Are we better off than when Crouch was here?

[slickmick]

With Saints i do not expect anything. Some believed that by getting rid of something like 20 players and then spending on replacements that we should be guarenteed promotion.I did not think so myself. I wanted to keep faith with HR and argued that he would turn things around, many didnt believe in him and wanted him gone. We then had Gb who again i thought was ok but again fans lost faith. We then got what i had tried to point out we woud get D&G and that was nearly a disaster. The club was then in tailspin and NP joined us. he brought in 2 defenders and a keeper to cover for KD and we scraped out of it. I was not enampured by him and doubted he was/is that good. I was happy for him to stay as the fans in general were united but I believe we would be worse off now if he had the same constraints, bu it is my opinion it is not fact, just opinion.

 

 

For what its worth I like both Jan and Pearson. As someone has stated above, they both bring something different to the game, yet they both are determined and focused to succeed.

I find it very hard to decide who we would be better off with. If Jan can get another defender that looks as good as Pearce, then he will just about win it for me.

[um pahars]

Jeez UP' date=' you dont half get in deep in the post analysis matey - 'heavy man' [/quote']

 

Whereas your posts ae always short, succinct and to the point.

 

Frank, most of your posts/replies are long, well written, deep and just as meaningful, so spare me the flippant resonse (or was it that there wasn't much in there that you could disagree with;)).

 

Additionally, when you got involved with the SOS initiative, I presume that was "deep" and heavy in "post analysis". It's certainly not something you get involved in if you're only here to watch the football now is it.

 

You were obviously concerned enough at the turn of the year to get involved in more than just watching the football and to get "deep", so let's not have a pop at those who are just as concerned that administration is still looming large on the horizon and who still have their doubts about the current regime.

 

Some posters are well versed in their one liners, but your riposte has quite a bit of Mr Pot about it.

[saint lard]

http://www.clubfanzine.com/southampton/v2.forum.topic.bythread.php?id_t=78871&piece=topic78871&id_categ=37

 

I trust this is a load of rollocks,aswell as being dated.

[OldNick]

For what its worth I like both Jan and Pearson. As someone has stated above, they both bring something different to the game, yet they both are determined and focused to succeed.

I find it very hard to decide who we would be better off with. If Jan can get another defender that looks as good as Pearce, then he will just about win it for me.

That is reassuring Mick, the sooner the fans can get a clear vision we all will enjoy football more

[Long Shot]

That is reassuring Mick, the sooner the fans can get a clear vision we all will enjoy football more

 

 

Regarding your "love" for Mandaric, Nick, I have it on very good authority that had "timings" been different then he would have come in for us - now that would have set the cat amongst the forum pigeons.

[benjii]

 

But Salz is a serious player in what's left of the world of finance. Despite tommac's defamatory posts about his being a doddery old fool, he is still in his fifties, and not so long ago was rumoured to be taking over at the top of Rothschilds Bank (a family which also has a strong Saints association by the way)

 

http://www.moneyweek.com/news-and-charts/anthony-salz-the-city-lawyer-everyone-wants-to-hire.aspx

 

In any case, if Wilde is looking for a distress sale of his shares, as a result of this rumoured liquidity crisis of his, then I imagine Salz would be involved in sorting something out.

 

Salz >>> Rothschild >>> Deripaska>>> Mandelson >>> Big Yachts >>> Paul Allen >>> Bill Gates

 

The Magnificent 7?

[trousers]

Regarding your "love" for Mandaric, Nick, I have it on very good authority that had "timings" been different then he would have come in for us - now that would have set the cat amongst the forum pigeons.

 

[OldNick]

Regarding your "love" for Mandaric, Nick, I have it on very good authority that had "timings" been different then he would have come in for us - now that would have set the cat amongst the forum pigeons.

Well the timings are just right then. There is no way he would have taken us over IMO as he loves the Skates too much and would not do a Harry on them IMO anyway.

What would he do if he had come, turn us into Pompeys training ground I suspect.

[Delmary]

I think the rumour was that Salz's involvement was as a kind of guarantor - someone who would underwrite the purchase of shares.

 

Assuming that Fulthorpe has, like all good cowboys, ridden into the sunset, the only player left standing in Crouch's camp is Anthony Salz.

 

But Salz is a serious player in what's left of the world of finance. Despite tommac's defamatory posts about his being a doddery old fool, he is still in his fifties, and not so long ago was rumoured to be taking over at the top of Rothschilds Bank (a family which also has a strong Saints association by the way)

 

http://www.moneyweek.com/news-and-charts/anthony-salz-the-city-lawyer-everyone-wants-to-hire.aspx

 

In any case, if Wilde is looking for a distress sale of his shares, as a result of this rumoured liquidity crisis of his, then I imagine Salz would be involved in sorting something out.

 

This of course would simply alter the personnel at the top. I have no idea what would happen about additional investment - and even Morph's elliptical post doesn't suggest anything other than a change of the guard.

 

Long story short: rumour upon rumour. In the end, who knows?

Salz has been Executive Vice Chairman of Rothschilds Bank since late 2007.

[Roman]

Salz has been Executive Vice Chairman of Rothschilds Bank since late 2007.

 

Evidence that my rumours are not utter nonsense?

[Frank's cousin]

Whereas your posts ae always short, succinct and to the point.

 

Frank, most of your posts/replies are long, well written, deep and just as meaningful, so spare me the flippant resonse (or was it that there wasn't much in there that you could disagree with;)).

 

Additionally, when you got involved with the SOS initiative, I presume that was "deep" and heavy in "post analysis". It's certainly not something you get involved in if you're only here to watch the football now is it.

 

You were obviously concerned enough at the turn of the year to get involved in more than just watching the football and to get "deep", so let's not have a pop at those who are just as concerned that administration is still looming large on the horizon and who still have their doubts about the current regime.

 

Some posters are well versed in their one liners, but your riposte has quite a bit of Mr Pot about it.

 

UP

 

Unfortunately you may have interpreted my post outside the spirit in which it was intended... and perhaps been oversensitive to my comment. So in answer I would make the following points:

 

1. I have no gripe with those concerned about the behind the scenes stuff - but have come to realise that the only REAL way I can help is by spending my cash and supporting the team. ... and unsurprisingly have discovered that given that there is a desire amongst the coaching set up to play a passing game - despite what that means in the hurly burly of the CCC (and I am not about to do a Wenger on that front) - its actually far more enjoyable than watching the journeymen plod around the park that we could afford with the 'experience' tag...and I am just trying to advocate this improved enjoyment - something that we should be perhaps even more grateful for given the issues off the pitch.

 

2. With respect to te SOS situation... yup I was involved, albeit briefly and did and do 'care' - if that is the right word - and got involved because a) I was asked , b) it appelaed to my ego (hey just being honest) but perhaps most importantly 3) that Given the opportunity it would have been churlish to turn it down - eg talk is all fine, but action etc...

 

The problem is that that exercise was a classic in 'being used'. It is no surprize that only 1 audience was granted - because it suited the cause to meet with 6 fans some of which were considered to have influnce on the fan forum, and be sounded out on the idea of a Lowe/Wilde colaboration and the European Coach etc.... at the time the idea that at least 2/3 would be prepared to work together was appealing, but we actually got feck all out of it...apart from in hindsight appreciating that these guys should not be underestimated... they are sharp, clever and resourceful and will sue all means to ensure they get what THEY want.

 

Cynical? not really, REALISTIC. I think the naive dream of a local Business type who caries the altruistic vison of the fans on his sleave is something we should forget about. Ideally I also believe that rather than wasting energy swimming against the tide, if fans want to influence the way things are going and the club is run, the only way to do this is work colaboratively with eyes open all the time, but establishing a dialogue that is constructive, no matter what is thrown back - its the way to the higher moral ground and would be supported by all - what I cant support is the vitriol and bitterness - negative energy that gets us nowhere and effects both the enjoyment of those going to games and can impact on all aspects of the club... not just the boardroom at which is it aimed...

 

So as I no longer have an opportunity to be involved in constructive initiatives, its far better to focus on what I can do = supporting the side as best I can and as much as time and money will allow. Just my current opinion I guess.

 

3. If I am really honest, you do like to pick isolated sentences from posts though and feeback on these - and although you make alot of good sense in your reply, it is a bit frustrating in that often when taken in isolation the sentences being critiqued or responded to, no longer make the same point as when part of the whole paragraph etc... which does tend to get my goat a bit ... ;-)

[hughieslastminutegoal]

For what its worth I like both Jan and Pearson. As someone has stated above, they both bring something different to the game, yet they both are determined and focused to succeed.

I find it very hard to decide who we would be better off with. If Jan can get another defender that looks as good as Pearce, then he will just about win it for me.

 

But we need to get defenders who will stay beyond January, or it's try-again time. I don't think we can risk more discontinuity that late in the season.

[Mole]

2. With respect to te SOS situation... yup I was involved, albeit briefly and did and do 'care' - if that is the right word - and got involved because a) I was asked , b) it appelaed to my ego (hey just being honest) but perhaps most importantly 3) that Given the opportunity it would have been churlish to turn it down - eg talk is all fine, but action etc...

 

The problem is that that exercise was a classic in 'being used'. It is no surprize that only 1 audience was granted - because it suited the cause to meet with 6 fans some of which were considered to have influnce on the fan forum, and be sounded out on the idea of a Lowe/Wilde colaboration and the European Coach etc.... at the time the idea that at least 2/3 would be prepared to work together was appealing, but we actually got feck all out of it...apart from in hindsight appreciating that these guys should not be underestimated... they are sharp, clever and resourceful and will sue all means to ensure they get what THEY want.

 

I'm not being funny but you lot were counselled on the meeting with Wilde before you went into it. If you'd stuck by your word and inisisted the meeting was minuted then Wilde would not have been able to play games with yoU. I've got absolutely no sympathy for you or any of the other SOS posse. You all put your greedy ITK aspirations ahead of doing the right thing and therefore none of you have any right to give lectures or whinge about what a complete failure the initiative was. You, or the other SOS boys, might not like my bluntless but this is how it was and not once have you lot ever apologised for lying to us, instead you think we should feel sorry for you. Un-****ing-believeable.

[slickmick]

But we need to get defenders who will stay beyond January, or it's try-again time. I don't think we can risk more discontinuity that late in the season.

 

Jan as in Jan Portelviet

[Long Shot]

Well the timings are just right then. There is no way he would have taken us over IMO as he loves the Skates too much and would not do a Harry on them IMO anyway.

What would he do if he had come, turn us into Pompeys training ground I suspect.

 

Not for the first time, Nick, I have to tell you your opinion is incorrect. For the record MM had already bought into Leicester by the time this club became "available" for the right price. He has told a colleague of mine had he not (by then) gone in for Leicester he would have been interested in us.

 

I am also told he has tried to search for others prepared to invest in us since. How hard he has tried I don't know but he bears us no ill will and has severed all connections with the Skates. I think he thinks us as a good long term investment.

[OldNick]

Not for the first time, Nick, I have to tell you your opinion is incorrect. For the record MM had already bought into Leicester by the time this club became "available" for the right price. He has told a colleague of mine had he not (by then) gone in for Leicester he would have been interested in us.

 

I am also told he has tried to search for others prepared to invest in us since. How hard he has tried I don't know but he bears us no ill will and has severed all connections with the Skates. I think he thinks us as a good long term investment.

Well my opinion and that MM may have been interested, neither are facts. You may have had someone been told that MM wished to buy into the club but MM says a lot of things in devilment. I would doubt he would effect the worship he has by the Pompey fans by daring to save us and even make us better than them.

[Snowballs2]

I'm not being funny but you lot were counselled on the meeting with Wilde before you went into it. If you'd stuck by your word and inisisted the meeting was minuted then Wilde would not have been able to play games with yoU. I've got absolutely no sympathy for you or any of the other SOS posse. You all put your greedy ITK aspirations ahead of doing the right thing and therefore none of you have any right to give lectures or whinge about what a complete failure the initiative was. You, or the other SOS boys, might not like my bluntless but this is how it was and not once have you lot ever apologised for lying to us, instead you think we should feel sorry for you. Un-****ing-believeable.

 

 

That was my point at the original idea, I was probably the most anti person on the board about SOS, I knew what would happen and have been proven right. I personally took a great deal of flak from Steve Grant, FF,etc etc. Never did I get a message to say sorry you were right. I hope that Nobody ever tries to dream up such a crazy scheme again without first listejning to the views of those that they pretended they were going to represent. I kept some of the quotes from that time because the self serviving committee were so bloody arrogant

[up and away]

Originally Posted by Frank's cousin

2. With respect to te SOS situation... yup I was involved, albeit briefly and did and do 'care' - if that is the right word - and got involved because a) I was asked , b) it appelaed to my ego (hey just being honest) but perhaps most importantly 3) that Given the opportunity it would have been churlish to turn it down - eg talk is all fine, but action etc...

 

The problem is that that exercise was a classic in 'being used'. It is no surprize that only 1 audience was granted - because it suited the cause to meet with 6 fans some of which were considered to have influnce on the fan forum, and be sounded out on the idea of a Lowe/Wilde colaboration and the European Coach etc.... at the time the idea that at least 2/3 would be prepared to work together was appealing, but we actually got feck all out of it...apart from in hindsight appreciating that these guys should not be underestimated... they are sharp, clever and resourceful and will sue all means to ensure they get what THEY want.

I'm not being funny but you lot were counselled on the meeting with Wilde before you went into it. If you'd stuck by your word and inisisted the meeting was minuted then Wilde would not have been able to play games with yoU. I've got absolutely no sympathy for you or any of the other SOS posse. You all put your greedy ITK aspirations ahead of doing the right thing and therefore none of you have any right to give lectures or whinge about what a complete failure the initiative was. You, or the other SOS boys, might not like my bluntless but this is how it was and not once have you lot ever apologised for lying to us, instead you think we should feel sorry for you. Un-****ing-believeable.

 

What a total over reaction and more in spite than common sense. I said at the time that their approach was impractical and there would have to be information given confidentially or none at all. Just because they were a little naive in their objectives does not diminish for me their aims and goals, however unsuccessful it may be judged. Just look at the people that attended and pick out someone whose judgement you trust. From the subsequent information coming from that person you can learn a lot, so to my eyes it was not a waste, you just had to know how to pick the sixpences out of the Christma pud.

[Frank's cousin]

I'm not being funny but you lot were counselled on the meeting with Wilde before you went into it. If you'd stuck by your word and inisisted the meeting was minuted then Wilde would not have been able to play games with yoU. I've got absolutely no sympathy for you or any of the other SOS posse. You all put your greedy ITK aspirations ahead of doing the right thing and therefore none of you have any right to give lectures or whinge about what a complete failure the initiative was. You, or the other SOS boys, might not like my bluntless but this is how it was and not once have you lot ever apologised for lying to us, instead you think we should feel sorry for you. Un-****ing-believeable.

 

What the feck? Where has anyone suggested anyone should feel 'sorry' for us? 'greedy aspirations'? ******... we knew we would be spun a line, does that make it wrong to try and read between the lines? Just because we were being spun a line, does it make it wrong to at the very least stick to our principles and not divulge info that was asked not to be divulged? The fact that it went no further is a sad but not unexpected, but does it make it wrong from trying? No one is whinging, but I was responding to a question from UP - what in unfecking believable is your post because you seem rather bitter?

[Long Shot]

Well my opinion and that MM may have been interested, neither are facts. You may have had someone been told that MM wished to buy into the club but MM says a lot of things in devilment. I would doubt he would effect the worship he has by the Pompey fans by daring to save us and even make us better than them.

 

 

You know Nick sometimes it would serve you better it you just shut up and accepted others might actually know a bit more than you do.

[Mole]

What a total over reaction and more in spite than common sense. I said at the time that their approach was impractical and there would have to be information given confidentially or none at all. Just because they were a little naive in their objectives does not diminish for me their aims and goals, however unsuccessful it may be judged. Just look at the people that attended and pick out someone whose judgement you trust. From the subsequent information coming from that person you can learn a lot, so to my eyes it was not a waste, you just had to know how to pick the sixpences out of the Christma pud.

 

You clearly don't have a clue. The SOS initiative, though well intentioned, was a complete and utter failure because those on it didn't have the integrity to stand by what they promised to do.

 

It would not suprise me if Wilde hadn't read the thread prior to the SOS meeting and seen the agreement for it to be minuted and thus pre-empted this spanner in the works. The SOS delegates should have stood their ground and honoured their comittment and given Wilde a choice - either we do this minuted or we report back that you refused to give an open interview. If they'd given Wilde this choice and he'd refused to talk to them then that in itself would have spoken volumes.

[RoswellSaint]

I'm not being funny but you lot were counselled on the meeting with Wilde before you went into it. If you'd stuck by your word and inisisted the meeting was minuted then Wilde would not have been able to play games with yoU. I've got absolutely no sympathy for you or any of the other SOS posse. You all put your greedy ITK aspirations ahead of doing the right thing and therefore none of you have any right to give lectures or whinge about what a complete failure the initiative was. You, or the other SOS boys, might not like my bluntless but this is how it was and not once have you lot ever apologised for lying to us, instead you think we should feel sorry for you. Un-****ing-believeable.

 

I didn't read it as looking for our sympathy, just being honest.

[Frank's cousin]

That was my point at the original idea, I was probably the most anti person on the board about SOS, I knew what would happen and have been proven right. I personally took a great deal of flak from Steve Grant, FF,etc etc. Never did I get a message to say sorry you were right. I hope that Nobody ever tries to dream up such a crazy scheme again without first listejning to the views of those that they pretended they were going to represent. I kept some of the quotes from that time because the self serviving committee were so bloody arrogant

 

The trouble was Snowballs2, that the rock and hard place scenario was there... do you acknowledge that its in effect a waste of time due to the spin we knew we would get and thus turn down the offer? Or try and use it as an exercise to actually get to know someone first hand, listen and then analyse without the prejudice of previous experience or hearsay and gossip? No one was arrogant, just hopeful that something might be learned, if thats arrogant (?) or naive sobeit, but its hardly harmful...

 

Given the overwhelming support Wilde had from the majority (myself NOT included) when he ousted Lowe, I wanted to see for myself what he was all about... just because not everyone had the chance to do that, should I have turned it down?

 

I am sure you have plenty of quotes from that time, but I daresay they are aspirational and hopeful, rather than naive, and they certainly are not arrogant - I dont recall anyone saying this WOULD be a solution, but merely a start of dialogue which we HOPED MIGHT prove useful... in the end it did not, but why was it wrong to try?

 

Wilde did actually tell us truth:

 

1) he Lowe thinking about joining up - not hopeful crouch would accept

2) European Coach /set preferred due to finance - Youth the future

3) Wilde not interested in selling out to someone with no money or having to borrow to fund the purchase - simply changing ownership with no additional funds pointless

4) Longterm - hopeful that assets could be utilised to provide additional income to the football club - but long term projects.

 

Just asked us not to discuss publically.... you live and learn.

[Mole]

What the feck? Where has anyone suggested anyone should feel 'sorry' for us? 'greedy aspirations'? ******... we knew we would be spun a line' date=' does that make it wrong to try and read between the lines? Just because we were being spun a line, does it make it wrong to at the very least stick to our principles and not divulge info that was asked not to be divulged? The fact that it went no further is a sad but not unexpected, but does it make it wrong from trying? No one is whinging, but I was responding to a question from UP - what in unfecking believable is your post because you seem rather bitter?[/quote']

 

Stick to your principles ROFL.

 

You promised everyone (on the thread prior to the meeting) that you would insist [to Wilde] the discussions would be minuted and reported back.

 

Is this statement correct?

 

And what did you do in practice?

[Roman]

Wilde did actually tell us truth:

 

1) he Lowe thinking about joining up - not hopeful crouch would accept

2) European Coach /set preferred due to finance - Youth the future

3) Wilde not interested in selling out to someone with no money or having to borrow to fund the purchase - simply changing ownership with no additional funds pointless

4) Longterm - hopeful that assets could be utilised to provide additional income to the football club - but long term projects.

 

Just asked us not to discuss publically.... you live and learn.

 

Good grief, Frank. He effectively gave you advance notice that he and Lowe were about to unite and replace Crouch? That really IS news.

[Mole]

Good grief, Frank. He effectively gave you advance notice that he and Lowe were about to unite and replace Crouch? That really IS news.

 

Apparently the SOS people told Wilde they wanted him back as chairman!

[OldNick]

You know Nick sometimes it would serve you better it you just shut up and accepted others might actually know a bit more than you do.

And so a forum for people to debate opinions is null and void because you say so, ohh great one please accept my humble apologies Longshot has spoken.

Behave, you may think in an arrogant way that you know it all but we all get fed duff info.

We dont know who you are but unless you are MM I doubt that you know his real thoughts.

Look at it realistically why would MM a man with a bigger ego than RL wish to be turned on by his most loyal supporters. I cannot see him ever wanting to do that unless he was just doing it to close us down.

So perhaps you can do us a service and instead of trying to stamp on peoples valid opinions/beliefs come and give us good reason to shut up by giving us some fair debate or facts. Not I know someone and so it is 100% correct...is that not fair?

[Long Shot]

And so a forum for people to debate opinions is null and void because you say so, ohh great one please accept my humble apologies Longshot has spoken.

Behave, you may think in an arrogant way that you know it all but we all get fed duff info.

We dont know who you are but unless you are MM I doubt that you know his real thoughts.

Look at it realistically why would MM a man with a bigger ego than RL wish to be turned on by his most loyal supporters. I cannot see him ever wanting to do that unless he was just doing it to close us down.

So perhaps you can do us a service and instead of trying to stamp on peoples valid opinions/beliefs come and give us good reason to shut up by giving us some fair debate or facts. Not I know someone and so it is 100% correct...is that not fair?

 

 

Keep digging Nick

Oh, and by the way - no one (I repeat no one) has a bigger ego than Mr Lowe and that............... is a fact not an opinion.

[dubai_phil]

Good grief, Frank. He effectively gave you advance notice that he and Lowe were about to unite and replace Crouch? That really IS news.

 

Now there's an interesting question.....

 

But you should have asked were they told or did they already know?

 

Allegedly

[NickG]

Keep digging Nick

Oh, and by the way - no one (I repeat no one) has a bigger ego than Mr Lowe and that............... is a fact not an opinion.

 

made me smile thinking of an internationally agreed unit of measurement of ego -so you can compare -as fact!

[Roman]

Keep digging Nick

Oh, and by the way - no one (I repeat no one) has a bigger ego than Mr Lowe and that............... is a fact not an opinion.

 

That kind of statement is ALWAYS an opinion, LS.

 

Given your history with RL, you might consider that the more you get embroiled in the 'office politics' of a club, or any organisation for that matter, the less objective you can be.

 

It doesn't mean your views are invalid - but they are just that: views. I'm sure you'll get a quorum on the idea that RL is many things, including an egotist - but the biggest ever, ever?!

 

Sometimes, the closer you are, the less you see.

[Snowballs2]

Why do we have to resort to slagging off each other when there are so many people in positions of power that should be feeling our vitriol ? How anyone could even begin to defend Lowe is beyond belief. Those That have welcomed him back should get a reality check after screwing us up last time.

[NickG]

Why do we have to resort to slagging off each other when there are so many people in positions of power that should be feeling our vitriol ? How anyone could even begin to defend Lowe is beyond belief. Those That have welcomed him back should get a reality check after screwing us up last time.

 

:confused:

 

if its the last two posts, no-one is suggesting he doesn't have huge ego, just you can't measure it subjectively!

[Roman]

:confused:

 

if its the last two posts, no-one is suggesting he doesn't have huge ego, just you can't measure it subjectively!

 

I think he's having a little go a me, Nick, not you. He's never forgiven me for taking tommac a little less than dead seriously.

[Snowballs2]

Roman not having a go at you at all. What I cannot understand because I am a very simple country boy is...why do some of you guys have to turn things personal. I find it unbelievable that something lighthearted as a fan message board is taken so personally over the way opinions are expressed, disected and replied to.

The only time that I have ever reacted in this way was over SOS and I was proven subsequently to be right.

Frankly your own personal views are such, that the next day they can be completely reversed.

[Roman]

Snowballs, once again you are reading FAR too much into it. Chill!

[OldNick]

Keep digging Nick

Oh, and by the way - no one (I repeat no one) has a bigger ego than Mr Lowe and that............... is a fact not an opinion.

LS you do make some grandoise statements. You know RL and do you know MM?

Both have massive egos and whilst I could see RL going to Pomey as he is not liked by the fans here and so nothing to lose. I BELIEVE (not fact) that MM would not come here as he is so adored by the Skate faithful that he would not wish to tarnish that.

if he looked at it at a seperate financial proposition , I agree he might think it would be a good one, he would not put pen to paper.

 

As for massive egos I dont think there is a barometer that can measure those.

I doubt you could put a piece of paper between the 2 of theirs though.

As for digging i dont need to know who you are. Reading your posts I have a fair idea who it is and am surprised that you have come back after all this time and told people to shut up.

That is not your usual tack amd I had thought you would have changed for the better.

[Wes Tender]

For me, the situation regarding the SOS meeting is a fairly straightforward one. There should have been an insistence that the meeting be minuted. If that failed, as it did, then as far as I'm concerned, yes, it was preferable to proceed with the meeting rather than walking away, but other scenarios come into play. If the meeting had been minuted, then Wilde is entitled to ask that some disclosures he makes are off the record, but if not minuted, then IMO he has forfeited that right, as the meeting is deemed to be an informal chat and it is fair game to mention anything that was discussed. Having minutes is a two way street and as much to Wilde's benefit if he wanted to dispute anything disclosed to others afterwards.

 

I am dumbstruck by Frank telling us only now that it was planned all that time ago that Wilde was considering an alliance with Lowe and that they were planning employing a foreign coach. Was this disclosed after the meeting and I missed it, or has it only just surfaced now?

 

Understood that Crouch might have been sounded out about it and declined to join with the other two, but had Wilde approached Crouch to explore the alternative alliance with Crouch, sidelining Lowe and his cronies? Did Wilde naively expect that he would be popular for bringing the hated Lowe group back into play? And I wonder whether he approved of the dismissal of Pearson in favour of JP and Wotte? What was the reaction of the SOS group to this revelation about Lowe and Wilde returning? I hope that it was made crystal clear to him that it would split the fan base right down the middle and that the result might well be catastrophic if the JP management experiment with the youngsters did not work. It did not take a genius to work out that the two of them would only return under sufferance initially and that many would grasp the first opportunity to get on their backs the moment it became clear that it wasn't working.

 

One can only hope that the Quisling has to sell his shares soon as a result of the collapse of the housing market and that they are not bought by the Lowe cabal and that that shareholding might then ally itself to Crouch. My personal preference failing a takeoever with good proper investment would be for the club to be run by a board comprising competant executive directors excluding any of the major shareholders; that way, a certain degree of unity could be achieved. Failing that, I'd grudgingly prefer a Wilde / Crouch alliance over the worst of all worlds situation we have now of two failed past chairmen which has already led to disunity and disruption and will ultimately and inevitably lead to the demise of the club.

[Snowballs2]

For me, the situation regarding the SOS meeting is a fairly straightforward one. There should have been an insistence that the meeting be minuted. If that failed, as it did, then as far as I'm concerned, yes, it was preferable to proceed with the meeting rather than walking away, but other scenarios come into play. If the meeting had been minuted, then Wilde is entitled to ask that some disclosures he makes are off the record, but if not minuted, then IMO he has forfeited that right, as the meeting is deemed to be an informal chat and it is fair game to mention anything that was discussed. Having minutes is a two way street and as much to Wilde's benefit if he wanted to dispute anything disclosed to others afterwards.

 

I am dumbstruck by Frank telling us only now that it was planned all that time ago that Wilde was considering an alliance with Lowe and that they were planning employing a foreign coach. Was this disclosed after the meeting and I missed it, or has it only just surfaced now?

 

Understood that Crouch might have been sounded out about it and declined to join with the other two, but had Wilde approached Crouch to explore the alternative alliance with Crouch, sidelining Lowe and his cronies? Did Wilde naively expect that he would be popular for bringing the hated Lowe group back into play? And I wonder whether he approved of the dismissal of Pearson in favour of JP and Wotte? What was the reaction of the SOS group to this revelation about Lowe and Wilde returning? I hope that it was made crystal clear to him that it would split the fan base right down the middle and that the result might well be catastrophic if the JP management experiment with the youngsters did not work. It did not take a genius to work out that the two of them would only return under sufferance initially and that many would grasp the first opportunity to get on their backs the moment it became clear that it wasn't working.

 

One can only hope that the Quisling has to sell his shares soon as a result of the collapse of the housing market and that they are not bought by the Lowe cabal and that that shareholding might then ally itself to Crouch. My personal preference failing a takeoever with good proper investment would be for the club to be run by a board comprising competant executive directors excluding any of the major shareholders; that way, a certain degree of unity could be achieved. Failing that, I'd grudgingly prefer a Wilde / Crouch alliance over the worst of all worlds situation we have now of two failed past chairmen which has already led to disunity and disruption and will ultimately and inevitably lead to the demise of the club.

 

 

I concur with this, which as far as I am concerned mirrors my own views

[up and away]

Originally Posted by up and away

What a total over reaction and more in spite than common sense. I said at the time that their approach was impractical and there would have to be information given confidentially or none at all. Just because they were a little naive in their objectives does not diminish for me their aims and goals, however unsuccessful it may be judged. Just look at the people that attended and pick out someone whose judgement you trust. From the subsequent information coming from that person you can learn a lot, so to my eyes it was not a waste, you just had to know how to pick the sixpences out of the Christma pud.

You clearly don't have a clue. The SOS initiative, though well intentioned, was a complete and utter failure because those on it didn't have the integrity to stand by what they promised to do.

 

It would not suprise me if Wilde hadn't read the thread prior to the SOS meeting and seen the agreement for it to be minuted and thus pre-empted this spanner in the works. The SOS delegates should have stood their ground and honoured their comittment and given Wilde a choice - either we do this minuted or we report back that you refused to give an open interview. If they'd given Wilde this choice and he'd refused to talk to them then that in itself would have spoken volumes.

 

Why are you getting so bent out of shape over something minor? nearly as bad as Cherry Pester getting to the sweets at checkout with his mum. As soon as Wilde would not disclose anything publicly the SOS initiative was dead, as Wilde was the only one prepared to speak even minimally. The SOS was dead there and then, what then followed was a separate issue. The fact Ron was naive enough to nail up their altruistic beliefs at the beginning is another matter, but no major conspiracy.

 

Then the fact "If they'd given Wilde this choice and he'd refused to talk to them then that in itself would have spoken volumes."

Spoke volumes? maybe in your world, but out in the real world it did not matter a jot. Their initial aims were sound but highly naive.

[Weston Saint]

SOS did no good. Nor did do any harm. It was a non event. It is history. It is unworthy of further comment in my opinion so I will not be returning to the subject.

[Frank's cousin]

In response to the 'news' and how we reacted... Firstly, as was mentioned by those involved the intention was clear - to talk, listen and report back. Upon meeting it was made clear that it was to be inconfidence - do you walk away? I can see an argumnet for that, but it seems churlish and perhaps naive to miss an opportunity - Dont forget this was meant to be the first of many - an initial introduction. The fact that Mr Wilde was prepared in confidence to sus us out on some things which at the time were not really considered likely i should add - was indeed 'news' but considering there was a hope that these meetings would continue, does anyone really think it would have been a good idea to ignore the confidentiality request? That is a mtter of principle whatever 'Stanley' is insinuating.

 

NO one really thought it was worth reporting to be honest as it seemed so far fetched - what was more interesting at the time given al the takeover talk, was that Wilde himself was not prepared to sell simply for a change of ownership, -eg to parties who were going to fund a purchase via refinancing the club etc - eg show us the money or here's your coat.

 

I find it rather sad that there are fans out their who seem so bitter that something was tried - fair enough if you feel it was naive or misguided, but the intentions were always honorable. It failed, so what, did the world end? Judging by some of the comments it would appear so.... and I really cant work out why all the bitterness

 

Given the opportunity to speak with Lowe, Wilde or Crouch again, I would go and talk and listen again. Why? because I believe its easier and better to form an opinion and make a judgement only when as fully informed as possible, not before, or by listening to gossip, hearsay or rhetoric.

 

Its interesting though that any say it was highly naive. Maybe in the ideal of having a long term impact true, but then again, was it wrong to assume that these guys might listen, if fans perspectives were discussed in a calm, rational and constructive manner, rather than with the acid vitriol that often accompanies fan forums etc... Passions can easily run high and we wanted simply to avoid that scenario?

 

We were not naive in understanding that we would be spun a yarn and that it would be also about what Wilde got from us... but, I learned something about him that day which was part of the excercise.

 

So given what was said - and in hindsight agreed it was PRETTY BIG NEWS - should we have said feck it and disclosed the lot? Well that really depends on your own opinion on whether it was worth breaing the promise for - your own levels of when the information is of more interest than your principle. Personally, given we are talking football, I and the others independently must have reached the same conclusions - it was not, especially as mentioned that it did not seem a likely outcome.

 

I also believe its a shame that one or two folk are so resentful of the idea - I hope it does not deter those who have an opportunity to talk directly with directors form doing so in future, publically or privately as only with such meetigs can you really start to build a picture of what these guys are like.... and thus form an informed opinion.

 

As Ron said, its dead, it achieved nothing and its past - and was only brought up as UP asked a question about it and I have no shame in responding, nor do I feel embarrassed about its failure. As others have said - you can often learn as much from failure as you can from success....

 

I will reiterate, I dont believe any of those taking part did so to be ITK - as teh subsequent posts will have shown - and being in the dammed if you do damned if you dont position made us all uncomfortable.... but I will also freely admit that having the opportunity did massage the ego - and that IS just being honest.

[Wes Tender]

So given what was said - and in hindsight agreed it was PRETTY BIG NEWS - should we have said feck it and disclosed the lot? Well that really depends on your own opinion on whether it was worth breaing the promise for - your own levels of when the information is of more interest than your principle. Personally, given we are talking football, I and the others independently must have reached the same conclusions - it was not, especially as mentioned that it did not seem a likely outcome.

 

I'm assuming that what you are talking about here, Frank, is the revelation that Wilde was going to cosy up with Lowe? Now, you may have decided amongst yourselves that you chose not to report it as a possibility because you did not believe that it would come to pass and also that you considered it a breach of a promise that you made to Wilde not to repeat it, if I have read the gist of your explantion correctly.

 

But if somebody asks you not to repeat what they are about to tell you and then drops a bombshell like that, I think that there are extenuating circumstances that allow you to renege on that promise. Initially, I'd be very surprised if you didn't tell Wilde in no uncertain terms that if this came to pass, then he risked major repercussions from the fans. If Wilde thought that he could tell you such important plans and expect that you would not share them with those you represented, then it would be him who was naive.

 

There would have been an opportunity to have made it plain to Wilde that his alliance with the Lowe faction was not acceptable to most fans and on that basis he might have chosen another path. As it is, we are stuck with them for the time being and as a result our club is in a bad mess.

[OldNick]

I'm assuming that what you are talking about here, Frank, is the revelation that Wilde was going to cosy up with Lowe? Now, you may have decided amongst yourselves that you chose not to report it as a possibility because you did not believe that it would come to pass and also that you considered it a breach of a promise that you made to Wilde not to repeat it, if I have read the gist of your explantion correctly.

 

But if somebody asks you not to repeat what they are about to tell you and then drops a bombshell like that, I think that there are extenuating circumstances that allow you to renege on that promise. Initially, I'd be very surprised if you didn't tell Wilde in no uncertain terms that if this came to pass, then he risked major repercussions from the fans. If Wilde thought that he could tell you such important plans and expect that you would not share them with those you represented, then it would be him who was naive.

 

There would have been an opportunity to have made it plain to Wilde that his alliance with the Lowe faction was not acceptable to most fans and on that basis he might have chosen another path. As it is, we are stuck with them for the time being and as a result our club is in a bad mess.

Wes surely it is a case of utmost integrity. I have received and sent pm's on here and have always done so in good faith and all the posters have kept thier integrity.

If you have a meeting and the proviso being it is private, then that is how it should be respected.

All the SOS as far as I can see acted with integrity and should not be criticised for doing so.

i was not a great supporter of it as it was always going to be a cosy group who would not be allowed to divulge information for legal reasons as much as anything,and so it is history and the people involved should be allowed to walk without any question.

[Mole]

In response to the 'news' and how we reacted... Firstly' date=' as was mentioned by those involved the intention was clear - to talk, listen and report back. Upon meeting it was made clear that it was to be inconfidence - do you walk away? I can see an argumnet for that, but it seems churlish and perhaps naive to miss an opportunity - Dont forget this was meant to be the first of many - an initial introduction. The fact that Mr Wilde was prepared in confidence to sus us out on some things which at the time were not really considered likely i should add - was indeed 'news' but considering there was a hope that these meetings would continue, does anyone really think it would have been a good idea to ignore the confidentiality request? That is a mtter of principle whatever 'Stanley' is insinuating.[/quote']

 

There you go again talking about principles. If you had any principles you and the others would have honoured your commitment to insist the meeting was minuted. This is what you promised to everyone on TSF. If Wilde could not go along with this then you should have walked away. By the very fact the meeting was advertised in a sticky thread you were in effect representing TSF posters. If it was just a private jolly for ITK wannabees you should not have bigged it up. You made a commitment to normal Saints fans and you did not honour that commitment. It's as simple as that and the sad thing is i really don't think you get why this was so wrong.

 

NO one really thought it was worth reporting to be honest as it seemed so far fetched - what was more interesting at the time given al the takeover talk' date=' was that Wilde himself was not prepared to sell simply for a change of ownership, -eg to parties who were going to fund a purchase via refinancing the club etc - eg show us the money or here's your coat.[/quote']

 

Well you couldn't report it anyway could you? You promised MW everything he said was in confidence.

 

I find it rather sad that there are fans out their who seem so bitter that something was tried - fair enough if you feel it was naive or misguided' date=' but the intentions were always honorable. It failed, so what, did the world end? Judging by some of the comments it would appear so.... and I really cant work out why all the bitterness.[/quote']

 

Once again you are evadading the crux of the issue and are looking for sympathy. You're the ones who betrayed a commitment to Saints fans so instead of acting all "oh woe is me" you should have done the honourable thing in the first place and stuck to you word.

 

Given the opportunity to speak with Lowe' date=' Wilde or Crouch again, I would go and talk and listen again. Why? because I believe its easier and better to form an opinion and make a judgement only when as fully informed as possible, not before, or by listening to gossip, hearsay or rhetoric.[/quote']

 

But i thought you weren't interested in boardroom matters? Isn't this the argument you were using to have a pop at Um Pahars?

 

Its interesting though that any say it was highly naive. Maybe in the ideal of having a long term impact true' date=' but then again, was it wrong to assume that these guys might listen, if fans perspectives were discussed in a calm, rational and constructive manner, rather than with the acid vitriol that often accompanies fan forums etc... Passions can easily run high and we wanted simply to avoid that scenario?[/quote']

 

Of course you and the others were naive, but you were forewarned and to this end it was agreed the meeting would be minuted. The simple truth is that you didn't have the ingetrity to stand by your word and you got stung because of it.

 

We were not naive in understanding that we would be spun a yarn and that it would be also about what Wilde got from us... but' date=' I learned something about him that day which was part of the excercise.[/quote']

 

You were naive.

 

So given what was said - and in hindsight agreed it was PRETTY BIG NEWS - should we have said feck it and disclosed the lot? Well that really depends on your own opinion on whether it was worth breaing the promise for - your own levels of when the information is of more interest than your principle. Personally' date=' given we are talking football, I and the others independently must have reached the same conclusions - it was not, especially as mentioned that it did not seem a likely outcome.?[/quote']

 

You broke your promise to fans at the drop of a hat so what's the difference?

 

I also believe its a shame that one or two folk are so resentful of the idea - I hope it does not deter those who have an opportunity to talk directly with directors form doing so in future' date=' publically or privately as only with such meetigs can you really start to build a picture of what these guys are like.... and thus form an informed opinion.[/quote']

 

There was nothing wrong with the idea, the problem was the people on it who didn't stick by their word to TSF posters.

 

As Ron said' date=' its dead, it achieved nothing and its past - and was only brought up as UP asked a question about it and I have no shame in responding, nor do I feel embarrassed about its failure. As others have said - you can often learn as much from failure as you can from success....[/quote']

 

Well you should be embarrassed by it's failure. You put yourself on a pedastool and let everyone down.

 

I will reiterate' date=' I dont believe any of those taking part did so to be ITK - as teh subsequent posts will have shown - and being in the dammed if you do damned if you dont position made us all uncomfortable.... but I will also freely admit that having the opportunity did massage the ego - and that IS just being honest.[/quote']

 

Nonsense. If being ITK wasn't your primary concern you'd have had the integrity to honour your pledge to TSF posters.

[Wes Tender]

Wes surely it is a case of utmost integrity. I have received and sent pm's on here and have always done so in good faith and all the posters have kept thier integrity.

If you have a meeting and the proviso being it is private, then that is how it should be respected.

All the SOS as far as I can see acted with integrity and should not be criticised for doing so.

i was not a great supporter of it as it was always going to be a cosy group who would not be allowed to divulge information for legal reasons as much as anything,and so it is history and the people involved should be allowed to walk without any question.

 

Nick, I think that there is a vast difference between maintaining the integrity of information sent in a PM and this scenario. Any information received by me through a PM is sacrosanct, exactly as the label says, a private message between two parties only.

 

But here we are talking about a group of individuals nominated by other interested parties on this forum to represent their interests. Firstly we have to accept that the meeting will not be minuted, which I'm sure would not be acceptable to most, but as Frank says, better to proceed anyway, as at least we can gain some insight into the thoughts of those with power and influence over matters.

 

But are we to accept that just because Wilde asked for some information to go no further, that we are to accept that it doesn't, regardless of how important the information is?

 

Let's consider the moral and ethical stance of Michael Quisling Wilde here as a yardstick. The self same individual who rode into SFC on his white charger promising that he would give us back our club and who 5 minutes later sides with the very person who he had come in to oust.

 

What would be the point of a meeting like this if our representatives are first to be handicapped by no minutes and then tied by a promise that anything they are told is subject to a binding promise not to dislose it to us?

 

Were we to ask a range of questions covering all eventualities and when we were right about something, be told "you might think that, but I couldn't possibly comment"?

 

I'm beginning to think that it might have been better to have either refused to not have minutes or to have insisted that anything discussed was for the consumption of the forum.

[OldNick]

Nick, I think that there is a vast difference between maintaining the integrity of information sent in a PM and this scenario. Any information received by me through a PM is sacrosanct, exactly as the label says, a private message between two parties only.

 

But here we are talking about a group of individuals nominated by other interested parties on this forum to represent their interests. Firstly we have to accept that the meeting will not be minuted, which I'm sure would not be acceptable to most, but as Frank says, better to proceed anyway, as at least we can gain some insight into the thoughts of those with power and influence over matters.

 

But are we to accept that just because Wilde asked for some information to go no further, that we are to accept that it doesn't, regardless of how important the information is?

 

Let's consider the moral and ethical stance of Michael Quisling Wilde here as a yardstick. The self same individual who rode into SFC on his white charger promising that he would give us back our club and who 5 minutes later sides with the very person who he had come in to oust.

 

What would be the point of a meeting like this if our representatives are first to be handicapped by no minutes and then tied by a promise that anything they are told is subject to a binding promise not to dislose it to us?

 

Were we to ask a range of questions covering all eventualities and when we were right about something, be told "you might think that, but I couldn't possibly comment"?

 

I'm beginning to think that it might have been better to have either refused to not have minutes or to have insisted that anything discussed was for the consumption of the forum.

I understand your frustration Wes, and of course I know that you indeed are to be totally trusted by PM.

The people involved may have been overcome by vanity/ego/or curiosity but I beleive their foremost reasons were for good reasons.

I still say that if they were asked not to comment they were right not to do so.

If it was of national importance then fine, but we are talking a football club and being a PLC it may be seen as sensitive information (it was very sensitive)

Who else went to the meeting. I know Weston and FC did but was there a large group or just 3-4?

[Snowballs2]

I understand your frustration Wes, and of course I know that you indeed are to be totally trusted by PM.

The people involved may have been overcome by vanity/ego/or curiosity but I beleive their foremost reasons were for good reasons.

I still say that if they were asked not to comment they were right not to do so.

If it was of national importance then fine, but we are talking a football club and being a PLC it may be seen as sensitive information (it was very sensitive)

Who else went to the meeting. I know Weston and FC did but was there a large group or just 3-4?

 

 

I believe a total of 6 self formed individuals including FF

[OldNick]

I believe a total of 6 self formed individuals including FF

Thanks Snowballs. Im amzed the link up between RL and MW was not leaked and so credit where it is due on that one. It must have been difficult for some to keep quiet

[Frank's cousin]

TBH Stanely, think what you like, I dont need your sympathy ( really not sure how you work this out BTW?). I am happy with my part in all this - only raised it again as response to a question rom UP, naturally, would have preferred it to have had a more positive outcome, but hey you live and learn... also at the end of the day this is Football FFS, .... in the grand scheme of things its seems that the resentment and bitterness expressed by a few is vastly inflated given what we are talking about...