Leon Crouch speaks

[slickmick]

Question is would Barclays not be making the demand rather than a decision?

 

My guess is yes also

 

Unless Leon knows where he hid the investors of course

 

 

Your right Phil, I keep overlooking the fact/assumption that Barclays are calling the shots.

[OldNick]

I havent read the whole thread but has anyone brought up the fact apart from LC RL MW the others in the bunch have done a really poor job. Wiseman Corbett and Trant , fans who have overseen this disaster by saying nothing it seems.

[saintjay77]

crouch has his faults but IMO cares more about the club than the other two clowns, not gonna happen but If the stay away fans did return and we were regularly exceeding 20,000 gates would Lowe and Wilde still sell our key players anyway?

 

my guess is yes

 

Probably yes now as there is only a handful of games till the transfer window. Had we been getting those gates throughout the season and still sold the family jewels then everyone would have allot more right to go mad at the current board. If 18k gates service our outgoings and our debt then 20k should be putting us in a very good position.

 

but if we need 18k and only getting 14k then its a bit late for a rallying cry of fill the stadium so the fans are not an excuse.

[St Marco]

To be fair though Wilde brought this response himself. In his programme notes at Plymouth game he pretty much ripped into Crouch and placed the blame on his door. The reality is that Wilde is the one to blame for what has happened. He came in saying he was the saviour and had the cash to be injected into the club. He was the one who green lighted the mass spending we had in our promotion chasing season. When that didn't work he brought in people who were meant to be on his side. They didn't agree with Wilde so Wilde quit like he does. Then Crouch said we had to make cut backs and he was sacked. Then when the board couldn't get new investment they left with a nice £500k pay off. And now Wilde comes back saying everyone is to blame but him. Well sorry Wilde but in my book you are worse then the rest of them combined and you are to blame for our situation. You lied about investment, you brought in people who were cowboys and we had to pay £500k to rectify your mistake. Then you come out thinking the fans are stupid and will believe someone who had no control over the finances side was to blame in his 4 month chairmanship.

Then you go on to say

"We are pleased that Mr Crouch is enjoying watching the fantastic displays that our young squad have been providing, and are confident we will be able to improve on the encouraging start we have made.”

This just sums up the man. We are 3 places away from the relegation zone. Won 1 out of 11 home games and lost 5 of them. Have lost nearly 50% of our 20 games already this season. And have seen some of the worst performances i have ever seen. If Kelvin Davis was not in the form of his life i have no doubt we would of not won most of our wins, which are only 5....How is that encouraging exactly? The guy is a total moomin.

 

As for Lowe i think the bit where Crouch says

“Despite receiving tens of millions from player transfers, television, sponsorship revenues and packed houses at St Mary’s, all we were left with when Rupert departed was the second year parachute payment."

 

Think that sums it up pretty well.

[offix]

Mr. Crouch has my respect. Class act.

[offix]

From the article:

“We are pleased that Mr Crouch is enjoying watching the fantastic displays that our young squad have been providing, and are confident we will be able to improve on the encouraging start we have made.”

 

Fantastic displays? Encouraging start? What team have they been watching?

[benjii]

From the article:

“We are pleased that Mr Crouch is enjoying watching the fantastic displays that our young squad have been providing, and are confident we will be able to improve on the encouraging start we have made.”

 

Fantastic displays? Encouraging start? What team have they been watching?

 

R Lowe Chairman's Select 11 Irregulars FC

[derry]

Crouch is such a muppet:

 

 

 

Just like Ted Bates' reign resulted in our relegation in 1974 no doubt. And presumably he'll be first to acknowledge that his own reign took us to the brink of relegation to the 3rd tier? Crikey, that sounds even worse doesn't it Leon?

 

 

 

In other words, Rupert spent every penny we had on the team, Leon is making the point that Rupert wasn't squirreling it away and refusing to spend it...

 

 

 

Oh no, wait, that doesn't fit in with what I want to say, I'd better try to claim Rupert was squirreling it away and refusing to spend this fictional money after all!

 

 

 

Could Captain ****up possibly have considered the idea - I know it's outrageous to even suggest this - that he actually checked this triffling matter *before* supporting Wilde?

 

 

 

He's a loose cannon, no doubt with the best intentions, but with very little clue. You'd almost think he was on a different planet sometimes...

 

 

 

Ah yes, so he is!

 

Why the hell you should mention Ted Bates is ludicrous in the context of this thread. When Ted stood down to allow McMenemy to become manager we were about 4th in the first division. It was McMenemy that was responsible for relegation in 1974.

[benjii]

Why the hell you should mention Ted Bates is ludicrous in the context of this thread. When Ted stood down to allow McMenemy to become manager we were about 4th in the first division. It was McMenemy that was responsible for relegation in 1974.

 

He never lets facts get in the way of a minority rant.

[saintjay77]

Why the hell you should mention Ted Bates is ludicrous in the context of this thread. When Ted stood down to allow McMenemy to become manager we were about 4th in the first division. It was McMenemy that was responsible for relegation in 1974.

 

still resulted in relegation.

 

lots of different circumstances and reasons in both but i think jonah was trying to show double standards are widly used when ever lowes name gets thrown into the hat.

[saint1977]

I havent read the whole thread but has anyone brought up the fact apart from LC RL MW the others in the bunch have done a really poor job. Wiseman Corbett and Trant , fans who have overseen this disaster by saying nothing it seems.

 

Add Askham to the list and put him at the top. Actually, it's a shame that there is antagonism between Leon and Rupert as actually, along with Cowen (never met Lee Hoos), they are the only boardroom figures post-Bates that I have had any respect for. I'm not a Rupert fan but I do recognise he's had his good moments at SFC. Leon is a fan, I don't agree with some of his decisions but actually, if Leon and Lowe had have shaken hands in summer 2006 and cut Wilde out (who was seen by most of us, me included, as someone with SFC's best interests at heart. How wrong we were), who knows things may not have got this bad. Rupert may have restrained Leon a bit and likewise, Leon may have curbed the worst of Lowe's flights of fantasy and experimentation. In reality, they'd probably have been fighting in 5 seconds flat but it isolates why we're in a mess that we expect so little of our major shareholders.

 

Wilde has actually sunk even lower than Guy Askham in my all time Saints hate list. The man is a weasel and I respect Lowe even if I don't like him for fronting up and taking stick from the fans. Mike just hides when the going gets tough and was clearly full of egotistical nonsense in 2006, there were no investors and the board quickly saw that.

[derry]

still resulted in relegation.

 

lots of different circumstances and reasons in both but i think jonah was trying to show double standards are widly used when ever lowes name gets thrown into the hat.

 

Linking Lowe to Ted Bates is a bloody insult to the best manager we have ever had, with 60 years service.

[Harry Faz]

He never lets facts get in the way of a minority rant.

 

exactly Jonahs argument is very one eyed.....

 

Quote:

Despite receiving tens of millions from player transfers, television, sponsorship revenues and packed houses at St Mary’s, all we were left with when Rupert departed was the second year parachute payment.

 

In other words, Rupert spent every penny we had on the team, Leon is making the point that Rupert wasn't squirreling it away and refusing to spend it...

 

 

Quote:

“I do not believe that Harry Redknapp was given a fair chance with only £90,000 spent on Ricardo Fuller

 

Oh no, wait, that doesn't fit in with what I want to say, I'd better try to claim Rupert was squirreling it away and refusing to spend this fictional money after all!

 

 

Yes Rupert spent the money, but the real question is how wisely he spent it - we ended up with a huge squad of journeymen because we had a wage cap per player, would have been better to have had fewer, better players...and we also spent a lot of money on paying off managers etc .

 

I dont think Rupert has an impressive record of investing wisely andl eon has a fair point.

[saint1977]

Interesting. He keeps quiet for so long and then speaks out this week. I wonder why that is? Tax bills coming up? Last throw of a political dice? Saints back in the media with the cup draw? or simply random timing?

 

He'll give his shares away eh? Wait for the "oh the Echo mis-quoted me should somebody suddenly pop out the woodwork next year.

 

He's obviously not keen to form a "united appraoch" to getting the politics sorted out, so I just go back to the All in or all out

Thanks Leon, the sooner you and the other two leave the sooner we can move on.

 

Most sensible post here. Crouch was probably responding to the comments in the annual report, some of which were true, some were inflammatory and some verging on the daft.

[saintjay77]

Linking Lowe to Ted Bates is a bloody insult to the best manager we have ever had, with 60 years service.

 

But it goes to show that peoples hate for the man Lowe changes the way they think about any decissions that are made and can be put down to his name.

 

i wouldnt compare the 2 myself but looking at a few things in black and white its funny how the same events get treated differently. Had we won the FA Cup in 2003 would Lowe have been looked at any differently? If we get promoted while Lowe is still here would that make him look any better?

 

My thoughts are that he would still be a posh ***t and i would rather him be gone basically because although he will happily take the plaudits when he gets things right he doesnt have the humility to own up when he makes a hash of things.

[saintjay77]

exactly Jonahs argument is very one eyed.....

 

Quote:

Despite receiving tens of millions from player transfers, television, sponsorship revenues and packed houses at St Mary’s, all we were left with when Rupert departed was the second year parachute payment.

 

In other words, Rupert spent every penny we had on the team, Leon is making the point that Rupert wasn't squirreling it away and refusing to spend it...

 

 

Quote:

“I do not believe that Harry Redknapp was given a fair chance with only £90,000 spent on Ricardo Fuller

 

Oh no, wait, that doesn't fit in with what I want to say, I'd better try to claim Rupert was squirreling it away and refusing to spend this fictional money after all!

 

 

Yes Rupert spent the money, but the real question is how wisely he spent it - we ended up with a huge squad of journeymen because we had a wage cap per player, would have been better to have had fewer, better players...and we also spent a lot of money on paying off managers etc .

 

I dont think Rupert has an impressive record of investing wisely andl eon has a fair point.

 

A club with a low income sets a wage cap isnt really that daft. the players that managers brought in within that wage cap is slighty more daft.

 

We had 1 year where we did better in the league than we have done in a very long time and we also reached the FA Cup final. Before that we were a mediocor team that always struggled to stay in the top flight. after that we returned to being that team and lost our top flight status.

 

Now on our season of success we could have risked everything and raised wage caps and transfer spending in the hope that the manager could buy enough quality players to take us to the next level. how much have sunderland spent? Or leeds in the past? or we could have carried on within sensible limits which we did. for a club that was usually close to relegation i dont think it was that out of order to run the club with caution and as Crouch states himself that when he came in there was no more than the parachute money so Lowe much have been running the club within the budget that the clubs income alloud.

[ottery st mary]

I havent read the whole thread but has anyone brought up the fact apart from LC RL MW the others in the bunch have done a really poor job. Wiseman Corbett and Trant , fans who have overseen this disaster by saying nothing it seems.

 

Or others over the years like, Lowey and his Lavender Hill Mob....Richards, Withers, Askham, Windsor Wot Not and the Like. This little team have done so much...Right...Maybe they are the root of the problem.

Then again the agents/employees/sat at the top table posters only see it one way...eh! nickh and buddies....A better word than Luvvies.

[jonah]

Yes Rupert spent the money, but the real question is how wisely he spent it - we ended up with a huge squad of journeymen because we had a wage cap per player, would have been better to have had fewer, better players...and we also spent a lot of money on paying off managers etc .

 

Rupert isn't the one who chose to expand the squad, that was WGS who thought "strength in depth" was more important than overpaying for 1 or 2 players. If you haven't figured it out by now, Rupert's long-term plan has always been to bring through players from the academy - if you don't have a sugar daddy, you have to have a way to generate more money than your peers... the academy provides an excellent way to do that.

 

As for spending the money, again that's pretty much up to the managers too - Redknapp only finding one player in the whole summer is well documented even if Crouch (and formerly Wilde) like to twist it around whilst somehow saying Rupert still spent all the money (bright guy that Leon). For all the bullsh!t on here about wage caps, let's not forget that Redknapp paid HUGE salaries to get Bernard & Co in on loan and we saw how motivated those players were for a relegation fight - Redknapps decisions, Redknapp's failure... along with blame to be shared from everyone at the club from RL to Peter Crouch. Sh!t happens (unless you're a plastic Saints fan to whom relegation can never happen of course).

 

Derry, you completely miss the point about the Ted Bates comment, but nothing new there.

 

With regards to the comments in the financial report, well that's exactly where they belong and they were wholly appropriate. The average person reading that report is probably capable of doing a bit more than holding a crayon and can understand the points being made without having a hissy-fit and beating their chests. If Crouch wasn't happy with the comments, then the correct and appropriate form of reply is at the club's AGM - not squealing to the local rag. But that would involve thinking before acting... like checking Wilde's preposterous claims before siding with him.

[OldNick]

Or others over the years like, Lowey and his Lavender Hill Mob....Richards, Withers, Askham, Windsor Wot Not and the Like. This little team have done so much...Right...Maybe they are the root of the problem.

Then again the agents/employees/sat at the top table posters only see it one way...eh! nickh and buddies....A better word than Luvvies.

you obviously have great affection for Wiseman ,Trant, Corbett. For me 2 of the three have been sat there enjoying the fruits of the positions they hold for years. Trant came in on the back of the Wilde bunch and did not deliver either as far as Iam concerned.

I would not worry if the lot disappeared into oblivion (I mean all the directors etc) and we were left with an alternative, but if you would trust those so called fans with running things then more fool you.

LC is the closest to putting his money where his mouth is, but all the ones who have sat and voted and not had the backbone to really stand up for the club for decades should not be given any slack.It galls me to know that thise people hiding in the shadows still enjoy the perks even though the club is in financial trouble.

[OldNick]

Then again the agents/employees/sat at the top table posters only see it one way...eh! nickh and buddies.....

LOL , a few posters on here speak to me at matches, and I can tell you it is not in the boardroom or players lounge.

[Snowballs2]

I am glad that at long last we have the view from Crouch..based on past history I believe him rather than Wilde and Lowe. We really should never trust Lowe ever again.

[mitch01]

To be fair Leon, Lowe has absolutely no choice but to sell if the crowds arent coming back, he makes him sound like he's doing it for his own gain.

[ottery st mary]

you obviously have great affection for Wiseman ,Trant, Corbett. For me 2 of the three have been sat there enjoying the fruits of the positions they hold for years. Trant came in on the back of the Wilde bunch and did not deliver either as far as Iam concerned.

I would not worry if the lot disappeared into oblivion (I mean all the directors etc) and we were left with an alternative, but if you would trust those so called fans with running things then more fool you.

LC is the closest to putting his money where his mouth is, but all the ones who have sat and voted and not had the backbone to really stand up for the club for decades should not be given any slack.It galls me to know that thise people hiding in the shadows still enjoy the perks even though the club is in financial trouble.

 

nickh

You seem to know everything in your statement about certain Directors but once again you have nothing to say about Loweys cronies, like, Askham, Richards, Whithers and Windsor wots his name. As I have said before these are the hidden core of our continued downfall.The merry mob who have done nothing for this club but put the front mouth piece in place..They are are the root of all our problems and have had many many years to do something constructive for the club. Who has taken more out of this club than any other.

You know its Lowey and his chums.

[IronCitySaint]

Thought this was a very restrained and interesting response from LC. There is a very obvious difference in the way things are said in these exchanges between Crouch and Lowe. Crouch speaks like a fan, and fairly regular person, whilst Lowe speaks like a pompous and condescending twerp at all times, regardless of the issue. Glad to see that Crouch is prepared to lose all his investment if the right person were to come along. Unfortunately this is a mute point as the other two will never agree to do the same thing.

 

But the main difference between them is that, despite being made the fall guy by the idiots in charge, he still calls for unity and support from the fans, and still puts his hand into his own pocket to sponsor and support the club. Where was the rallying cry from Lowe and his cronies during last seasons relegation fight? Where was the support from Wilde during that period? The difference is that Crouch cares for the club whereas Lowe and Wilde care only for themselves.

[The Rover]

“I would give away all my shares to the right person. I don’t care about the money, all I care about is the future of this great club."

 

I thought this was the most promising part of his article.

 

All credit to the man he's been no more successful at running the club than Wilder or Lowe but if they shared his willingness to sacrifice his investment for the good of the club, there is a far better chance that Southampton FC might become great again.

[solentstars]

nickh

You seem to know everything in your statement about certain Directors but once again you have nothing to say about Loweys cronies, like, Askham, Richards, Whithers and Windsor wots his name. As I have said before these are the hidden core of our continued downfall.The merry mob who have done nothing for this club but put the front mouth piece in place..They are are the root of all our problems and have had many many years to do something constructive for the club. Who has taken more out of this club than any other.

You know its Lowey and his chums.

who is this lowey,is he related to lowe :confused:

[ALWAYS_SFC]

I agree

 

Wilde Lowe and Crouch are all to blame for our current demise in that order.

 

However whether Crouch could have stopped the rot is open to question whether Wilde and Lowe can is also open to question but there are slight signs of recovery but only time will tell

 

Why they cannot stop bickering is the main question of course as Crouch says Investment is probably the only way forward but as nothing has happened in three years something else has been tried.

 

They should all keep quiet and as the previous poster says get behind the team.

 

What is your definition of "signs of recovery"?

[ALWAYS_SFC]

Crouch

 

Well he has been very consistant in his comments to friendly groups behind the scenes. There is nothing new here. Why has he decided to go more public now? Well I know he was upset by comments when the Accounts were released. I do not expect him to get into a further slanging match. He has said his piece and will continue to support Saints from the "terraces".

 

Let us not forget he is asking for the supporters to unite and get behind the team by attending. That has to benefit the football club. Is that not what we all want?

 

Lowe

 

He is in the driving seat now. He has been remarkable quiet until the accounts were released and I fully expect he to continue quietly working behind the scenes to stabilise our financial position.

 

Whatever the rights and wrongs he is passionate to develop a side of young talented and motivated players who want to play for Southampton. However, he has to balance that with the more pressing problem of our finances.

 

No matter who is in charge, without investment and income we cannot go forward. We all have to play our part where we can

 

Administration

 

For those that are staying away hoping for Administration in the near future, think again. With careful management of finances and with the continued support of the loan holder, Bank and creditors it is not the expected or the intended path being taken. All that will happen is that some of our younger players will have to be sold resulting in a weaker team and the possibility of relegation and more cutbacks.

 

Lol, he is doing it on the cheap as he has always done.

[ottery st mary]

who is this lowey,is he related to lowe :confused:

 

matey of miney

[John B]

What is your definition of "signs of recovery"?

 

I think the team is performing better and the general feeling of the fans is slightly more confident.

 

What is your definition of doing it on the cheap

[70's Mike]

I think the team is performing better and the general feeling of the fans is slightly more confident.

 

What is your definition of doing it on the cheap

 

 

PROBLEM IS 5000 at least do not agree with you

[ALWAYS_SFC]

I think the team is performing better and the general feeling of the fans is slightly more confident.

 

What is your definition of doing it on the cheap

 

The team is struggling to score goals....

 

Trying to many young lads,some who are`nt ready yet and some who just

are`nt good enough and without enough experience with them to help them out.

 

If the club are not very careful this will lead to relegation...

 

I really,really hope not but a lack of a "real" goalscorer will cost us dear.

Edited 3 December, 2008 by ALWAYS_SFC

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

Reading Leon Crouch's words today it is abundantly clear to me that were LC still in charge tonight SFC would be a better run , better supported and far more united football club than it is now - the fact that he is no longer our Chairman represents a minor tragedy for all those who hold the best interests of this club close to their hearts .

[ALWAYS_SFC]

Reading Leon Crouch's words today it is abundantly clear to me that were LC still in charge tonight SFC would be a better run , better supported and far more united football club than it is now - the fact that he is no longer our Chairman represents a minor tragedy for all those who hold the best interests of this club close to their hearts .

 

Absolutely right!!!

[John B]

Reading Leon Crouch's words today it is abundantly clear to me that were LC still in charge tonight SFC would be a better run , better supported and far more united football club than it is now - the fact that he is no longer our Chairman represents a minor tragedy for all those who hold the best interests of this club close to their hearts .

 

Some of your points are correct better supported and more united.

 

But Crouch does not appear to know how to run the Football Club he is a supporter and supporters are not very good at running clubs apparently

Edited 3 December, 2008 by John B

[John B]

PROBLEM IS 5000 at least do not agree with you

 

Are you not a little more confident than a month ago?

[up and away]

Thought this was a very restrained and interesting response from LC. There is a very obvious difference in the way things are said in these exchanges between Crouch and Lowe. Crouch speaks like a fan, and fairly regular person, whilst Lowe speaks like a pompous and condescending twerp at all times, regardless of the issue. Glad to see that Crouch is prepared to lose all his investment if the right person were to come along. Unfortunately this is a mute point as the other two will never agree to do the same thing.

 

But the main difference between them is that, despite being made the fall guy by the idiots in charge, he still calls for unity and support from the fans, and still puts his hand into his own pocket to sponsor and support the club. Where was the rallying cry from Lowe and his cronies during last seasons relegation fight? Where was the support from Wilde during that period? The difference is that Crouch cares for the club whereas Lowe and Wilde care only for themselves.

 

Crouch cares for the club in his own way, which has to align to his ego and prejudices. Although Wilde caused most of the damage, Crouch is right up there and without doubt the idiot of the 3. Trying to work with Crouch must have been a nightmare for the previous execs and resulted in an environment that snowballed to our current predicament. It's all right talking about having a plan to square the club financially, then just stick your head in the sand and leave the nasty work to someone else. In effect he did the square root of feck all to address our problems, only magnified them. His one and only plan, sit on his arse and hope we get taken over by any pikey that will glance his way. You keep hearing snippets that Crouch would not have done this or that, but other equally dumb decisions are not even mentioned in passing, very selective.

 

And will anyone look through this statement and tell me that Crouch was working towards financial prudence and creating an environment to take the club forward!

 

"I am gutted it has come to this. I have spent the last nine months working tirelessly for this club representing the fans, but I have been a thorn in their (the executive board members) side.

"I opposed the mass exodus of staff at the club, we are losing too many good people. I knew it would be a real battle and it has been. I am devastated. I have spent the last 18 months battling these people."

[sadoldgit]

Crouch has class, humanity, humility and business accumen that Lowe could only dream of.

 

Oh dear Alpine, you do choose your heroes randomly don't you.

 

Of course we were such a success both footballwise and financially under Crouch's control weren't we?

 

And as for you blind allegance to Nigel "Three Wins" Pearson, he actually managed to take us to the brink of relegation. If Lowe had appointed him as manager we know full well you would still be leading the witch hunt on Pearson to this day.

Edited 3 December, 2008 by sadoldgit

[Delmary]

you obviously have great affection for Wiseman ,Trant, Corbett. For me 2 of the three have been sat there enjoying the fruits of the positions they hold for years. Trant came in on the back of the Wilde bunch and did not deliver either as far as Iam concerned.

I would not worry if the lot disappeared into oblivion (I mean all the directors etc) and we were left with an alternative, but if you would trust those so called fans with running things then more fool you.

LC is the closest to putting his money where his mouth is, but all the ones who have sat and voted and not had the backbone to really stand up for the club for decades should not be given any slack.It galls me to know that thise people hiding in the shadows still enjoy the perks even though the club is in financial trouble.[/quote]I made this point at the start of the season but got shouted down.

[Window Cleaner]

Absolutely right!!!

 

He could always buy up some more shares,enough to seize power and run the club in his own way. Why doesn't he do that then?.I mean he wouldn't mind giving his shares "to the right person" so in for 2 million in for a pound I say.

I'm sure he could find people who wouldn't mind selling their shares, enough to approach a majority with the support of his historic allies.

Talks a good takeover, reality is, as usual ,sadly less spectacular.

[Mole]

It's good that Leon has spoken out. He should still be chairman of the club.

 

His call for the Lowe boycott to end is a honourable one and Leon is a voice fans respect (unlike slithery Mike Wilde), but speaking personally the pain of Lowe at the club runs too deep for me to ever return and feather his nest again.

[1965onwards]

Lets nail the lie perpetuated by many morons on here than Leon Crouch has some responsibility for our financial plight and never took any action to mitigate our losses.

 

LC was first Chairman from Febuary 07 to July 07,obviously after the winter transfer window,no players were signed in that period.After he was ousted by the execs we signed on big wages John,Thomas,Safri,Euell.

 

Raziak was effectively signed by Lowe.Skacel and Davis were signed long before Febuary 07.All the journeymen let go this summer such as Wright,Ostlund and Licka were signed

before Febuary 07.

 

When LC became chairman again in December 07 the high-wage deals had already been done.

 

In January he sent out Raziak and Skacel on loan to save money as Burley did not want to use them.Not exactly doing nothing IMHO.

 

Yes he sanctioned the loans of Wright,Lucketti and Perry.If he hadn't we would have been relegated and you morons would really have had something to whinge about.

 

Lowe carries the main responsibility for our problems for replacing Sturrock with Wigley and then choosing a Manager(Redknapp) who never wanted to be here.Wilde carries the remaining responsibility for appointing the execs who put the nails in our coffin.

 

So you lying Lowe and Wilde luvvies can just F**k off.

[Delmary]

Thought this was a very restrained and interesting response from LC. There is a very obvious difference in the way things are said in these exchanges between Crouch and Lowe. Crouch speaks like a fan, and fairly regular person, whilst Lowe speaks like a pompous and condescending twerp at all times, regardless of the issue. Glad to see that Crouch is prepared to lose all his investment if the right person were to come along. Unfortunately this is a mute point as the other two will never agree to do the same thing.

 

But the main difference between them is that, despite being made the fall guy by the idiots in charge, he still calls for unity and support from the fans, and still puts his hand into his own pocket to sponsor and support the club. Where was the rallying cry from Lowe and his cronies during last seasons relegation fight? Where was the support from Wilde during that period? The difference is that Crouch cares for the club whereas Lowe and Wilde care only for themselves.[/quote]They all care for the club I'm sure. Lowe's biggest downfall is he's not capable of communicating affectively with the masses.

[saintwarwick]

Reading Leon Crouch's words today it is abundantly clear to me that were LC still in charge tonight SFC would be a better run , better supported and far more united football club than it is now - the fact that he is no longer our Chairman represents a minor tragedy for all those who hold the best interests of this club close to their hearts .

 

That is pure speculation and cannot be proved but you are of course entitled to an opinion.

[ottery st mary]

Crouch cares for the club in his own way, which has to align to his ego and prejudices. Although Wilde caused most of the damage, Crouch is right up there and without doubt the idiot of the 3. Trying to work with Crouch must have been a nightmare for the previous execs and resulted in an environment that snowballed to our current predicament. It's all right talking about having a plan to square the club financially, then just stick your head in the sand and leave the nasty work to someone else. In effect he did the square root of feck all to address our problems, only magnified them. His one and only plan, sit on his arse and hope we get taken over by any pikey that will glance his way. You keep hearing snippets that Crouch would not have done this or that, but other equally dumb decisions are not even mentioned in passing, very selective.

 

And will anyone look through this statement and tell me that Crouch was working towards financial prudence and creating an environment to take the club forward!

 

"I am gutted it has come to this. I have spent the last nine months working tirelessly for this club representing the fans, but I have been a thorn in their (the executive board members) side.

"I opposed the mass exodus of staff at the club, we are losing too many good people. I knew it would be a real battle and it has been. I am devastated. I have spent the last 18 months battling these people."

 

Ego , idiot, dumb, you must be talking about my old mate Lowey and you are one hell of a sensible poster who knows what they are talking about. Unless this is some form of self description....You must show us really what Lowey has done to create this illusion you and the Lowey Mateys talk about.

Edited 3 December, 2008 by ottery st mary
spelling still at kindergarten

[Mole]

Lets nail the lie perpetuated by many morons on here than Leon Crouch has some responsibility for our financial plight and never took any action to mitigate our losses.

 

LC was first Chairman from Febuary 07 to July 07,obviously after the winter transfer window,no players were signed in that period.After he was ousted by the execs we signed on big wages John,Thomas,Safri,Euell.

 

Raziak was effectively signed by Lowe.Skacel and Davis were signed long before Febuary 07.All the journeymen let go this summer such as Wright,Ostlund and Licka were signed

before Febuary 07.

 

When LC became chairman again in December 07 the high-wage deals had already been done.

 

In January he sent out Raziak and Skacel on loan to save money as Burley did not want to use them.Not exactly doing nothing IMHO.

 

Yes he sanctioned the loans of Wright,Lucketti and Perry.If he hadn't we would have been relegated and you morons would really have had something to whinge about.

 

Lowe carries the main responsibility for our problems for replacing Sturrock with Wigley and then choosing a Manager(Redknapp) who never wanted to be here.Wilde carries the remaining responsibility for appointing the execs who put the nails in our coffin.

 

So you lying Lowe and Wilde luvvies can just F**k off.

 

Don't let the Lowe supporting scumbags get to you. They are an internet phenomenom and always have been. They're just a vocal minority of pathetic traitors. Go in any pub and try and find a luvvie, go in any workplace and try and find a luvvie - they are a insignificant minority. The attendances speak for themselves. If we'd still had Crouch and Pearson - as Leon rightly says - we'd be getting 20,000 plus gates. Under Lowe we're getting 5,000 less. Lowe and his little helper are pariahs who simply won't get the message that they're not wanted.

[Mole]

Lowe's biggest downfall is he's not capable of communicating affectively with the masses.

 

Lowe comunicates perfectly well with the masses. His sneering words are completely representative of how he views us.

[1965onwards]

I would like Crouch to sue Lowe for his libellous remarks in the financial statement.

 

Would love to see the whole truth come out in open court.

[ottery st mary]

Rupert isn't the one who chose to expand the squad, that was WGS who thought "strength in depth" was more important than overpaying for 1 or 2 players. If you haven't figured it out by now, Rupert's long-term plan has always been to bring through players from the academy - if you don't have a sugar daddy, you have to have a way to generate more money than your peers... the academy provides an excellent way to do that.

 

As for spending the money, again that's pretty much up to the managers too - Redknapp only finding one player in the whole summer is well documented even if Crouch (and formerly Wilde) like to twist it around whilst somehow saying Rupert still spent all the money (bright guy that Leon). For all the bullsh!t on here about wage caps, let's not forget that Redknapp paid HUGE salaries to get Bernard & Co in on loan and we saw how motivated those players were for a relegation fight - Redknapps decisions, Redknapp's failure... along with blame to be shared from everyone at the club from RL to Peter Crouch. Sh!t happens (unless you're a plastic Saints fan to whom relegation can never happen of course).

 

Derry, you completely miss the point about the Ted Bates comment, but nothing new there.

 

With regards to the comments in the financial report, well that's exactly where they belong and they were wholly appropriate. The average person reading that report is probably capable of doing a bit more than holding a crayon and can understand the points being made without having a hissy-fit and beating their chests. If Crouch wasn't happy with the comments, then the correct and appropriate form of reply is at the club's AGM - not squealing to the local rag. But that would involve thinking before acting... like checking Wilde's preposterous claims before siding with him.

 

Hissy fit and beating your own chest and trying to show other posters how clever you are.The one eyed look of surprise of a starboard lookout who supports the Captain, who is ashore whilst the ship sinks in the middle of the ocean..Now I understand why you are called JONAH...OR IS IT TO DO WITH YOUR POOR STOCKS AND SHARES PORTFOLIO...sIMILIAR TO YOUR LOVED ONE AND HIS BRILLIANT BUSINESS ACUMEN..

 

JONAH..You have not got a clue about finances or Football and you should stick to Sailors and being a lookout.

Please No more Hissy Fits Jonah old boy the City is not impressed with you.

I think this might just be my opinion of you and your matey Lowey.

[1965onwards]

Talking of sailors,its Jonahs turn in the barrel.