Jump to content

To re-elect R J G Lowe - 94.95%


Thedelldays

Recommended Posts

but if you say he was sacked then that is fine by me.

 

You'll have to trust me on this one fella, Pearson was more than happy to work with Lowe (which does suggest that Lowe is not viewed as evil by everyone, or, of course Pearson may just have really wanted to carry on regardless of his alledged meddling ways), but Lowe exercised the break clause so he could bring Jan in.

 

There are others on here who were aware of Jan being in the background well before Lowe got his feet back under the table.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do think it's a shame that the dissenters walked out and didn't register their votes.

 

I have to say though, that if I had been there I may have thought it a wise decision to leave.

 

We can add "Lowe's letter" to "Chris Iwelumo" "picturegate" and the "tracksuit" (amongst others) in his ridiculous Pythonic catalogue of absurdity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Call it semantics if you like, but his contact had expired.

 

What if Pearson chose not to take the new contract on offer? And if he had it wouldn't have been a universally welcomed appointment, for which RL would have been held responsible.

 

If he was offered anything Lowe would have made a big song and dance about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You'll have to trust me on this one fella, Pearson was more than happy to work with Lowe (which does suggest that Lowe is not viewed as evil by everyone, or, of course Pearson may just have really wanted to carry on regardless of his alledged meddling ways), but Lowe exercised the break clause so he could bring Jan in.

 

There are others on here who were aware of Jan being in the background well before Lowe got his feet back under the table.

 

i believe you mate....was the parting of ways amicable?,because there are people on here who would have you believe that pearson and lowe were at each others throats and that pearson was struck dumb by the decision?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was never going to be defeated in a vote and the BBC have covered it as a mass walk out of shareholders, so maybe there was some logic in just getting up and walking out.

 

The beeb are all over that story like a rash...

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/s/southampton/default.stm

 

As are Sky Sports...

 

http://www.skysports.com/football/team/0,19734,11700,00.html

 

In fact i'm struggling to find any info outside of the OS, the Daily Echo and here of course

 

I'm with TDD on this one...they should have stayed and voted...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe. Personally, I reckon Tsvangirai was right to withdraw from the run-off with Mugabe too...

 

In fairness A_S, Lowe wasn't sanctioning a campaign of violence against anyone who was threatening to vote against him, which was why Tsvangirai (along with the fac the Mugabe can easily ride roughshot over domestic and international law) rightly pulled out.

 

Crouch and co should have stayed to vote against Lowe. It would have made a statement to those who don't see another way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

for someone so evil, bad and devisive..

 

how did he get such backing to return

 

 

 

 

how does it work etc..?

 

Surely the question is right now, who's in favour of Rupert Lowe?

Last year we all thought things couldn't get any worse...

How wrong were we?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't quote me on this but I'm pretty certain that Lowe, for all his sins, has not been having villages burned and citizens killed or maimed in order to ensure that they voted his way. I'm also reasonably confident that McMenemy and Corbett did not withdraw from the AGM in fear of the lives of more of the population, not to mention their own.

 

Call me arrogant but I think it's a preposterous analogy, and more insulting to the people of Zimbabwe than it is to Rupert Lowe.

 

Agree. Alpine, UP, hang your heads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i believe you mate....was the parting of ways amicable?,because there are people on here who would have you believe that pearson and lowe were at each others throats and that pearson was struck dumb by the decision?

 

Pearson went on holiday to Malta thinking he had done enough to get the job. He was quite open with people saying he was willing to stay and work with whoever came in and after he sat down with Lowe he came out thinking about next season.

 

I understand Pearson was shocked when he heard he didn't get the job and the line I also heard was that he was a tad miffed that Lowe had not told him face to face (or even via a telephone call).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yee-ha, saddle up, the sanctimonious posse are in town.

 

:smt078:smt078:smt078

 

Yeah, sanctimonious. I see that's about the only word you've used in your posts tonight, run out of superlatives have we?

 

One of my friends from work moved over here 3 years ago with his sister from Zimbabwe, after his parents spent ages trying to get them over. They had lost 98% of their 5000 acre farm, he had lost 3 close relatives, and his parents couldn't leave the country. They still haven't left and he hasn't heard from his parents now for 6 weeks.

 

How dare you, you putrid little man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, sanctimonious. I see that's about the only word you've used in your posts tonight, run out of superlatives have we?

 

One of my friends from work moved over here 3 years ago with his sister from Zimbabwe, after his parents spent ages trying to get them over. They had lost 98% of their 5000 acre farm, he had lost 3 close relatives, and his parents couldn't leave the country. They still haven't left and he hasn't heard from his parents now for 6 weeks.

 

How dare you, you putrid little man.

 

How very, very, very dare you:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

 

Saddle up, read the post (particularly the bit that says and no I don't think Lowe is comparable with Mugabe, put in there becuase otherwise I knew some idiots would raise the sanctimonious posse, but sadly it still hasn't stopped some making something out of nothing) and then kindly fccuk off Sherriff Sanctimonious.

 

Yee-ha.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Um Pahars, you're out of line. You may be utterly convinced of your innocence with regards to the Lowe/Mugabe analogy but you're looking like a true ignorant with your tiresome use of other people's perceived sanctimony as a defence.

 

Why the fccukc do you think I put that line in there saying, in no way am I comparing Lowe to Mugabe, right from the very start.

 

I'll give you a little clue, because I think there is no way you can compare Lowe with the actions of a brutal dictator, so that is why I find it slightly sanctimonious, if not a tad thick, that some can't seem to understand that:rolleyes::rolleyes:

 

You carry on raising that posse boy, you can be Deputy to DPS's Sherriff, and you can go looking for your next piece of sport:smt078.

 

If you do not have the ability to read caveats, and see that people were referring to the process of withdrawing from a vote, as opposed to debating the morality and actions of an African dictator, then the pair of you are a couple of przie fccukcing idiots worthy of your badges.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How very, very, very dare you:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

 

Saddle up, read the post (particularly the bit that says and no I don't think Lowe is comparable with Mugabe, put in there becuase otherwise I knew some idiots would raise the sanctimonious posse, but sadly it still hasn't stopped some making something out of nothing) and then kindly fccuk off Sherriff Sanctimonious.

 

Yee-ha.

 

Explain how it is a nice analogy then, and how the situations between someone trying to stave off the threat of administration at a football club and someone else using intimidation, threats and murder to force people to vote a particular way. The only way the 2 situations are similar is that there was a vote involved. That's it.

 

It's similar to comparing a plane landing at Heathrow to 9/11 because there is a plane involved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Explain how it is a nice analogy then, and how the situations between someone trying to stave off the threat of administration at a football club and someone else using intimidation, threats and murder to force people to vote a particular way. The only way the 2 situations are similar is that there was a vote involved. That's it.

 

It's similar to comparing a plane landing at Heathrow to 9/11 because there is a plane involved.

 

Fccluk me, it took you quite a while to work that one out.

 

The analogy was that by withdrawing from the vote, Tsvangirai gained some excellent publicity and effectively rendered the vote invalid and worthless meaning that although Mugabe won it was widely seen as a hollow victory.

 

That's what i was referring to, nothing to with Mugabe being a brutal dictator etc etc etc, and certainly not comapring Lowe or the context with the atorcities happening out there (hence my fccuking big caveat that you and Ponty seemed to have missed).

 

Comprende???

 

Or is that still too hard for you to absorb?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is it with some people that seem to get some strange enjoyment by twisting something innocuous into a slight that they have to feel outraged by? There's some pretty high horses under the likes of Ponty and DPS tonight by the look of it.

Or are they "Lowe" horses?

 

Jeez!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fccluk me, it took you quite a while to work that one out.

 

The analogy was that by withdrawing from the vote, Tsvangirai gained some excellent publicity and effectively rendered the vote invalid and worthless meaning that although Mugabe won it was widely seen as a hollow victory.

 

That's what i was referring to, nothing to with Mugabe being a brutal dictator etc etc etc, and certainly not comapring Lowe or the context with the atorcities happening out there (hence my fccuking big caveat that you and Ponty seemed to have missed).

 

Comprende???

 

Or is that still too hard for you to absorb?

 

And that is EXACTLY as I meant it too. Crouch & Co were similar to Tsvangirai in that their refusal to participate in the votes totally remove the legitimacy and moral certitude of the result and deny the unanimity of participation in the respective "coronations".

 

Seems I over-estimated the level of intelligence on here by a wide margin; I thought less contributors subscribed to Sun-like conclusion jumping and moral outrage......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure why you've undertaken this crusade against sanctimony.

 

All I've been doing is replying to some outrageous accusations from yourself and DPS.

 

If you hadn't made such ridiculous accusations, then I would not have replied. It's as simple as that. If people accuse me of something that was never my intention then I wll reply informing them of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think there's any need to make those sort of ridiculous analogies is all.

 

So just what are the powers of administrators??? Are you now telling us what analogies we can make (if so please supply a list of banned ananlogies). If I've missed that in the rules then feel free to let me know where I should be looking.

 

It makes light of some serious sh*t.

 

If anything, you're the one making light of some serious sh*t, but trying to link posts with things that people never ever intended to in the first place. You're the one taken things out of context.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What this boils down to is Lowe having the majority of the popular vote, and those who don't hold him in high regard trying to spin it in any other way.

 

Once more, socialist superfan Richard Chorley grabs an opporutunity to make a ill informed gesture, apropos of nothing, whilst others (who are really old enough to know better) also joined in, to make their cause seem more pantomime than politik (on an important issue too). I don't know why they are celbrating, since their actions acting their shoe size rather than age, seem to play directly into Lowe's description of them as "The Lunatic Fringe".

 

And what, in real terms, did it achieve? Will the world stop spinning tomorrow, or even start to stop? Lowe will be in a stronger position than ever. And those who acted up today may have a warm feeling in their egos tommorow when they look for their names in the local press, but they have simply made themselves look foolish, and shown just how irrelevent to the position of power they truly are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think there's any need to make those sort of ridiculous analogies is all. It makes light of some serious sh*t.

 

Oh and there are numerous "Lowe Out" posts with my name to them before you think that's my motive.

 

FFS :rolleyes:

 

All you've done is wasted a bunch of your bandwidth with this guff. I hope we don't all have to pay extra to buy some more...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What this boils down to is Lowe having the majority of the popular vote, and those who don't hold him in high regard trying to spin it in any other way.

 

Once more, socialist superfan Richard Chorley grabs an opporutunity to make a ill informed gesture, apropos of nothing, whilst others (who are really old enough to know better) also joined in, to make their cause seem more pantomime than politik (on an important issue too). I don't know why they are celbrating, since their actions acting their shoe size rather than age, seem to play directly into Lowe's description of them as "The Lunatic Fringe".

 

And what, in real terms, did it achieve? Will the world stop spinning tomorrow, or even start to stop? Lowe will be in a stronger position than ever. And those who acted up today may have a warm feeling in their egos tommorow when they look for their names in the local press, but they have simply made themselves look foolish, and shown just how irrelevent to the position of power they truly are.

 

 

Perhaps you should have been there and thus got a better feel of the anger. Lowe was at his sanctimonious worst and had shut down any further debate at the time of the walkout. To see an AGM walkout like that painted a picture that will last long in Lowe's pysche.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What this boils down to is Lowe having the majority of the popular vote, and those who don't hold him in high regard trying to spin it in any other way.

 

Once more, socialist superfan Richard Chorley grabs an opporutunity to make a ill informed gesture, apropos of nothing, whilst others (who are really old enough to know better) also joined in, to make their cause seem more pantomime than politik (on an important issue too). I don't know why they are celbrating, since their actions acting their shoe size rather than age, seem to play directly into Lowe's description of them as "The Lunatic Fringe".

 

And what, in real terms, did it achieve? Will the world stop spinning tomorrow, or even start to stop? Lowe will be in a stronger position than ever. And those who acted up today may have a warm feeling in their egos tommorow when they look for their names in the local press, but they have simply made themselves look foolish, and shown just how irrelevent to the position of power they truly are.

 

It's very misleading to use the word "popular vote" (which indicates the measure of overall share of the vote in a one-man-one-vote system), when we're talking about block voting of shares. If Lowe, his monkey Wilde, and the few other supporters he has vote to reinstate him, and Crouch & co. abstain, then clearly he will get the sort of headline number we're talking about. It is in no way a measure of "popularity". Far from it, the AGM walkout (prompted by his behaviour) - not to mention the reaction of the crowd at the forthcoming games - are a much better indication of how 'popular' he is.

 

You have a good point on Chorley though. His antics, presumably motivated by a wish to again be centre stage (pantomime dame?) and get himself in the papers (he got what he wanted, well done), merely detracted from the central issues, and again allowed Lowe to lump all sensible opposition to him into the "lunatic fringe".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What this boils down to is Lowe having the majority of the popular vote, and those who don't hold him in high regard trying to spin it in any other way.

 

Once more, socialist superfan Richard Chorley grabs an opporutunity to make a ill informed gesture, apropos of nothing, whilst others (who are really old enough to know better) also joined in, to make their cause seem more pantomime than politik (on an important issue too). I don't know why they are celbrating, since their actions acting their shoe size rather than age, seem to play directly into Lowe's description of them as "The Lunatic Fringe".

 

And what, in real terms, did it achieve? Will the world stop spinning tomorrow, or even start to stop? Lowe will be in a stronger position than ever. And those who acted up today may have a warm feeling in their egos tommorow when they look for their names in the local press, but they have simply made themselves look foolish, and shown just how irrelevent to the position of power they truly are.

 

First sentence is absolute crap , if there ever was a popular vote by supporters of SFC Lowe would be lucky to get 10%.

At the moment many tolerate him because they see no alternative BUT NO WAY is that a popular vote

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blimey and you lot think Rupes is the Spin Master!!!!

 

You might think its ok to drop in the Mugabe bits and try to make it sound like your not refering to him or what ever your point was, and i am sure Rodney Marsh thought it was Ok to make a few light harted comments about the Tsunami a few years back too. Im sure he didnt mean any disrespect to all those people killed and made homeless and the comparission of how the team were sweeping aside all in front of them probably did look like a Tsunami. Still not the sort of coment anyone should be saying though it is?

 

If I was to talk about some pedofile and in the same paragraph mention (Insert username) and try to link 2 sentances together by a harmless word in between whilst adding a cavet stating I am not suggesting that i think (Insert username) is a pedo in any way. But I kept repeating it for months. It wouldnt take long before people started to associate (Insert username) with pedo and there would be a lynch mob.

 

Same as how people believe Pearson was sacked. people say it because its easier to create the spin that Lowe is still the big bad man and we should all hate him for it. when the truth (if what UP has said is the truth) is still something we can hate lowe for but doesnt quite fit into the adgenda that some people have.

 

many dont like lowe but too many use lowes tactics to put there point accross. does that make them any better than lowe?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blimey and you lot think Rupes is the Spin Master!!!!

 

You might think its ok to drop in the Mugabe bits and try to make it sound like your not refering to him or what ever your point was, and i am sure Rodney Marsh thought it was Ok to make a few light harted comments about the Tsunami a few years back too. Im sure he didnt mean any disrespect to all those people killed and made homeless and the comparission of how the team were sweeping aside all in front of them probably did look like a Tsunami. Still not the sort of coment anyone should be saying though it is?

 

If I was to talk about some pedofile and in the same paragraph mention (Insert username) and try to link 2 sentances together by a harmless word in between whilst adding a cavet stating I am not suggesting that i think (Insert username) is a pedo in any way. But I kept repeating it for months. It wouldnt take long before people started to associate (Insert username) with pedo and there would be a lynch mob.

 

Same as how people believe Pearson was sacked. people say it because its easier to create the spin that Lowe is still the big bad man and we should all hate him for it. when the truth (if what UP has said is the truth) is still something we can hate lowe for but doesnt quite fit into the adgenda that some people have.

 

many dont like lowe but too many use lowes tactics to put there point accross. does that make them any better than lowe?

 

On the Pearson issue, please refer to my previous reply to you on this topic:

 

When did he sack pearson?

 

I got no problem having a pop at lowe but I wish people would have a go at him for the right things.

I take your point, although it is rather pedantic.

 

Ok, Lowe 'removed him from his position', 'didn't renew his contract' - however you spin it, his tenure terminated at SFC as soon as Lowe took the reigns again. No doubt you will counter with the propoganda from the time put about by Lowe and his spin doctors that 'Pearson was more expensive than JP/Wotte'. Looking back, that might have been a massive false economy? I certainly think so.

 

What's that old saying again: "you pay peanuts; you get monkeys".

PS What's a "pedo"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the Pearson issue, please refer to my previous reply to you on this topic:

 

PS What's a "pedo"?

 

So if you get made reduntant do you go round saying you got sacked? If your a contractor and your contract finishes are you sacked then?

 

I worked as a contractor for a few years and a few times the company decided they wernt going to renew the contract and there was always clauses that meant they could end the contract at various times as if it had run out completly. Not once did I say I had been sacked. But if people keep saying pearson was sacked it will become widly accepted that he was sacked and the amazing lowe bashing will continue for stuff that is simply not true. it doesnt do the argument for having a go at lowe any good at all IMO.

 

Isnt spin to take a fact and twist it a little to suit an adgenda? This is something Lowe does all the time and something we rightly have go about. yet it seems its ok to say pearson got sacked, WGS and lowe hated each other, Sturrock was sacked and it also seems ok to talk about Lowe and Mugabe in the same paragraph. :rolleyes:

 

pedo = kiddy fiddler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if you get made reduntant do you go round saying you got sacked? If your a contractor and your contract finishes are you sacked then?

 

He wasn't made redundant, nor had his contract finished.

 

HTH

 

I worked as a contractor for a few years and a few times the company decided they wernt going to renew the contract and there was always clauses that meant they could end the contract at various times as if it had run out completly.

 

If the company had invoked a break clause in your contract and then immediatlely brought someone else in to do exactly the same job, then I would say you'd been given the elbow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What this boils down to is Lowe having the majority of the popular vote, and those who don't hold him in high regard trying to spin it in any other way.

 

Once more, socialist superfan Richard Chorley grabs an opporutunity to make a ill informed gesture, apropos of nothing, whilst others (who are really old enough to know better) also joined in, to make their cause seem more pantomime than politik (on an important issue too). I don't know why they are celbrating, since their actions acting their shoe size rather than age, seem to play directly into Lowe's description of them as "The Lunatic Fringe".

 

And what, in real terms, did it achieve? Will the world stop spinning tomorrow, or even start to stop? Lowe will be in a stronger position than ever. And those who acted up today may have a warm feeling in their egos tommorow when they look for their names in the local press, but they have simply made themselves look foolish, and shown just how irrelevent to the position of power they truly are.

 

 

What did it achieve put the AGM and the anti Lowe protest across all the media to-day.

 

Made Ruperts face even redder

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He wasn't made redundant, nor had his contract finished.

 

HTH

 

 

 

If the company had invoked a break clause in your contract and then immediatlely brought someone else in to do exactly the same job, then I would say you'd been given the elbow.

 

Im not trying to start an argument with you but IMO you could be as ITK as saintdavid and tommac just as much as you could be 100% correct. I have no idea and as this place has been proved in the past to be full of wannabee ITK's forgive me for not taking your info as the truth and nothing but the truth.

 

My points were not based on fact and I was just putting forward a different view. I have said many times I think Pearson should have been given a chance and think he may have done better with the current squad and problems.

 

you may be right and i may have been given the elbow but when companys have let me go as a contractor I know that it has been because they are tightening there belts and expensive contractors are the 1st out of the door to be replaced with cheaper alternatives. jobs still need to be done and the companys will decide how much they want or need to pay for them to get done. I still dont think I got sacked from a contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SaintJay, you really come across as a pedant of the highest order. Ever thought of asking Lowe for a job as one of his hangers-on?

 

If your going to call someone names make sure you know they understand what your calling them otherwise its not an insult ;)

 

If you think I would want a job with Rupes you have clearly got your wires crossed. I just dont think acting like lowe is the best way to object to him.

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...