself politically with certain regimes and been vocal about others - so by placing himself on one side he opened the door to those who did not agree with the regime. This was sad day as it meant that those who could not reconcile any support for the Wilde/Crouch debacle, where drawn into criticising LM for his part (albeit small) in that. NO differnt from MLT becomming involved with Pinnacle - heart in right place, but brain not doing its due dilegence...

 

Lets be honest, most fans dont care about the politic. Most really only care about what happens on the pitch and therefore heroes from out past success, are more important to them than anything that happens in the boardroom - hense the support for heroes past whatever they may say in the media.

 

Naturally, the media like to blow these things up - and as we have seen, they seem to delight in taking advantage of the 'footballer brain' being as it is - Benali, MLT and LM have all IMHO been victim to the media setting them up for a quote they can twist and turn - and they were unwise to open that door.

 

They are rightly entitled to their opinion, and I doubt that it it has much of a 'destablising' effect as some like to presume (with the possible oexception of the 'club for sale' story at a time of negotiating new sponsorship.... but we do not know who released or made that up...),... but what it odes do is divide sections of the fanbase (well that minority that care). We have seen it on here. It chips away at the solidarity we all seemed to have when ML took over... it undermines the confidence in some that the direction is the right one. Wat I do not understand is what is the reason to do it? Disagree for sure, opinion is everyone's right, but why not phras it in such a way that minimises any 'story'?

 

LM, MLT etc could quite easily say something along the lines of 'what really matters is that the club achieves its ambitions, that it has the success the fans deserve and progresses back to the higher table. We have seen some major changes in the way the new owners have gone about things, and if I am honest, I dont quite understand why some of these approaches have been taken, but if you look at the football we playing, the financial stabilty we have and teh success this is generating, they must being doing something right... and ultimately that is what matters'

 

Naturally the media would pick out 'I dont quite understand why some of these approaches have been taken' -and add a headline or 'LM criticises NC appraoch' .... thats teh reason why its best to keep completely quite or just do live interviews where there is less chance of being had... although both MLT and FB seem to have almost relished the chance to comment... just dont get it.

 

No one WANTS to criticise LM, MLT or FB. Their contribution to our history can not be taken away. But by commenting in the media in such a way as to leave themselves open to either a live 'comment' or quotes that can easily be misinterpreted, they create the problem. Its no surprise that given the way our media operate, that NC is very cautious, keeps his own counsel and only uses official channels for communication. That way he knows his comments cannot be manipulated to suit the story. I just wish MLT, LM etc would do the same. Otherwise it gives the perception that they dont care if the media turn it into a continued story of friction... and thats what's embarrasing.

[Frank's cousin]

Nothing personal Geneva (as I was going to raise a similar point with DellDays and a couple of others), but is success on the pitch the only thing that matters to you???

 

If so, would you be willing to pay any price for that success???

 

Being totally hypothetical, would you accept £40 for matchday tickets? £50? £60?

 

Would you accept Steve Grant being banned from St Mary's if the powers that be thought his criticisms were unwarranted? Would you accept this forum being shut down if the Club felt it was a hindrance to success?

 

What about banning all media sources (radio, TV, papers etc) and only allowing supporters to pick up stuff about the Club from the Official Site?

 

What about withdrawing all co-operation for any event outside the confines of the Club if they felt it hindered success(i.e. no other charitable work, engagement with the local community)?

 

I'm sure I could list loads more, but hopefully you get my drift.

 

Is success on the pitch really everything, or do we also want "something else" alongside it (ethics, fairness, history, a community spirit, togetherness)???

 

In which case, is it not a personal decision as to what level of success we would accept balanced against these "other issues"???

 

 

Or is everything up for scarifice on the altar of success???

 

To be honest UP, we cant judge what teh vast majority of teh fan base want byt the few obsessives on here ;-)

 

The point really is, that you can have both success and the 'spirit and community' - the question remains though as to what that 'spirit and community' mean - because I would guess it means something different depending on who you ask. For many, the PERCEPTION of lets call it 'ruthless focus' that some accuse the club of IS a price worth paying for success.

 

However, I also think we have a few bits screwed up... but we need to put it into some kind of context. When NC was apointed by ML, we were in a terrible stabe as a club and as a business. The whole thing needed a complete review and restructuure, a complete chnage in approach if we were to avoid the mistakes of the past and rebuild from the ground up. Now there are different ways that this can be done, different 'change management' solutions etc... NC used his preferred approach - probably 'broke a few eggs' in making the new cake... and its that what some cant rationalise.

 

If you look at the clubs that ARE successful, they have deliberately moved towards the corporate - they have BUILT on the legacy of their past, but not been slaves to it - and the future is seen as more important. If we dont like this, fair enough, thats our choice, but the quaint, provincial community club catogory, rarely supplies champions. Derby and Notts Forest etc was probably the last time and that under the direction of a 'tyrant' who did as he pleased....

 

So we need to be realistic. I also believe that when we start to see the fruits of this change, we will also see a more relaxed approach - still focussed, but perhapss more open to the 'softer' elements of a club culture. At this time the focus is all on the pitch... and I dont have any problem with that.

[MarkSFC]

The problem has always been quite simple - Lawrie has in the past aligned himself politically with certain regimes and been vocal about others - so by placing himself on one side he opened the door to those who did not agree with the regime. This was sad day as it meant that those who could not reconcile any support for the Wilde/Crouch debacle, where drawn into criticising LM for his part (albeit small) in that. NO differnt from MLT becomming involved with Pinnacle - heart in right place, but brain not doing its due dilegence...

 

Lets be honest, most fans dont care about the politic. Most really only care about what happens on the pitch and therefore heroes from out past success, are more important to them than anything that happens in the boardroom - hense the support for heroes past whatever they may say in the media.

 

Naturally, the media like to blow these things up - and as we have seen, they seem to delight in taking advantage of the 'footballer brain' being as it is - Benali, MLT and LM have all IMHO been victim to the media setting them up for a quote they can twist and turn - and they were unwise to open that door.

 

They are rightly entitled to their opinion, and I doubt that it it has much of a 'destablising' effect as some like to presume (with the possible oexception of the 'club for sale' story at a time of negotiating new sponsorship.... but we do not know who released or made that up...),... but what it odes do is divide sections of the fanbase (well that minority that care). We have seen it on here. It chips away at the solidarity we all seemed to have when ML took over... it undermines the confidence in some that the direction is the right one. Wat I do not understand is what is the reason to do it? Disagree for sure, opinion is everyone's right, but why not phras it in such a way that minimises any 'story'?

 

LM, MLT etc could quite easily say something along the lines of 'what really matters is that the club achieves its ambitions, that it has the success the fans deserve and progresses back to the higher table. We have seen some major changes in the way the new owners have gone about things, and if I am honest, I dont quite understand why some of these approaches have been taken, but if you look at the football we playing, the financial stabilty we have and teh success this is generating, they must being doing something right... and ultimately that is what matters'

 

Naturally the media would pick out 'I dont quite understand why some of these approaches have been taken' -and add a headline or 'LM criticises NC appraoch' .... thats teh reason why its best to keep completely quite or just do live interviews where there is less chance of being had... although both MLT and FB seem to have almost relished the chance to comment... just dont get it.

 

No one WANTS to criticise LM, MLT or FB. Their contribution to our history can not be taken away. But by commenting in the media in such a way as to leave themselves open to either a live 'comment' or quotes that can easily be misinterpreted, they create the problem. Its no surprise that given the way our media operate, that NC is very cautious, keeps his own counsel and only uses official channels for communication. That way he knows his comments cannot be manipulated to suit the story. I just wish MLT, LM etc would do the same. Otherwise it gives the perception that they dont care if the media turn it into a continued story of friction... and thats what's embarrasing.

 

good post.

[um pahars]

Naturally' date=' the media like to blow these things up - and as we have seen, they seem to delight in taking advantage of the 'footballer brain' being as it is - Benali, MLT and LM have all IMHO been victim to the media setting them up for a quote they can twist and turn - and they were unwise to open that door. [/quote']

 

Frank, some very valid points in your piece and I'm not sure as to whether or not you read Lawrie's piece over the weekend, but he mentioned many of the things you have said (not believing all you read, it is valid to offer up an opinion, he wants the Club to succeed on and off the pitch, has no problem with Cortese etc etc etc).

 

I mentioned in earlier posts that MLT, Lawrie and others need to be careful when espousing their opinions as very often their opinion carries more gravitas than us mere mortals. I don't think any on "their side" have covered themselves in any kind of glory and they need to quickly bury the hatchet.

 

Its no surprise that given the way our media operate' date=' that NC is very cautious, keeps his own counsel and only uses official channels for communication. That way he knows his comments cannot be manipulated to suit the story. [/quote']

 

But I also think in the interest of balance it should be remembered that Cortese has used these Official channels to take a swipe at various individuals. As an example the comments made at the end of the season when Cortese was rebuffing the Pardew rumours (rumours which Cortese later revealed were correct with him and Markus having a serious difference of opinion over his future) where he takes an unnecessary swipe at MLT for delaying their purchase and accusing others of wanting to harm the Club only add to the feud. Additionally, he and others have used the off the record format to get their point across as well.

[manji]

Also cos I know mike quite well so am going to stick up for him even though he's crap.

At least youre honest.................

[GenevaSaint]

Nothing personal Geneva (as I was going to raise a similar point with DellDays and a couple of others), but is success on the pitch the only thing that matters to you???

If so, would you be willing to pay any price for that success???

Being totally hypothetical, would you accept £40 for matchday tickets? £50? £60?

Would you accept Steve Grant being banned from St Mary's if the powers that be thought his criticisms were unwarranted? Would you accept this forum being shut down if the Club felt it was a hindrance to success?

What about banning all media sources (radio, TV, papers etc) and only allowing supporters to pick up stuff about the Club from the Official Site?

What about withdrawing all co-operation for any event outside the confines of the Club if they felt it hindered success(i.e. no other charitable work, engagement with the local community)?

I'm sure I could list loads more, but hopefully you get my drift.

Is success on the pitch really everything, or do we also want "something else" alongside it (ethics, fairness, history, a community spirit, togetherness)???

In which case, is it not a personal decision as to what level of success we would accept balanced against these "other issues"???

Or is everything up for scarifice on the altar of success???

 

I would say generally speaking, and I know generalisations are dodgy, but the majority of fans don't really care about the political goings on at the club.

 

The examples you gave are a bit far fetched apart from the ticket prices, anything can happen there. In regards to the community enagement that's exactly what the club want so you're barking up the wrong tree there.

 

Personally, success on the pitch is not the only measure; success in the bigger picture is also important. What I can say is that at the moment people on both sides of the argument are making mountains out of molehills. Cortese has come in and shook up the "fooball born and bred" group, and some don't like it.

 

Oh and banning Steve, if needs be, as long as he can still play in the forum match ;-)

[um pahars]

The point really is' date=' that you can have both success and the 'spirit and community' - the question remains though as to what that 'spirit and community' mean - because I would guess it means something different depending on who you ask. For many, the PERCEPTION of lets call it 'ruthless focus' that some accuse the club of IS a price worth paying for success. [/quote']

 

Agree totally.

 

I was merely trying to challenge the claim that success is everything and all that matters is what happens on the pitch. I fully accept there is a balance here and like you accept that for each individual that balance will be different (and quite possibly moveable at different times).

 

I just thought the argument to any "dissent" or "constructive criticism" of, Success Is Everything was a tad shallow and dismissive.

 

However' date=' I also think we have a few bits screwed up... but we need to put it into some kind of context. When NC was apointed by ML, we were in a terrible stabe as a club and as a business. The whole thing needed a complete review and restructuure, a complete chnage in approach if we were to avoid the mistakes of the past and rebuild from the ground up. Now there are different ways that this can be done, different 'change management' solutions etc... NC used his preferred approach - probably 'broke a few eggs' in making the new cake... and its that what some cant rationalise. [/quote']

 

I certainly agree about the context (and I have total respect for Liebherr, Cortese, the Family Trust etc in saving us), which is why I am more than happy to support Cortese in his drive to take the Club forward.

 

However, I also don't think it's unreasonable to offer up an opinion (and even a criticism) when things haven't gone exactly to plan. I find the notion that just because you criticise an individual decision/incident you are either disloyal or unable to see the bigger picture as somewhat crass and rather ignorant.

 

I certainly have no problem with honest mistakes (particuarly if they are made in what is thought as the best interests of the Club at the time) and accept that running a Club and satisfying everyone is a very difficult task. But one concern I do have however is the apparent reluctance to apologise/make up/rectify once these mistakes have been made, with the NI situation being a prime example. Why the Club are still stringing that one out and refusing any attempts at mediation/chance to explain themselves just doesn't sit well with me.

 

If you look at the clubs that ARE successful' date=' they have deliberately moved towards the corporate - they have BUILT on the legacy of their past, but not been slaves to it - and the future is seen as more important. If we dont like this, fair enough, thats our choice, but the quaint, provincial community club catogory, rarely supplies champions. Derby and Notts Forest etc was probably the last time and that under the direction of a 'tyrant' who did as he pleased.... [/quote']

 

I don't think anyone is suggesting we have to live in the past, dwell in the past or even be slaves to the past. That said, I think even many of the "successful" Clubs have been happy to recognise and trade off their past (for commercial as well as emotional reasons).

 

So we need to be realistic. I also believe that when we start to see the fruits of this change' date=' we will also see a more relaxed approach - still focussed, but perhapss more open to the 'softer' elements of a club culture. At this time the focus is all on the pitch... and I dont have any problem with that. [/quote']

 

Fingers crossed that success on the pitch is matched by a feeling of goodwill and togetherness off of it. In the meantime I think certain individuals need to reign things in and think about the reaction any comments might bring, whilst others need to stop being so precious, paranoid and petty.

[Frank's cousin]

UP, Agreed with your comments - I guess for us mere mortals, it is also a bit easier to see the logic and rationale from both perspectives. I can fully understand why the club has gone about its 'focussed' approach which has left a few head reeling, and on the flip side, appreciate that nothing should be above criticism and if its fair and based on logic, then it should actually be encourgaed - in effect it becaomes positive criticism, rather than the 'distraction' that NC is so weary of.

 

I have not read the article, so cannot comment, but it sounds like there is an olive branch and if so, then thats great - itw what we want. We all know Lawrie is a big ego and opinionated - and nowt wrong with that. Its not that or his opinion that I have been critical of, but maybe afterall the problems we have suffered, I just felt that at the positives really do outway any negatives, so even if certain points are vaild, I have struggled to see what there has been to gain from 'rocking the boat' at this time... OK biassed in this because it was just great to finally have a club on the up and in theory rid of the politics of the past.

 

I hope all bridges have not been burned, as Lawrie and MLT could be strong allies and a good bridge to fans (even if I dont always agree with them ;-)), but all parties woul need to soften their stance and agree to disagree - or at least accept that change is not necessarily always a bad thing. Football culture is very much engrained in the past - most changes that go against the 'tradition of a local club' do tend to meet resistance - especially from thsoe whose association with the club, be it as fans or players or management, is longer than the new owners or directors. Its understandable as we see such ownership as 'custodianship' and transient - But I guess, given what we have been through, I am maybe just naturally cautious of things that could unsettle the current ownership and make them think again?

 

As you know, I struggled deeply with teh concept of Wilde, and Wilde/Crouch as well intentioned as they were, they simply lacked the experience to deliver success on the bufdget we were faced with, or the cash to cover for them during the learning process. Lawrie was on their side, so he was tainted IMHO by that, but not for ever ;-) - and typically for the web forum, this was interpreted as some sort of full support for Lowe.... The same applies now. I dont think for one moment that NC should be or is above criticism. I think he has and will make mistakes, but thankfully these are mostly on the PR side, and not financial as his predecessors so we have at least a very solid foundation for the rebuild... and thats why If foced to come down on one side or the other, It would at this stage be very much with NC (not that I think we should be forced to chose) - My hope was that given LMs and MLTs love for the club, that they might also recognise this and put aside their personal issues with NC and avoid the media - who as we know are quick to take advantage and twist quotes to suit tehir own agendas - and maybe NC for his part needs to appreciate that we CAN be fully behind what he is looking to do, but also have opinion on some of the more 'community and club culture' which at the end of the day is only made to ENHANCE the positive approach he is taking, and not designed to challenge it.

[Guan 2.0]

What came first, the chicken or the egg?

 

Or

 

The article written by Lawrie rushing all of a sudden to make it clear he's open to being Cortese's BFF, or the invite to the same room as Nicola by Eddie Mitchell?

 

IMO it doesn't matter as long as bridges are built (or at least attempted).

 

Let's just hope steady eddie doen't make LM walk up the side steps, he doesn't want an article in the mail about that, LOlZORZ111.

[PhilippineSaint]

I think it's a given that if Saints started testing football boots on animals a lot of people would find it somewhat off.

 

I've always thought football boots were made out of animals so testing them on a few shouldn't really matter should it

[FloridaMarlin]

Did you read his Echo piece where he mentioned not believing everything your read in the press on this issue? If so, then I think you might want to reconsider the "planting" claim.

 

(Of course could have been misquoted in his Echo article, though not likely, IMHO).

 

I wasn't refering to the columns LM writes and which go in under his own name.

 

I was comparing his criticism of anonymous internet warriors to the instances where unattributed negative stories in the national media are written by a particular journalist who has been his pet reporter for many years.

 

It's pretty much the same thing, but by a different name, in my book.

[MarkSFC]

I have just read the article in the echo written by Lawrie and to quote him "it has to be said" that I find his article very disappointing. The underlying tone is one of defence, making his points very clear, and passing the buck on occassion. He likes to boost his ego doesnt he "if ever he wants a conversation I will be available" aimed towards NC, and in regard to new managers "...if they ever want a chat they know where I am".

 

He goes on to say "I keep away from the training ground and wish them well from a distance". Well I should hope he does.....Regardless of all the great things you did for Southampton FC you're not part of the club any more Lawrie, just be a fan.

 

He also speaks about "us" in his article - which seems to be on the behalf of "the players". MLT,KK and FB are mentioned. I find it interesting that he speaks so obviously for a collective group.

 

It is clear to me that the man has a huge ego and misses the limelight. I dont doubt his affection for the club nor do I forget the great times he brought us in the late 70's/early 80's. I wont forget the players he brought in and the style he encouraged. I will never forget the moment I heard that Kevin Keegan (European Player of the Year!!) had signed. Nor will I forget when he left for Sunderland.

 

No one is squeeky clean in this world, no one never makes a mistake or three but its how you act generally and how you move on that matters. Unfortunately some people cant or wont move on.

 

When something has been such a big part of your life and you of it, it is very hard to let go. However you have to in order to let it thrive and move on, and for yourself as well. Some are much better at that than others...

[Dellman]

In most walks of life when you leave, you leave and LM doesn't seem able to do that, what would the Labour people say if Gordon Brown was still sounding off about the party leadership? I note LM says he doesn't go to the training ground any more...why should he for heaven's sake, what's it got to do with him? Absolutely nothing

[hughieslastminutegoal]

Duncan, thanks for drawing it to our attention. I have just read the article. I see is all as a "right to reply"

 

He talks about the celebrations and the award. No problem with that.

 

He expresses his sadness that the club had to ring the BBC to distance them from the event and the award. They are entitled to do that and he is entitled to comment on that call.

 

He praises Cortese for his financial steering of the club and his ability to turn big clubs away from trying top by our best players. He wishes him well

 

He is puzzled why the club seem to think he is against the club or Cortese. He says he is not.

 

He hints at media turning support for Pardew into criticism of Cortese at the end of last season. The second part was not the case.

 

I thought it was a decent article almost offering an olive branch to the club. I hope Mr Cortese reads it and gives McMenemy a call.

 

I've normally supported LM, but he really is missing the point.

He tells us there has been only one official FA cup winning team get-together. Well, how many "official" ones does he need? If he wants to get his mates together for a horlicks or cocoa that's fine, no one's stopping him, but stop living in the past in public.

 

He offers the club "an olive branch"? Isn't that just a tad arrogant? That somehow the club should feel that accepting his olive branch is a necessity?

 

He did well for us. I fondly dust off my 1976 etc. memories from time to time, but for heavens sake Lawrie it was nearly 35 years ago. I'm not going to forget it because I was there, but really, your regular public reminders are becoming a bit sad now.

[Matthew Le Tissier]

To be fair I totally agree with him, this forum is full of dickheads who think they know it all but actually haven't got a clue what they are talking about.

 

Also I think the point that he doesn't hold back is untrue as I'm

Sure what he said about some forum users was put very politely.

[manji]

To be fair I totally agree with him, this forum is full of dickheads who think they know it all but actually haven't got a clue what they are talking about.

 

Also I think the point that he doesn't hold back is untrue as I'm

Sure what he said about some forum users was put very politely.

 

Reading your last 2 posts I can safely say I havnt got a clue what you are talking about. Are you unwell ?