Jump to content

Ward Prowse / Rupert Lowe


Gemmel

Recommended Posts

The mail love Lowe as he's friends with Charlie sake. However, I think the guy is forgetting that when lawrie was there we produced le tissier, shearer, wallaces, Maddison, flowers etc.

The system did need re-establishing, though, as Graeme Souness impressively destroyed the whole lot (while Lawrie was director of football, let's not forget) in the space of a year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lowe never had a clue.

Well, actually I think he did. It is an inescapable fact that he put things in motion that paved the way for our Academy to be where it is today. He deserves a lot of criticism for many things, but on this he rightly deserves a small part of the credit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The mail love Lowe as he's friends with Charlie sake. However, I think the guy is forgetting that when lawrie was there we produced le tissier, shearer, wallaces, Maddison, flowers etc.

 

Agreed. Think that the club has always had an eye for young players. Once he had been here for three or four years the McMenemy 'youth policy' was providing a large chunk of the first team squad, stars like Williams and solid pro's like Bambi Waldron and Graham Baker. The Nicholl side that reamed the 'best ever' Liverpool side had the last stream of this youth policy pulling the strings, grounded and nurtured brilliantly by Merrington. Crediting Lowe in this area is like crediting One Direction for inventing rock and roll...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, actually I think he did. It is an inescapable fact that he put things in motion that paved the way for our Academy to be where it is today. He deserves a lot of criticism for many things, but on this he rightly deserves a small part of the credit.

 

 

He was also ahead of his time in running a football club at break-even point (as we had to as we were a plc) when all the mongs in the Northam were yelling at him to invest (i.e spend money the club didn't have... or cheating as we call it when Pompey do it...)

 

Staying in the PL for as long as we did, with more and more clubs coming up with rich sugar daddies was no mean feat. Also add to that re-establishment of the Academy and the building of a new stadium for the the incredibly cheap price of about £30m...

 

I love how many fans can just say "Lowe was crap" without coming close to realising that the changes Lowe made to the club to drag it from the archaic state it was in was precisely the reason why it proved attractive to Liebherr and Cortese.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was also ahead of his time in running a football club at break-even point (as we had to as we were a plc) when all the mongs in the Northam were yelling at him to invest (i.e spend money the club didn't have... or cheating as we call it when Pompey do it...)

 

Staying in the PL for as long as we did, with more and more clubs coming up with rich sugar daddies was no mean feat. Also add to that re-establishment of the Academy and the building of a new stadium for the the incredibly cheap price of about £30m...

 

I love how many fans can just say "Lowe was crap" without coming close to realising that the changes Lowe made to the club to drag it from the archaic state it was in was precisely the reason why it proved attractive to Liebherr and Cortese.

 

Will fall on death ears I'm affraid - Most reasonable fans see his failings for what they were - but also credit where its due - the problem is, prudent financial policy and being happy to invest 2mil a year in the academy rather than first team etc - were the antithis of waht was being spouted by those that just saw him as toff with no place in football. It became so ingrained that even though the plain fact is that prudent finance and academy investment was the way forward, most wont even acknoledge he got that right now.

 

What many dont appreciate is that the previous era when clubs like saints brought through players was 'A DIFFERENT' era - at that time local lad joined as apprentice son 5 bob a week and polished boots and all clubs did the same - and like all clubs we had duffers and good uns. But as we headed towards the sky revolution this as already begining to change as income and attendances were falling - all seater stadia saw to that, and academies became an expense too many - or were given little investment - what Lowe did was accept it was necessary to SPEND a large wedge to buold it up again - 2mil was a lot less than other bigger clubs, but as aproportion of our revenue it was higher and he set up Bath, and brought in continental coaches as in Prost etc - this was GOOD stuff, but naturally some saw this as 'expense' at the expens eof the first team as a luxury we could not afford and as an idicator he did not know what he was doing.

 

Toff, arrogant, duckshooting rednosed plonker - probably, but still astute when it came to the way football would need to go for clubs of our size - his biggest 'crime' was not having the resources to progress beyond the odd good season at a time when resources was the only way to success.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was also ahead of his time in running a football club at break-even point (as we had to as we were a plc) when all the mongs in the Northam were yelling at him to invest (i.e spend money the club didn't have... or cheating as we call it when Pompey do it...)

 

Staying in the PL for as long as we did, with more and more clubs coming up with rich sugar daddies was no mean feat. Also add to that re-establishment of the Academy and the building of a new stadium for the the incredibly cheap price of about £30m...

 

I love how many fans can just say "Lowe was crap" without coming close to realising that the changes Lowe made to the club to drag it from the archaic state it was in was precisely the reason why it proved attractive to Liebherr and Cortese.

 

I think it is time for Saints supporters to grow up and see the positive things that Lowe brought to the club. Much of his legacy lives on. The biggest failure on the part of Lowe was not to bring in big investment. I believe this was due to his egocentric insistence of holding all the strings and not letting potential investors take over or share the running of the club. Had Lowe had the investment he would have bought in big signings and perhaps never got to being taken in by Sir Clive Woodward's insane ideas. Although there was some method is Woodward's madness.

 

I still believe that Lowe had/has some connections with Cortese, with selling the club to him and Markus, probably a long time before the club ended up in administration. Of all past regimes, Lowe's vision is the one that resembles most closely that of our current benefactors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is time for Saints supporters to grow up and see the positive things that Lowe brought to the club. Much of his legacy lives on. The biggest failure on the part of Lowe was not to bring in big investment. I believe this was due to his egocentric insistence of holding all the strings and not letting potential investors take over or share the running of the club. Had Lowe had the investment he would have bought in big signings and perhaps never got to being taken in by Sir Clive Woodward's insane ideas. Although there was some method is Woodward's madness.

 

I still believe that Lowe had/has some connections with Cortese, with selling the club to him and Markus, probably a long time before the club ended up in administration. Of all past regimes, Lowe's vision is the one that resembles most closely that of our current benefactors.

 

The biggest irony of them all! Like you say, it wa snot Lowe's ideas or vision that was wrong, just not having a pot to **** in to make it work and a reluctance to compromise his position for the revenues/investment that would have supported it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lowe's only motive for developing our youth was money. He basically saw pound marks above the young players heads. They were never developed for the benefit of the club rather they were developed for the cheques he would receive from players like Walcott. The money those cheques brought in never benefitted the club, they benefitted his shareholding buddies, where most of the money we got from those players PROBABLY ended up. The difference between now and then is when we develop a player we can actually develop a player with a very good chance it will be for the benefit of Southampton Football club, not for Spurs or Arsenal :p. If we do have a player who gets seduced by a big club, like the Oxlade Chamberlain situation, were the the player wants to leave. Then we also know the money from the sell will be invested back in the team. That NEVER would of happened under Lowe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, actually I think he did. It is an inescapable fact that he put things in motion that paved the way for our Academy to be where it is today. He deserves a lot of criticism for many things, but on this he rightly deserves a small part of the credit.

 

 

The strategies of Lowe and Cortese are one and the same. Their execution is different because of one fundamental, Cortese places first team results above every other concern. Which is perfect football Chairmanship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The strategies of Lowe and Cortese are one and the same. Their execution is different because of one fundamental, Cortese places first team results above every other concern. Which is perfect football Chairmanship.
Partly that and partly the fact that Cortese's vision is funded by the Liebherr's equity, Lowe had share-holders to answer to - who knows how each one would work out if they were in the other's shoes.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will fall on death ears I'm affraid - Most reasonable fans see his failings for what they were - but also credit where its due - the problem is, prudent financial policy and being happy to invest 2mil a year in the academy rather than first team etc - were the antithis of waht was being spouted by those that just saw him as toff with no place in football. It became so ingrained that even though the plain fact is that prudent finance and academy investment was the way forward, most wont even acknoledge he got that right now.

 

What many dont appreciate is that the previous era when clubs like saints brought through players was 'A DIFFERENT' era - at that time local lad joined as apprentice son 5 bob a week and polished boots and all clubs did the same - and like all clubs we had duffers and good uns. But as we headed towards the sky revolution this as already begining to change as income and attendances were falling - all seater stadia saw to that, and academies became an expense too many - or were given little investment - what Lowe did was accept it was necessary to SPEND a large wedge to buold it up again - 2mil was a lot less than other bigger clubs, but as aproportion of our revenue it was higher and he set up Bath, and brought in continental coaches as in Prost etc - this was GOOD stuff, but naturally some saw this as 'expense' at the expens eof the first team as a luxury we could not afford and as an idicator he did not know what he was doing.

 

Toff, arrogant, duckshooting rednosed plonker - probably, but still astute when it came to the way football would need to go for clubs of our size - his biggest 'crime' was not having the resources to progress beyond the odd good season at a time when resources was the only way to success.

 

 

Very true he saw the way football was going with SKY etc early and helped improve our academy with good technical coaching he also saw no option but to build a stadium (which also heavily contained our spend) . Look at the opposite at Poopey no spend on a stadium or youth and therefore no legacy with all monies blown on overpaid journeymen and has beens.

 

What Lowe lacked were funds, some listening skills, a bit of charisma and the ability to attract investment. He also erred on the side of prudence in the Strachan era where a bit of a gamble may have seen us push on!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very true he saw the way football was going with SKY etc early and helped improve our academy with good technical coaching he also saw no option but to build a stadium (which also heavily contained our spend) . Look at the opposite at Poopey no spend on a stadium or youth and therefore no legacy with all monies blown on overpaid journeymen and has beens.

 

What Lowe lacked were funds, some listening skills, a bit of charisma and the ability to attract investment. He also erred on the side of prudence in the Strachan era where a bit of a gamble may have seen us push on!

 

I know many see/saw me as some sort of Lowe apologist... I am not and am happy to admit his numourous failings, but I was also irritaed by the constant mythology - anyone could access the full accounts if they wanted to detailed accounts as was necessary for any PLC - and the idiocy of rumours about pocketing cash and all money going to shareholders was total bollo x - yesthere were dividends a necssaary evil of a PLC otherwise folk sell their shares and the value of the company falls to a point where raising capital becomes impossible - maintaining the shareprice through dividends and buy backs was a necessary part of ensuring we got finance on manageable and favourable terms fo things like the stadium and the dividends were never above 800k and many seasons we did not provide any.

 

Lets not forget the none of teh shareholders incluidng the historic ones such as the Corbetts ever turned their divs down to 'reinvest' in the first team either - and I dont blame them. It was this sort of BS I had issue with, not with critique of his arrogance or ego (which probably did stand in the way of some investment oportunity for sure) .... and we still see it today - mis informed accusation of monies form sales funding shareholder dividends.... Zzzzzzz

Edited by Frank's cousin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wish I hadnt read that! didnt realise Ward Prowse was a dirty skate! (-;

 

Didn't someone post a link of one of his twitter comments? Before the skates game? I'm pretty sure he made it very clear he was a Saints fan even though his father was a skate, cant remember what thread it was on now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was also ahead of his time in running a football club at break-even point (as we had to as we were a plc) when all the mongs in the Northam were yelling at him to invest (i.e spend money the club didn't have... or cheating as we call it when Pompey do it...)

 

Staying in the PL for as long as we did, with more and more clubs coming up with rich sugar daddies was no mean feat. Also add to that re-establishment of the Academy and the building of a new stadium for the the incredibly cheap price of about £30m...

 

I love how many fans can just say "Lowe was crap" without coming close to realising that the changes Lowe made to the club to drag it from the archaic state it was in was precisely the reason why it proved attractive to Liebherr and Cortese.

Cortese's priorities and approach are almost identical to Lowe's, the only real - but important- difference is that he has the financial resources behind him and has a better eye for a manager.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lowe's only motive for developing our youth was money. He basically saw pound marks above the young players heads. They were never developed for the benefit of the club rather they were developed for the cheques he would receive from players like Walcott. The money those cheques brought in never benefitted the club, they benefitted his shareholding buddies, where most of the money we got from those players PROBABLY ended up. The difference between now and then is when we develop a player we can actually develop a player with a very good chance it will be for the benefit of Southampton Football club, not for Spurs or Arsenal :p. If we do have a player who gets seduced by a big club, like the Oxlade Chamberlain situation, were the the player wants to leave. Then we also know the money from the sell will be invested back in the team. That NEVER would of happened under Lowe.

 

What complete and utter bollux.

 

We were a plc so if you want to see where the money "PROBABLY" ended up then all you need to do is to look at the published accounts. You will quickly find that sqaure root of f'k all went to shareholders. As one myself I certainly never received a penny...

 

As for players only leaving now because they want to leave. Are you honestly saying that Bridge, Walcott and the rest were forced out of the door by a chariman looking to cash in???? No, they all wanted to leave and so they did. Which is exactly the same as will happen with Lallana, Shaw, Ward-Prowse (who I would imagine has as much loyalty to the club as Oxo) when/if they want to leave.

 

I'm very happy with how Cortese is running the club but do you really think "the money from a sale will be invested back into the team"?

 

Let's look at the facts, we have got promoted to the PL this year and that is worth tens of millions of ££s. As Sky showed on Sunday, the net spend on players has been £3m, a figure even Rupurt would be proud of. What's that? £1m per year. I'm sure if our net spend under Lowe was £1m per year the fans would be baying for blood.

 

Given the above, how much of the Oxo money do you think has been ploughed back into the club. I would wager not very much at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only the blinkered fail to recognise the good things Lowe did (new stadium, development of the academy, run the business at break-even) alongside the awful things he did (poor managerial appointments, dreadful PR, over-interference in the playing side).

 

Agreed - but do think the over -interference in the playing side was over played

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As ever with Lowe, polarised views but I go somewhere in between. Between 1997 and 2003 for me he was a breath of fresh air compared to the carnage of the Askham era with Branfoot and all the old players on big wages we lost a fortune on and the less said about the stock market launch and the few years before it the better. Lowe did build much better infrastructure, not just the academy but SMS and made it a more solid entity. However, although some of his ideas were very good, he needed much greater financial clout to carry them through and he just didn't have the money to undo Askham's messy deadlock of different stakeholders and buying them out with a larger scale investor.

 

I think 2002/3 went to his head a bit and he thought we could replicate that with any old manager in charge. Wrong. The Woodward thing was muddled in its execution and a distraction when the squad had dangerously diluted whilst the managerial swing door kept revolving. By the time he returned, the whole club stank of administration and it was only a matter of time until it did enter it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As ever with Lowe, polarised views but I go somewhere in between. Between 1997 and 2003 for me he was a breath of fresh air compared to the carnage of the Askham era with Branfoot and all the old players on big wages we lost a fortune on and the less said about the stock market launch and the few years before it the better. Lowe did build much better infrastructure, not just the academy but SMS and made it a more solid entity. However, although some of his ideas were very good, he needed much greater financial clout to carry them through and he just didn't have the money to undo Askham's messy deadlock of different stakeholders and buying them out with a larger scale investor.

 

I think 2002/3 went to his head a bit and he thought we could replicate that with any old manager in charge. Wrong. The Woodward thing was muddled in its execution and a distraction when the squad had dangerously diluted whilst the managerial swing door kept revolving. By the time he returned, the whole club stank of administration and it was only a matter of time until it did enter it.

 

I've always put our relegation down to the fact that for two or three years we bought hardly anyone of better quality (the Mikael Nilssons etc) whilst all around us clubs were strengthening. I look back on that squad and shudder. Prutton, Higginbotham, Davenport... It's the stuff of nightmares. Then we sack Sturrock who I didn't think we would have prospered under anyway, and appointed Wigley was who little better than a gormless idiot. We appoint Redknapp who is only a good manager when he has money to spend, we don't give him enough cash and go down.

 

It also occurs to me that Lowe never wanted to attract investment or sell the club. I was never in favour of getting rid of him but his position became untenable and then yes, I wanted him gone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only the blinkered fail to recognise the good things Lowe did (new stadium, development of the academy, run the business at break-even) alongside the awful things he did (poor managerial appointments, dreadful PR, over-interference in the playing side).

 

I agree with this. In some ways Lowe was somewhat of a visionary. Unfortunately a lot of his 'visions' didn't pay off and at times that made him look foolish. He did rebuild the Academy after some barren years but remember, we were producing our fair share of top flight players long before anyone had ever heard of Rupert Lowe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with this. In some ways Lowe was somewhat of a visionary. Unfortunately a lot of his 'visions' didn't pay off and at times that made him look foolish. He did rebuild the Academy after some barren years but remember, we were producing our fair share of top flight players long before anyone had ever heard of Rupert Lowe.

 

Lawrie McMenemy would never let you forget.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Managerial merry go round for a decade leading to utter instability and a bloated squad of disjointed journeymen that were not good enough.

 

Buying players without the manager's input. As if Rupes had the first idea about what made a good player. He even bought injured players .

 

Bizarre tinkering with the coaching infrastructure, rugby coaches and soccer skills coaches being paid big bucks for some strange master plan.

 

Alienation of fans and utterly gash PR.

 

Giving Harry Redknapp 90k to spend when he had assembled a team that was (IMO) 1 good striker short of being able to compete for top 2 on a shoestring. This was after having sold off Crouch and Phillips.

 

Dumping a decent manager in Nigel Pearson and appointing a pair of Dutch uknowns who sank without trace.

 

Being the source of constant political infighting.

 

Finally running out on a broken and busted club, leaving it for dead.

 

Thanks Rupes for all your efforts.....and yes I will give you some credit for an academy but don't forget we'd always had one, where do you think the likes of Chivers, Channon, Wallace, Shearer and LeTiss had all come from?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always put our relegation down to the fact that for two or three years we bought hardly anyone of better quality (the Mikael Nilssons etc) whilst all around us clubs were strengthening. I look back on that squad and shudder. Prutton, Higginbotham, Davenport... It's the stuff of nightmares. Then we sack Sturrock who I didn't think we would have prospered under anyway, and appointed Wigley was who little better than a gormless idiot. We appoint Redknapp who is only a good manager when he has money to spend, we don't give him enough cash and go down.

 

It also occurs to me that Lowe never wanted to attract investment or sell the club. I was never in favour of getting rid of him but his position became untenable and then yes, I wanted him gone.

 

Well he did only have 6% of the shares and as we saw when Wilde and Crouch arrived, if someone had wanted it they could have bought it. The problem with a PLC was that how do you attract 'investment' - unless all shareholders put in cash equivilent to their shareholding, it would mean a dilution of someones holding - and for what purpose if not totally smitten to blow money?

 

Any outsider would want equity for a cash injection and that would mean a huge chunk going to shareholders rather than the club, unless shareholders were prepared to dilute their equity for nothing - I remember Lowe's 20mil and they can be chairman quote - which was never truely understood or interpreted correctly - I believe what he meant was if someone cam in with 20 mil as a cash gift, they could be chairman and he would step aside - but there was no mention of any of the shareholders relinquishing their stake - in addition if someone came in and bought 20 mil of shares (about 60% of the clubs value at the time) they would be in a position to take charge anyway - but this would not have meant any cash for the squad, unless they pumped in some more... many misinterpreted this as Lowe saying ' give me 20 mil and you can take my share and be chairman' - easy to see why they might have thought this as Lowe did not explain it at all well (not for the first time), but as a result some felt he wanted 20 mil to leave and called him a greedy fecker because of it - another myth Lowe brough on himself...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only the blinkered fail to recognise the good things Lowe did (new stadium, development of the academy, run the business at break-even) alongside the awful things he did (poor managerial appointments, dreadful PR, over-interference in the playing side).

 

:) Over interference in the playing side. If you are going bankrupt and you insist certain players cannot be played because we can't afford their bonuses, that's what he's meant to do. When you are paying millions for an Academy and insist on having a route to the first team for those players, that's just basic logic.

 

Lowe never got involved in these matters on that level unless it was financially under lined. His asset was getting the right people into the right positions and then giving them the freedom to make it a success. Before Lawrie left he brought the back up to the first team to it's knees. Leaving Lowe to have to build from scratch, who went away and studied what was successful, listened wisely to the right people then let the appointments do what they were paid for. All those people we have had at the Academy that have gone on to star elsewhere do not have one bad word to say about Lowe, just praise.

 

In a lot of the good characteristics, Lowe and Cortese are two peas from the same pod. It would not surprise me if he's working to a blueprint left over by Lowe. With the added benefit of money and without the need to open his mouth every other minute you get what we have now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no question that Lowe was instrumental in putting the structure in place for the Academy development and for that he deserves credit. Also he handled the Walcott transfer well. Everything else he screwed up as he was clueless. For those who claimed Lowe was Strachan's biggest supporter read in Stachan's biography about the SFC director in the bushes at Staplewood spying on training with a pair of binos - until he fell out of the bush. You could not make it up. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For those who claimed Lowe was Strachan's biggest supporter read in Stachan's biography about the SFC director in the bushes at Staplewood spying on training with a pair of binos - until he fell out of the bush. You could not make it up.

 

Didn't Lowe also hire people to post 'Rupert is great' propaganda on here?

 

:facepalm: + :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:) Over interference in the playing side. If you are going bankrupt and you insist certain players cannot be played because we can't afford their bonuses, that's what he's meant to do. When you are paying millions for an Academy and insist on having a route to the first team for those players, that's just basic logic.

 

Lowe never got involved in these matters on that level unless it was financially under lined. His asset was getting the right people into the right positions and then giving them the freedom to make it a success. Before Lawrie left he brought the back up to the first team to it's knees. Leaving Lowe to have to build from scratch, who went away and studied what was successful, listened wisely to the right people then let the appointments do what they were paid for. All those people we have had at the Academy that have gone on to star elsewhere do not have one bad word to say about Lowe, just praise.

 

In a lot of the good characteristics, Lowe and Cortese are two peas from the same pod. It would not surprise me if he's working to a blueprint left over by Lowe. With the added benefit of money and without the need to open his mouth every other minute you get what we have now.

 

You entirely missed my point on over-interference. It was the mongrammed tracksuit and pushing through transfers over his managers' heads that earned him criticism in certain quarters. I personally didn't have too much of a problem with him bringing in players; we saw the likes of Crouch and Niemi because of that approach. And its not dissimilar to the system we have now with a transfer committee. As my previous post to Frank stated, this approach was another stick for some to beat him with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What complete & utter bollux.

 

Lowe, Cowan & his buddies were the largest shareholders & took the majority of any dividend that was paid out. They also put in place 'share buy back' for no other reason than diluting the shares in issue to increase their personal percentage holdings.

 

I know Lowe from WH Ireland as well. A business that booted him out for his performance. I know him from Morgan Grenfell where he traded junk bonds. He was crap at that too.

 

I will give him some credit for ensuring the academy was important. As for his motives, not sure. I think his general idea was to sell a player a year to keep the club going. Understandable, but that aspiration tied in nicely with his dividend & share buy back policy.

 

 

What complete and utter bollux.

 

We were a plc so if you want to see where the money "PROBABLY" ended up then all you need to do is to look at the published accounts. You will quickly find that sqaure root of f'k all went to shareholders. As one myself I certainly never received a penny...

 

As for players only leaving now because they want to leave. Are you honestly saying that Bridge, Walcott and the rest were forced out of the door by a chariman looking to cash in???? No, they all wanted to leave and so they did. Which is exactly the same as will happen with Lallana, Shaw, Ward-Prowse (who I would imagine has as much loyalty to the club as Oxo) when/if they want to leave.

 

I'm very happy with how Cortese is running the club but do you really think "the money from a sale will be invested back into the team"?

 

Let's look at the facts, we have got promoted to the PL this year and that is worth tens of millions of ££s. As Sky showed on Sunday, the net spend on players has been £3m, a figure even Rupurt would be proud of. What's that? £1m per year. I'm sure if our net spend under Lowe was £1m per year the fans would be baying for blood.

 

Given the above, how much of the Oxo money do you think has been ploughed back into the club. I would wager not very much at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We appoint Redknapp who is only a good manager when he has money to spend, we don't give him enough cash and go down.

 

Utter, utter ******. If there is one thing you can fault Lowe for here is that it was in giving satchel face too much funds in the January window in trying to keep us up.So much so that we were in severe financial difficulty following relegation that Crouch had to go for a good price, leaving us with that measly £90k.

 

Just look at the players we brought in to avoid relegation. Quasie, Redknappm Barnard, Davenport and Camara costing £0.75M just for is short loan. Not to mention we still had offers on the table for Dawson and Reid at Forest up to the very end. Just go and compare that with the mighty tactician that was Bryan Robson and figure out how we got tucked up like a kipper?

 

Satchel face was ashamed to be at Saints and wish he never made the move from the first day. Spurred into the position by his lovers tiff with Mandaric, then shining like a beetroot with embarrassment when introduced to the press and a Saints scarf.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The biggest irony of them all! Like you say' date=' it wa snot Lowe's ideas or vision that was wrong, just not having a pot to **** in to make it work and a reluctance to compromise his position for the revenues/investment that would have supported it.[/quote']

 

That and a couple of fluffed managerial appointments. Lowe was trying to achieve something very similar to what we're attempting now: Investment in the academy and facilities, sustainable finances, a coherent style of play from youth to first-team. It seemed to me that it would have had more success if he'd got the top job right and employed/retained the right manager. They weren't always his fault (Hoddle/Strachan leaving). But it seemed to me what he was attempting to do in promoting coaches from within the club was maintain a consistency of style and vision. The problem arose in that when those promoted coaches didn't get the results in the short to medium term, Lowe bowed to economic pressure and recruited some old-school british manager for a short-term fix. These in turn brought in their favoured 'seasoned' pros, which created a bottle-neck where the Academy should have been feeding the first team, and a disconnect in the club style of play.

 

With a bit more money Lowe would have had the financial leeway to join up all the dots, rather than living in terror of relegation. Now, with decent money backing the project, a similar ethic might work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rupert Lowe was spawn of the Devil whose only purpose in being involved with Saints was to enrich himself so that he could buy more babies to eat. How do I know? I read it on here! I do recall also that he oversaw the construction of the SMS although he warned at the time that it was only affordable as long as we stayed in the Prem. He tried to stave off relegation by employing Redknapp, who like it not, is widely regarded as an effective manager, and Lowe gave him the funds to bring in new players in that January window. In the end, one more goal scored to change a draw to a win, would have kept us up and sent down WBA instead. It was obviously Lowe's fault that we didn't score that goal so he got what he deserved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The mail love Lowe as he's friends with Charlie sake.

 

However, I think the guy is forgetting that when Lawrie was there we produced le tissier, shearer, wallaces, Maddison, flowers etc.

 

 

well actually - he wasn't. Lawrie left - and went to Sunderland in June 1985. Le Tissier debuted in August 1986..and most of the others even later.

 

The man responsible for nurturing that talent ..and quite a few more was ..Dave Merrington, who had charge of the youth set-up from mid 1984 right through until he had the unenviable task of trying to keep us afloat for the season 1995/96. (eleven years later). When Rupert Lowe took over, he sacked DM and put in Graeme Souness......and he didn't stay for more than a year...

 

For those who love to cringe and criticise DM's input on Radio Solent, show some consideration because the man was probably the finest youth team trainer the club has ever had - bar none.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WOW! Lowe’s levels of arrogance know no bounds!! He helped with the academy, not disputing that, but that is all. He took more than he gave.

 

I still laugh as Rupe’s Wiki “POWER BROKER” self-appointed tag. Says it all. It is hardly rocket science and he used the club as a farm rather than an investment because no businessman with a modicum of sense would invest with him at the helm. Ask yourself, in all his time at the club – is it not odd no-one made any substantial investments? Much like the Jim Hone period – I expect any interest we may have had would have been instantly muted with more focus on engineering personal financial reward. Conjecture based on observations, history and my own meandering opinion. All that time in charge and no investment. Says it all and I would love to know why but can hazard a guess.

 

So, rather than building the youth or trying to keep them, sell at first big offer. Good for the bank, bad for the team. My friend in the academy spoke direct with Gareth Bale's Dad at the time of the Spurs transfer so I know exactly how the Lowe level of trying to keep a players differs from that of how Cortese kept Lallana and tried to keep Oxo. Offering a player a p*ss poor contract and saying "but we'll really look after you" is pathetic and akin to telling them to "foxtrot oscar". Personally, I think he may have stayed had a reasonable package been offered but we were not in a good way financially and no way would he or his cronies invest. They need that share money for their personal accounts along with the dividends and such. Pathetic how we also wrote off Bale’s resale fee for Forecast and the other dross he got in. Such sporting and financial acumen!

 

I love the way arrogant people think, it's laughable. Totally into themselves and blinded from reality. Almost sociopathic without sense and empathy, so they say. He truly has forgotten he removed Pearson, instilled 2 Dutch no hopers and thought he knew better than lifelong professionals (an EPIC FAL!!) pleading with him a squad of academy kids will not work yet he conveniently forgets this and the fact his magnificent "financial prudence" failed to balance the books and he had not been vigilant enough to prevent Barclays putting us into admin. with a relatively small debt, at a time AFTER the 10 point deduction cut off.

 

Of course, Lowe blamed Barclays as people of his ilk do. Never man enough to hold their hands up and admit fault from the massive catalogue of failings and his absolute ineptitude in the sporting arena. Conveniently forgetting how he run us into the ground and almost destroyed us. It’s likely an article deliberately made to goad the fans. Arrogant people in tw*tty financial circles have a perverse sense of humour and place themselves above “normal” working classes and you only have to analyse that t*sser from Barclays on the Libor scandal to realise. Bunch of bankers – no offence Nicola cos he’s hardly Captain Charisma and certainly doesn’t have a warmth and empathy for people which is sad but, unlike Lowe, he does run the club well and the management of SFC currently has the 2 key elements which has strangled our club for years under Askham, Lowe and all the other self serving cronies (I don’t include Best as he did try, he did care, he did appoint a decent manager in Pearson and he did invest (personally) rather than profit personally from shares, etc. and use the club as an egotists train set. Almost child-like.

 

Yes, he appointed well with Elias, Jennings, etc because Lowe did know the value of the Academy and he saw it as the only facet to bring in money and he was so tight, he would hold out for the absolute max transfer fee which was good for the club, no-one can deny. However, what he fails to mention to the absolute detriment of any sporting success is that he sold every performing academy players as soon as the first big money offer came in and subsequently sold off any other player that hit form. From a sporting perspective, suicide. Hence why I was relieved when Lallana was kept with a proper package offered and future rising stars will likely be made good offers and the club will try and keep them....rather than offering a p*ss poor contract, knowing they’ll say no so you can turn to the fans and say “they wouldn’t sign the contract we offered”.

 

Luckily, the parasitic rein of Lowe has long gone and it took us 7 hard years and almost extinction to wash away the bile which pervaded every nook and cranny within St Mary’s (sadly, just Forecast left on a STUPIDLY contract long contract. Worst keeper we must have had – how long shall we sign him for without knowledge of his skill? Errrr, 5 years, 6....why not 7? Wonder what idiot signed that.................). What a t*sser. The article isn’t serious. Just a troll trying to stir up fans. If he does truly want credit still, he’ll need to accept all the blame first but sadly I don’t think people of his blinded reasoning will ever do that. Cheeky sod. His prevaricating rein is dead but our club, no thanks to him, is not. Good riddance and don’t you dare try and piggy back on our current rebirth and as Lowe is akin to the afterbirth. Send him away to be examined....preferably in a padded cell with the purveyors of a one world government to do some exploratory work!!

He is a part of our history I would prefer forgotten and his mere name on the main page in our bright new era is an insult to the club, the fans, Cortese, the Liebherr’s and those whom helped rebuild the dilapidated ruins which was our club post Lowe. Foxtrot Oscar please and take your sensational tabloid t*ssy hack with you.

The ending of the article is pure Lowe, funny guy when he wants to be, and I quote - “I was kicked out of the club but I think I left them with a pretty good legacy”. LMAO – There’s no point even engaging a comment like that if that is his mind set. The nutter!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...