STEVEADAMS Posted 11 March, 2018 Posted 11 March, 2018 Seriously, could it be ? For what possible reason ? How could we have gone from “Best run club in PL” to one of the worst so quickly ? Any ideas ? The fact that so many of us are asking this is the most absurd aspect of this whole situation.
Charlie Wayman Posted 11 March, 2018 Posted 11 March, 2018 Here's a clue. Receivership, all debts written off.... Can it be deliberate you ask. You need to ask?
supersonic Posted 11 March, 2018 Posted 11 March, 2018 Whether there's any truth in this or not I don't know but Reading are also struggling big time after being bought by Chinese owners and are facing some heavy criticism from fans for not sacking Stam (sound familiar?). Basically the new owner won't get rid of Stam until the end of the season as he feels it's bring shame/embarrassment upon himself as it'll be an admittance of failure of him for not thoroughly doing his research on the club before buying. Could we be in a similar position where Gao has informed us we can't sack the useless ****?
adrian lord Posted 11 March, 2018 Posted 11 March, 2018 Certainly ‘face’ is very important in Chinese culture. But then one would’ve thought standing by and allowing the club to be relegated without so much as a whimper would be still worse face? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Dellman Posted 11 March, 2018 Posted 11 March, 2018 Seriously, could it be ? For what possible reason ? How could we have gone from “Best run club in PL” to one of the worst so quickly ? Any ideas ? We got rid of the man who got us the reputation. Simple.
Junior Mullet Posted 12 March, 2018 Posted 12 March, 2018 We got rid of the man who got us the reputation. Simple. Yup, but that's never been a popular point of view around here.
aintforever Posted 12 March, 2018 Posted 12 March, 2018 We got rid of the man who got us the reputation. Simple. Nobody got rid of Cortese, he resigned. He jumped ship like all the other rats when Marcus' money dried up and Kat wanted her inheritance.
alpine_saint Posted 12 March, 2018 Author Posted 12 March, 2018 Certainly ‘face’ is very important in Chinese culture. But then one would’ve thought standing by and allowing the club to be relegated without so much as a whimper would be still worse face? Yep, this. Having spent 210million quid on a failing business is a bigger disgrace in every culture than sacking someone incompetent at his job.
Whitey Grandad Posted 12 March, 2018 Posted 12 March, 2018 Whether there's any truth in this or not I don't know but Reading are also struggling big time after being bought by Chinese owners and are facing some heavy criticism from fans for not sacking Stam (sound familiar?). Basically the new owner won't get rid of Stam until the end of the season as he feels it's bring shame/embarrassment upon himself as it'll be an admittance of failure of him for not thoroughly doing his research on the club before buying. Could we be in a similar position where Gao has informed us we can't sack the useless ****? If you sack a useless manager do you lose more face than if you're relegated?
DT Posted 12 March, 2018 Posted 12 March, 2018 It must be that Gao refuses to pay the compensation sacking MP requires, thus making around £5m or so more when he does the firesale. That's all I can think of. Nobody is this incompetent
Cabrone Posted 12 March, 2018 Posted 12 March, 2018 Makes you wonder, you couldn't have done a better job at destroying what the club has built up over the last 7 years If you tried. The chairman isn't exactly whiter than white. https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football/3431770/premier-league-u-turn-200m-southampton-gao-lisheng/ PREM chiefs may be forced to let the Chinese tycoon they branded a “criminal” bid to take over Southampton. Relegation and a fire sale to come? Let's see.
nta786 Posted 12 March, 2018 Posted 12 March, 2018 It must be that Gao refuses to pay the compensation sacking MP requires, thus making around £5m or so more when he does the firesale. That's all I can think of. Nobody is this incompetent I would have bought this rhetoric but we clearly did not mind spending £19m on his mate.
DT Posted 12 March, 2018 Posted 12 March, 2018 I would have bought this rhetoric but we clearly did not mind spending £19m on his mate. They'll get the majority of that back by selling him on somewhere. Sometimes this kind of thing is called money laundering...
angelman Posted 12 March, 2018 Posted 12 March, 2018 Deliberate? No, I wouldn't say so. I think that the alienation that it would cause should we go down, would be huge. If we manage to scrape enough points together, then that alienation will be less, but still be there. We were dire for large parts of last season, and even worse this season. In the past 2 seasons, I have seen Saints win 9 times at home in the league.
nta786 Posted 12 March, 2018 Posted 12 March, 2018 They'll get the majority of that back by selling him on somewhere. Sometimes this kind of thing is called money laundering... will we? I just cannot see us receiving more than £10m back for him- in fact I think he along with us will be playing Championship football.
S-Clarke Posted 12 March, 2018 Posted 12 March, 2018 will we? I just cannot see us receiving more than £10m back for him- in fact I think he along with us will be playing Championship football. What you'll find (if we do get relegated) is that clubs won't pay the fee's we demand, so we will be loaning lots of these guys out just to get a % of their wages off the wage bill.
LVSaint Posted 12 March, 2018 Posted 12 March, 2018 Not necessarily deliberate, but survival certainly not the priority? Although the income derived from Premier League membership far outweighs the Championship, to function as a club in the Prem, you have to spend an awful lot of it in wages and purchases. After the summer player sales (adding to the 75M for VVD) and the onset of parachute payments, what's to say that the first year's Championship status (albeit reduced supporter admission income) is any less lucrative?
aintforever Posted 12 March, 2018 Posted 12 March, 2018 It’s hard to think of any logical reason why they would relegate the club on purpose, the drop in income is so great it makes no sense financially. We have one of the most expensive squads outside the top 6 so could be in big trouble. I suppose in theory if the players have relegation clauses and take a big wage cut Gao could trouser a decent amount of transfer cash and leave us with the youth team in the Championship, then syphen off the parachute money like the skates owner. Still not sure it adds up tho.
alpine_saint Posted 13 March, 2018 Author Posted 13 March, 2018 I guess now that the board have finally done something, we can conclude the answer is no, and its just arrogance and incompetence that it took so long.
CB Fry Posted 13 March, 2018 Posted 13 March, 2018 Not necessarily deliberate, but survival certainly not the priority? Although the income derived from Premier League membership far outweighs the Championship, to function as a club in the Prem, you have to spend an awful lot of it in wages and purchases. After the summer player sales (adding to the 75M for VVD) and the onset of parachute payments, what's to say that the first year's Championship status (albeit reduced supporter admission income) is any less lucrative? It is and will be less lucrative.
Ex Lion Tamer Posted 13 March, 2018 Posted 13 March, 2018 I think as someone posted on the other thread, they wanted to limp through until summer when they could get their ideal manager. And they've only just realised that this was going to lead to relegation
iansums Posted 13 March, 2018 Posted 13 March, 2018 Seriously, could it be ? For what possible reason ? How could we have gone from “Best run club in PL” to one of the worst so quickly ? Any ideas ? No, of course not. Are you deliberately a cretin? The board have made a poor managerial appointment, this has nothing to with how well the club is run. A well run club can make mistakes.
hypochondriac Posted 13 March, 2018 Posted 13 March, 2018 No, of course not. Are you deliberately a cretin? The board have made a poor managerial appointment, this has nothing to with how well the club is run. A well run club can make mistakes.I don't think it's the mistake or few mistakes that have been the issue, it's the inaction and doing nothing at all that have made people question things.
iansums Posted 13 March, 2018 Posted 13 March, 2018 I don't think it's the mistake or few mistakes that have been the issue, it's the inaction and doing nothing at all that have made people question things. I don't disagree but clearly the board wanted to give MP as long as possible to turn things round, another mistake. This is a good article on TUI: https://www.fansnetwork.co.uk/football/southampton/news/47715/who-is-who-in-the-blame-list-at-st-marys
hypochondriac Posted 13 March, 2018 Posted 13 March, 2018 I don't disagree but clearly the board wanted to give MP as long as possible to turn things round, another mistake. This is a good article on TUI: https://www.fansnetwork.co.uk/football/southampton/news/47715/who-is-who-in-the-blame-list-at-st-marysBut I'm afraid it was quite obviously the wrong thing to do. Giving managers more time can be an honourable trait but by December there were zero signs at all that anything was being done differently to try to turn things around. The fact we have now sacked him shows that we should have done it much earlier and that combined with our awful January window may now result in our relegation.
iansums Posted 13 March, 2018 Posted 13 March, 2018 But I'm afraid it was quite obviously the wrong thing to do. Giving managers more time can be an honourable trait but by December there were zero signs at all that anything was being done differently to try to turn things around. The fact we have now sacked him shows that we should have done it much earlier and that combined with our awful January window may now result in our relegation. Once again, I don't disagree. We can all easily say in hindsight that he should have been sacked earlier. However the whole point of my post was that it is not deliberate and the situation we are in does not mean we are a badly run club.
alpine_saint Posted 13 March, 2018 Author Posted 13 March, 2018 No, of course not. Are you deliberately a cretin? The board have made a poor managerial appointment, this has nothing to with how well the club is run. A well run club can make mistakes. A well-run club identifies mistakes and corrects them a timely manner to prevent damage to the business. Yes, today (with hindsight...) the club has taken action. The jury is out on the timely manner part. And as someone who clearly has a talent for identifying cretins (I guess there is at leas one mirror in your home), you tell me if it is deliberate.
SaintRichmond Posted 13 March, 2018 Posted 13 March, 2018 (edited) Les Reed and the much adored Kat. And Mr Gao has to grow some f()cking balls too. Les Reed Charltons Saviour Kat No AMBITION (like her Father had ) - 1000% BUSINESS, not Football. Now she's got her wedge back, so she should F Off Gao should Go - Only in it for the Money, whereas WE are in it for FOOTBALL - Why can't people see that ? ( plus he only has Two Takeaways, and they ran out of Soy Sauce ) Edited 13 March, 2018 by SaintRichmond missed words
iansums Posted 13 March, 2018 Posted 13 March, 2018 A well-run club identifies mistakes and corrects them a timely manner to prevent damage to the business. Yes, today (with hindsight...) the club has taken action. The jury is out on the timely manner part. And as someone who clearly has a talent for identifying cretins (I guess there is at leas one mirror in your home), you tell me if it is deliberate. Read the article on TUI, you might learn something.
hypochondriac Posted 13 March, 2018 Posted 13 March, 2018 Once again, I don't disagree. We can all easily say in hindsight that he should have been sacked earlier. However the whole point of my post was that it is not deliberate and the situation we are in does not mean we are a badly run club.It wasn't hindsight though, an unprecedented number of fans and commentators thought he should be sacked around the start of the year. Had we not sacked him yesterday, I can see why people thought there was something dodgy going on. I don't think any manager has performed as poorly for so long for an established club and mot been sacked. It was getting bizarre.
iansums Posted 13 March, 2018 Posted 13 March, 2018 It wasn't hindsight though, an unprecedented number of fans and commentators thought he should be sacked around the start of the year. Had we not sacked him yesterday, I can see why people thought there was something dodgy going on. I don't think any manager has performed as poorly for so long for an established club and mot been sacked. It was getting bizarre. You're like the bloke in the Monty Python sketch looking for an argument.
hypochondriac Posted 13 March, 2018 Posted 13 March, 2018 You're like the bloke in the Monty Python sketch looking for an argument.Because I can see alpines point. I know its easy to have a go at him because of how absurd he is, but I do think he has a point. My guess is that there was indecision because of Gao but it does look very odd. I don't think there's a need to send him abuse on this topic.
shurlock Posted 13 March, 2018 Posted 13 March, 2018 Because I can see alpines point. I know its easy to have a go at him because of how absurd he is, but I do think he has a point. My guess is that there was indecision because of Gao but it does look very odd. I don't think there's a need to send him abuse on this topic. Very much doubt it had anything to do with Gao, though obviously he has executive power and can override anyone at the club. It was a footballing decision led by Les and to a lesser extent Krueger. Just look at the latest DT article - it comes across as thoroughly unrepentant with its talk of unlucky draws and belief that Pellegrino could have still been a long-term success.
iansums Posted 13 March, 2018 Posted 13 March, 2018 Because I can see alpines point. I know its easy to have a go at him because of how absurd he is, but I do think he has a point. My guess is that there was indecision because of Gao but it does look very odd. I don't think there's a need to send him abuse on this topic. Your correct, I apologize to Alpine for my words. I do however feel that the possibility of him being a cretin is slightly less fanciful than that of the club deliberately attempting to be one of the worst run clubs or deliberately trying to get relegated.
Kingsland Codger Posted 13 March, 2018 Posted 13 March, 2018 You're like the bloke in the Monty Python sketch looking for an argument. Oh no he's not.
hypochondriac Posted 13 March, 2018 Posted 13 March, 2018 Oh no he's not.I was going to write this but thought better of it Ps yes I am.
iansums Posted 13 March, 2018 Posted 13 March, 2018 I was going to write this but thought better of it Ps yes I am. That's not an argument, it's contradiction:D.
hypochondriac Posted 13 March, 2018 Posted 13 March, 2018 That's not an argument, it's contradiction:D.Sorry I didn't pay for the full argument so I can no longer continue!
iansums Posted 13 March, 2018 Posted 13 March, 2018 Sorry I didn't pay for the full argument so I can no longer continue! At least we can agree on what a brilliant sketch that was.
shurlock Posted 13 March, 2018 Posted 13 March, 2018 At least we can agree on what a brilliant sketch that was. Certainly funnier than your avatar pal.
niceandfriendly Posted 13 March, 2018 Posted 13 March, 2018 Certainly funnier than your avatar pal. Haha, "my generations comedy is better than your generations comedy". Sigh.
hypochondriac Posted 13 March, 2018 Posted 13 March, 2018 Haha, "my generations comedy is better than your generations comedy". Sigh.It's true though Derek is a piece of sh*t. The office is amazing though, and extras was decent so it's not all bad.
shurlock Posted 13 March, 2018 Posted 13 March, 2018 Haha, "my generations comedy is better than your generations comedy". Sigh. Leaving aside Monty Python was a bit before my time, that's exactly it pal.
iansums Posted 13 March, 2018 Posted 13 March, 2018 It's true though Derek is a piece of sh*t. The office is amazing though, and extras was decent so it's not all bad. Such a shame that once again you state opinion as fact. I really enjoyed Derek especially the first series, a very different sort of comedy.
hypochondriac Posted 13 March, 2018 Posted 13 March, 2018 Such a shame that once again you state opinion as fact. I really enjoyed Derek especially the first series, a very different sort of comedy.Definitely different. The kind of comedy that is unfunny.
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now