Basset : / Daily Echo : Lowe Did not pick the team

[um pahars]

Say we kept Mills and Cranie and did not recruit Powell and Makin.

 

Suppose we kept Blackstock and Best and did not recruit Saga and BWP

 

Would we not be in a better position.

 

Who knows (and I'm not really sure why you're even asking me).

Edited 13 November, 2008 by um pahars

[um pahars]

relevant not is the level of involvement but the fact that it makes us unable to do a like for like comparison as to whether Lowes perceived level of involvement is effecting results - as we now have less able players

 

Que???

[John B]

Who knows (and I'm not really sure why you're even asking).

 

Because that is the strategy I think Lowe wants in the long term

 

 

A first team with a number of homegrown players plus other quality players from outside Like Rasiak Safri Davis

 

 

I think that is a reasonable approach which as worked before.

 

 

Buying a whole team is costly and with our finances has proved not to work both in the Premiership and now in the Championship.

 

 

But in the meantime we have to survive the best we can

Edited 13 November, 2008 by John B

[um pahars]

Because that is the strategy I think Lowe wants in the long term

 

 

A first team with a number of homegrown players plus others from outside.

 

 

I think that is a reasonable approach which as worked before.

 

 

Buying a whole team is costly and with our finances has proved not to work both in the Premiership and now in the Championship

 

And as I (and others) have said, I don't think there is anything wrong with that strategy (in principle). How many homegrown youngsters will be in that team will be up for debate, but in essence it's a reasonable suggestion.

 

However, that's not what is being delivered at the moment and the results aren't flowing through either.

[John B]

And as I (and others) have said, I don't think there is anything wrong with that strategy (in principle). How many homegrown youngsters will be in that team willbe up for debate, but in essence it's a reasonable suggestion.

 

However, that's not what is being delivered at the moment and the results aren't flowing through either.

 

Yes I agree but we have no money to buy in some quality players and that is our real problem.

 

Realistically we need a RB CB RM and a Striker but we cannot afford them

[um pahars]

Yes I agree but we have no money to buy in some quality players and that is our real problem.

 

Realistically we need a RB CB RM and a Striker but we cannot afford them

 

Money doesn't solve every problem, and there are many ways of skinning a cat. We've brought in excess of 10 players so we have had some latitude and of course we go back to the possibility that a different manager can get different results from similar playing assets.

[NickG]

Que???

 

we were talking about the fact that level of involvement is less of interest if its working.

 

I was only trying to say that it is impossible to say whether whatever the level of involvement JP suffers is effecting us as we were always likely to struggle with no players.

[um pahars]

we were talking about the fact that level of involvement is less of interest if its working.

 

I was only trying to say that it is impossible to say whether whatever the level of involvement JP suffers is effecting us as we were always likely to struggle with no players.

 

It will be impossible to compare and judge any hypothetical situtation, be it would we be doing better with Pearson in charge, would it be better if we had more money, would it be better if Lowe interfered less (or even more).

 

We can of course voice our opinion, but that is all it is, our opinion and it will never be backed up by any degree of fact in these scenarios.

 

My personal gut feel is that I don't believe that any manager will perform to his best if he is being second guessed, being told on and on and on who should be playing and/or being subservient to someone, who although they now have quite a bit of football experience, is not someone I would want involved in first team affairs.

[John B]

Money doesn't solve every problem, and there are many ways of skinning a cat. We've brought in excess of 10 players so we have had some latitude and of course we go back to the possibility that a different manager can get different results from similar playing assets.

 

 

You raise an interesting point which I have often wondered about.

 

 

How much affect does a manager have on a team and how long does it take for him to make a positive contribution and the team to gell.

 

 

Take Dowie why has he been at so many clubs for such a short amount of time why will anybody employ him

[up and away]

Good question. If we were winning would anyone care who was picking the team?

 

My feeling on this is that the chairman should employ a manager to manage and I do not want to get into symantics about coach, manager job titles. As in any business the manager should identify a) any glaring weaknesses and b) where the team could be strengthened by the inclusion and/or replacement of a player.

 

The manager should also identify preferred selections of players he wants.

 

The chairman should identify the strategy he wants the manager to employ, eg develop young players ahead of buying expensive established pro's.

 

At some point there has to be some negotiation between the Chairman (board members responsible) and the manager as to the best way forward.

 

Personally I would like to see a manager given a budget transfers and wages and it is his job to identify players to fit that budget and keep all the players happy (wages issues outside a structure method we used to employ). The chairman should do the negotiations and offload unwanted players to maintain the budgets accordingly.

 

In simple terms it should be a partnership with both sides driving each other to maintain objectives and work within budgets.

 

Absolutely no arguments there until we reached this season. I have been crying out over this period for someone to do exactly as Lowe indicated. It does not have to be Lowe, anyone with half a brain could do it, but it must have been so revolutionary that it bypassed all, including most that are moaning now. If we had applied that action at that point we would not be in the financial mess we are now and could easily of had the correct blend of youth and experience.

 

This season is a separate issue where we are effectively in administration without the title. When we failed to move on the higher earners or gain player fees, we had to get the wage bill even lower to accommodate this over a longer term strategy. We are living from hand to mouth at the present time, hoping we can make it to the January window and gain capital from who ever we can. There is no Bale or Walcott to lend a helping hand this time and realistically, I cannot see us being able to avoid administration. I have no problem with what Wilde and Lowe are doing at the present time, I would want any BoD to come up with the best direction for the slim possibility of getting us out of this mess. A lot of fans are disappointed that we are relying so heavily upon youth players, something I felt equally when we found Pearson was to be replaced. But such is the magnitude of the mess we were in, I can go along with this plan as it makes sense. Fans will quickly point out that this is folly as the way we are heading it will result in league1 anyway, along with the mandatory administration. But that is akin to pointing at dark clouds in the distance, whilst failing to notice the piano coming off the 20th floor.

 

For all those who have found their voices, just a pity you never found them when we going headlong into this mess. Even the purchase of donkeys at exhorbitent salaries was greeted with cheers and we will eat this division, solely based upon an afternoon in the sun. Well we have ****ed it all against the wall and the only value left will be any salt content remaining, but the donkeys will have had that as well. And for the brave ones who hold no fear of administration, just look at York. Where the administrator had to sell it off for a £1 because of the expense of holding on to it, only to see it eventaully go for £400k profit. All of a sudden Lowe gets elevated to Mother Theresa status.

 

Lowe is not the issue here, our prevailing conditions are. Can we do anything about it? Yes, very easily by attending home games, but that does not hold up to some that hate Lowe more than they love Saints and cannot see the position we are in. Others find the hurt too much and just can't bear to watch and Lowe is such an easy target to pin all our ails upon. But if we do not go to home games, who the fook will? I fully expect a lot of these fans will be going round with the bucket to rally round the club when we have the vultures picking on the bones. We will get what we deserve according to our fan base and I cannot see a more deserving case out there.

[Beckster Von Doodle]

It will be impossible to compare and judge any hypothetical situtation, be it would we be doing better with Pearson in charge, would it be better if we had more money, would it be better if Lowe interfered less (or even more).

 

We can of course voice our opinion, but that is all it is, our opinion and it will never be backed up by any degree of fact in these scenarios.

 

My personal gut feel is that I don't believe that any manager will perform to his best if he is being second guessed, being told on and on and on who should be playing and/or being subservient to someone, who although they now have quite a bit of football experience, is not someone I would want involved in first team affairs.

 

That's a first for you, you usually just make the situations fit your agenda.

[um pahars]

That's a first for you, you usually just make the situations fit your agenda.

 

Methinks you need to try and read what people post then, as opposed to just bumbling through them, being blinkered and assuming you know what they're saying.

 

You ought to try and be a bit more open and receptive (but not receptive enough to be brainwashed into the chasm I, and others have created:rolleyes:)

[Beckster Von Doodle]

Absolutely no arguments there until we reached this season. I have been crying out over this period for someone to do exactly as Lowe indicated. It does not have to be Lowe, anyone with half a brain could do it, but it must have been so revolutionary that it bypassed all, including most that are moaning now. If we had applied that action at that point we would not be in the financial mess we are now and could easily of had the correct blend of youth and experience.

 

This season is a separate issue where we are effectively in administration without the title. When we failed to move on the higher earners or gain player fees, we had to get the wage bill even lower to accommodate this over a longer term strategy. We are living from hand to mouth at the present time, hoping we can make it to the January window and gain capital from who ever we can. There is no Bale or Walcott to lend a helping hand this time and realistically, I cannot see us being able to avoid administration. I have no problem with what Wilde and Lowe are doing at the present time, I would want any BoD to come up with the best direction for the slim possibility of getting us out of this mess. A lot of fans are disappointed that we are relying so heavily upon youth players, something I felt equally when we found Pearson was to be replaced. But such is the magnitude of the mess we were in, I can go along with this plan as it makes sense. Fans will quickly point out that this is folly as the way we are heading it will result in league1 anyway, along with the mandatory administration. But that is akin to pointing at dark clouds in the distance, whilst failing to notice the piano coming off the 20th floor.

 

For all those who have found their voices, just a pity you never found them when we going headlong into this mess. Even the purchase of donkeys at exhorbitent salaries was greeted with cheers and we will eat this division, solely based upon an afternoon in the sun. Well we have ****ed it all against the wall and the only value left will be any salt content remaining, but the donkeys will have had that as well. And for the brave ones who hold no fear of administration, just look at York. Where the administrator had to sell it off for a £1 because of the expense of holding on to it, only to see it eventaully go for £400k profit. All of a sudden Lowe gets elevated to Mother Theresa status.

 

Lowe is not the issue here, our prevailing conditions are. Can we do anything about it? Yes, very easily by attending home games, but that does not hold up to some that hate Lowe more than they love Saints and cannot see the position we are in. Others find the hurt too much and just can't bear to watch and Lowe is such an easy target to pin all our ails upon. But if we do not go to home games, who the fook will? I fully expect a lot of these fans will be going round with the bucket to rally round the club when we have the vultures picking on the bones. We will get what we deserve according to our fan base and I cannot see a more deserving case out there.

 

Careful you'll be accused of blaming the fans for Lowe's failings, truth is there are 8000 misiing on last seasons average and over a season that is significant dosh.

 

The real fear is that the January window is a damp squid unless we have plyers that the very richest clubs are interested in, banks will not be lending money to football clubs to speculate with when the contract for the TV is up next year for negotiation and the numbers should not be anywhere near those of past deals.

 

If we can find someone to buy the club for a £1 having enter administration that is not the issue, they will still have to pay off the debts which may include the mortgage us having defaulted on the old one. So that may mean someone having to fill a £30m hole - not so appealing now is it? Then there will be funds on top of that for ongoing running costs. There are other ways around it but that will mean even bigger points deductions a la Luton.

 

You are very right in what you say, some on here are blinded by their hate of Lowe, others use it as an easy excuse because they are PL plastic fans, and there will be those who just cannot afford it at the moment.

 

I will be there Saturday - to support Saints come what may, because that is what the real fans do, others will be listening to their radios, updating teletext ot refreshing their phones, because that is what real fans do. Others will be at home moaning about Lowe's involvement rather than supporting the team they profess to love. They are the 'customers' we need to get back.

[Beckster Von Doodle]

It will be impossible to compare and judge any hypothetical situtation, be it would we be doing better with Pearson in charge, would it be better if we had more money, would it be better if Lowe interfered less (or even more).

 

We can of course voice our opinion, but that is all it is, our opinion and it will never be backed up by any degree of fact in these scenarios.

 

My personal gut feel is that I don't believe that any manager will perform to his best if he is being second guessed, being told on and on and on who should be playing and/or being subservient to someone, who although they now have quite a bit of football experience, is not someone I would want involved in first team affairs.

 

Isn't this creating a scenario to fit your agenda then? You are bending the facts to fit your story not using them to support an argument. More anti Lowe rhetoric!

 

If you do not believe I read everything then you are mistaken.

Edited 13 November, 2008 by Beckster Von Doodle
correction

[Long Shot]

That's a first for you, you usually just make the situations fit your agenda.

 

And you don't of course.

 

Like I said last night it is because of fans like you that we are where we are.

The "Lowe apologists" will have much to answer for come the final reckoning which by all accounts (now theres a word to strike fear into Wilde's heart) is not far off.

 

I believe Um Pahars's agenda to be, ultimately for the greater good of the club, yours, like Lowe's, is driven by no more than self-justification and self-glorification.

[um pahars]

Careful you'll be accused of blaming the fans for Lowe's failings, truth is there are 8000 misiing on last seasons average and over a season that is significant dosh.

 

The real fear is that the January window is a damp squid unless we have plyers that the very richest clubs are interested in, banks will not be lending money to football clubs to speculate with when the contract for the TV is up next year for negotiation and the numbers should not be anywhere near those of past deals.

 

If we can find someone to buy the club for a £1 having enter administration that is not the issue, they will still have to pay off the debts which may include the mortgage us having defaulted on the old one. So that may mean someone having to fill a £30m hole - not so appealing now is it? Then there will be funds on top of that for ongoing running costs. There are other ways around it but that will mean even bigger points deductions a la Luton.

 

You are very right in what you say, some on here are blinded by their hate of Lowe, others use it as an easy excuse because they are PL plastic fans, and there will be those who just cannot afford it at the moment.

 

I will be there Saturday - to support Saints come what may, because that is what the real fans do, others will be listening to their radios, updating teletext ot refreshing their phones, because that is what real fans do. Others will be at home moaning about Lowe's involvement rather than supporting the team they profess to love. They are the 'customers' we need to get back.

 

It must be extremely difficult being such an uber fan!!!!

 

The simple fact is that people's support of their Club manifests itself in a myriad of ways.

 

I'm sure we all wish everyone was as committed and devoted as you, but then again, most of us live in the real world.

 

And in the real world we have to accept that whilst there is a hard core support of 10,000 to 14,000 who will probably go come what may, there will be many others who will go depending on the quality of what is before them, how they perceive it as value for money, whether or not we're winning and what the atmosphere/community spirit is like, along with a number of other reasons.

 

So whilst your devotion is admirable, it really is up to the Club to entice, tempt and win back the missing thousands.

 

The PLC is in the entertainment business and modern day football is no longer the preserve of those devoted to their community club. Although some of course still maintain that link, others see themselves exactly how those in charge want to see them, customers (as you point out).

 

And I know of no other business where the customers are blamed for not buying a sub standard product.

[um pahars]

Isn't this creating a scenario to fit your agenda then? You are bending the facts to fit your story not using them to support an argument. More anti Lowe rhetoric!

 

If you do not believe I read everything then you are mistaken.

 

Did you find it diificult to read and understand the starting piece that said:

 

My personal gut feel

 

Thanks for confirming my earlier thoughts.

[Beckster Von Doodle]

And you don't of course.

 

Like I said last night it is because of fans like you that we are where we are.

The "Lowe apologists" will have much to answer for come the final reckoning which by all accounts (now theres a word to strike fear into Wilde's heart) is not far off.

 

I believe Um Pahars's agenda to be, ultimately for the greater good of the club, yours, like Lowe's, is driven by no more than self-justification and self-glorification.

 

What a load of tosh!!!

 

Please explain how a) Why you feel I am a Lowe apologist, b) why I am to blame for where we are?

 

As for self glorification and self justification this is something that cannot be said of those with an anti Lowe agenda of course!

[um pahars]

What a load of tosh!!!

 

Please explain how a) Why you feel I am a Lowe apologist, b) why I am to blame for where we are?

 

a) because you apologise on behalf of him (probably), and

 

b) because you are, fact (probably).

 

With all due respect, we've had some nice debates across the divide on here recently, so maybe you would be well served to wind in the little quips.

 

HTH.

[up and away]

Originally Posted by Beckster Von Doodle

That's a first for you, you usually just make the situations fit your agenda.

And you don't of course.

 

Like I said last night it is because of fans like you that we are where we are.

The "Lowe apologists" will have much to answer for come the final reckoning which by all accounts (now theres a word to strike fear into Wilde's heart) is not far off.

 

I believe Um Pahars's agenda to be, ultimately for the greater good of the club, yours, like Lowe's, is driven by no more than self-justification and self-glorification.

 

There are no apologists, this is about looking at all the facts and making the best decision upon those facts. Just because you don't discount immediately anything that includes Lowe in the analysis and just concentrate on what is best for Saints is not being an apologist, just common sense.

As for Um Pahars agenda we have seen so many of his failings it is a total embarrassment. Throughout all of this there has been only one answer to get us out of the sheite, all shareholders working together. But it's impossible to play the blame game that way so you prefer to back the village idiot on a self destruct mission.

I am still ****ing myself laughing over his last campaign of discrediting the OS regarding Poortvliet's resume. Did he actually think Lowe or Wilde put that up personally? Mind you he never complained too much when Hiley went bumping down the road.

[saintjay77]

There are no apologists, this is about looking at all the facts and making the best decision upon those facts. Just because you don't discount immediately anything that includes Lowe in the analysis and just concentrate on what is best for Saints is not being an apologist, just common sense.

As for Um Pahars agenda we have seen so many of his failings it is a total embarrassment. Throughout all of this there has been only one answer to get us out of the sheite, all shareholders working together. But it's impossible to play the blame game that way so you prefer to back the village idiot on a self destruct mission.

I am still ****ing myself laughing over his last campaign of discrediting the OS regarding Poortvliet's resume. Did he actually think Lowe or Wilde put that up personally? Mind you he never complained too much when Hiley went bumping down the road.

 

I think as saints fans we all want what is best for the club but some have so much hate for Lowe they see anything he does as some kind of plot to p1ss us lot off.

 

We moan that the kids dont get a chance and yet when we find out Lowe was moaning about the same thing all hell breaks loose because he is interfearing.

 

We want him to bugger off but he owns part of the club so unless someone offers him some money for his shares he aint going anywhere.

 

We used to moan cause he says too much and now people are moaning that he hasnt said anything.

 

There are so many arguments for and against him yet its the few deluded people that manage to stir up more of a frenzy and create more problems.

 

This club will be better without him IMO but only if we get to the point where someone actually offers to buy him and the others out. get rid of him via administration and I can see him walking straight back in through the door along with wilde and some other idea of how to do things.

[um pahars]

As for Um Pahars agenda we have seen so many of his failings it is a total embarrassment. Throughout all of this there has been only one answer to get us out of the sheite, all shareholders working together. .

 

LOL.

 

I've actually lost count of the number of times I have had to correct you on the numbers and financial errors you have made in your poor analyses over the months.

 

How many errors do you think I have picked you up on over the last year???

 

Being honest, some of your other posts aren't that bad, it's only when you venture into trying to speak on the financial side that you come across as somewhat lacking in knowledge.

 

I am still ****ing myself laughing over his last campaign of discrediting the OS regarding Poortvliet's resume. Did he actually think Lowe or Wilde put that up personally? Mind you he never complained too much when Hiley went bumping down the road.

 

Maybe we should have had a closer look at his CV, because the promised Total Footabll Revolution has not been delivered by the "revolutionary coaching set up".

 

And as for Hiley, well considering I married his daughter, i think I'm entitled to defend him.;-)

 

PS As I said to Becks, it's been quite good on here recently with debate and input from both sides, so maybe you need to rethink the content and style of your posts (or maybe the vitriol is trotted out when there is an absence of content).

[Long Shot]

What a load of tosh!!!

 

Please explain how a) Why you feel I am a Lowe apologist, b) why I am to blame for where we are?

 

As for self glorification and self justification this is something that cannot be said of those with an anti Lowe agenda of course!

 

 

Sigh,

a) Because you always seem to stick up for Lowe using worn out excuses. b) and while you and your cohorts do so we will never move on - you perpetrate the myth, you prolong the disease, you nurture the unsustainable, you manipulate propaganda in favour of the fraud, in short your prop up the corrupt, undenying man that is Mr Lowe esq.

 

You can't help it. I assume.

 

He has you under a spell. Is it politics - yes probably. Is it sex - I doubt it? Is it a fear of being proved totally 100% wrong - Yes.

 

Whilst people like you demand medals just for being there on Saturday you remind me of the men going over the top in the First World War knowing that they were being lead by donkeys, but hey that doesn't matter because we are real soldiers/fans. Please pause a moment and question what your great mesiah has done for SFC. Taken the crowds down to less than were at the low days in football at the Dell ie sub 15,000. Divided the fans like it would have been impossibe to conceive. And yet you are still in denial, still peddling the broken dream that this man is the right man to lead us?

 

Come on Beckster - the quicker you and your dwindling band of Japanese soldiers escape the Philipine jungle the better. The man has to go, you know it in your heart of hearts - give up the fight and accept you got it wrong.

Kind Regards

Long Shot

[Fowllyd]

A tangential question - are the posts from Beckster actually from her, or from Bon Call Night? I don't profess to be an expert, but they read like the latter's work, and he's used Beckster's id to post before. If he's doing it now, then why the hell doesn't he reach in his virtual pocket, find a handy fiver and post under his own id?

 

Of course, if it's actually Beckster posting, then both have my sincere and grovelling apologies...

[Scudamore]

And you don't of course.

 

Like I said last night it is because of fans like you that we are where we are.

The "Lowe apologists" will have much to answer for come the final reckoning which by all accounts (now theres a word to strike fear into Wilde's heart) is not far off.

 

I believe Um Pahars's agenda to be, ultimately for the greater good of the club, yours, like Lowe's, is driven by no more than self-justification and self-glorification.

 

What was an interesting debate is being ruined by your attempts at mudslinging and compartmentalising. All "Lowe apologists" have exactly the same views is how posts like this come across which is of course ludicrous.

 

And furthermore should the "final reckoning" come nice and soon as you allude to then i'll not be embarassed/crushed because as always i'm a Saints fan first and foremost. And if/when Lowe leaves that will still be the case, Saints will still be here and the club and the club alone will still have my allegiance regardless of who sits in the chairmans seat...

 

There is little self-justification and self-glorification to be had from predicting the future of Saints better than someone else. But trying to understand where we find ourselves at present and come to terms with it without the need to try and belittle your fellow fans (who don't conform to your views) takes a certain level of pragmatism which you seem incapable of...or at least unwilling to try...

 

Change your attitude and perhaps people may be a little more receptive to your views i'd suggest...

[St_Tel49]

But I have never said that any of this is FACT, have I ? As I said, people will read into what is printed exactly what they want to see. Surely you don't believe everything you read in the press, particularly given the generally sycophantic tone of the Echo ?

Except people, yourself included, believe the bits they want to believe. This whole thread is pointless because it doesn't PROVE a damn thing one way or the other so people sift through it for stuff to support their own particular prejudice - in whatever direction it lies.

[Long Shot]

What was an interesting debate is being ruined by your attempts at mudslinging and compartmentalising. All "Lowe apologists" have exactly the same views is how posts like this come across which is of course ludicrous.

 

And furthermore should the "final reckoning" come nice and soon as you allude to then i'll not be embarassed/crushed because as always i'm a Saints fan first and foremost. And if/when Lowe leaves that will still be the case, Saints will still be here and the club and the club alone will still have my allegiance regardless of who sits in the chairmans seat...

 

There is little self-justification and self-glorification to be had from predicting the future of Saints better than someone else. But trying to understand where we find ourselves at present and come to terms with it without the need to try and belittle your fellow fans (who don't conform to your views) takes a certain level of pragmatism which you seem incapable of...or at least unwilling to try...

 

Change your attitude and perhaps people may be a little more receptive to your views i'd suggest...

 

But will they - you seem very Hamlet cigarish. With respect may I suggest you change your attitude because

 

 

I don't think you realise just how desperate things have become. My attitude is there because as a club we are tetering on the edge and Lowe doesn't care if this club goes into administration. He will simply blame the fans. So rather than have a go at my attitude take a good hard look at our future (if there is one) and then, with respect get real. Fans like Beckster and you are one big reason why we are where we are.

Edited 14 November, 2008 by Long Shot

[fos1]

Fans will always be at each others throats while Lowe is chairman, the fan base will never be united, this is why with our club so close to going into administration that he has to be removed. Fans need to be pulling in one direction to get our club out of this mess. Askham, Withers, Thomson, Wilde have to start to look in the mirror friendship does not come into this now, you have to put the club first for once in your lives !!

or we will no longer have our football club to support.

[saintjay77]

But will they - you seem very Hamlet cigarish. With respect may I suggest you change your attitude because

 

 

I don't think you realise just how desperate things have become. My attitude is there because as a club we are tetering on the edge and Lowe doesn't care if this club goes into administration. He will simply blame the fans. So rather than have a go at my attitude take a good hard look at our future (if there is one) and then, with respect get real. Fans like Beckster and you are one big reason why we are where we are.

 

We are where we are because we support the club??? Are you for real????

 

I agree we are tetering on the edge and for a long time we have needed to make a decission and go for it with all the majour players pulling in the same direction. To be fair the only way the current lot (and I mean all of them) are going to succeed will be if they all do things as 1 unit with the same message and the same belief that they want the same things. IMO its the constant divide between sharholders and between fans that is causing us more problems than the results.

 

I dont believe for a second Lowe doesnt care if we go into administration and if he does point some of the blame to the fans then he will be bloody right. There is something we as fans can do to help the club and that is turn up. For many reasons not enough are turning up so there for some of the blame should go to the fans. Some can do so mething about it and some cant so its not a blame game trying to make people feel guilty. its just the facts.

 

A big portion of the blame needs to go to the main shareholders and I would be amazed if Lowe would publicly admit that but we all know it to be true. But then saying that, Wilde and Lowe cant stand each other and Wilde gave Lowe the boot in the 1st place cause he couldnt work with him. So those 2 have at least tried to put there personal opinions aside in an attempt to work together to save the club from going into administration. so thats another flaw to your idea of lowe doesnt care about us going into admin.

 

Right now it doesnt feel like there is any improvment anywhere in our club as we keep hearing or seeing 1 bad story after another. If this continues then we will go down the pan and have to try to build from even lower than we are now and probably with the same people in charge. with the same people refusing to help and blaming everyone else but themselves.

 

If we can show some improvment and keep us out of admin and build even very slowly then I will continue to support our great club however i can and no matter who is in charge. Same as I will support anyone that has the balls to take us over an inject some life into us.

[Wes Tender]

The real fear is that the January window is a damp squid

 

Hahahaha! That's a good one It doesn't really make much sense though, as because they live in the sea, it is not exactly unusual to find damp squid.

 

I wonder whether you meant damp squib? A squib is a firework, so a damp one wouldn't work. That would seem to make much more sense.

[Wes Tender]

Fans will always be at each others throats while Lowe is chairman, the fan base will never be united, this is why with our club so close to going into administration that he has to be removed. Fans need to be pulling in one direction to get our club out of this mess. Askham, Withers, Thomson, Wilde have to start to look in the mirror friendship does not come into this now, you have to put the club first for once in your lives !!

or we will no longer have our football club to support.

 

What a breath of fresh air and common sense amongst all the long-winded waffle that proceeded it. This is the simple truth of the matter. The paying public don't want to buy the product in sufficient numbers to sustain the company and it is not their fault that they feel this way. The fault lies directly with the board. Unless they can work together with the other major shareholders to put things right, then they should resign. Otherwise they will have control over nothing, as the club will be in administration. If the current board think that they can then buy the club from the admistrators and continue as before, I for one will never pay my hard-earned dosh to attend ever again until we are rid of them all for good.

[Frank's cousin]

UP. Re the manager being given a budget and handling wages etc - The trouble is that we have seen this system systematically abused and although its been tricky to make allegations stick, we all knmow the brown envelopes are legendary - The system has gotten alot worse, with agents fuelling the market - Could Mr Redknapp explain the need to make some 125 transfers in 5 years at West Ham? of which only 30 odd vere made a 1st team appearence? (Tom Bowers ) - the vast sums of money and nature of negtiations as a result, goes way beyond the often naive transfer dealings of the past - and to expect Managers, to do this as well is often asking to be taken for a ride?

 

Of course they should still identify players etc for both ins and outs - but that is only possible if the cahirman TRUSTS that the manager is making these decions on purely footballing terms and not on agent 'recommendations'. Its a sad state of affairs, but i think Lowes biggest problem is that he simply does not TRUST these financials which are inexcess of 60% of turnover to someone who is probably not qualified. And I think its fair to say that whilst not a universal truth, he is probably in some case justified in that.

 

Unfortunately its the impact of that situation on the managers ability to their job - although I will add this caveat; For me teh greatest managers are those that can improve waht they have - it may not be possible to make a silk purse, but it should certainly be possible to see improvement if working correctly with coaches and the development teams - The CONSTANT cry from 'old school' managers that they ned the freedom to by players THEY want is wearing a little thin and sound smore like an excuse for failure to coach properly - afterall we have all seen managers spend millions and get no improvement or regress!

 

I do think football needs to take a long hard look at why it lets itself be ruled by outdated concepts - that worked well in the age of the gentlemen chairman and manager, but seem perpetuated today my myth. Many argue that you only need to look at the success that Alex Ferguson has had to see this - but he dosen't get ivolved in contract negotiations and setting of wages. He has had success because a) hes actually very good, B) lucky to be at a club that is aspirational for players so the best youth stay and its easier to bring players to the club, C) Luck in the early days in that his job was saved - ironically by 5 youth players that came through at the same time.... not alot to do with being able to control the purse strings. Its ironic that the vey best managers at the top clubs dont actually need to worry abut that side of things and can concentrate on the side.

 

As I say you only have to look at the sheer crap our managers have bought over the years to see why someone of Rupert's Ilk would be horried at teh thought of letting them loose with a budget - however little or much he has learned about the game, surely you can see his point? Especially in the current financial climate....

[Scudamore]

Fans will always be at each others throats while Lowe is chairman, the fan base will never be united, this is why with our club so close to going into administration that he has to be removed. Fans need to be pulling in one direction to get our club out of this mess. Askham, Withers, Thomson, Wilde have to start to look in the mirror friendship does not come into this now, you have to put the club first for once in your lives !!

or we will no longer have our football club to support.

 

Fans will argue til the end of time regardless of this issue. Just like they did before Rupert Lowe and just like they will after Rupert Lowe. As they did when Rupert Lowe wasn't here and we all argued over whether we should get rid of Burley. This idea that the whole world will suddenly become a fairyland of happiness when the wicked overlord is deposed is an utter fallacy...

[Wes Tender]

Fans will argue til the end of time regardless of this issue. Just like they did before Rupert Lowe and just like they will after Rupert Lowe. As they did when Rupert Lowe wasn't here and we all argued over whether we should get rid of Burley. This idea that the whole world will suddenly become a fairyland of happiness when the wicked overlord is deposed is an utter fallacy...

 

Did you not notice something very relevant in what you just said? When Lowe wasn't here, you said that we moaned about Burley. That is precisely the point.

 

Before we became a PLC, before the reverse takevover, was there ever much debate about the Chairman or the board? Not that I'm aware of. Half the fans couldn't even tell you who the chairman was at that time.

[CB Fry]

Did you not notice something very relevant in what you just said? When Lowe wasn't here, you said that we moaned about Burley. That is precisely the point.

 

Before we became a PLC, before the reverse takevover, was there ever much debate about the Chairman or the board? Not that I'm aware of. Half the fans couldn't even tell you who the chairman was at that time.

 

 

Yeah, because Southampton Football Club are the only football club on the planet that know who their chairman is and dislike him.

 

I think you'll find almost all other league clubs who, in the last ten years have had their fans despise their chairman/figurehead/owner at some point.

 

Plenty of other clubs have been fu cked over a hell of a lot more by owners/chairmen/false messiahs than we have.

 

Lowe going will be brilliant for all of us, but some people are deluded to the point of lunacy that his very disappearance will turn us into world beaters living in fluffy duffy georgeous land forever more.

 

There's plenty of footballl clubs bigger or as big as us that didn't need Rupert Lowe's help to flush themselves down the toilet.

[Wes Tender]

Yeah, because Southampton Football Club are the only football club on the planet that know who their chairman is and dislike him.

 

I think you'll find almost all other league clubs who, in the last ten years have had their fans despise their chairman/figurehead/owner at some point.

 

Plenty of other clubs have been fu cked over a hell of a lot more by owners/chairmen/false messiahs than we have.

 

Lowe going will be brilliant for all of us, but some people are deluded to the point of lunacy that his very disappearance will turn us into world beaters living in fluffy duffy georgeous land forever more.

 

There's plenty of footballl clubs bigger or as big as us that didn't need Rupert Lowe's help to flush themselves down the toilet.

 

I was talking about this club. Of course, feel free to widen the scope of the debate to cover other clubs if you like. Indeed why stop at clubs in this country?

[SaintRichmond]

Yes I agree but we have no money to buy in some quality players and that is our real problem.

 

Realistically we need a RB CB RM and a Striker but we cannot afford them

 

 

OK ... So WHY did Lowe SELL, or get rid of, the ones we did have ??? ...... I don't recalll him getting Millions upon Millions for them ...... so, bearing in mind your post, and the state we find ourselves in now ..... a completely pointless and negative exercise .......

 

....... by a wonderful Businessman, as he likes to think of himself

[um pahars]

A few things to agree with, and a few things I can't believe you've posted!!!!

 

UP. Re the manager being given a budget and handling wages etc - The trouble is that we have seen this system systematically abused and although its been tricky to make allegations stick' date=' we all knmow the brown envelopes are legendary....[/quote']

 

I couldn't have explained myself very well, as there is no way I would want the manager (and certainly not someone with Redknapp's reputation) involved in handling wages. For me that is an area that the CEO of the Club should sort out.

 

Of course they should still identify players etc for both ins and outs - but that is only possible if the cahirman TRUSTS that the manager is making these decions on purely footballing terms and not on agent 'recommendations'. ....

 

If the Chairman does not trust the manager then you have to wonder what the ****c is goin on. Chairman have to employ managers, trust them within their playing remit and let them get on with that job.

 

Its a sad state of affairs' date=' but i think Lowes biggest problem is that he simply does not TRUST these financials which are inexcess of 60% of turnover to someone who is probably not qualified. And I think its fair to say that whilst not a universal truth, he is probably in some case justified in that. ....[/quote']

 

Well if this really is the case then I fail to see how Lowe can perform the role of CEO correctly. He has to employ suitably qualified and experienced managers and let them get on with the job of managing first team affairs.

 

For me teh greatest managers are those that can improve waht they have - it may not be possible to make a silk purse' date=' but it should certainly be possible to see improvement if working correctly with coaches and the development teams - The CONSTANT cry from 'old school' managers that they ned the freedom to by players THEY want is wearing a little thin and sound smore like an excuse for failure to coach properly - afterall we have all seen managers spend millions and get no improvement or regress!....[/quote']

 

Have to agree that the real mark of a good manager is getting the best out of the resources he has.

 

However, player trading is also a feature of a good manager and can't be taken out of the equation of trying to say what makes a good manager.

 

I do think football needs to take a long hard look at why it lets itself be ruled by outdated concepts - that worked well in the age of the gentlemen chairman and manager' date=' but seem perpetuated today my myth. Many argue that you only need to look at the success that Alex Ferguson has had to see this - but he dosen't get ivolved in contract negotiations and setting of wages. He has had success because a) hes actually very good, B) lucky to be at a club that is aspirational for players so the best youth stay and its easier to bring players to the club, C) Luck in the early days in that his job was saved - ironically by 5 youth players that came through at the same time.... not alot to do with being able to control the purse strings. Its ironic that the vey best managers at the top clubs dont actually need to worry abut that side of things and can concentrate on the side.....[/quote']

 

I think you'll find that the days when managers immersed themselves in contractual negotiations and sorting out wages are well gone.

 

As I say you only have to look at the sheer crap our managers have bought over the years to see why someone of Rupert's Ilk would be horried at teh thought of letting them loose with a budget - however little or much he has learned about the game' date=' surely you can see his point? Especially in the current financial climate....[/quote']

 

I actually think one of the reasons we bought such crap is down to Lowe himself. The revolving managerial door ensured transfer budgets were spent haphazardly and I also feel the overall strategy (transfer fees payable and wages) encouraged mediocrity.

 

But at the end of the day a manager is judged on performances on the pitch, and a big part of that will involve his transfer dealings. Every manager will sign a few stinkers, but it's how it pans out in the long run and ultimately points per game that will decide their fate.

 

If the Chairman/CEO doesn't trust the manager, second guesses him all the time, challenges selection and goes on and on and on about who should feature, then I have to say that I think that is just a recipe for disaster!!!!

[Beckster Von Doodle]

Sigh,

a) Because you always seem to stick up for Lowe using worn out excuses. b) and while you and your cohorts do so we will never move on - you perpetrate the myth, you prolong the disease, you nurture the unsustainable, you manipulate propaganda in favour of the fraud, in short your prop up the corrupt, undenying man that is Mr Lowe esq.

 

You can't help it. I assume.

 

He has you under a spell. Is it politics - yes probably. Is it sex - I doubt it? Is it a fear of being proved totally 100% wrong - Yes.

 

And the alternative to Lowe is?

 

Whilst people like you demand medals just for being there on Saturday you remind me of the men going over the top in the First World War knowing that they were being lead by donkeys, but hey that doesn't matter because we are real soldiers/fans. Please pause a moment and question what your great mesiah has done for SFC. Taken the crowds down to less than were at the low days in football at the Dell ie sub 15,000. Divided the fans like it would have been impossibe to conceive. And yet you are still in denial, still peddling the broken dream that this man is the right man to lead us?

 

Come on Beckster - the quicker you and your dwindling band of Japanese soldiers escape the Philipine jungle the better. The man has to go, you know it in your heart of hearts - give up the fight and accept you got it wrong.

Kind Regards

Long Shot

 

And I am blind to this - do you not think that the likes of Wilde & Crouch have do none of the damage?

 

When Lowe was ousted the crowds were well above 20,000, the numbers were dwindling last season before his return.

 

I do not deny that Lowe needs to go but what are our options, who can do better, what can vbe done to get the fans back?

 

Being anti Lowe is easy, and as we are using extreme metaphors it is like saying we'll just get rid of Saddam Hussein, what is difficult is having tugged on that thread and wathched the whole shooting match unravel we have to fill the void. Until we have a suitable replacement with a proper plan to rebuild the squad, the finances and everything else there is no alternative.

 

So you can continue to wage your war against Lowe a la George Bush, whilst people like me try and hold onto the reins to ensure there is a decent exit plan.

 

I demand no medals for going, but I will not be preached to transparent fools who would rather see the club disappear under the waves whilst using Lowe as an excuse. Football is not politics to me. The running of SFC is another issue, but I want to save the football team and whatever little I can do I will.

[ottery st mary]

An alternative to Lowey is anybody that a sensible board would put in place to run the finances...a sensible man with business acuman would be a great start..The same sensible board..if there was one at Saints..to appoint a sensible football Chairman...Not Wildey..

 

Neither Lowey are business men an neither is a football man..

[CB Fry]

I was talking about this club. Of course, feel free to widen the scope of the debate to cover other clubs if you like. Indeed why stop at clubs in this country?

 

 

Er, and you said that before Lowe turned up no-one talked about the chairman, which is true. But it is also true that in the last ten years the awareness of "who your chairman is" has reverberated around the football world. ie everyone at clubs all over the country know about their chairman (and probably don't like them).

 

ie Rupert Lowe did not single handedly invent the idea of the high profile chairman. Coventry fans all knew who their chairman was when they got relegated.

 

But then, of course, people like you have absolutely no interest in concepts like "context" or heaven forbid, the "wider world".

 

[70's Mike]

Er, and you said that before Lowe turned up no-one talked about the chairman, which is true. But it is also true that in the last ten years the awareness of "who your chairman is" has reverberated around the football world. ie everyone at clubs all over the country know about their chairman (and probably don't like them).

 

ie Rupert Lowe did not single handedly invent the idea of the high profile chairman. Coventry fans all knew who their chairman was when they got relegated.

 

But then, of course, people like you have absolutely no interest in concepts like "context" or heaven forbid, the "wider world".

 

 

at least Richardson pumped money into Coventry

[NickG]

I know this my be hard to do -but bare with me!

 

Apart (I know its impossible to separate) the history and personal dislike - what has Lowe done wrong this time.

 

shut corners - think was last board?

 

get rid of NP - I can see that one (although not totally convinced he would be doing any better but who knows and its been done to death on here!)

 

appoint unknown managers -agree

 

player loans - differcult to judge without seeing the detailed accounts.

 

on the positive, one of the worst things about him last time was his publicity seeking - that seems to have stopped.

 

Genuinely interested in range of opinions -a objective as poss!

Edited 14 November, 2008 by NickG

[ottery st mary]

I know this my be hard to do -but bare with me!

 

Apart (I know its impossible to separate) the history and personal dislike what has he done wrong this time.

 

shut corners - think was last board?

 

get rid of NP - I can see that one (although not totally convinced he would be doing any better but who knows and its been done to death on here!)

 

appoint unknown managers -agree

 

player loans - differcult to judge without seeing the detailed accounts.

 

on the positive, one of the worst things about him last time was his publicity seeking - that seems to have stopped.

 

Genuinely interested in range of opinions -a objective as poss!

 

Dare I say you might be right, Nick..... Wildey is totally to blame for this fiasco..

 

 

But I still blame Lowey for letting Wildey cause this fiasco..

 

Lowey to go Tuesday.

[saintjay77]

OK ... So WHY did Lowe SELL, or get rid of, the ones we did have ??? ...... I don't recalll him getting Millions upon Millions for them ...... so, bearing in mind your post, and the state we find ourselves in now ..... a completely pointless and negative exercise .......

 

....... by a wonderful Businessman, as he likes to think of himself

 

Wages - appearence fees - bonus'

 

Its been obvious that anyone who was on a wedge was on the list to be shipped out 1st. when the interest wasnt there for them the next best option of selling a player or 2 was on the cards.

 

Scakel almost went but couldnt agree terms, I have no idea on the price that was offered but I doubt it would have been much for us to say yes. A mistake that I think we did make wasa to get in a load of crocked players (probably cause they were dirt cheap) based on believing we would have half a squad. we didnt get rid of nearly enough players and the crocked players are taking forever to recover.

 

the only reason skacel got back in the team was because the idea that "All" high earners must go was re-thought in the light that we didnt have enough quality to cover. I think the decission was made that it would be either John or Skacel that got a game and the budget deemed that both wouldnt play. John has gone and Skacel is a regular. If mills was good enough then Skacel would still not be getting a game.

[Beckster Von Doodle]

An alternative to Lowey is anybody that a sensible board would put in place to run the finances...a sensible man with business acuman would be a great start..The same sensible board..if there was one at Saints..to appoint a sensible football Chairman...Not Wildey..

 

Neither Lowey are business men an neither is a football man..

 

Great someone else then - not really an answer is it?

 

Who... names.... how.... method....

 

If I had the answers I would be screaming Lowe out from the top of the civic centre. This is the whole problem to many are willing to cut their noses off to spite their face.

 

Lowe out is the the question, not the answer!!

[Beckster Von Doodle]

at least Richardson pumped money into Coventry

 

And took more out than anyone ever did. £800,000 in a one off payment plus his annual salry in their relegation season. A significant amount in those times.

[ottery st mary]

Great someone else then - not really an answer is it?

 

Who... names.... how.... method....

 

If I had the answers I would be screaming Lowe out from the top of the civic centre. This is the whole problem to many are willing to cut their noses off to spite their face.

 

Lowe out is the the question, not the answer!!

 

My humble submission is that a sensible board would have put a man called Salz in the chair......This man is a true businessman...unlike Lowey.

This man has many great contacts that could be developed for the benefit of the Saints...Unlike Lowey. This man would be a true Saints man for the long term benefit of Saints and the company going forwards...Unlike Lowey.

 

The true question is WHY did the mob..Askham,Richards,Withers, Windsor.whats his name put Lowey in and WHY have they left him in situ when it is clear to most everyone that Lowey does not work....The change should happen now....Salz in the chair....Lowey out and his mob out...They are not interested in Saints FC..

 

Lowey out is the answer..as I see it ..anyone but him for me. but Salz will be in sooner than later..I am sure...Wildey is on the move.

 

All my own opinion.. I feel strongly that I might be right on this subject...Like you, hopefully, I want Saints to win and move up the ladder but we have to attempt to put something concrete together before it is too late....Lowey and Wildey dream team is splitting badly at the seams.

[Beckster Von Doodle]

My humble submission is that a sensible board would have put a man called Salz in the chair......This man is a true businessman...unlike Lowey.

This man has many great contacts that could be developed for the benefit of the Saints...Unlike Lowey. This man would be a true Saints man for the long term benefit of Saints and the company going forwards...Unlike Lowey.

 

The true question is WHY did the mob..Askham,Richards,Withers, Windsor.whats his name put Lowey in and WHY have they left him in situ when it is clear to most everyone that Lowey does not work....The change should happen now....Salz in the chair....Lowey out and his mob out...They are not interested in Saints FC..

 

Lowey out is the answer..as I see it ..anyone but him for me. but Salz will be in sooner than later..I am sure...Wildey is on the move.

 

All my own opinion.. I feel strongly that I might be right on this subject...Like you, hopefully, I want Saints to win and move up the ladder but we have to attempt to put something concrete together before it is too late....Lowey and Wildey dream team is splitting badly at the seams.

 

I get the opinion that he was asked to do just that when Crouch was involved and ran a mile, but that is speculation.

 

Trouble is what is he going to do any different to what is happening now? Although I agree with the idea in principle it is just pulling the lever on the fruit machine and getting another line that pays nothing.

 

If he were to come in he would need to come in with a strategy for the business, and the football. I think you would still end up with divisions as we did when Crouch was in charge.

[Scudamore]

at least Richardson pumped money into Coventry