Leslie Charteris Posted 18 August, 2008 Share Posted 18 August, 2008 This quote from the forum underneath the article linked to above talks a lot more sense than many on here. This seems to be much closer to the reality of the situation than the "reality" described by some members... "Davies was never going to stay so get used to the fact that he is moving on. He was signed and was given a contract for £10k per week. Within weeks, after Crouch took over as Chairman, he was asked to take a pay cut to £5k per week which he refused to accept so it was always on the cards he would leave. At Middlesborough he was never considered 'top drawer' but would cope in the Championship and therefore ended up at Saints. His 'style' suited the fans, who were looking for a hero, but will never be a class act and will continue to be a journeyman." ..but why miss an opportunity to have a go at Lowe. It must be immensely satisfying to be right all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Bates Posted 18 August, 2008 Author Share Posted 18 August, 2008 Lowe sold them to a pimp long ago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legod Second Coming Posted 18 August, 2008 Share Posted 18 August, 2008 how many times do I need to repeat it ? The club needs to be made as attractive as possible to a buyer with money as quickly as possible, whilst still owning a few decent players and assets from which to build. That means as cheap as possible. That means going into administration. Lowe, Wilde and their mis-management will take what they can and f**k off forever then. And we can start again. Who gives a shiit about the 10 or 17 points ? These two idiots ahve no money - WE HAVE NO FUTURE UNDER THEIR OWNERSHIP Who do you think will take us over when we got into administration?? Like most businesses it will be the INCUMBENT management. Christ, are you genuinely this naive??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 18 August, 2008 Share Posted 18 August, 2008 Who do you think will take us over when we got into administration?? Like most businesses it will be the INCUMBENT management. Christ, are you genuinely this naive??? why is it naiiveity ? We've had a few nibbles over the past year. Maybe the club would be more attractive then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 18 August, 2008 Share Posted 18 August, 2008 So Saints fans are now down on a player they havent seen but take notice of a load of goons on a football forum. Imagine how rival teams would get reports from here on a load of players. You cant take notice of them until you yourselves have seen the player.I agreee with the sentiments that he doesnt inspire but I doubt he is costing anything Pulis is trying to get his son to a new surrounding where he will not be seen as 'only plays because of his father' And conversely of course it seems to be the case that unless Pulis selects his son he would not have played for Stoke or any other team that Pulis has managed except through nepotism. I agree that an internet forum is not the place to use as a pointer as to a player's prowess, but if they looked at ours, they would notice the vast majority up in arms that we were selling Davies, but look at their forum and nobody has a good word to say about Pulis junior. But the manager used to say that there is no point in bringing in a player unless he is better than what we have. Used correctly, that policy would entail a gradual improvement in a squad. Applied to us now, as we are getting rid of any quality and replacing it with youth, so the judgement of whether any replacement is better than what we have is clouded. But on the face of it, it appears that we would be better off not having Pulis as part of the deal, unless of course JP had him in on trial and saw something in him that everybody else seems to have missed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRichmond Posted 18 August, 2008 Share Posted 18 August, 2008 Who do you think will take us over when we got into administration?? Like most businesses it will be the INCUMBENT management. Christ, are you genuinely this naive??? If we are worth " peanuts ", then we will be more of an attractive proposition than we are at the moment Al this selling off of what talent we have IS NOT REDUCING THE DEBT, purely paying the Interest to satisfy Barclays The "Naivity " to which you refer, should be aimed at the Lowe ? Wilde ticket, because they have done NOTHING, nor will they do anything, for the furtherance of Saints Football All their remit is .... do enough to keep us "legally solvent " ...... keep the PLC fraternity Happy, sell anything that can attract a fee, and everything from a "sound" business point of view will be fine ....... the fact that the Football Team will be heading for Div 1, or worse, does not figure in their litle minds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_clark Posted 18 August, 2008 Share Posted 18 August, 2008 Can't wait for the arrival of Pulis' son. :-S http://www.clubfanzine.com/stoke_city/v2.showNews.php?id=3410 Oh, f*cking fantastic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 18 August, 2008 Share Posted 18 August, 2008 If we are worth " peanuts ", then we will be more of an attractive proposition than we are at the moment Al this selling off of what talent we have IS NOT REDUCING THE DEBT, purely paying the Interest to satisfy Barclays The "Naivity " to which you refer, should be aimed at the Lowe ? Wilde ticket, because they have done NOTHING, nor will they do anything, for the furtherance of Saints Football All their remit is .... do enough to keep us "legally solvent " ...... keep the PLC fraternity Happy, sell anything that can attract a fee, and everything from a "sound" business point of view will be fine ....... the fact that the Football Team will be heading for Div 1, or worse, does not figure in their litle mindsWould Saints stay up with a minus 10 point penalty? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ottery st mary Posted 18 August, 2008 Share Posted 18 August, 2008 The truth is probably somewhere betwwen RL & MW wishing to protect their stake in the business and the bank saying "ok, but continued support will mean selling assets". The Bank will not stipulate who they sell as otherwise would become "interested directors" under the terms of the Companies Act and thus illegal. It seems to me that as nobody wishes to buy Kelvin Davies, Euell and Skajel we are forced to sell others who can raise reasonable sums, not by design but simply circumstances. That is the fact of the case surely? We can all help in a small way by ensuring that the 18K fans who were their on Saturday each bring and ex-supporter back to SMS for the rest of the season. So finances dictate but then we are supposed to be taking a player not good enough for Stoke reserves or any of the teams he has been loaned out to. Surely he will need wages and reduces the fee for Davies. It does not make sense and if JP has a choice he was not watching the Stoke friendly or in any of his appearances in the past seasons. Just can't make sense of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legod Second Coming Posted 18 August, 2008 Share Posted 18 August, 2008 why is it naiiveity ? We've had a few nibbles over the past year. Maybe the club would be more attractive then. Firstly, most of these nibbles have been from people who do not have the clout to buy the club, lest it would have been sold. SISU was our only realistic purchaser. Second, there is no guarantee that ANY buyer is any more likely to buy us out of adminsitration when the club is STILL loss-making. Few people buy loss-making businesses, fewer still when staring down the barrel of recession. Third, the points loss would relegate us, making it EVEN more difficult to turn the business around and therefore even less saleable. And finally, because the most likely buyer of ANY business that goes into administration is either the incumbent or former management. (That's what comes of being married to a bank manager, the son-in-law of an accountant and the brother-in-law of a receiver...) Our ONLY hope of survival is to match out income to our outgoings. Frankly THAT is the only hope of ANY business to survive. You don't like Lowe, I don't like him. But to launch us into administration to try and oust him is a guarantee of relegation. At least his way offers us hope of survival. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Martini Posted 18 August, 2008 Share Posted 18 August, 2008 why is it naiiveity ? We've had a few nibbles over the past year. Maybe the club would be more attractive then. Maybe? You're willing to risk the future of the club on it maybe being more interesting to investors? What happens if we're not interesting anyway, then we're absolutely fooked beyond repair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 18 August, 2008 Share Posted 18 August, 2008 Maybe? You're willing to risk the future of the club on it maybe being more interesting to investors? What happens if we're not interesting anyway, then we're absolutely fooked beyond repair. We're f**ked anyway, mate.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Martini Posted 18 August, 2008 Share Posted 18 August, 2008 We're f**ked anyway, mate.. I'm not saying it will be easy but I still feel we have a chance if we just get some more of the high earners of our books. It won't be easy but at least we have a fighting chance. Going into administration just fooks us up more and doomes us to relegation straight away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 18 August, 2008 Share Posted 18 August, 2008 We're f**ked anyway, mate.. You dont need to keep telling us of your lack of fibre and panic at the first dark cloud, its getting boring. You dont know how close you weree to actually travelling to watch Saints.Had Stern put his chance away, you'd be booking tickets for the Blackpool game ,thereagain it on tv and so you could have said you went even if you stayed in your armchair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 18 August, 2008 Share Posted 18 August, 2008 You dont need to keep telling us of your lack of fibre and panic at the first dark cloud, its getting boring. You dont know how close you weree to actually travelling to watch Saints.Had Stern put his chance away, you'd be booking tickets for the Blackpool game ,thereagain it on tv and so you could have said you went even if you stayed in your armchair. Hey nick, whatever makes you feel better...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintDonkey Posted 18 August, 2008 Share Posted 18 August, 2008 Administration means a 10 point penalty, probably having to sell players anyway followed by almost certain relegation and further points penalties next season. Selling players means it'll be tougher to avoid relegation - but a great deal less tough than dealing with a penalty. Personally I'd be for selling the players and avoiding administration. Anyone who thinks otherwise seriously needs their heads examining. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr X Posted 18 August, 2008 Share Posted 18 August, 2008 Administration means a 10 point penalty, probably having to sell players anyway followed by almost certain relegation and further points penalties next season. Selling players means it'll be tougher to avoid relegation - but a great deal less tough than dealing with a penalty. Personally I'd be for selling the players and avoiding administration. Anyone who thinks otherwise seriously needs their heads examining. We have to keep enough players to be able to have a chance of staying in this league though. And I don't see us doing it if we continue to sell the players that might keep us up. It's a lose lose situation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 18 August, 2008 Share Posted 18 August, 2008 Didn't Michael Wilde say that he could easily find a couple of million if it was needed? ****ing judas scum lying tosser ****. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InvictaSaint Posted 18 August, 2008 Share Posted 18 August, 2008 According to Michael Wilde in Saturday's match programme, the club is now "back on track for a more stable and successful future" [sic]. Doesn't exactly smack of somebody who knows that unless we raise £4M by the end of the month, then the administrators are on their way, does it? Unless of course he has been taking lessons from the White Star Line school of maritime management....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintDonkey Posted 18 August, 2008 Share Posted 18 August, 2008 According to Michael Wilde in Saturday's match programme, the club is now "back on track for a more stable and successful future" [sic]. Doesn't exactly smack of somebody who knows that unless we raise £4M by the end of the month, then the administrators are on their way, does it? Unless of course he has been taking lessons from the White Star Line school of maritime management....... To be fair to him "On track for a more stable and successful future" doesn't mean the same thing as actually having a stable and successful future Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenTreeFrog Posted 18 August, 2008 Share Posted 18 August, 2008 But the manager used to say that there is no point in bringing in a player unless he is better than what we have. Used correctly, that policy would entail a gradual improvement in a squad. Applied to us now, as we are getting rid of any quality and replacing it with youth, so the judgement of whether any replacement is better than what we have is clouded. If he had said that then it would be a ridiculous comment to make as it would mean we would only ever sell weaker players and buy better ones. Our finances make that totally impossible; in fact for most clubs it would be impossible. What he did say was our finances mean we are no longer be able to buy, or even get loan players, for any position where a young player is currently available in our youth team. He claimed the youth players would need to 'prove themselves' once given the chance but of course reality means we will have little choice but to play squad players regardless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Marco Posted 18 August, 2008 Share Posted 18 August, 2008 Be interesting to know where this £4m by end of transfer day comment came from that the echo printed. I cant believe it is true for 1 minute because what happens if they dont make the £4m? The bank go "we want our cash or we send the heavies round!!". The banks are not stupid, they know they have a better chance getting their money back by giving the club the best chance to survive. If we go down we will go into admin and the banks will lose everything. This just looks like classic Lowe selling off anything that has a value. If we are in the situation where we still need lots of cut backs after all the ones over the past 4 months then it raises the question where has the money gone from that? And here we are again back to where we were 2 years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Martini Posted 18 August, 2008 Share Posted 18 August, 2008 Like I said it looks like the combined sum of 4 million from the Davies and Surman rumours and the alleged comment by Lowe before the Brum match that the bank forced him to accept the offer for Davies are being added up by the Echo to: The bank wants 4 million in player sales. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 18 August, 2008 Share Posted 18 August, 2008 I have researched our record with Davies in the side. This is not to put a downer on him as i like him as a player and of course no defeat/win is down to 1 player.CCC ONLY He played 23 games won 4 drew 10 lost 9 clean sheets 5 against 32 I wonder if those figures are a surprise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 18 August, 2008 Share Posted 18 August, 2008 (edited) To be balanced i got the figures of before he came and after. Before he joined was 11 games LOST 5 DREW 1 WON 5 GOALS AGAINST 25 CLEAN SHEETS NONE GAMES AFTER HE WAS INJURED (12) LOST 4 DREW 4 WON 4 GOALS CONCEDED 20 CLEAN SHEETS 3 THE GOALS PER GAME RATIO WAS DEFINATELY BETTER WHEN HE PLAYED. Edited 18 August, 2008 by OldNick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint_ed Posted 18 August, 2008 Share Posted 18 August, 2008 Despite me being totally gutted about the impending sale of Davies, but I can just about understand our desperate need for cash, but what I can't understand and what makes me furious is that we are signing Pulis. If we are trying to cut our wage bill, why sign such utter sh!te??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calvin Posted 18 August, 2008 Share Posted 18 August, 2008 We're well-and-truly fuuucked. I have to agree. who will Saints sell next... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fowllyd Posted 18 August, 2008 Share Posted 18 August, 2008 Despite me being totally gutted about the impending sale of Davies, but I can just about understand our desperate need for cash, but what I can't understand and what makes me furious is that we are signing Pulis. If we are trying to cut our wage bill, why sign such utter sh!te??? Are we? It's only the Echo saying that. If I were you I wouldn't take that as fact! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Totton Red Posted 18 August, 2008 Share Posted 18 August, 2008 Be interesting to know where this £4m by end of transfer day comment came from that the echo printed. I cant believe it is true for 1 minute because what happens if they dont make the £4m? The bank go "we want our cash or we send the heavies round!!". The banks are not stupid, they know they have a better chance getting their money back by giving the club the best chance to survive. If we go down we will go into admin and the banks will lose everything. This just looks like classic Lowe selling off anything that has a value. If we are in the situation where we still need lots of cut backs after all the ones over the past 4 months then it raises the question where has the money gone from that? And here we are again back to where we were 2 years ago. The Echo are printing the script written for them by SFC and the scaremongering is to appease as many fans as possible. It is obvious that we need to be financially prudent but the deadlines are invented to dilute the impact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faz Posted 18 August, 2008 Share Posted 18 August, 2008 The Echo are printing the script written for them by SFC and the scaremongering is to appease as many fans as possible. It is obvious that we need to be financially prudent but the deadlines are invented to dilute the impact. OMG, you mean it's a conspiracy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 18 August, 2008 Share Posted 18 August, 2008 I have thought about becoming a full member having been away for a while but when you get that total pric* alpine spouting such negative ****e all the time im not sure i want to pay just to read his ****e. why cant you and sfc stick to your own twosome site and allow those with some intellect to have reasoned debate on this web Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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