Crouch on radio today

[Window Cleaner]

  John B said:

It is the top six quoute I think is rubbish

 

Crouch said last season when he took over that we were heading for the play offs when in fact we were heading for the relegation zone.

 

Surely with some type of costing the team would not be going for promotion to the Premiership.

 

I am not saying that the present regime is doing a good job but at the moment we are not in administration if we were then of course Lowe and Wilde would have failed.

 

He also said we were getting investment in 3 to 6 months every 3 to 6 months.

He also said "it is Paul Allen"

 

In fact he said a whole lot of stuff, in the end the execs told him it would be just as well if he didn't say anything at all about anything whatsoever.

 

Pity he didn't keep it zipped instead of uttering this sort of bilge

"There is no rush because we are very happy with what Jason and John are doing," said the Southampton chairman Leon Crouch. "In the meantime we will continue our hunt for new investment."

What they were doing being beating Leicester in the cup, losing at home to Norwich and getting a shaky draw at Palace, yep reasons to be cheerful 1.2.3

Edited 28 January, 2009 by Window Cleaner

[Faz]

This whole thing leaves a bad taste. What are LCs motives I wonder?

[Village Saint]

  slickmick said:

Bit of a high opinion of himself, but he isn't far off.

If we had him and Pearson still here, I think we would be out of trouble.

 

Well in a diiferent sort of trouble. We would be in administration!

[St. Jason]

  NickG said:

this does not help the club -at all.

 

 

He is a fan, we all accept that. As a fan can he not see that these continual squabbles are harming the club.

 

I am not saying he could not do a good job or whether what he had said is true.

 

But as a fan and shareholder -does this do any good for Saints or could it harm us?

 

As an individual does this do any good for his ego?

 

Any comparisons with the numerous bad things the others have done are not relevant to this. Two wrongs etc.

 

Actions may help, continual rants without action only harm.

 

Nick he's in opposition, he's no different than David Cameron imo. I believe it's his job to speak out, he has been there, he has seen the accounts, he knows whats what within the club!

 

I think we have a right to know that an offer to clear the overdraft was made, I also believe we have right to know it was turned down by Lowe and Wilde. Without Crouch speaking out we'd still be treated like mushrooms by the club!

 

Note: how exactly can it hurt the club, surely what Crouch has done is told potential suitors that the club can be taken over for £6m??

[Wes Tender]

  Village Saint said:

Well in a diiferent sort of trouble. We would be in administration!

 

Ah! Given your crystal ball a polish again?

 

Perhaps there might have been the extra 10,000 through the gates that have deserted us since the return of Lowe and the Quisling giving extra revenue. Perhaps Pearson would not have signed the dross that has been signed under Poortvliet's tenure, you know, the players who are rejects at their lower division clubs, or who couldn't even get a game when their father is manager.

 

Perhaps the unity that had been demonstrated under the previous regime might have been much preferable to the poison atmosphere that pervades the club under the two most hated figures in the club's history.

 

Perhaps we might not see all these PR people spinning for all they're worth on behalf of said hated figures.

[St. Jason]

  John B said:

It is the top six quoute I think is rubbish

 

Crouch said last season when he took over that we were heading for the play offs when in fact we were heading for the relegation zone.

 

Surely with some type of costing the team would not be going for promotion to the Premiership.

 

I am not saying that the present regime is doing a good job but at the moment we are not in administration if we were then of course Lowec and Wilde would have failed.

 

So the appointed manager walking/pushed out, sitting second from bottom, 1 home win in 14, 6 wins in 29, 26 goals scored (less than 1 a game) and 44 conceded isn't failure??

Fvck me, if that's success I think my season ticket renewal form will get a swift 'not none at this address' stamped on it!

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

  Village Saint said:

Well in a different sort of trouble. We would be in administration!

 

I see no evidence to support this .

 

On the contrary it's my opinion that SFC would be a better run , better supported and as a consequence better financed club today had Leon Crouch remained as Chairman .

Crouch would certainly have cut expenditure last summer just as Lowe did , the only difference is that Leon with his innately superior understanding of the game would very likely have made a better job of it . Just my opinion but I doubt LC would ever have allowed all of Rasiak , Saganowski and Stern John to leave the club in its hour of need - at least one would have probably stayed and we'd be in a much healthier league position tonight as a result , even if the Chairman had to pay the players wages to do it .

Edited 28 January, 2009 by CHAPEL END CHARLIE

[NickG]

  St. Jason said:

Nick he's in opposition, he's no different than David Cameron imo. I believe it's his job to speak out, he has been there, he has seen the accounts, he knows whats what within the club!

 

I think we have a right to know that an offer to clear the overdraft was made, I also believe we have right to know it was turned down by Lowe and Wilde. Without Crouch speaking out we'd still be treated like mushrooms by the club!

 

Note: how exactly can it hurt the club, surely what Crouch has done is told potential suitors that the club can be taken over for £6m??

 

it can hurt the club in that just about every departing player, manager, ex player and pundit states that the boardroom instability has a bad effect on the team.

I appreciate your view on the opposition bit but personally don't see that as fitting. He is not in a formal role to undermine the board with fans etc is he? Sure campaign with shareholders and investors but this public criticism continually knocks the club - Lowe is as bad

[St. Jason]

  John B said:

I am not happy but not angry if we have no money to pay players we are not going to be a good team I would have thought.

 

I fairly angry last season where we wasted lots of money and nearly got relegated especially during the last day of the season where if other teams won we were down.

 

If Crouch had got rid of Burley at Christmas perhaps things would have been better

 

So Lowe appointed Burley, Wilde and his execs took over and sanctioned Burley's massive spending spree, Crouch took over mid-December yet he's still to blame for not getting rid of Burley within his first week of work.

 

Some would argue that is was pretty good business. If Crouch had sacked Burley it would of cost the club thousands, in the end the club made hundreds of thousands by him walking away!

[St. Jason]

  CB Fry said:

I'd forgotten this quote but it is worth remembering when considering Crouch's level of delusion.

 

He said this at the appointment of Dodd and Gorman that the playoffs were in reach.

 

Meaning he can't really crow about how successful he and Pearson were when all we did was stay up because some other teams failed.

 

If all three of Leicester, Cov and us had won on the last day we were down.

 

I don't doubt we would be doing better under Nige now were he hear, but top six is I think pretty ga-ga.

 

Just a small point cb, but do all clubs not win titles, cups, promotion or get relegated because other teams failed. Who'd of won the fa cup last year if Cardiff & Skate won? Are Man Utd not top of the league because Liverpool lost?

[Snowballs2]

  St. Jason said:

So Lowe appointed Burley, Wilde and his execs took over and sanctioned Burley's massive spending spree, Crouch took over mid-December yet he's still to blame for not getting rid of Burley within his first week of work.

 

Some would argue that is was pretty good business. If Crouch had sacked Burley it would of cost the club thousands, in the end the club made hundreds of thousands by him walking away!

 

 

Now don't ruin his whole anti Crouch thoughts please, let John still think that it really is Crouch who is the devil incarnate...after all it takes the spotlight and pressure off Lowe and Wilde

[saint lard]

  nickh said:

are dividends still beig paid??? I thought we were losing money not paying out dividends.

As for the deal, what is it?

 

Just repeating what Crouch was saying in the interview reference dividends.

If you listen to what he says you will hear what context he used the term in,also you will get the gist of the deal on offer,not that it hasn't been mentioned copius amounts by others.

[saintjay77]

  St. Jason said:

Just a small point cb, but do all clubs not win titles, cups, promotion or get relegated because other teams failed. Who'd of won the fa cup last year if Cardiff & Skate won? Are Man Utd not top of the league because Liverpool lost?

 

Oh come on. You cant deny that we blew our chances when our fate was still in our own hands. Sure it takes others failures to highlight your own success' but we were down and out after failing to get the points in some crucial games against oposition that had no reason to turn up.

 

Shef U still had plenty to play for which makes our result look allot better than it maybe was but that result on its own was not enough. Had we gone down Pearsons record would have looked pretty awful IMO which would have been a shame on his part as he didnt have a lot going for him with us from the moment he walked through the door.

[SaintRobbie]

Crouch provides at least some hope. Lowe/Wilde = none.

 

Frankly anyone who doesnt support him now must be barking.

Edited 28 January, 2009 by SaintRobbie

[fos1]

  SaintRobbie said:

Crouch provides at least some hope. Lowe/Wilde = none.

 

Frankly anyone who doesnt support him now must be barking.

 

100% correct

[Johnny Shearer]

I'm sick of all three and despair about the club. At board level its a joke.

[CB Fry]

  St. Jason said:

Just a small point cb, but do all clubs not win titles, cups, promotion or get relegated because other teams failed. Who'd of won the fa cup last year if Cardiff & Skate won? Are Man Utd not top of the league because Liverpool lost?

 

 

The league is the league. Leicester definitely deserved to go down.

 

My point is only that the great escape was not that great - we needed results to go our way to stay up. "It's still in our hands" is always the most precious commodity in the relegation battle, and losing that is second only to being mathmatically down, and we lost it.

 

The point is Crouch came in talking play offs and we ended up with relegation out of our hands on the last afternoon. That is as close as it gets.

[SOTONS EAST SIDE]

  CB Fry said:

The league is the league. Leicester definitely deserved to go down.

 

My point is only that the great escape was not that great - we needed results to go our way to stay up. "It's still in our hands" is always the most precious commodity in the relegation battle, and losing that is second only to being mathmatically down, and we lost it.

 

The point is Crouch came in talking play offs and we ended up with relegation out of our hands on the last afternoon. That is as close as it gets.

Utter Trash! "relegation out of our hands" statement. We had to go out to win(like everyone else), not sit back and hope a draw was good enough, then that would have been out of our hands. We won, others didnt so we took our chance and stayed up. We only relied on ourselves TO DO THE JOB not others, and reaped the rewards.Or did you forget Coventry finished below us as well!!

Get some perspective FFS!

Edited 28 January, 2009 by SOTONS EAST SIDE

[CB Fry]

  SOTONS EAST SIDE said:

Utter Trash! "relegation out of our hands" statement. We had to go out to win(like everyone else), not sit back and hope a draw was good enough, then that would have been out of our hands. We won, others didnt so we took our chance and stayed up. We only relied on ourselves TO DO THE JOB not others, and reaped the rewards.Or did you forget Coventry finished below us as well!!

Get some perspective FFS!

 

 

Relegation was out of our hands on the last day of last season. What that means is we could have gone out and "done our job" and still gone down. What that also means is we hadn't been "doing our job" in the weeks leading up to that weekend.

 

That is just a fact, there's no need to get silly about it.

 

My perspective is twenty twenty and was my original point - when Crouch came in he was talking about success as the play-offs which did not come to pass, as relegation was out of our hands on the last day, which, apart from actually being relegated is about as far from the play offs as you can get.

[HEBRIDEAN SAINT]

I was in edinburgh airport, with gb behind me at security. I asked if he thought saints would survive? "it's going to be tight down there," he said.

I pointed out young kayne mclaggon scored last night.

"is he any good?" asked gb

i was quite surprised at this - but then i can't remember if gb was at the club when mclaggon joined the academy. If he was then he obviously took little interest in the youngsters. But i'll give him the benefit of the doubt.

"he's going to go a long way," i said.

And with that gb went one way and i the other.

[Frank's cousin]

  Pancake said:

If I was chairman we would be sitting mid table in Prem after spanking Man Utd 3-1 at SMS last night.

 

Whatever...

 

You cant say that - on what evidence? ;-) Seriously, and I do actually believe this , all three of the antagonists WANT the club secure and doing well, ...but, either dont have a clue how to do it, dont have the money to do it, disagree on how to do it. Crouch certainly wins/knows the PR game, but it all goes back to adding concrete plans and vaible solutions to his fan friendly rhetoric and he would be the wiiner by a mile.... which we are still waiting for.

[Frank's cousin]

  SaintRobbie said:

Crouch provides at least some hope. Lowe/Wilde = none.

 

Frankly anyone who doesnt support him now must be barking.

 

But what would we be supporting? That is the question, and I mean I would have no problem in supporting him if I knew what he was going to do or how he was going to do it...because he has not shared any vision, plan, answers, just talked a good game.... the last time we had that scenario, wilde took over.... then Crouch ..... then Lowe/Wilde... all promising change for teh betetr and delivering nothing....

[slickmick]

  Frank said:

But what would we be supporting? That is the question' date=' and I mean I would have no problem in supporting him if I knew what he was going to do or how he was going to do it...because he has not shared any vision, plan, answers, just talked a good game.... the last time we had that scenario, wilde took over.... then Crouch ..... then Lowe/Wilde... all promising change for teh betetr and delivering nothing....[/quote']

 

 

Thing is Frank, a lot of people are asking the same questions about the current regime and we are none to the wiser what their vision or plan is.

[OldNick]

  HEBRIDEAN SAINT said:

I was in edinburgh airport, with gb behind me at security. I asked if he thought saints would survive? "it's going to be tight down there," he said.

I pointed out young kayne mclaggon scored last night.

"is he any good?" asked gb

i was quite surprised at this - but then i can't remember if gb was at the club when mclaggon joined the academy. If he was then he obviously took little interest in the youngsters. But i'll give him the benefit of the doubt.

"he's going to go a long way," i said.

And with that gb went one way and i the other.

being MClaggon he may of wondered if he was Scottish. He looks like he is to me

[OldNick]

[quote=CHAPEL END CHARLIE;184802

 

.

Crouch would certainly have cut expenditure last summer just as Lowe did , the only difference is that Leon with his innately superior understanding of the game would very likely have made a better job of it . Just my opinion but I doubt LC would ever have allowed all of Rasiak , Saganowski and Stern John to leave the club in its hour of need - at least one would have probably stayed and we'd be in a much healthier league position tonight as a result , even if the Chairman had to pay the players wages to do it .

and how does LC have a better understanding of football?????

As for the chairman paying the wages, why should/would he.He could do so now if he was so charitable.Get things into context they are all no better than useless.

[Greenridge]

  Frank said:

But what would we be supporting? That is the question' date=' and I mean I would have no problem in supporting him if I knew what he was going to do or how he was going to do it...because he has not shared any vision, plan, answers, just talked a good game.... the last time we had that scenario, wilde took over.... then Crouch ..... then Lowe/Wilde... all promising change for teh betetr and delivering nothing....[/quote']

 

Valid questions FC and I think we have to be careful of the 'anything but Lowe' route which didn't yield fruit last time. I believe the one thing LC would offer would be a far more unified support base which would be a significant positive but that alone is not what the club needs. I'm sure we'd also see a switch in manager / head coach but there are of course no guarantee's that that would be succesful.....

[OldNick]

  Greenridge said:

Valid questions FC and I think we have to be careful of the 'anything but Lowe' route which didn't yield fruit last time. I believe the one thing LC would offer would be a far more unified support base which would be a significant positive but that alone is not what the club needs. I'm sure we'd also see a switch in manager / head coach but there are of course no guarantee's that that would be succesful.....

LC would definately be less of an irritation to the fan base BUT he would not unite fans as he is too much of a loose cannon.

My experience of him as an ambassador for our club was not good.I was a guest of one of the former directors at Bournemouth when saints played them in a preseason friendly .LC was rude and ignorant to the Bournemouth directors.They were very upset no respect was shown to them.Very embarrassing to me,being a saints fan and hearing their experience.

[SOTONS EAST SIDE]

  CB Fry said:

Relegation was out of our hands on the last day of last season. What that means is we could have gone out and "done our job" and still gone down. What that also means is we hadn't been "doing our job" in the weeks leading up to that weekend.

 

That is just a fact, there's no need to get silly about it.

 

My perspective is twenty twenty and was my original point - when Crouch came in he was talking about success as the play-offs which did not come to pass, as relegation was out of our hands on the last day, which, apart from actually being relegated is about as far from the play offs as you can get.

But thats football is'nt it, you cant rely on anyone else except yourselves, so relegation was in our hands , like it was in everybody else's. We did our job others didnt! FACT!!!!!

[OldNick]

  SOTONS EAST SIDE said:

But thats football is'nt it, you cant rely on anyone else except yourselves, so relegation was in our hands , like it was in everybody else's. We did our job others didnt! FACT!!!!!

I dont know if you are intentionally missing the point but, we had got into a position last day of the season that it wasn't in our hands.That is the point, if LC and crew were so good we would have not been RELYING on other scores as well as getting our own job done.

[up and away]

  Jackie@home said:

Most of us realise the financial mess we are in, but Crouch is not alone in believing that someone else could do a better job under the same financial constraints.

 

The amount of money that has been wasted since Lowe returned has been criminal - the usual accumulation of a huge squad of average players not even good enough to get on the bench, coaching staff on "gardening leave" that we are obviously still paying.

 

Whoever has been scouting Gasmi, Pulis, Peckhardt, Smith, Robertson, etc., has cost this club a packet. Whoever he is, we don't even know, but he must be getting a fee or salary.

 

I think the vast majority of us would have swap one wage of either John or Rasiak for 6 other nonenties. We might have actually won a couple more home games that would have kept the crowds from dropping so drastically.

 

The vast majority of Championship clubs are working under very tight financial constraints, but most are better run than us. I'm not suprised Crouch thinks he can do a better job than Lowe - I'm pretty sure that I could too.

 

At first glance your points look sound, but dig deeper and it's not quite that straight forward. As you say "The vast majority of Championship clubs are working under very tight financial constraints" but we are not afforded that luxury because of the financial mess we are in. We are competing with League 1 clubs and lower for experienced players, with a bit of luck with the younger players because of our previous standing. As for being able to get rid of 6 non entities for one decent player, I am not even sure that ratio would get you a leg. Not only are their salaries high, but the playing bonuses must be similarly high. When I look at someone like Pulis, I can understand many fans questioning the worth of such a player. Then I look at the fact that deal incorporated a very expensive, injured player going the other way. I still can't believe we managed to get rid of Davies and I still don't know if he has started a league game for Stoke yet? If the down side of having Pulis is getting Davies off the wage bill, is there even a seconds thought?

 

Ther are plenty that could do the job, but I am not sure many will make the right decision irrespective of how unpopular the decision is. We are in desperate times and no decision in this environment is going to be easy or straightforward. I just wish fans would look at what needs to be done, irrespective of who is making that decision. They now have the wage bill under control by even the lower CCC standards, but that is no where near enough for us because of the mountain of debt we created beforehand.

 

What Crouch showed clearly in those final weeks at the helm was that he was prepared to sit there taking no action, waiting for a magical investor to appear. Pleading for more time as it was just around the corner. Well if that's a corner, the curvature of the earth could well fit that criteria.

[Nineteen Canteen]

  Wes Tender said:

Ah! Given your crystal ball a polish again?

 

Perhaps there might have been the extra 10,000 through the gates that have deserted us since the return of Lowe and the Quisling giving extra revenue. Perhaps Pearson would not have signed the dross that has been signed under Poortvliet's tenure, you know, the players who are rejects at their lower division clubs, or who couldn't even get a game when their father is manager.

 

Perhaps the unity that had been demonstrated under the previous regime might have been much preferable to the poison atmosphere that pervades the club under the two most hated figures in the club's history.

 

Perhaps we might not see all these PR people spinning for all they're worth on behalf of said hated figures.

 

Wes Tender, since when under Crouch did we average gates of 25k? Even under the resurgent performances masterminded by Pearson, gates did not increase dramatically until the last game of the season when all the 'real' supporters came along to 'celebrate'. No doubt many of these fans will be demonstarting on Saturday but unable to buy a ticket for the game.

 

Pearson was responsible for some poor signings and got lucky with Wright who would not have graced our team had we very unusually been without our 3 first team keepers. What would Pearson have done under the constraints imposed on JV.

 

The unity under Crouch was already begining to crack to such a degree that the anti-Lowe feeling wasn't as evident as it is now. Pearson may in the long term prove to be a good manager but the real test of any manager is one who can act with no money at all and perhaps that's why some Scottish managers are so revered. The likes of Coyle, Jimmy Calderwood and Levene all come to mind before we talk about the likes of Ferguson and Moyes - but there are exceptions to the rules as we have found to our cost. There was plenty of evidence to suggest that had Pearson stayed he would have been found out just like Ince.

 

It is a bit rich Crouch spouting off and making some wildly unsupportive claims and even with his £2m or £6m we would be unlikely to be much higher than we are now and no doubt with a team of overpaid journeyman and under utilised as opposed to overly untilised youth resource. Balance in the team is needed but evidence suggests neither has or would have achieved it.

 

The poisionous atmosphere is unpleasant and very damaging we all know that but what do we hope to achieve. Oust Lowe and Wilde for Crouch? Is that the answer? As an intelligent poster are you seriously saying that you would prefer Crouch in charge with his overblown fan friendly rhetoric pulling the wool over the fan's eyes as the club really does sink under his overblown hopes and expectations?

 

I'm accused of being many things but I simply believe given the alternatives Lowe remains the only solution worthy of our support because he won't let populist and unproven views deviate the board from making decsions with the long term interests of the club at heart. Crouch's recent behaviour can at best be described as childish and his approach is the business equivalent of ADHT in my opinion and his desire to be a solution and liked by all will bring this club to its knees quicker than any divisive atmosphere generated by the fans against Lowe.

 

Ultimately, a credible solution that will unite the fans will, we hope, come to the fore but in the meantime jumping out of the frying pan into the fire is absolutely insane and if nothing else continuity under Lowe is what this club needs than a well off but not rich enough fan memorable only for his false claims and overseer of our greatest but self inflicted escape.

 

Our creditors are going to want to see continuity unless they can see real benefits of any change in personnel and I ask everyone to be honest, if you are a senior manager at Barclays are you going to be able to make a case for Crouch over Lowe to your shareholders and board? Another 10k??!! on the gate? Even if you can support that, will it help to blow it on some meal ticket, pension boosting wage for players of the likes of Euell or Idiakez?

 

Demonstrate by all means but I hope you all have a plan other than pinning your hopes on the likes of Crouch and McMenemy. IMO you'll be heading for oblivion fuelled by a load of fan-friendly empty promises and rhetoric and I prefer to be told as it is and when it is necessary. Lowe tells us as it is and I prefer my facts unbellished and heavilly loaded with realism than with talks of play-offs and all on the strength of appointing a management team made up of a manager of 6 months experience at Eastleigh and a scout.

[Nineteen Canteen]

  SaintRobbie said:

Crouch provides at least some hope. Lowe/Wilde = none.

 

Frankly anyone who doesnt support him now must be barking.

 

Woof woof

[hypochondriac]

  Nineteen Canteen said:

Woof woof

 

Which I believe was his point sundance.

[Give it to Ron]

  Nineteen Canteen said:

. Lowe tells us as it is and I prefer my facts unbellished and heavilly loaded with realism than with talks of play-offs and all on the strength of appointing a management team made up of a manager of 6 months experience at Eastleigh and a scout.

 

With an anonymous letter written by his mum?

 

Can you tell me what great heights JP managed at before he was appointed by old rosey cheeks - oh yeah the equivalent of Eastleigh.

 

Look back through your posts Sundance and even you were questioning this appointment and advocating bringing in Dowie!!

[JohnnyFartPants]

I am with Sundance Beast/Nineteen Canteen on this one. It doesn't make me a Lowe Luvvie to consider Lowe the best option at the moment, given that I think all options are pretty crap. Basically, what I am being asked is would I like a punch in the face every 30 minutes to having my head cut off.

 

Do I want someone addressing the finances, however tough those choices are, to somebody saying, "I would have sorted it all out by now" with no method or clarity as to how this would have been acheived, which would end in the club no longer existing.

 

The obvious way out of all of this is for a buy out, but this is no more or less likely with or without the good old protesters march.

[Give it to Ron]

  JohnnyFartPants said:

I am with Sundance Beast/Nineteen Canteen on this one. It doesn't make me a Lowe Luvvie to consider Lowe the best option at the moment, given that I think all options are pretty crap. Basically, what I am being asked is would I like a punch in the face every 30 minutes to having my head cut off.

 

Do I want someone addressing the finances, however tough those choices are, to somebody saying, "I would have sorted it all out by now" with no method or clarity as to how this would have been acheived, which would end in the club no longer existing.

 

The obvious way out of all of this is for a buy out, but this is no more or less likely with or without the good old protesters march.

 

So the best option is having someone that appoints 4 Dutch jokers who have very little experience of English football in a season where you know you are losing the majority of your experienced players.

The best option is having a recruitment policy of 5 loanees who cannot get in the squad ahead or untried 17 year olds.

Best option of having the football chairman and largest shareholder failing to attend the AGM.

Best option of having your customer base alienated and at each others throats because of your policies.

 

There was a solution where all 3 parties stay out of the limelight and work together through an independant CEO but that did not suit anyones ego.

 

As Jim Royle would say "best option my arse" doesn't make you a luvvie in my eyes just misguided.

[hypochondriac]

Why do people assume that Crouch had no plan to cut costs just because he has failed to outline it in detail in public? Remember it was him who first proposed closing the corners.

[JohnnyFartPants]

  Give it to Ron said:

So the best option is having someone that appoints 4 Dutch jokers who have very little experience of English football in a season where you know you are losing the majority of your experienced players.

The best option is having a recruitment policy of 5 loanees who cannot get in the squad ahead or untried 17 year olds.

Best option of having the football chairman and largest shareholder failing to attend the AGM.

Best option of having your customer base alienated and at each others throats because of your policies.

 

There was a solution where all 3 parties stay out of the limelight and work together through an independant CEO but that did not suit anyones ego.

 

As Jim Royle would say "best option my arse" doesn't make you a luvvie in my eyes just misguided.

 

I didn't know we have 4 Dutchmen here to be honest. Is one of them the new centre half, as he seems quite decent? The system was set up to stop us losing money, I believe, If we stay up and the debt is less, then it has worked. It was never set up to make the football better, but something had to give with the banks breathing down our necks. Crouch was doing nothing but looking for investment, in a poor way. Christ, even his radio speech ends with, "what we really need is investment, but whoever invests must realise that they probably won't ever get their money back out again." Awe inspiring stuff Crouch!!

 

The best policy was loads of low paid loanees, yes. Especially as it meant we could loan out the high earners. I think the idea was that in the worst case scenario, we can trim the wage bill now, and if all works, we can sell in January, if all fails, we can call them back. Either way, until January we will have saved money with an option for change should we need it, and we need it!! Some would call that shrewd.

 

Wilde not at the AGM I have no issue with. It is all smoke and mirrors anyway as we all know who the "real" chairman is.

 

The customer base will be just as alienated if Crouch were still in charge/got back in charge. It needs a complete clean out. I will repeat myself however. I think the lot we have at the moment are better than the current alternative, but I wish they would all fu(k off.

[Give it to Ron]

  JohnnyFartPants said:

I didn't know we have 4 Dutchmen here to be honest. Is one of them the new centre half, as he seems quite decent? The system was set up to stop us losing money, I believe, If we stay up and the debt is less, then it has worked. It was never set up to make the football better, but something had to give with the banks breathing down our necks. Crouch was doing nothing but looking for investment, in a poor way. Christ, even his radio speech ends with, "what we really need is investment, but whoever invests must realise that they probably won't ever get their money back out again." Awe inspiring stuff Crouch!!

I will repeat myself however. I think the lot we have at the moment are better than the current alternative, but I wish they would all fu(k off.

 

Sorry its down to 3 now we did have 4 - JP, Wotte, Gorre and Van Der Waals but all were paid less that what Pearson and Hockaday would of cost ;-)

 

As for your last paragraph I totally and 100% agree!

[slickmick]

  Nineteen Canteen said:

Pearson was responsible for some poor signings and got lucky with Wright who would not have graced our team had we very unusually been without our 3 first team keepers. What would Pearson have done under the constraints imposed on JV.

 

 

Lucky with Wright ? What was lucky about it, he was a proven quality keeper. At the time Kelvin was not having the best of seasons, granted he is now. As for our other 2 keepers, how can you suggest they were better ?

 

Poor signings ? as in Lucketti and Perry ?

 

This part of the post would suggest you are Rupert Lowe because you clearly dont know what you are talking about when it comes to football matters.

 

Can you tell us why Rudi has been left out of the squad Rupert ?

Stick to the finances and leave football matters to those you employ.

[OldNick]

  slickmick said:

Lucky with Wright ? What was lucky about it, he was a proven quality keeper. At the time Kelvin was not having the best of seasons, granted he is now. As for our other 2 keepers, how can you suggest they were better ?

 

Poor signings ? as in Lucketti and Perry ?

 

This part of the post would suggest you are Rupert Lowe because you clearly dont know what you are talking about when it comes to football matters.

 

Can you tell us why Rudi has been left out of the squad Rupert ?

Stick to the finances and leave football matters to those you employ.

RW was on Malc Websters advice//insistance so Im told.Lucketti did ok but was not there for the win against Sheff utd last day.

[OldNick]

  JohnnyFartPants said:

I am with Sundance Beast/Nineteen Canteen on this one. It doesn't make me a Lowe Luvvie to consider Lowe the best option at the moment, given that I think all options are pretty crap. Basically, what I am being asked is would I like a punch in the face every 30 minutes to having my head cut off.

 

Do I want someone addressing the finances, however tough those choices are, to somebody saying, "I would have sorted it all out by now" with no method or clarity as to how this would have been acheived, which would end in the club no longer existing.

 

The obvious way out of all of this is for a buy out, but this is no more or less likely with or without the good old protesters march.

Fair assessment as far as Im concerned

[slickmick]

  nickh said:

RW was on Malc Websters advice//insistance so Im told.Lucketti did ok but was not there for the win against Sheff utd last day.

 

 

So what ? Why does that make him our 4th choice goalie and why were we lucky ? More down to good management and contacts that know their stuff.

Lucketti and Perry were looking a solid partnership which assisted in our survival. Before they came along we looked awful at the back and would have gone down for sure.

[Wes Tender]

  Nineteen Canteen said:

Wes Tender, since when under Crouch did we average gates of 25k? Even under the resurgent performances masterminded by Pearson, gates did not increase dramatically until the last game of the season when all the 'real' supporters came along to 'celebrate'. No doubt many of these fans will be demonstarting on Saturday but unable to buy a ticket for the game.

 

Surely you mean unwilling and not unable? Anybody can buy a ticket for most parts of the ground nowadays as there are wide open spaces which used to be filled until Lowe and Wilde returned and home wins became rarer than hens' teeth.

 

Pearson was responsible for some poor signings and got lucky with Wright who would not have graced our team had we very unusually been without our 3 first team keepers. What would Pearson have done under the constraints imposed on JV.

 

So he got lucky with Wright, but presumably not unlucky with Davies being injured? And seemingly you have forgotten that he also appointed Perry and Lucketti too and tightened up a badly leaking defence meaning that we became a team hard to beat. Your last question is open only to conjecture, meaning that equally you cannot dispute with real conviction what might have happened if Pearson was operating under similar restraints to JP. I reckon that his experience of working with youngsters meant that he would have been quite comfortable with that situation, although he would undoubtedly have balanced the youngsters with some more expreienced players than JP did and not been so one dimensional in his tactics. Judging by the comments from Wotte, that would have been an improvement over the hapless JP.

 

The unity under Crouch was already begining to crack to such a degree that the anti-Lowe feeling wasn't as evident as it is now.

 

Really? I had sensed that club unity had been better at the end of the season than for some considerable time. Most had looked with renewed optimism towards being to consolidate and rebuild under Pearson this season, me included. As soon as Lowe returned with the Quisling's help, I refused to renew two STs as a result. I had my serious doubts about the prospects of success of Lowe's bizarre experiment and my doubts have been well founded. It now seems that although we still have a Dutch manager in charge, he realises himself that he must revert to more traditional British methods if he is to retain his job.

 

Pearson may in the long term prove to be a good manager but the real test of any manager is one who can act with no money at all and perhaps that's why some Scottish managers are so revered. The likes of Coyle, Jimmy Calderwood and Levene all come to mind before we talk about the likes of Ferguson and Moyes - but there are exceptions to the rules as we have found to our cost.

 

Wasn't WGS a Scot too? He seemed to do alright with limited funds. Burley had done OK with limited funds before he came here. And just to totally confound your argument below, Ince had plenty of money available to him from the Walker Trust.

 

There was plenty of evidence to suggest that had Pearson stayed he would have been found out just like Ince.

 

Was there? Tell me all about it, I'd love to see this evidence. Although Pearson is a division below us, his team is running away with the division. Also he has not spent significant amounts of money and has a team comprising a large proportion of youngsters.

 

It is a bit rich Crouch spouting off and making some wildly unsupportive claims and even with his £2m or £6m we would be unlikely to be much higher than we are now and no doubt with a team of overpaid journeyman and under utilised as opposed to overly untilised youth resource.

 

You mean under-utilised in the sense of Pulis and Gasmi and other failed loanees who have since been returned to their clubs as useless? Nodoby is denying that some of the highest paid players would have been sold or loaned out under Crouch too, but I suspect that we wouldn't have jettisoned all three of Rasiak, Saganowski and John. Otherwise your comments are purely speculative conjecture based purely on prejudice.

 

Balance in the team is needed but evidence suggests neither has or would have achieved it.

 

We know that JP hasn't achieved it. Whether Pearson would have achieved a balanced team is again speculation. But he has a pretty well balanced team at Leicester, so why shouldn't he have had one here. Burley had ample time to address our defensive shortcomings and never did. Pearson sorted it out in a very short time.

 

The poisionous atmosphere is unpleasant and very damaging we all know that but what do we hope to achieve. Oust Lowe and Wilde for Crouch? Is that the answer? As an intelligent poster are you seriously saying that you would prefer Crouch in charge with his overblown fan friendly rhetoric pulling the wool over the fan's eyes as the club really does sink under his overblown hopes and expectations?

 

Apart from the last bit you added, then yes, I am saying that Crouch would be the better option at the moment, if only for the sake of fan unity and increased attendances. If he got shot of Wotte and got in an experienced British manager too, then that would justify it by itself. Crouch could be replaced once financial stability and survival in this division had been achieved.

 

I'm accused of being many things but I simply believe given the alternatives Lowe remains the only solution worthy of our support because he won't let populist and unproven views deviate the board from making decsions with the long term interests of the club at heart.

 

Unproven views? You sum up the mad experiment perfectly and as something Lowe introduced, it has much to do with our current parlous state. So you absolve him of all blame for that, do you? If Lowe were the only solution worthy of our support, then God help us! Suggesting that he is the only person capable of acting as Chairman or chief executive is laughable. There must be numerous others who are financially astute and with bags of ability in running a smallish PLC like this one but without causing the animosity and division in the fan base that Lowe does.

 

Crouch's recent behaviour can at best be described as childish and his approach is the business equivalent of ADHT in my opinion and his desire to be a solution and liked by all will bring this club to its knees quicker than any divisive atmosphere generated by the fans against Lowe.

 

Lowe's behaviour at the AGM was equally childish. He came out of that with any aura of respectability badly damaged by his arrogant disregard of any constructive criticism from shareholders.

 

Ultimately, a credible solution that will unite the fans will, we hope, come to the fore but in the meantime jumping out of the frying pan into the fire is absolutely insane and if nothing else continuity under Lowe is what this club needs than a well off but not rich enough fan memorable only for his false claims and overseer of our greatest but self inflicted escape.

 

....rather than the alternative currently with his feet under the table, who has only ever taken from the club, overseen our actual relegation and is going for a repeat performance.

 

Our creditors are going to want to see continuity unless they can see real benefits of any change in personnel and I ask everyone to be honest, if you are a senior manager at Barclays are you going to be able to make a case for Crouch over Lowe to your shareholders and board?

 

Well, you seem to have forgotten that Crouch did have the support of Barclays. He is a well respected local businessman having built up a large Engineering Group from nothing. His personal wealth dwarfs Rupert's. Are Barclays going to be happy that for all Lowe's financial accumen gained from the City, that he alienates such a high percentage of the customer base of the PLC?

 

Another 10k??!! on the gate? Even if you can support that, will it help to blow it on some meal ticket, pension boosting wage for players of the likes of Euell or Idiakez?

 

Who says it would be blown on players like that? Idiakez was signed by Burley. The extra attendances would assist in reducing the overdraft and therefore additional interest charged, but also enable us to get in a better manager as a priority instead of the never mind the quality feel the width Dutch jokers.

 

Demonstrate by all means but I hope you all have a plan other than pinning your hopes on the likes of Crouch and McMenemy. IMO you'll be heading for oblivion fuelled by a load of fan-friendly empty promises and rhetoric and I prefer to be told as it is and when it is necessary. Lowe tells us as it is and I prefer my facts unbellished and heavilly loaded with realism than with talks of play-offs and all on the strength of appointing a management team made up of a manager of 6 months experience at Eastleigh and a scout.

 

You must live in cloud cuckoo land. Lowe tells it how it is? So you're the one that believes everything that is said by the OS. And while you condemn the appointment of Dodd as a mistake and it was, then kindly accept that Wigley, Gray and JP were just as ridiculous mistakes by Lowe with the difference that we had more money and a Premiership standing for the first two and a perfectly decent English manager doing a reasonable job when he dismissed Pearson for the Dutch clowns.

 

As usual, your posts are riddled with inconsistencies and are now also shot full of holes.

[OldNick]

  slickmick said:

So what ? Why does that make him our 4th choice goalie and why were we lucky ? More down to good management and contacts that know their stuff.

Lucketti and Perry were looking a solid partnership which assisted in our survival. Before they came along we looked awful at the back and would have gone down for sure.

Just that NP was getting all the credit for his signing when it was GB's goalkeeping coach who sounded him out and got him here, apart from that it was NP's superb talent spotting.

[Snowballs2]

  Wes Tender said:

You must live in cloud cuckoo land. Lowe tells it how it is? So you're the one that believes everything that is said by the OS. And while you condemn the appointment of Dodd as a mistake and it was, then kindly accept that Wigley, Gray and JP were just as ridiculous mistakes by Lowe with the difference that we had more money and a Premiership standing for the first two and a perfectly decent English manager doing a reasonable job when he dismissed Pearson for the Dutch clowns.

 

As usual, your posts are riddled with inconsistencies and are now also shot full of holes.

 

 

Is nineteen canteen a reincarnation of Sundance or Scooby?

[Guan 2.0]

  SOTONS EAST SIDE said:

Utter Trash! "relegation out of our hands" statement. We had to go out to win(like everyone else), not sit back and hope a draw was good enough, then that would have been out of our hands. We won, others didnt so we took our chance and stayed up. We only relied on ourselves TO DO THE JOB not others, and reaped the rewards.Or did you forget Coventry finished below us as well!!

Get some perspective FFS!

 

Are you being deliberately thick? I ****ing hope so. Try and read the words slowly, or go over the last oh, I don't know, 50 years of football coverage. Then concentrate very hard, and you might just get it into your head that 'Even if they win, their league status is OUT OF THEIR HANDS, as they're relying on results elsewhere' is an end-of season expression used in football, applied to us at the end of last season.

 

Now get a grip, stop acting like a Mardy **** and using a lost and ****ty argument to try and support the theory that Crouch heralded some sort of Gold Age in his time here.

[slickmick]

  nickh said:

Just that NP was getting all the credit for his signing when it was GB's goalkeeping coach who sounded him out and got him here, apart from that it was NP's superb talent spotting.

 

Crouch agreed to it so did Pearson.

[Big Bad Bob]

  slickmick said:

Crouch agreed to it so did Pearson.

 

Damn, you edited your post you rotter you!!

 

And I was going to defend 19 on this one point too!!

 

  19 said:

Pearson was responsible for some poor signings and got lucky with Wright who would not have graced our team had we very unusually been without our 3 first team keepers.

[Wes Tender]

  Guan 2.0 said:

Are you being deliberately thick? I ****ing hope so. Try and read the words slowly, or go over the last oh, I don't know, 50 years of football coverage. Then concentrate very hard, and you might just get it into your head that 'Even if they win, their league status is OUT OF THEIR HANDS, as they're relying on results elsewhere' is an end-of season expression used in football, applied to us at the end of last season.

 

Now get a grip, stop acting like a Mardy **** and using a lost and ****ty argument to try and support the theory that Crouch heralded some sort of Gold Age in his time here.

 

But equally faulty is the mistaken reasoning that some spout that we were in that position because Pearson had failed to get better results . Our position at the end of the season was as a result of points gained or dropped in every match of the season. Therefore that must take account of the position inherited by him from matches where either Burley or Dodd and Gorman were in charge before him.