What did Duncan (Fitzhugh Fella) say on Radio Hampshire?

[Greenridge]

There are loads of options out there. For starters, the major share holders need to start working together and find a new leader to unite the club . Rupert Lowe needs to understand that his presence is counter productive. He needs to step back into the shadows.

 

I truly believe this would be a massive step forwards. It is undisputable even to the most ardent of Lowe supporters that his presence is incredibly devisive to the club. The above proposed change may not bring the addtional funds the club so badly needs but it would kick-start a more homogeneous effect with which I'm sure some of the missing feel-good factor would return.

 

We would then be in a position to move forwards as a Club.

[Delmary]

And you have evidence of this then, if so please enlighten us.

Read the various Saints forums, listen to local radio phone ins and talk to fellow Saints fans at St.Marys. Not difficult to work out really. To pretend that Lowe will eventually unite the fans base is dream land stuff IMHO. He's got an impossible task and some fans will not forgive. I'm being a realist

[Delmary]

An email I sent to Michael Wilde a few weeks ago.

 

Dear Michael,

 

It's been a difficult six months and without doubt the return of Rupert Lowe has cast a dark shadow over this once great club. I know you're hurting like the rest of us and you took the bold step to try and unite this club by joining forces with Rupert. However, it's clearly evident that the wounds are too deep and our club will never move forward until Rupert steps down and sells up. Therefore I urge you to encourage Rupert to do what is best for Southampton Football Club. He should be thanked from our hearts and always be remembered for delivering our wonderful stadium as well as restarting the youth conveyer belt. But he needs to be brave, do what is right for Southampton Football club and retire gracefully. Let's move forward as a modern football club, spending within its means, employing the best manager within our budget and build a team that balances youth with experience. Please deliver this football club back to the hearts of the people of Southampton.

 

Yours sincerely

[um pahars]

There are loads of options out there. For starters, the major share holders need to start working together and find a new leader to unite the club . Rupert Lowe needs to understand that his presence is counter productive. He needs to step back into the shadows.

 

I'm just not sure that that is possible as there is so much vitriol and hatred between the three of them.

 

I know Wilde & Lowe both did a massive U turn only a couple of months after declaring they couldn't work together, but I just can't see the big three ever managing to work things out.

 

IMHO it probably needs 1, 2 or 3 of them to sell out to get things moving again.

 

But even then I can't see who could (or would) sell up to break the impasse.

 

I'm not sure that I know whatthe answer is from the bottom of this pit that we have found ourselves in, but I do know that I don't think the current set up is the answer.

 

I still keep wondering just why Wilde and Lowe's cabal did what they did last summer. At that point it looked as though we had a chance of getting out of the mire, now I just see the headlights of the administration juggernaut approaching fast!!!

Edited 14 November, 2008 by um pahars

[ottery st mary]

Oh dear, so after 2 years of silence whilst a bunch of clowns and mercenaries run the club irresponsibly to the verge of administration, Duncan is back on the old "it's all Lowe's fault" bandwagon. Seems a little hypocritical to accuse RL of being divisive whilst speaking on radio shows urging shareholders to vote out the chairman!

 

Of course I'm sure an alternative plan was proposed for after we've burnt the heretics at the stake? I remember the last one went along the lines of "anyone would be better" and that worked out just great with Wilde & Co...

 

Jonah, whatever you say.....Duncan is right.....You or your few buddies will not change what 20,000 fans think of your old mucker Lowey.

[ottery st mary]

Are you for real?

I have a feeling that Duncan speaks for us all - apart from you.

QUOTE]

 

You are so very wrong.

 

I can't take any of this too seriously though. Lowe has his faults for sure but he is a businessman and that is a skill we need at the minute. I have no real issues with duncan either but I do know he has an axe to grind which will always cause me to take his comments with a pinch of salt.

 

I just don't think now is the time to be devisive.

 

Lowey a businessman ..you must be having a larf..where is your evidence..No chance.

[ottery st mary]

Jonah posted some good stuff, certainly not 'spitting out dummies' stuff. Try reading it first and you will find it contains some good and honest points.

 

Like you the same old same old very tiresome..Lowey to go soon.

[Mole]

I still keep wondering just why Wilde and Lowe's cabal did what they did last summer. At that point it looked as though we had a chance of getting out of the mire, now I just see the headlights of administration approaching fast!!!

 

Wildes u-turn is still a mystery. Some says it's because Merlion isn't doing very well and he was desperate for Lowe to return to asset strip, but i'm not so sure. I think his return was purely for revenge against Leon Crouch.

 

As for administration i agree and have seen it coming for quite some time.

[ottery st mary]

An email I sent to Michael Wilde a few weeks ago.

 

Dear Michael,

 

It's been a difficult six months and without doubt the return of Rupert Lowe has cast a dark shadow over this once great club. I know you're hurting like the rest of us and you took the bold step to try and unite this club by joining forces with Rupert. However, it's clearly evident that the wounds are too deep and our club will never move forward until Rupert steps down and sells up. Therefore I urge you to encourage Rupert to do what is best for Southampton Football Club. He should be thanked from our hearts and always be remembered for delivering our wonderful stadium as well as restarting the youth conveyer belt. But he needs to be brave, do what is right for Southampton Football club and retire gracefully. Let's move forward as a modern football club, spending within its means, employing the best manager within our budget and build a team that balances youth with experience. Please deliver this football club back to the hearts of the people of Southampton.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Hopefully well received by Wildey.

[saintwarwick]

Read the various Saints forums, listen to local radio phone ins and talk to fellow Saints fans at St.Marys. Not difficult to work out really. To pretend that Lowe will eventually unite the fans base is dream land stuff IMHO. He's got an impossible task and some fans will not forgive. I'm being a realist

 

I read the various Saints forums and speak to fans at St Mary's (sorry don't get the signal for the radio phone ins up here) and know the fans are split but until the so called knights in shining armour appear we have to make do with who we have. For that reason we have to be united behind the team and don't let your personal hatred of one man get in the way of supporting the boys on the pitch. However if you would rather take the hatred on one man against supporting your team then that is your choice.

[saintwarwick]

Like you the same old same old very tiresome..Lowey to go soon.

 

When, you have a date for his departure? I'm sure there will be a big party when he does.

[Mole]

I read the various Saints forums and speak to fans at St Mary's (sorry don't get the signal for the radio phone ins up here) and know the fans are split but until the so called knights in shining armour appear we have to make do with who we have. For that reason we have to be united behind the team and don't let your personal hatred of one man get in the way of supporting the boys on the pitch. However if you would rather take the hatred on one man against supporting your team then that is your choice.

 

I don't think Saints fans are split regarding Lowe. The term implies a 50/50 divsion when in reality you're hard pressed to find anyone with a good word for Lowe away from this forum.

[saintwarwick]

An email I sent to Michael Wilde a few weeks ago.

 

Dear Michael,

 

It's been a difficult six months and without doubt the return of Rupert Lowe has cast a dark shadow over this once great club. I know you're hurting like the rest of us and you took the bold step to try and unite this club by joining forces with Rupert. However, it's clearly evident that the wounds are too deep and our club will never move forward until Rupert steps down and sells up. Therefore I urge you to encourage Rupert to do what is best for Southampton Football Club. He should be thanked from our hearts and always be remembered for delivering our wonderful stadium as well as restarting the youth conveyer belt. But he needs to be brave, do what is right for Southampton Football club and retire gracefully. Let's move forward as a modern football club, spending within its means, employing the best manager within our budget and build a team that balances youth with experience. Please deliver this football club back to the hearts of the people of Southampton.

 

Yours sincerely

 

I think we are at the moment

 

As this email was from a couple of weeks ago have you had a reply yet?

[ottery st mary]

When, you have a date for his departure? I'm sure there will be a big party when he does.

 

April 1st would be suitable for our Director of Football.

 

You have a good weekend saintwarwick.....I am at the University on Tuesday evening talent spotting...I do hope you will be buying me a pint....

 

Saints to win this weekend.

[70's Mike]

I don't think Saints fans are split regarding Lowe. The term implies a 50/50 divsion when in reality you're hard pressed to find anyone with a good word for Lowe away from this forum.

 

and that is what the Luvvies do not grasp or just ignore, true or not the vast majority of the people of this city, whether they go to games or not,blame Lowe for the decline of this club

[Delmary]

I read the various Saints forums and speak to fans at St Mary's (sorry don't get the signal for the radio phone ins up here) and know the fans are split but until the so called knights in shining armour appear we have to make do with who we have. For that reason we have to be united behind the team and don't let your personal hatred of one man get in the way of supporting the boys on the pitch. However if you would rather take the hatred on one man against supporting your team then that is your choice.

How can I hate a person that I have never met before you buffoon;). He's just not right for the club at this point in our history. Just like when the conservatives got kicked out back in the 1990s. Public opinion had turned against them.

[saintwarwick]

April 1st would be suitable for our Director of Football.

 

You have a good weekend saintwarwick.....I am at the University on Tuesday evening talent spotting...I do hope you will be buying me a pint....

 

Saints to win this weekend.

 

I'd love to but unfortunately I will be back in Warwick working, please have a pint for me.

[ottery st mary]

I'd love to but unfortunately I will be back in Warwick working, please have a pint for me.

 

No that will be me at Warwick University....but not to worry.

[Beckster Von Doodle]

I truly believe this would be a massive step forwards. It is undisputable even to the most ardent of Lowe supporters that his presence is incredibly devisive to the club. The above proposed change may not bring the addtional funds the club so badly needs but it would kick-start a more homogeneous effect with which I'm sure some of the missing feel-good factor would return.

 

We would then be in a position to move forwards as a Club.

 

So proved by Crouch and Wilde being chairmen, NOT.

 

There were those who still felt that someone else could do better. We need a clean slate completely. The problem is who and how and when. Yes you are right but there is no alternative or the alternatives are just as bad and will still have no money and old ideas.

[Beckster Von Doodle]

and that is what the Luvvies do not grasp or just ignore' date=' true or not the vast majority of the people of this city, whether they go to games or not,blame Lowe for the decline of this club[/quote']

 

Is there no room for the ones who want Lowe out but feel that the replacement should be better considered than last time?

 

Too many on here from both sides are blinkered by the fact that just because they disagree they are either pro or anti, I would suspect if you removed the emotion and asked the question

 

If given an alternative that had a strategy to take SFC forward and all the ideas were credible and achievable would you prefer them to Lowe?

 

I reckon you would be up to the 90% plus mark of people who want RL away from the club.

 

I suspect that even Jonah wants Lowe out but it would be pointless replacing the wolves in the sheeps' field with lions wouldn't it.

[Beckster Von Doodle]

I'm just not sure that that is possible as there is so much vitriol and hatred between the three of them.

 

I know Wilde & Lowe both did a massive U turn only a couple of months after declaring they couldn't work together, but I just can't see the big three ever managing to work things out.

 

IMHO it probably needs 1, 2 or 3 of them to sell out to get things moving again.

 

But even then I can't see who could (or would) sell up to break the impasse.

 

I'm not sure that I know whatthe answer is from the bottom of this pit that we have found ourselves in, but I do know that I don't think the current set up is the answer.

 

I still keep wondering just why Wilde and Lowe's cabal did what they did last summer. At that point it looked as though we had a chance of getting out of the mire, now I just see the headlights of the administration juggernaut approaching fast!!!

 

Ah, some balance to your arguement. It seems that we are speaking from the same book.

 

You have summed up exactly where we are. Any 1, 2 or even all three of them have no room to manouver because of no funding. Decisions are made based on paying the next weeks bills and we have to just grin and bare it.

 

Regardless of the views on Lowe, whether they be out at any cost, out with the right alternative or even keep him, unless the next man comes with a bucket load of money nothing will change.

 

Given the current alternatives, stability is the best option for the boardroom if not the bank account.

[Long Shot]

Ah, some balance to your arguement. It seems that we are speaking from the same book.

 

You have summed up exactly where we are. Any 1, 2 or even all three of them have no room to manouver because of no funding. Decisions are made based on paying the next weeks bills and we have to just grin and bare it.

 

Regardless of the views on Lowe, whether they be out at any cost, out with the right alternative or even keep him, unless the next man comes with a bucket load of money nothing will change.

 

Given the current alternatives, stability is the best option for the boardroom if not the bank account.

 

 

There is sense to your argument but for your last sentence. There is no stability in the boardroom - under Lowe's stewardship the boat is sailing straight into the rocks - to do nothing is suicide - there is no grin and bear it alternative.

[um pahars]

Ah, some balance to your arguement..

 

Do me a favour, the only reason you're now seeing some balance is because you might agree with something I've posted. You're so blinkered that you only see what you want to see half the time (and just don't bother to read for the other 50% judging by some of your replies).

 

Any 1, 2 or even all three of them have no room to manouver because of no funding. Decisions are made based on paying the next weeks bills and we have to just grin and bare it..

 

But I'm hearing snippets that the bank aren't at all happy and things are getting pretty desperate.

 

You're right about Wilde and Lowe not having any money, but would Crouch offering to keep the wolves from the door in the short term by throwing money at the problem put a different slant on it?????

 

In this instance, would Lowe, Wilde and others be prepared to do the honurable thing?????

 

Given the current alternatives, stability is the best option for the boardroom if not the bank account.

 

And this is where I do have massive doubts, because everything I see on and off the pitch just points to meltdown. Since the summer we have just gone backwards.

 

Is just keeping the status quo just accepting our fate as I can't see any progress on or off the pitch??????

 

I would hardly call the current position stability.

 

We had a chance for stability at the back end of last season, but sadly Lowe and Wilde jumped in with both feet in the middle of a relegation battle and have failed miserably.

 

Where were you in the summer with your ideas of maintaining some stability??????

[Alain Perrin]

Several posters on here seem to spend a lot of their valuable time constantly sticking up for Lowe on this forum.

 

I wonder if they give their time for free?

 

 

Several posters on here do the opposite. Who is employing them?

[Beckster Von Doodle]

Do me a favour, the only reason you're now seeing some balance is because you might agree with something I've posted. You're so blinkered that you only see what you want to see half the time (and just don't bother to read for the other 50% judging by some of your replies).

 

 

 

But I'm hearing snippets that the bank aren't at all happy and things are getting pretty desperate.

 

You're right about Wilde and Lowe not having any money, but would Crouch offering to keep the wolves from the door in the short term by throwing money at the problem put a different slant on it?????

 

In this instance, would Lowe, Wilde and others be prepared to do the honurable thing?????

 

 

 

And this is where I do have massive doubts, because everything I see on and off the pitch just points to meltdown. Since the summer we have just gone backwards.

 

Is just keeping the status quo just accepting our fate as I can't see any progress on or off the pitch??????

 

I would hardly call the current position stability.

 

We had a chance for stability at the back end of last season, but sadly Lowe and Wilde jumped in with both feet in the middle of a relegation battle and have failed miserably.

 

Where were you in the summer with your ideas of maintaining some stability??????

 

Just because I do not respond on every point raised in an e-mail doesn't mean I haven't read it.

 

No I see balance because you are not using rumour and supposition to support an extreme arguement. However, you now say you hear snippets that the bank are not happy, again I doubt whether the bank would discuss this with anyone out side the clubs boardroom and in turn whether they would discuss this with anyone outside the club so I am guessing that this info is either more rumour or third hand with others embelishments. I have heard that we are operating hand to mouth but nothing on what the banks are currently thinking.

 

I think if you look back I was asking for Crouch to be given the chance, I don't think he could have done any better or worse than Lowe I wonder whether he would have been as brutal in the cost cutting and whether with financial conditions now as they are whether the banks may have already pulled the plug.

 

Crouch managed with his heart IMO and maybe we needed someone like Lowe to make the nasty decisions, and I said at the time it should be short term.

 

Changing everything again for the sake of it is not stability.

 

Has Crouch got enough money to throw millions away? Unless he has Wilde and Crouch stepping aside will be like putting a sticking plaster on a hole in the Hoover dam.

 

We can discuss possible options forever but we both know in reality we either need a sugar daddy or to get back in the Premier League. The former will probably give the latter, the other way around is a lot harder and no garantee of Longevity if we do get up.

 

All that I ask of people on here is to think ahead, and not make the same mistake we all did last time in removing Lowe at all costs when there is not a viable alternative. If someone is going to come in with £10-15m to inject then fine but again he must have the strategy as well not just lets blow it on players as that has led us to where we are now with an unsustainable wage bill.

 

Steve I have nothing personal against you, I dislike the tone that comes across in your postings sometimes but you usually manage to add at least one line that is so extreme that it urges me to respond.

 

HTH

[Sundance Beast]

An email I sent to Michael Wilde a few weeks ago.

 

Dear Michael,

 

It's been a difficult six months and without doubt the return of Rupert Lowe has cast a dark shadow over this once great club. I know you're hurting like the rest of us and you took the bold step to try and unite this club by joining forces with Rupert. However, it's clearly evident that the wounds are too deep and our club will never move forward until Rupert steps down and sells up. Therefore I urge you to encourage Rupert to do what is best for Southampton Football Club. He should be thanked from our hearts and always be remembered for delivering our wonderful stadium as well as restarting the youth conveyer belt. But he needs to be brave, do what is right for Southampton Football club and retire gracefully. Let's move forward as a modern football club, spending within its means, employing the best manager within our budget and build a team that balances youth with experience. Please deliver this football club back to the hearts of the people of Southampton.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Intersting an email that within it's heart seems to be requesting the status quo is maintained. You couldn't make it up.

[Weston Super Saint]

Intersting an email that within it's heart seems to be requesting the status quo is maintained. You couldn't make it up.

 

Did you miss the bit about Rupert Lowe stepping down?

 

I would suggest that isn't keeping the status quo...

[Sundance Beast]

Ahhh!!! Somedunce Sheep is back! *rejoices*

 

 

 

The comment about “Duncan Holley is as forward thinking as one of his books” also had a delicious irony…seeing as the mere name “historian” suggests otherwise. A forward thinking history book just doesn’t sound right - but let’s not let common sense cloud your views.

 

Oh dear Gordon, it seems irony is actually lost on narrow minded individual's like yourself. Perhaps I need to make my wit a little more obvious but I was trying to say that as the club's historian Holley is perhaps unlikely to embrace the future.

 

I thought your Gary Glitter inference/veiled insult was a little unnecessary but the mere fact you consider using his name as a point of reference suggests more about you than myself. No doubt the S has long since dropped off your swimming trunks.

 

Enjoy the game today in case you've lost sight of what it's all about.

[SOTONS EAST SIDE]

Did you miss the bit about Rupert Lowe stepping down?

 

I would suggest that isn't keeping the status quo...

Its that blinkered vision,just like the favourite in the 3.00pm race at chepstow! lol

[70's Mike]

Is there no room for the ones who want Lowe out but feel that the replacement should be better considered than last time?

 

Too many on here from both sides are blinkered by the fact that just because they disagree they are either pro or anti, I would suspect if you removed the emotion and asked the question

 

If given an alternative that had a strategy to take SFC forward and all the ideas were credible and achievable would you prefer them to Lowe?

 

I reckon you would be up to the 90% plus mark of people who want RL away from the club.

 

I suspect that even Jonah wants Lowe out but it would be pointless replacing the wolves in the sheeps' field with lions wouldn't it.

 

PROBLEM IS how do you define better?

in 97 i thought we were getting better than Askham and ended up with a clone controlled by Askham

Edited 15 November, 2008 by 70's Mike

[SOTONS EAST SIDE]

Oh dear Gordon, it seems irony is actually lost on narrow minded individual's like yourself. Perhaps I need to make my wit a little more obvious but I was trying to say that as the club's historian Holley is perhaps unlikely to embrace the future.

 

I thought your Gary Glitter inference/veiled insult was a little unnecessary but the mere fact you consider using his name as a point of reference suggests more about you than myself. No doubt the S has long since dropped off your swimming trunks.

 

Enjoy the game today in case you've lost sight of what it's all about.

I find your reference to peadofila and a poster a disgrace! Do you know this poster! Proberly not! I find your posts a good source of amusement, with your seemingly blinkered views. But you've gone to far now!!!!!

[Greenridge]

So proved by Crouch and Wilde being chairmen, NOT.

 

There were those who still felt that someone else could do better. We need a clean slate completely. The problem is who and how and when. Yes you are right but there is no alternative or the alternatives are just as bad and will still have no money and old ideas.

 

Did you actually read what I'd written and understand the thrust of it or just jumped on your pro-Lowe bandwagon without digesting it's content. You continue to be very predictable. Just to underline my point that you are obviously finding difficult to grasp perphaps you'd care to look at last seasons average gate compared to this?

[Wes Tender]

I find your reference to peadofila and a poster a disgrace! Do you know this poster! Proberly not! I find your posts a good source of amusement, with your seemingly blinkered views. But you've gone to far now!!!!!

 

To be fair, SES, Sundance was only responding to what Gordon Mockles had written.

 

Gordon Mockles: I think you need to find a new fallen idol to worship. I hear Gary Glitter is feeling lonely and persecuted Sundance!

 

God knows why I'm coming to his defence after some of the guff he's posted about me!

[Toomer]

Oh dear Gordon, it seems irony is actually lost on narrow minded individual's like yourself. Perhaps I need to make my wit a little more obvious but I was trying to say that as the club's historian Holley is perhaps unlikely to embrace the future.

 

I thought your Gary Glitter inference/veiled insult was a little unnecessary but the mere fact you consider using his name as a point of reference suggests more about you than myself. No doubt the S has long since dropped off your swimming trunks.

 

Enjoy the game today in case you've lost sight of what it's all about.

 

Has yours?

[um pahars]

What was also funny about that show on Thursday night was the sole caller coming on at the end to defend Lowe.

 

Actually, he didn't defemd Lowe as he didn't really say anything in support of him, he was more like playing Devil's Advocate to some of Mark Dennis' more outlandish outbursts.

 

A couple of his gems were:

 

"The shareholders are representing the supporters"

 

&

 

"There are 14,000 up there who are supporting Lowe".

 

If you really think the small cabal of shareholders who are pulling the strings at the moment are represnting the supporters then you are a complete fool.

 

Some may believe they are doing the right thing for the Club, but others are certainly in it for themselves. To suggest they represent the supporters is hilarious.

 

Secondly, how can you claim that those who still attend matches are supporting Lowe is even more ridiculous. Just because people still follow their team, there is no way it can be deemed as even tacit support for the new regime.

 

Of course there are some in the crowd who are still supportive of Lowe et al, but to blindly say those that still go all support the set up is blatant spin.

 

Anyone know who it was??? He came on under the moniker John Lowe (not a relation BTW).

[Tamesaint]

What was also funny about that show on Thursday night was the sole caller coming on at the end to defend Lowe.

 

Actually, he didn't defemd Lowe as he didn't really say anything in support of him, he was more like playing Devil's Advocate to some of Mark Dennis' more outlandish outbursts.

 

A couple of his gems were:

 

"The shareholders are representing the supporters"

 

&

 

"There are 14,000 up there who are supporting Lowe".

 

If you really think the small cabal of shareholders who are pulling the strings at the moment are represnting the supporters then you are a complete fool.

 

Some may believe they are doing the right thing for the Club, but others are certainly in it for themselves. To suggest they represent the supporters is hilarious.

 

Secondly, how can you claim that those who still attend matches are supporting Lowe is even more ridiculous. Just because people still follow their team, there is no way it can be deemed as even tacit support for the new regime.

 

Of course there are some in the crowd who are still supportive of Lowe et al, but to blindly say those that still go all support the set up is blatant spin.

 

Anyone know who it was??? He came on under the moniker John Lowe (not a relation BTW).

 

It couldn't have been Sundance. The doctors don't let him near a telephone in the home where he lives ;-)

[Beckster Von Doodle]

What was also funny about that show on Thursday night was the sole caller coming on at the end to defend Lowe.

 

Actually, he didn't defemd Lowe as he didn't really say anything in support of him, he was more like playing Devil's Advocate to some of Mark Dennis' more outlandish outbursts.

 

A couple of his gems were:

 

"The shareholders are representing the supporters"

 

&

 

"There are 14,000 up there who are supporting Lowe".

 

If you really think the small cabal of shareholders who are pulling the strings at the moment are represnting the supporters then you are a complete fool.

 

Some may believe they are doing the right thing for the Club, but others are certainly in it for themselves. To suggest they represent the supporters is hilarious.

 

Secondly, how can you claim that those who still attend matches are supporting Lowe is even more ridiculous. Just because people still follow their team, there is no way it can be deemed as even tacit support for the new regime.

 

Of course there are some in the crowd who are still supportive of Lowe et al, but to blindly say those that still go all support the set up is blatant spin.

 

Anyone know who it was??? He came on under the moniker John Lowe (not a relation BTW).

 

OMG - the bigger shareholders are in it for investment, the exception may be Crouch, and possibly Wilde, there may also be a bit of self preservation going on as well at the moment.

 

The are many smaller shareholders who probably do represent the fans but unless there is significant organisation they will never bring anything to bere.

 

I would call it naivity rahter than spin, I would suggest the majority want Lowe out in some form or another.

 

Now please post something contreversial so I can disagree with you again!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Dalek2003]

We need a sugar daddy.

[Roman]

We need a sugar daddy.

 

Hugh Heffner?

[suewhistle]

Is there no room for the ones who want Lowe out but feel that the replacement should be better considered than last time?.

 

Exactly. I dislike Lowe and feel he is arrogant, condescending, patronising with a Ratneresque attitude to his customers. That said I don't think people who want us to lose and go into administration have a clue. The assets will be stripped, we'd lose Staplewood, the academy, etc all at liquidation prices and the 'conveyor belt' would be lost,. Any half decent player will go, at knock-down prices. The administrators would be obliged to get the best price for any remaining assets, but I can't see who would want to buy, and would we want them anyway? Going concerns with potential are much easier to sell, but a less than half full ground doesn't offer anybody outside much potential, does it? If we were crap and still fairly full that would be different.

 

Any finally, I don't want to be devisive, because it's 'dIvisive'.:-)

[Beckster Von Doodle]

Exactly. I dislike Lowe and feel he is arrogant, condescending, patronising with a Ratneresque attitude to his customers. That said I don't think people who want us to lose and go into administration have a clue. The assets will be stripped, we'd lose Staplewood, the academy, etc all at liquidation prices and the 'conveyor belt' would be lost,. Any half decent player will go, at knock-down prices. The administrators would be obliged to get the best price for any remaining assets, but I can't see who would want to buy, and would we want them anyway? Going concerns with potential are much easier to sell, but a less than half full ground doesn't offer anybody outside much potential, does it? If we were crap and still fairly full that would be different.

 

Any finally, I don't want to be devisive, because it's 'dIvisive'.:-)

 

You make absolutely pertinent points, the assets like staplewood would be sold off when land prices are at rock bottom to boot. Anyone wantas Lowe out at any cost or thinks administration is a good option needs to considered the points made two or three times before reacting.

 

I think you also sum my feeling up on Lowe as well!

[Plumstead_Saint]

We need a sugar daddy.

Gary Glitter?

[ottery st mary]

Several posters on here do the opposite. Who is employing them?

 

I think Lowey pays out for both sides in order that he can stay in the limelight at all costs........He is the real Luvvie.......The old ham.

[InvictaSaint]

Whether people 'want' administration or not is ultimately a totally moot point; we are not breaking even on crowd figures at SMS, crowd numbers are dipping after 1 home win in 9 (relegation form), there are no family jewels left to sell (Lallana and Schneiderlin may well go for a pittance in January, but this will only paper over the cracks and will simply lead to a further downturn in crowd numbers).

 

When administration does come a'calling, it won't be because posters here wanted it; it will be because of Lowe's ego-driven experimentation with a coach who is out of his depth ("we just need to put them in the net" - no sh*t Sherlock) and players who, try as they might, just don't have the mettle or the experience.

 

Expect the worst.

[sadoldgit]

What a shame that Duncan has decided not to post on here, as his opinions always struck some resonance with my own feelings about how the club has been mismanaged this past decade or so.

 

But what is this? The reappearance of Somedunce and Jonah too, on the same thread? It's almost as if Lowe had picked up the phone to them and said, listen chaps, that historian chap is being rather nasty about me, could you go on that forum thing and try and level the playing field a bit, you know, try and put our side of things over. The bounder says that I'm devisive, but he obviously hasn't the first idea. Why, I even settled my differences with that toady Wilde and allowed him back at the top table with no animosity. Let bygones be bygones, I say. Why are those oiks who follow this wretched club so damned small-minded that they have to constantly harp on about things like this? If anybody wants to come in a put £25 million on the table, the Chair is theirs...

 

Wes, would this be the same Duncan who quite freely said that he would rather SFC were relegated than Lowe stay in charge?

 

Well, I don't know about you, but I think that speaks more about Duncan's own personal issues with Lowe than it does about his love for SFC.

 

For me, I do not give a toss about who is in control as long as we DON'T get relegated.

 

For goodness sakes, look at the clubs around us. All of them have had some success in the Prem as well as us and they are all in the crapper right now. How many of those other clubs does Rupert Lowe run exactly?

 

I suppose it is Rupert Lowe's fault that Laura got voted off the X Facto last week too?

 

Clubs like us get relegated every season and many struggle to adjuct. It is a fact of life.

 

You can spend all day (as many here do) moaning and bleating on about it being all Lowe's fault and what an awful man he is to do such awful things to our football club.....but it ain't going to change a thing.

 

If Duncan thinks that getting rid of Lowe will suddenly turn everything around he is very naive indeed.

 

I suspect his critisism of Wilde and friends was muted because he used to spend hours telling us that "anyone but Lowe" was better. Well, it wasn't was it?

[Long Shot]

Wes, would this be the same Duncan who quite freely said that he would rather SFC were relegated than Lowe stay in charge?

 

Well, I don't know about you, but I think that speaks more about Duncan's own personal issues with Lowe than it does about his love for SFC.

 

For me, I do not give a toss about who is in control as long as we DON'T get relegated.

 

For goodness sakes, look at the clubs around us. All of them have had some success in the Prem as well as us and they are all in the crapper right now. How many of those other clubs does Rupert Lowe run exactly?

 

I suppose it is Rupert Lowe's fault that Laura got voted off the X Facto last week too?

 

Clubs like us get relegated every season and many struggle to adjuct. It is a fact of life.

 

You can spend all day (as many here do) moaning and bleating on about it being all Lowe's fault and what an awful man he is to do such awful things to our football club.....but it ain't going to change a thing.

 

If Duncan thinks that getting rid of Lowe will suddenly turn everything around he is very naive indeed.

 

I suspect his critisism of Wilde and friends was muted because he used to spend hours telling us that "anyone but Lowe" was better. Well, it wasn't was it?

 

 

So that's why you were unable to "make the game" last week.

[Alain Perrin]

How can I hate a person that I have never met before you buffoon;)

 

Ahem.....

 

http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?p=106139#post106139

[Alain Perrin]

Wes, would this be the same Duncan who quite freely said that he would rather SFC were relegated than Lowe stay in charge?

 

Well, I don't know about you, but I think that speaks more about Duncan's own personal issues with Lowe than it does about his love for SFC.

 

For me, I do not give a toss about who is in control as long as we DON'T get relegated.

 

For goodness sakes, look at the clubs around us. All of them have had some success in the Prem as well as us and they are all in the crapper right now. How many of those other clubs does Rupert Lowe run exactly?

 

I suppose it is Rupert Lowe's fault that Laura got voted off the X Facto last week too?

 

Clubs like us get relegated every season and many struggle to adjuct. It is a fact of life.

 

You can spend all day (as many here do) moaning and bleating on about it being all Lowe's fault and what an awful man he is to do such awful things to our football club.....but it ain't going to change a thing.

 

If Duncan thinks that getting rid of Lowe will suddenly turn everything around he is very naive indeed.

 

I suspect his critisism of Wilde and friends was muted because he used to spend hours telling us that "anyone but Lowe" was better. Well, it wasn't was it?

 

I don't know Duncan, so my impression is only through his postings on here and occasional Daily Echo comments. That said, that impression is that his problem with RL has become personal and, for me, that devalues anything he has to say.

 

Personally I am neither pro-Lowe or anti-Lowe, just pro-Saints. I want us to do well and, if a better option than Lowe comes forward I will cling to it like Kate Winslett to a table leg. I do think RL is a divisive figure but I don't think the attendance cost of that devisiveness is that significant (100's not 1000's of fans) and, as the abortive chanting showed on Saturday, if Saints play well then the devisiveness is irrelevant.

 

What I do know is that we are in the financial doo doo and any boardroom shuffling or managerial shuffling will cost cash we don't have.

 

IMHO, the final hand has been dealt and we have to play it. Hopefully it is a good enough hand to avoid relegation and administration. We need the support of all fans, pro or anti, to avoid both and I think Duncan's call is unhelpful.

 

That said he's entitled to his opinion as I am to disagree with it.

[um pahars]

For goodness sakes, look at the clubs around us. All of them have had some success in the Prem as well as us and they are all in the crapper right now. How many of those other clubs does Rupert Lowe run exactly?

 

I suppose it is Rupert Lowe's fault that Laura got voted off the X Facto last week too?

 

Clubs like us get relegated every season and many struggle to adjuct. It is a fact of life.

 

Why do you persist with such a poor line of argument???

 

Just because other teams may or may not have the same problems with Chairman, managers, players or luck doesn't mean it is acceptable for us as well.

 

I take no solace from the fact that Watford or Norwich or Charlton are suffering.

 

Of course we have no divine right to grace the top flght, so to suggest that people think that and to suggest that we should be happy because there are other teams who are also in the mire is such a tired and pathetic line.

[Snowballs2]

I don't think Saints fans are split regarding Lowe. The term implies a 50/50 divsion when in reality you're hard pressed to find anyone with a good word for Lowe away from this forum.

 

 

 

In my humble opinion good old Pareto strikes again...80 / 20 in favour of Lowe out.