beatlesaint Posted 18 January, 2009 Posted 18 January, 2009 Serious question, especially for the Lowe supporters out there.... Can anyone give me a sensible answer to this - Lowe comes back as PLC chairman to protect his shares/investment and in order to do this he needs to put the club on a sound financial footing. Fair enough, I can understand that. So, in order to achieve the above the club needs to, at the very least, maintain CCC status, but hopefully push for promotion (NOT re-promotion as RL keeps insisting on calling it). To achieve this aim the football team need to win matches, this means they are at the very least comfortable in the league but it also means it will attract more fans through the turnstiles as people will always go and watch a winning team, hence improving the financial position of the club. With all that in mind why would Lowe play Russian Roulette with not just the club's future but his own shares by carrying out this Dutch experiment ? Where is the logic or what is the thinking behind carrying out an experiment with a club that is as financially in the mire as Lowe insists we are ? Surely the time for experiments comes when you are financially sound and have the resources to buy your way out of trouble if it all goes horribly wrong, like this has. We have nowhere to turn, we cannot afford to buy a round of drinks never mind our way out of this mess. So why, in all seriousness, has he taken such a massive gamble without a safety net ?
Sheaf Saint Posted 18 January, 2009 Posted 18 January, 2009 The answer is simple. It was the cheapest option available at the time, but Lowe beiong Lowe cannot help but try to put a positive spin on things and insult the intelligence of his paying customers at the same time by dressing it up as a 'revolutionary new coaching style'. By 'revolutionary' Rupert, do you mean 'sh1te'?
Thedelldays Posted 18 January, 2009 Posted 18 January, 2009 what really fecks me off..is when people say "who else is there" and/or "what better could anyone else do" ffs
sadoldgit Posted 18 January, 2009 Posted 18 January, 2009 Apaer from being the cheapest option (not sure about that, there is always someone cheaper) wasn't the idea to bring on the younger players and get a set up (conveyor belt) going so that player would come through the youth system and slot straight into the senior squad? Wasn't JP brought in because of his track record of bringing youngests through and Wotte to develop them in a similar way at a lower level? I can see the logic. It is just not working right now.
OldNick Posted 18 January, 2009 Posted 18 January, 2009 what really fecks me off..is when people say "who else is there" and/or "what better could anyone else do" ffsgive viable financial alternatives.Unless we know the exact finances it is hard to say. A minus 10 point penalty would kill the club.We overspent and have too high costs,something had to be done.My gripe is the manager and RL not taking action is going to cost us dear.
beatlesaint Posted 18 January, 2009 Author Posted 18 January, 2009 Apaer from being the cheapest option (not sure about that, there is always someone cheaper) wasn't the idea to bring on the younger players and get a set up (conveyor belt) going so that player would come through the youth system and slot straight into the senior squad? Wasn't JP brought in because of his track record of bringing youngests through and Wotte to develop them in a similar way at a lower level? I can see the logic. It is just not working right now. I can see the logic.....but only with a club that is on a sound financial footing. If you are in the mire financially surely you play it safe until that position is more haelthy ? Dont you ?
sadoldgit Posted 18 January, 2009 Posted 18 January, 2009 I can see the logic.....but only with a club that is on a sound financial footing. If you are in the mire financially surely you play it safe until that position is more haelthy ? Dont you ? Maybe they thought they were playing it safe. Maybe they thought that, without any money, they had no option. Who knows? We all though that brining in Strachan was a huge gamble at the time didn't we?
sadoldgit Posted 18 January, 2009 Posted 18 January, 2009 The main point is a decsiosn was made which has not panned out so far. We can belat all we like about the original decision but it makes no odds. The next decision is the most important one. Does JP stay and if not, who replaces him?
Badvoc Posted 18 January, 2009 Posted 18 January, 2009 Am I correct or did Lowe try to get Wotte and Portaloo in to SFC before he appointed Burley? Our chairman's decision making processes have always been chronic, and if this had happened previously we may already have been relegated a few years before. Anyhow, all this talk of bringing in a new man as manager points to just one name IMHO. Who has the passion to succeed? Who would instantly unite the fans? Who has legendary status in the game? Who could pull this disparate and fragile bunch of under achieving kids to fulfil (some) of their potential? Who could afford to work for the low wages we could only offer.......... Please, please KEVIN KEEGAN we need you now...... (I'll get me coat!)
sadoldgit Posted 18 January, 2009 Posted 18 January, 2009 Am I correct or did Lowe try to get Wotte and Portaloo in to SFC before he appointed Burley? Our chairman's decision making processes have always been chronic, and if this had happened previously we may already have been relegated a few years before. Anyhow, all this talk of bringing in a new man as manager points to just one name IMHO. Who has the passion to succeed? Who would instantly unite the fans? Who has legendary status in the game? Who could pull this disparate and fragile bunch of under achieving kids to fulfil (some) of their potential? Who could afford to work for the low wages we could only offer.......... Please, please KEVIN KEEGAN we need you now...... (I'll get me coat!) I think it was Wotte and another guy he was after.
saintstr1 Posted 18 January, 2009 Posted 18 January, 2009 To really understand all of this you first have to understand what makes Rupert Lowe Tick. RL is driven by his pride and his egotistical outlook on life , when he was removed from the club by Wilde he was damaged more than he will ever admit.He spent two years plotting his way back , not because he wanted SFC to do well and not as most think to safeguard his shares,that was a secondary issue. He got back his position of power that his egotistical pride needed by conning a very weak Mike Wilde into believing that he was about to lose his millions that he invested in SFC. It has been well documented that Wilde has severe cash flow problems and thinking that he was about to go to the wall he meekly fell in line with lowe , compleatly taken in by the Lowe Master Plan. The Lowe master plan was to install the Dutch coaches and work with Kids , this plan had been on Lowe's agenda for a few years and had absolutly nothing to do with the financial state of the club. It was simply a plan for Lowe to prove he knew better than the rest of the football world and it is now backfiring on him in a big way. The finances at SFC would have been the same this season regardless of Lowe, Crouch had allready instigated the savings and a lot of what Lowe as done was allready in place to be done. The biggest difference would have been Nigel Pearson would still have been manager , a manager who knows English football and the CCC. Whilst I am not naive enough to think everything would have been rosy with Crouch & Pearson at the helm, I am 100% sure we would be higher up the League and not one bit financially worse off than we are now. Rupert Lowe has so,so much to answer for, He is the ruination of this once great club. All IMO of course, (And I Have 60 years of supporting the Saints)
Dalek2003 Posted 18 January, 2009 Posted 18 January, 2009 Serious question, especially for the Lowe supporters out there.... Can anyone give me a sensible answer to this - Lowe comes back as PLC chairman to protect his shares/investment and in order to do this he needs to put the club on a sound financial footing. Fair enough, I can understand that. So, in order to achieve the above the club needs to, at the very least, maintain CCC status, but hopefully push for promotion (NOT re-promotion as RL keeps insisting on calling it). To achieve this aim the football team need to win matches, this means they are at the very least comfortable in the league but it also means it will attract more fans through the turnstiles as people will always go and watch a winning team, hence improving the financial position of the club. With all that in mind why would Lowe play Russian Roulette with not just the club's future but his own shares by carrying out this Dutch experiment ? Where is the logic or what is the thinking behind carrying out an experiment with a club that is as financially in the mire as Lowe insists we are ? Surely the time for experiments comes when you are financially sound and have the resources to buy your way out of trouble if it all goes horribly wrong, like this has. We have nowhere to turn, we cannot afford to buy a round of drinks never mind our way out of this mess. So why, in all seriousness, has he taken such a massive gamble without a safety net ? But he is done that before. Why gamble on a manager that had no experiebce of the Premiership ie Sturrock and with a dressing room full of experienced prem players when the club needed a manager WITH premier experience. Yes, Hoddle would have been a good choice, but aside from this, there were other candidates. So why ?
spyinthesky Posted 19 January, 2009 Posted 19 January, 2009 Another gamble was Sir Clive Woodward. However he wasn't a cheap option was he? Wonder how much he, Simon Clifford, the eye coach et al, all cost? BTW, Simon Clifford made a lot of noises about the future of Garforth Town 'his' club, destined for the Premiership. Garforth are making steady progress, currently 10th in the Unibond 1st Division North!!!
Doctoroncall Posted 20 January, 2009 Posted 20 January, 2009 Maybe they thought they were playing it safe. Maybe they thought that, without any money, they had no option. Who knows? We all though that brining in Strachan was a huge gamble at the time didn't we? Not that big a gamble when you consider the amount of players sold at Coventry which was the major factor that contributed to they downfall.
Doctoroncall Posted 20 January, 2009 Posted 20 January, 2009 Maybe they thought they were playing it safe. Maybe they thought that, without any money, they had no option. Who knows? We all though that brining in Strachan was a huge gamble at the time didn't we? Not that big a gamble when you consider the amount of players sold at Coventry which was the major factor that contributed to they downfall.
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