What's more important ? The furture of SFC or its past ?

[Saintandy666]

If it's possible to like both, why is the Liebherrs representative and MLT/LM playing this out in public? By putting it in the public domain I would suggest they are asking us to choose sides.

 

He's much more than a representative. He has total control, the Liebherr's provide the money, but Cortese has total control over the club. He isn't some spokesman.

[Daren W]

Let's play devils advocate, the same could be said about the delightful Rupert Lowe and he is certain no hero in anybodys eyes?

Very good point! I think Lowe is certainly responsible for some very poor decisions but was also some very good ones. After 20 years of talking about a new stadium, Lowe actually delivered it..

You can't airbrush out his role in the club either..

[um pahars]

Very well said; the need to pigeon-hole people into a pro or anti Cortese stance is as childish as it is ridiculous.

 

Some people obviously struggle with the concept of judging decisions on their individual merits and find it impossible to believe you can be very supportive of the overall thrust/direction of something, whilst at the same time having concerns regarding certain specific issues (and those specifics don't have to invalidate the whole plan, nor make you anti the whole plan, nor bring the whole plan in to question, nor be enough to railroad the plan, ad nauseum).

 

The last time I checked we hadn't all signed up to some kind of Cabinet Collective Responsibility when we bought our season tickets.

[Dig Dig]

Some people obviously struggle with the concept of judging decisions on their individual merits and find it impossible to believe you can be very supportive of the overall thrust/direction of something, whilst at the same time having concerns regarding certain specific issues (and those specifics don't have to invalidate the whole plan, nor make you anti the whole plan, nor bring the whole plan in to question, nor be enough to railroad the plan, ad nauseum).

 

The last time I checked we hadn't all signed up to some kind of Cabinet Collective Responsibility when we bought our season tickets.

 

It's funny you should say that because you pigeon hole and make sweeping statements about posters based on their views on individual scenarios quite often

[The Kraken]

Some people obviously struggle with the concept of judging decisions on their individual merits and find it impossible to believe you can be very supportive of the overall thrust/direction of something, whilst at the same time having concerns regarding certain specific issues (and those specifics don't have to invalidate the whole plan, nor make you anti the whole plan, nor bring the whole plan in to question, nor be enough to railroad the plan, ad nauseum).

 

The last time I checked we hadn't all signed up to some kind of Cabinet Collective Responsibility when we bought our season tickets.

 

I genuinely don't get it, I really don't. I can say until I'm blue in the face that I'm massively thankful for Cortese, what he's done for the club and the direction he's taking us in. Yet as soon as you mention one tiny facet where I don't particularly agree with his approach on an issue (however minor it be) you get an avalanche of "stop undermining the club" accusations. It's utterly ridiculous, idiotic and childish.

 

Besides which, I'm sure Nicola Cortese couldn't give two hoots about what a small bunch of random nobodies on an obscure internet forum think about him. I doubt there's anything that anyone on here could say that would have the effect of destabilising the club.

[CanadaSaint]

I have no doubt that Alpine's intentions were good with this thread but the entire problem is that some people are asking (or even forcing) us to choose between our past and our future.

 

I resent that and I'm sure that Alpine feels the same way.

 

This has been going on since football was invented, and the irony is that I can remember Lawrie Mac saying shortly after his arrival that Ted Bates needed to come to terms with the fact that things would be changing.

 

The only difference I can see is the fact that Cortese has been saying for some time that there are forces actively seeking to destabilize the Club. The more of these incidents there are, the more likely it is that he's right.

 

All the more reason for him to be very careful that he doesn't needlessly add fuel to their bonfire.

[Frank's cousin]

The past defines who we are? YES, but it can also hold you back in some respects, or are we happy with who we are; 'plucky saints '76 cup winners against the mighty Man U, or the side once that finished second in '84. Great occasions at the time and part of our history, but if we place TOO much importance on the past it can stiffle real progress... the ghosts of '66 have haunted England for 50+ years.... The question for me is whether its more important to embrace the here and now with an eye to changing what we are, or trying to stay as we are. One thing was certain after the 'bad times' was that we needed a NEW start. The focus needed to be on the future and that meant not forgetting the past, but certainly not being in awe of it. NC and ML had a vision of what they want Saints to be, not how they could recapture what happened 30 and 40 years ago.

 

Sport and football should be about never being satisfied with where you are, but about striving to do BETTER than what you have achieved in the past. Now given our position 2 years ago and what it takes in the current football environment, the only way to rebuild was IMO a NEW start, a new approach and a SINGLED bloody minded determination to have unity and a sprit of togetherness. Both LM and MLT for example were (for the right reasons) associated with the recent politics, and it was clear that as a result they would not be intrinsically involved going forward.... remember this decision had nothing to do with their obvious contributions to past success, but with their more recent involvement with one or more of the previous regimes. It was IMO nothing to do with ignoring the history of the club, but more to do with a clean slate... a fresh beginning.

 

Also lets not forget that most in football who are successful have huge egos - a good thing and a necessary thing - but it also means you cant have multiple egos involved if you want unity of purpose. I do not think NC would have acheived what we have without having 'broken a few eggs (egos)' - that may not sit well with everyone, but it was probably very necessary.

 

The 'past' also means something different to every fan depending on your age and which era is most influencial... its also defined by your most recent major success... I for one dont want what we have achieved historically to be the defining moment of our club, i want it to be more than that so look forwards rather than backwards.

 

Finally ... UP you set yourself up a bit with your statement... I can remember countless times when I traied to point out logic and merit in some of Lowe's decisions, even if from a practical perspective they might not have been workable - the Dutch duo was a case in point - a cheap measure to try and reduce costs by playing kids was step 1, the second - look to a country where coaches are used to doing this... OK we got a couple of useless guys which was a mistake, but that should distract from the concept or idea given the situation we were in financially... yet you have often been quite dismissive yourself based on the person making whose idea it was rather than the idea itself.

 

In a way these threads are in some respect the same thing. Countless fans have pointed out that whilst they are very happy with Cortese, that does not exclude him form crticism for wrong decisions... BUT given certain posters constant 'joy' in finding another stick its almost like ground hog day with Lowe mark 2 in the way some posters are attacking with glee... because he has a small spat with LM and MLT... its the posters with the ingrained 'he's a cock' mentality on here that I have an issue with... because it seems very familiar to teh last tiem we had soemone in charge that was noit some fan sychophant. The fact that we actually have reative success on the pitch now makes it all the more obvious that their attitude is less about the spat' and more about the fact they just dont like him or his approach - just wishe we would see more honesty as to the REAL reasons why.

[up and away]

As far as I am concerned you can have both the present and the past. The issue only arrives with interaction between the two camps and I will just leave them to sort that out themselves, what ever the outcome. I thought that Matty and Lawrie of late had stopped the sniping and all were observing a respectful silence. Cortese has unfortunately broken that cycle and how ever this came about, he should have at least known better. That does not mean I will even criticise Cortese over this, such is the amount he has got right and the issues he has had previously.

[Frank's cousin]

I genuinely don't get it, I really don't. I can say until I'm blue in the face that I'm massively thankful for Cortese, what he's done for the club and the direction he's taking us in. Yet as soon as you mention one tiny facet where I don't particularly agree with his approach on an issue (however minor it be) you get an avalanche of "stop undermining the club" accusations. It's utterly ridiculous, idiotic and childish.

 

Besides which, I'm sure Nicola Cortese couldn't give two hoots about what a small bunch of random nobodies on an obscure internet forum think about him. I doubt there's anything that anyone on here could say that would have the effect of destabilising the club.

 

It not you Kracken - thats the point - making a criticism of particiular decisions is healthy, and perfectly sound. Its the fact that there are some who once again are constantly griping about every single trivial piece of crap because they for some reason dislike/mistrust/think he's a cock ****** without evr presenting a truely honest reason... hense it comes across as agenda driven nonsense, rather than an appropriate and useful debate.

[um pahars]

It's utterly ridiculous, idiotic and childish.

 

It's also somewhat unhealthy!!!!

[The Kraken]

It not you Kracken - thats the point - making a criticism of particiular decisions is healthy' date=' and perfectly sound. Its the fact that there are some who once again are constantly griping about every single trivial piece of crap because they for some reason dislike/mistrust/think he's a cock ****** without evr presenting a truely honest reason... hense it comes across as agenda driven nonsense, rather than an appropriate and useful debate.[/quote']

 

FC, I know it's not me. But it's the frustration of being placed into the same category as the like of Docker-P, just because I happen to agree in some small part with his particular discussion regarding the ex-Saints (although quite clearly not to the same spittle-inducing invective as he chose to open with). As soon as you get an opinion as far to one side of the argument as Docker-P, the natural reaction in opposition to that is to go completely to the other side, which means that any discussion in the middle ground gets rendered obsolete as it just gets pushed one way or the other into the extremes.

 

For the record, I know there are many who it's easy to have a proper discussion with, as I believe my discussions yesterday on the ex-Saints thread with Dig Dig and Saint Bobby proved; all of us had our own opinions, we expressed them to each other and at the end of it, we respectfully agreed to disagree. So it was disappointing to catch up with the thread again today and see that it had once again descended into name calling and polarisation of the issues into black and white.

Edited 27 September, 2011 by The Kraken

[Minty]

Cortese has unfortunately broken that cycle and how ever this came about, he should have at least known better.

I'm not even sure this is a new quote as yet - it is remarkably similar to what was written previously, and as was mentioned earlier in the thread, we also don't know what the journalist's questions were, what order, what the FULL reply was, and the context in which it was made.

 

So, I for one won't be making any judgements. Sadly, as with most things in LIFE these days, let alone football, a majority of people are happy to make a decision and judgement based on their own interpretation of a *journalists* interpretation of a (possibly partial) reply given to an unknown question, with no knowledge of context or time frame.

 

Anyone who can do so is a better man than I.

[dune]

FC, I know it's not me. But it's the frustration of being placed into the same category as the like of Docker-P, just because I happen to agree in some small part with his particular discussion regarding the ex-Saints (although quite clearly not to the same spittle-inducing invective as he chose to open with). As soon as you get an opinion as far to one side of the argument as Docker-P, the natural reaction in opposition to that is to go completely to the other side, which means that any discussion in the middle ground gets rendered obsolete as it just gets pushed one way or the other into the extremes.

 

For the record, I know there are many who it's easy to have a proper discussion with, as I believe my discussions yesterday on the ex-Saints thread with Dig Dig and Saint Bobby proved; all of us had our own opinions, we expressed them to each other and at the end of it, we respectfully agreed to disagree. So it was disappointing to catch up with the thread again today and see that it had once again descended into name calling and polarisation of the issues into black and white.

 

Polarised views are fine in my book. It's when people start calling posters c/cks etc that it get's tiresome. If you have a point and you believe in your point it is unnecessary.

[um pahars]

Finally ... UP you set yourself up a bit with your statement... I can remember countless times when I traied to point out logic and merit in some of Lowe's decisions' date=' even if from a practical perspective they might not have been workable - the Dutch duo was a case in point - a cheap measure to try and reduce costs by playing kids was step 1, the second - look to a country where coaches are used to doing this... OK we got a couple of useless guys which was a mistake, but that should distract from the concept or idea given the situation we were in financially... yet you have often been quite dismissive yourself based on the person making whose idea it was rather than the idea itself. [/quote']

 

Without going over old ground, I never once during those days denied anyone the right to hold and espouse an honestly held opinion.

 

I may not have agreed with it (may have thought it slightly loopy even, LOL), would have put forward my reasons for disagreeing, maybe even countered it with an alternative, but I would have never have questioned your support for the Club and I pray I never used the term Lowe Luvvie in such a way as to stick everyone in the same box.

 

As Daren W mentions elsewhere, Lowe got quite a few things right, and I was more than happy to praise him for them (I remember GM digging out that thread regularly where I used to praise Lowe as a stick to beat me with, whereas I viewed it as a positive in that I was willing to give praise where it was due, regardless of who the person was!!!). I fully accept I may have been a tad "rabid" towards the end when I saw his ego go in to overdrive and the mad Dutch experiment almost consigned us to history, but I think that was an "exceptional" time LOL.

[Minty]

Polarised views are fine in my book. It's when people start calling posters c/cks etc that it get's tiresome. If you have a point and you believe in your point it is unnecessary.

Absolutely correct - but given that this is a discussion forum, the other key part of that is to actually try and explain the reasoning behind your polarised view, should you hold one, and to be able to accept criticism of it if alternative views are posted.

 

That, sadly, is all too rare on here.

[Chin Strain]

The past defines who we are? YES, but it can also hold you back in some respects, or are we happy with who we are; 'plucky saints '76 cup winners against the mighty Man U, or the side once that finished second in '84. Great occasions at the time and part of our history, but if we place TOO much importance on the past it can stiffle real progress... the ghosts of '66 have haunted England for 50+ years.... The question for me is whether its more important to embrace the here and now with an eye to changing what we are, or trying to stay as we are. One thing was certain after the 'bad times' was that we needed a NEW start. The focus needed to be on the future and that meant not forgetting the past, but certainly not being in awe of it. NC and ML had a vision of what they want Saints to be, not how they could recapture what happened 30 and 40 years ago.

 

Sport and football should be about never being satisfied with where you are, but about striving to do BETTER than what you have achieved in the past. Now given our position 2 years ago and what it takes in the current football environment, the only way to rebuild was IMO a NEW start, a new approach and a SINGLED bloody minded determination to have unity and a sprit of togetherness. Both LM and MLT for example were (for the right reasons) associated with the recent politics, and it was clear that as a result they would not be intrinsically involved going forward.... remember this decision had nothing to do with their obvious contributions to past success, but with their more recent involvement with one or more of the previous regimes. It was IMO nothing to do with ignoring the history of the club, but more to do with a clean slate... a fresh beginning.

 

Also lets not forget that most in football who are successful have huge egos - a good thing and a necessary thing - but it also means you cant have multiple egos involved if you want unity of purpose. I do not think NC would have acheived what we have without having 'broken a few eggs (egos)' - that may not sit well with everyone, but it was probably very necessary.

 

The 'past' also means something different to every fan depending on your age and which era is most influencial... its also defined by your most recent major success... I for one dont want what we have achieved historically to be the defining moment of our club, i want it to be more than that so look forwards rather than backwards.

 

Finally ... UP you set yourself up a bit with your statement... I can remember countless times when I traied to point out logic and merit in some of Lowe's decisions, even if from a practical perspective they might not have been workable - the Dutch duo was a case in point - a cheap measure to try and reduce costs by playing kids was step 1, the second - look to a country where coaches are used to doing this... OK we got a couple of useless guys which was a mistake, but that should distract from the concept or idea given the situation we were in financially... yet you have often been quite dismissive yourself based on the person making whose idea it was rather than the idea itself.

 

In a way these threads are in some respect the same thing. Countless fans have pointed out that whilst they are very happy with Cortese, that does not exclude him form crticism for wrong decisions... BUT given certain posters constant 'joy' in finding another stick its almost like ground hog day with Lowe mark 2 in the way some posters are attacking with glee... because he has a small spat with LM and MLT... its the posters with the ingrained 'he's a cock' mentality on here that I have an issue with... because it seems very familiar to teh last tiem we had soemone in charge that was noit some fan sychophant. The fact that we actually have reative success on the pitch now makes it all the more obvious that their attitude is less about the spat' and more about the fact they just dont like him or his approach - just wishe we would see more honesty as to the REAL reasons why.

 

[Minty]

I fully accept I may have been a tad "rabid" towards the end when I saw his ego go in to overdrive and the mad Dutch experiment almost consigned us to history, but I think that was an "exceptional" time LOL.

And there's another thing that this place mostly lacks - humility. We've all said things and done things which in hindsight either we regret or realise were wrong or inappapropriate, but so many get ultra defensive, and/or use that as a stick to beat others with ('told you so' threads annoy me especially), and it should be remembered that emotions do run high, especially when the whole existence of your club is threatened!

 

"To err is human, to forgive divine."

[Kingsland Red]

I am totally astounded at the amount of stick and abuse being directed at NC on here in recent days. The man who is masterminding our return to the big time and who has overseen putting a smile back on the faces of (most) Saints fans.

 

What the f**k is the problem with some of you ? Do you want the club to fail again ?

 

I love the contribution to our history that LM and MLT have made, but it is history. If the club fails, all we will have is memories and old paper-cuttings to remember. I find it utterly TRAGIC that some sort of open warfare is raging between old club legends and the current management, and subsequently between factions of fans, but if I am force to choose a side (which I dont want to), it MUST be the current management - they are taking the club forwards, and without them there would be no club.

 

Why dont you all stop obsessing about the feud, let the individuals involved carry it on amongst themselves, and celebrate being top of the NPC in a promotion position for the PL ???

 

Best comments yet on a bit of navel gazing by NC, MLT and Stelling. No one is bigger than our club.

[Alain Perrin]

A lot of people on here are lost without a bit of drama simple...

 

Very true. We're not going out of business, nor languishing at the bottom of the league. The world is out of kilter and even Alpine is posting stuff I agree with.

 

Yes, everything is connected with how we got to where we are today; Mrs Bates having Ted, Laurie attracting Keegan, Le Tissier scoring from a corner at Dellhurst, Lowe building the stadium that made us a good investment, Markus for buying us and Nicola for currently being at the helm.

 

However, whilst we can learn lessons from the past, the only thing we can influence is the future. At the end of the day (as long as it's not immoral) if people don't get freebies or the Chairman starts wearing a monogrammed tracksuit, I may not always agree, but I don't really care.

 

Someone once said "It's about winning games of football" and that'll do for me.

[Alain Perrin]

And there's another thing that this place mostly lacks - humility. We've all said things and done things which in hindsight either we regret or realise were wrong or inappapropriate, but so many get ultra defensive, and/or use that as a stick to beat others with ('told you so' threads annoy me especially), and it should be remembered that emotions do run high, especially when the whole existence of your club is threatened!

 

"To err is human, to forgive divine."

 

Rarely a truer word said on this forum. The one exception though is myself. I have rarely, if ever, been wrong.

[The Majestic Channon]

"How can I say that?" That "ridiculous statement"??

Take out McMenemy and Le Tissier would anyone have taken us over?

Without McMenemy would we have attracted the likes of Keegan etc?

Without Le Tissier would we have been in the Premiership for a long as we were?

The very fact that we were an attractive proposition was partially due to the input of those two...

**** me, I've heard it all. now.. Are people so desperate to support the new regime that they'll now try and wipe out the legacy of the people that speak out against him?

We can't re-write history or see what life would have been without those two but you show me ANY club that has fans that would turn on genuine legends like some have on here? Would Liverpool fans be-grudge Kenny Dalgleish a ticket free or not?? Would Arsenal fans be slagging of Henry or Wright?

No?

**** me people, no one's saying Cortese isn't doing a damn fine job but are we that shallow we'll turn on club legends like Le Tiss and McMenemy?

We ask loyalty off our new stars, and yet with LeTissier, the ultimate one club man, we turn on him at the first sign of any controversy. If you were Adam Lallana or Ricky Lambert would you give a **** about us seeing the way some fans can turn on club legends??

If anyone thinks we'd be anything other than a Charlton or a Sheffield United without the input of Le Tissier or McMenemy, they're deluded...

 

 

Excellent post

[Ewell]

Forget the past and we might as well be MK Dons.

Don't look to the future and we might as well be Portsmouth.

 

Have both... we'll be Southampton..

 

Brilliantly put and so true.

 

What is so wrong in wanting a future lead and inspired by Nicola Cortese whilst also recognising those who have contributed to our illustrious past? That is all the majority of us are saying.

 

But instead it has now become common place to label those you do not agree with as 'mongs' 'trolls' 'luvvies' 'fanontheboard types' amongst others which is banal and infantile and reflects poorly on any of your arguments!

[dingbattigger]

The past defines who we are? YES, but it can also hold you back in some respects, or are we happy with who we are; 'plucky saints '76 cup winners against the mighty Man U, or the side once that finished second in '84. Great occasions at the time and part of our history, but if we place TOO much importance on the past it can stiffle real progress... the ghosts of '66 have haunted England for 50+ years.... The question for me is whether its more important to embrace the here and now with an eye to changing what we are, or trying to stay as we are. One thing was certain after the 'bad times' was that we needed a NEW start. The focus needed to be on the future and that meant not forgetting the past, but certainly not being in awe of it. NC and ML had a vision of what they want Saints to be, not how they could recapture what happened 30 and 40 years ago.

 

Sport and football should be about never being satisfied with where you are, but about striving to do BETTER than what you have achieved in the past. Now given our position 2 years ago and what it takes in the current football environment, the only way to rebuild was IMO a NEW start, a new approach and a SINGLED bloody minded determination to have unity and a sprit of togetherness. Both LM and MLT for example were (for the right reasons) associated with the recent politics, and it was clear that as a result they would not be intrinsically involved going forward.... remember this decision had nothing to do with their obvious contributions to past success, but with their more recent involvement with one or more of the previous regimes. It was IMO nothing to do with ignoring the history of the club, but more to do with a clean slate... a fresh beginning.

 

Also lets not forget that most in football who are successful have huge egos - a good thing and a necessary thing - but it also means you cant have multiple egos involved if you want unity of purpose. I do not think NC would have acheived what we have without having 'broken a few eggs (egos)' - that may not sit well with everyone, but it was probably very necessary.

 

The 'past' also means something different to every fan depending on your age and which era is most influencial... its also defined by your most recent major success... I for one dont want what we have achieved historically to be the defining moment of our club, i want it to be more than that so look forwards rather than backwards.

 

Finally ... UP you set yourself up a bit with your statement... I can remember countless times when I traied to point out logic and merit in some of Lowe's decisions, even if from a practical perspective they might not have been workable - the Dutch duo was a case in point - a cheap measure to try and reduce costs by playing kids was step 1, the second - look to a country where coaches are used to doing this... OK we got a couple of useless guys which was a mistake, but that should distract from the concept or idea given the situation we were in financially... yet you have often been quite dismissive yourself based on the person making whose idea it was rather than the idea itself.

 

In a way these threads are in some respect the same thing. Countless fans have pointed out that whilst they are very happy with Cortese, that does not exclude him form crticism for wrong decisions... BUT given certain posters constant 'joy' in finding another stick its almost like ground hog day with Lowe mark 2 in the way some posters are attacking with glee... because he has a small spat with LM and MLT... its the posters with the ingrained 'he's a cock' mentality on here that I have an issue with... because it seems very familiar to teh last tiem we had soemone in charge that was noit some fan sychophant. The fact that we actually have reative success on the pitch now makes it all the more obvious that their attitude is less about the spat' and more about the fact they just dont like him or his approach - just wishe we would see more honesty as to the REAL reasons why.

 

 

Best post on the forum in days.

[Joesaint]

Future. Past is part of who we are though, can't change the past just influence the future.

 

 

COYS

[um pahars]

Brilliantly put and so true.

 

What is so wrong in wanting a future lead and inspired by Nicola Cortese whilst also recognising those who have contributed to our illustrious past? That is all the majority of us are saying.!

 

Indeed Ewell, but sadly it seems that some find that so difficult to understand.

 

But instead it has now become common place to label those you do not agree with as 'mongs' 'trolls' 'luvvies' 'fanontheboard types' amongst others which is banal and infantile and reflects poorly on any of your arguments!

 

And it's also a very lazy way of debating, or alternatively a mask for those who cannot offer up a coherent response.

[Roger]

If cortese has vetoed Beattie signing then it's awful. Then he would be effectively vetoing adkins then there's problems.

[The Kraken]

If cortese has vetoed Beattie signing then it's awful. Then he would be effectively vetoing adkins then there's problems.

 

Where have you got that from?

[Roger]

Derry said it's in echo and has been said by Beattie. Hopefully rubbish

[The Kraken]

Derry said it's in echo and has been said by Beattie. Hopefully rubbish

 

OK, cheers.

 

Actually, I've just seen there's a whole thread devoted to Beattie, so I'll leave it there!

[Thedelldays]

All this from someone saying..

 

"yes matt has criticised me in the past but no one is bigger than the club"

 

Christ...just an over reaction???

[Turkish]

All this from someone saying..

 

"yes matt has criticised me in the past but no one is bigger than the club"

 

Christ...just an over reaction???

 

Surely not. This TSW, domain of the reasoned football forum debater.

[Thedelldays]

Derry said it's in echo and has been said by Beattie. Hopefully rubbish

 

Depends for what reasons

 

BT is pretty crap now anyway

[Roger]

Depends for what reasons

 

BT is pretty crap now anyway

 

It doesn't depend on what reasons, the manager should make the football decisions. Imagine fergie bringing an old player back and the chairman saying no?

[Roger]

I'm hoping Derry is wrong and it's rubbish.

[Thedelldays]

It doesn't depend on what reasons, the manager should make the football decisions. Imagine fergie bringing an old player back and the chairman saying no?

 

It does matter

What if BT wanted parity with lambert in the wage demands

Or wanted assurances he will play

[Roger]

It does matter

What if BT wanted parity with lambert in the wage demands

Or wanted assurances he will play

 

good point delldays. That would be completely right. However, Derry said vetoed for being an ex saints player. Changing the subject what a great set of results tonight. The point at burnley looks a better one now. Lol at Pompey.

[Thedelldays]

Oh, if Derry says.......

[Dalek2003]

Some people have a personal agenda and that is more important than anything else. People had a personal agenda in 2004 and it resulted in us failing to appoint Hoddle, who would have probably kept our premiership status.

Make no mistake, some people would be happy to lead us into oblivion again just to satisfy their own selfish whim.

[Roger]

Oh, if Derry says.......

 

lol

[CanadaSaint]

Make no mistake, some people would be happy to lead us into oblivion again just to satisfy their own selfish whim.

 

Stop doing it then.

[JackFrost]

Some people have a personal agenda and that is more important than anything else. People had a personal agenda in 2004 and it resulted in us failing to appoint Hoddle, who would have probably kept our premiership status.

Make no mistake, some people would be happy to lead us into oblivion again just to satisfy their own selfish whim.

 

They certainly do don't they

[um pahars]

They certainly do don't they

 

Maybe you can answer this one as everyone else I've asked have failed to do so.

 

What does having an agenda mean and what is this agenda?

[Dalek2003]

They certainly do don't they

 

Yes, not to bring Hoddle back, but to remind people who and when our near oblivion was brought about.

[The Kraken]

I'm still thoroughly confused as to what a "furture" is.

[CB Fry]

Some people obviously struggle with the concept of judging decisions on their individual merits and find it impossible to believe you can be very supportive of the overall thrust/direction of something, whilst at the same time having concerns regarding certain specific issues (and those specifics don't have to invalidate the whole plan, nor make you anti the whole plan, nor bring the whole plan in to question, nor be enough to railroad the plan, ad nauseum).

 

The last time I checked we hadn't all signed up to some kind of Cabinet Collective Responsibility when we bought our season tickets.

 

I genuinely don't get it, I really don't. I can say until I'm blue in the face that I'm massively thankful for Cortese, what he's done for the club and the direction he's taking us in. Yet as soon as you mention one tiny facet where I don't particularly agree with his approach on an issue (however minor it be) you get an avalanche of "stop undermining the club" accusations. It's utterly ridiculous, idiotic and childish.

 

Besides which, I'm sure Nicola Cortese couldn't give two hoots about what a small bunch of random nobodies on an obscure internet forum think about him. I doubt there's anything that anyone on here could say that would have the effect of destabilising the club.

 

 

Two good posts and a good thread. The weekend was somewhat bizarre that it took about five minutes of some people saying "Cortese has got this one wrong" before others had leapt into "right fine so you all want to get rid of Cortese then?!?" defense and "these ex-players are nothing more than ex-employees" attack.

 

It was some kind of surreal meltdown. Happy to admit I got carried away too, but was attacking a) the people belittling MLT b) the people refusing to accept Cortese could ever do anything wrong, and c) the people weaving stupid theories blaming the newspaper for forcing him to say stuff. That's what wound me up more than anything Cortese actually said. And sometimes I do try and write the most furious polemic I can. It gets the forum going, no question.

 

Cortese is doing a brilliant job all in all, the league doesn't lie, and neither does the transfer balance sheet.

 

But Alpine's good opening post does pose the question about the past and the future. Well, lots of great contributions on here already about what our past means.

 

I have one more line about the future. If you don't learn from mistakes now it can affect the future. Cortese, as we move up the divisions is going to have to be slightly more circumspect then it seems he is now. Yes, of course he will still need to be focused and hard nosed but scoring own goals by getting carried away with his own legend will be dangerous in the wider gaze of the Premier League. If he needs a role model, I'd say his manager is a bloody good place to start. Or, failing that, pretty much any cheif exec from Prem clubs you cannot name. Most of them are pretty low profile.

Edited 27 September, 2011 by CB Fry

[Dig Dig]

That is a very charming post CB Fry

[JustMike]

The past does not win us games. The future is uncertain. It is those who are here now, who are working to make sure we achieve something now that are important.

 

We all like the romance of the past when times were good. We all shudder at the horror of when times were bad.

 

The here and now can affect the future but it cannot change the past.

This, in a large nutshell

[miserableoldgit]

I think the future is more inportant, that's why if the chairman is being a c*ck, he should be told.

"A c*ck" in whose opinion though? Even the small percentage of Saints fans that post on this forum can`t agree whether he is a God or the anti-Christ.

[Cricketphilly]

I follow Southampton FC and live in the now. I don't get misty eyed over ex-players however good they were and what they contributed.

Saying that I'm not ungrateful for their efforts but I don't believe they have a God given right to have any say in the club's running or staff.

ML bought the club as could have anyone else with the funds. He appointed NL and I would suggest he has done/is doing a fine job.

There were similar issues at Chelsea in the 90's if I remember rightly and that old Humbug, Bates, fell out with loads of ex-players. His

reasoning being, amongst other things, that he paid for his seat, why should they get free ones? Get behind the Club and keep it moving forward!

[Alain Perrin]

I'm still thoroughly confused as to what a "furture" is.

 

This is because you are living in the pist.