Mary Corbett on Radio Hants @6pm Thurs

[lordswoodsaints]

Who knows but Mary is. All hindsight is 20/20 and Corbett, Crouch and Trant have it in abundance and a pity they didn't take their roles at the club with a little less myopic foresight. The 3 wise monkeys who are simply out to curry favour but have a plan as fanciful as those of the protesters on Saturday. Is Mary going to lead the whip round? If so expect her to be knocking at your neighbours door asking them to persuade you to make a contribution.

 

It's bad enough listening to Crouch's wounded 'I could have' soldier act so I can't listen to the feed St Andrew has provided but I'm guessing she wasn't exactly subjected to a challenging line of questioning by Dumb and Dumber. Question's like, why speak out now Mary? What did you do with your status whilst at the club Mary? What do you understand by the term due diligence Mary?

 

Mary Corbett is a fan, Leon Crouch is a fan but they have as much right or expertise to run this club than many of the fans on this forum. Crouch's offer of £2m in football terms amounts to no more than the average fan ofering £200 and about as useful and frankly is just an empty and puerile gesture as this club want fail on the lack of £2m or £6m at its disposal but more with its long term outlook and supporter loyalty that is based in the real world. In fact apart from her name being synonymous with the club's history courtesy of her father that does not necessarily bestow the qualities needed to get us out of the mire. IMO her apparent failure in her previous duties makes her an irrelevance to comment on anything related to the club unless we can probe about her part in this sorry mess.

 

All this backbiting and protest it is all so counterproductive because ultimately the unwitting are either providing a platform for individuals petty and personal agendas, Duncan, or actually aideing and abetting the downfall of their own club.

 

Thankfully there is still a lot of middle ground supporters out there, other than 401 full members on this site, who simply want to support the team and willing to back Lowe until an obviously better alternative comes forward. Even on a thread in the lounge today one supporter actually said he still believes the board and the team will meet our survival goal this season but didn't post on the main sight for fear of the abuse. How sad is that? Bullying your own fans for having a different view than your own.

 

The good news is I believe fans like that still far outweigh those intent on protest without any plan beyond get Lowe out. Keep it up because the lack of acknowledgement you are getting from the club shows IMO how resolved they are to focus on turning this around even if it means dropping into League 1 for a season. Not a very savoury prospect but alot more wholesome than the known alternatives.

 

Don't underestimate the resolve this board has and I fully expect it to get worse before it gets better but with the likes of Crouch and Corbett it will simply be a case of ignoring the iceberg and lots of fan friendly rhetoroic.

 

I'm still just a very busy fan and for the record again I am not Lowe, Marland or work in the PR industry. I'm just a realist willing to put up with the abuse in the interest of balance and democracy. Interesting that the person nearest in nailing me so to speak is a fellow realist and certainly not one of the rabid serial abusers in the Lowe out camp who are in danger of proving the existence of the Lunatic Fringe with their idiotic theories on me. Most of you seriously need to focus on the points I raise as oppose to theorising about my identity but perhaps you do that to avoid looking at the reality. I'm just a fan and a ST holder and just as likely to sit next to you as anyone else. In fact I know I do and I listen to his clueless woes with a keen interest letting him set in concrete my own opinions. Yet still we get on and enjoy the games together but if I told him that Lowe is the best man at the moment I would ruin that comaradie and its largely down to pure prejudice in many cases.

 

Before I go, there was some confusion over my post last night when I said I don't give a sh1t. As usual this was taken out of context and I was not for one minute refering to the club but to those who are stupid enough to support the so called marching out protest. Do your thing the team and the truly faithful of us will cope without you the best we can.

 

I would love to join this forum as a full member but refuse to use Paypal so despite my offers of sending Baj a fiver in the post its fallen on deaf ears and they have failed to acknowledged two email requests. Draw your own conclusions.

 

Good night

 

 

nineteen canteen

A phrase which recognises that something or someone has been around forever and effectively gives off that point without being too descriptive and yet retaining an air of cool about the person delivering the comment

That guy is as old as the hills, he's been drinking round here since Nineteen Canteen.

 

im on to you NC it will only be a matter of time.

[Sheff Saint]

No ring fence. She did say that when eventually it gets planning permission it would be worth £12 millin plus, she thought that once this financial downturn ended it would get planning permission

 

With an assett like that and only a £4-£6 mil overdraft surely there is no way we'd be forced into admin (if we don't owe the tax man)

 

Even if that is only a speculative figure and of course available credit in the short term is hard to get, i still can't believe with that we'd be taken down, even if we went down.

[Turtle]

in response to nineteen canteen... (can't be arsed to "quote" the whole diatribe again.... saves space!)

 

 

You do speak very well, apart from the fact that your case against the lowe out brigade fails to recognise the limitations of the lowe administration - where you are very clear on the limitations of those other who tried (and failed) to deliver something different to the "prudent" and "experimental" approach lowe prefers.

 

People do business in different ways. Some succeed against the odds (and despite some decisions). Some fail despite having seemingly sound business plans.

 

The issue we have here is not as black and white as ANY of you paint it.

 

My main concern over the running of SFC is in that the model of having a PLC with large shareholders leasds to a belief that those people who could "afford" to buy enough shares can put themselves into the position of running a multi-million pound business. How many PLC's can you name where the major shareholders feel they are the best people to run the business on a day to day basis? Very few, I would summise? Just because you can afford to buy shares, should not lead you to believe you have the right skills and decision making ability to run something like a football club.

 

All the major shareholders (and prospective ones) should take a step out of the boardroom and appoint (through advertising and interview) a team who can run the company with clear objectives (measurable) and some level of acountability to the shareholders. This is how good governance works. The shareholders call to account those who run the business.

 

My personal preference would be for all the major shareholders to declare themselves unfit to be "on the board" and maybe even to sell their shares at today's prices to a local community body that would keep a watchful eye over those in charge.

 

The football club should be at the centre of the community and not used as a rich man's plaything. It should be inclusive to the people on the street and be accountable to the people of Southampton.

 

We are unlikely to rid ourselves of the PLC status that the reverse takeover brought to us, unless someone very rich decides they can't get a good enough return on their money with interest rates being so low.

 

One final thing about Mary Corbett's "interview" on Hants Radio - she speaks much sense, but fails to spot the flaw in seeking Fulthorpe/Cousins to step in. They too are fans with a small amount of money and little proof of any business accumen. We would be stepping out of yet another frying pan and into yet another inferno should these two be sucessful in ousting the present board. My personal experience of at least one of these people would bring to the conclusion that we would not be getting quite what we would be being sold!

 

Our club is failing and will continue to do so whilst any of the major protaganists remain involved.

[On the march again]

Nick I would like to put the record straight on Mary flying to see a friend who knew PA. Firstly, as I was initially responding to you when I made the comment, I am a little surprised that you seem to have 'spun' this story. It was the late Firefighter (sadly he vanished with all of his posts mysteriously deleted) who jumped on it and I regret mentioning it. Duncan is almost right, it was actually at my daughter's christening that Mary met a friend of mine who happens to have a holiday house next door or near to PA's. Mary merely tried very hard to ensure that my friend made contact with PA or his people to see if there was any truth or possibility of a takeover. It may seem naive now but at the time it seemed quite realistic. Was this unwise of her? She has also used every contact she can in the city to bring in some investment - all I would add unpaid.

I would also like to put right your comments about Corbett's somehow exploiting the Southampton gravy train. I can reassure you that I have never 'quaffed champagne' at the expense of Saints (sadly over the years there has been limited cause to). We did use the boardroom but that is where we have always met up (up until last season of course) - in fact I used to get a boll0cking from my late Grandfather when I didn't because he liked to talk over the match.

I resent having to join in this PR charade but I have also always bought my season tickets and my father before me. My Grandfather used to always buy two season tickets as well.

Like you Nick, I just want to go and watch a successful Saints team who are proud to represent Southampton.

[JohnnyFartPants]

I just heard that too ! Hope I have not missed it.

 

She did say on the introduction she thought that a buyer will come forward, she mentioned the latest tyre kicker Fulthorpe.

If he does come in eventually, many will give him a hard time for hanging about and not going for the club when he started shouting his mouth off.

 

Brilliant. The first "Get him out" post addressed to a potential buyer before he even buys, based on not buying sooner.

 

Only at Southampton!!

[OldNick]

Nick I would like to put the record straight on Mary flying to see a friend who knew PA. Firstly, as I was initially responding to you when I made the comment, I am a little surprised that you seem to have 'spun' this story. It was the late Firefighter (sadly he vanished with all of his posts mysteriously deleted) who jumped on it and I regret mentioning it. Duncan is almost right, it was actually at my daughter's christening that Mary met a friend of mine who happens to have a holiday house next door or near to PA's. Mary merely tried very hard to ensure that my friend made contact with PA or his people to see if there was any truth or possibility of a takeover. It may seem naive now but at the time it seemed quite realistic. Was this unwise of her? She has also used every contact she can in the city to bring in some investment - all I would add unpaid.

I would also like to put right your comments about Corbett's somehow exploiting the Southampton gravy train. I can reassure you that I have never 'quaffed champagne' at the expense of Saints (sadly over the years there has been limited cause to). We did use the boardroom but that is where we have always met up (up until last season of course) - in fact I used to get a boll0cking from my late Grandfather when I didn't because he liked to talk over the match.

I resent having to join in this PR charade but I have also always bought my season tickets and my father before me. My Grandfather used to always buy two season tickets as well.

Like you Nick, I just want to go and watch a successful Saints team who are proud to represent Southampton.

thankyou for your post. Also for clearing up the confusion because your post last season regarding MC going abroad to speak to the friend. Duncan gave a different story and so the spinning came from 2 posters who gave different versions of the same story.That is how the story got out of sync and in these suspicious times of politics and dealings at the club these things are magnified.

You were a good poster and then disappeared from the forum, having people who can come on and straighten these issues is something missing.I have long thought that SFC should have an official on here who can counter some of the more explosive claims.i do understrand the club is in a no win situation but some of the claims put on here are destructive.

Being just a fan who has always queued up and paid to get in and not sampled the delights of the boardroom I can only see it as i do from down here in the pile, every can of coke and bag of crisps is paid for by someone.I assume it is by the mugs who queue up to pay and apologies if you and your family have never sampled any of those privilages.

I may add that MC is playing a dangerous game by voicing her opinions now and not at other times in the past when things have gone pear shaped.Your grandfather is rightly revered for what he did to keep the club alive decades ago. I have been castigated on here for questioning why the family did not do anything to stop the reverse takeover, I was told your grandfather was unwell at the time and so accept that. I still cannot fathom why weren't the people who tried to get the shares from Mr Bowyer and your grandfather in an seemingly underhand way not outed and why the family still dealt with these same people who are now sitting in the background of the club and have been so for decades.

[corky morris]

It has taken a very long time for me to agree with anything NickH has written, but in this post I think he asks some very sensible questions.

For a man as litigious as Mr Lowe - I have always wondered why he never sued South Today over the programme that aired when the nursing home reversed into SFC.

They posed some very serious questions & some serious accusations were made which Lowe never responded too.

Why did the board at the time not ask more questions? I include McMenemy in that also.

[Gemmel]

Why did the board at the time not ask more questions? I include McMenemy in that also.

 

Beacuse the questions would have been a bit tricker for the board to answer

[OldNick]

It has taken a very long time for me to agree with anything NickH has written, .

I cant understand why I feel underwhelmed with that sentence.

[corky morris]

I cant understand why I feel underwhelmed with that sentence.

 

Maybe think about it a little longer & you may get an answer!

[Weston Saint]

Maybe think about it a little longer & you may get an answer!

Made me smile. Sorry Nick

[OldNick]

Maybe think about it a little longer & you may get an answer!

Still thinking still the same.

[Frank's cousin]

It has taken a very long time for me to agree with anything NickH has written, but in this post I think he asks some very sensible questions.

For a man as litigious as Mr Lowe - I have always wondered why he never sued South Today over the programme that aired when the nursing home reversed into SFC.

They posed some very serious questions & some serious accusations were made which Lowe never responded too.

Why did the board at the time not ask more questions? I include McMenemy in that also.

 

 

Uhm - I think the problem is that as fans we belive we have emotional ownership of 'our ' club - so anything that looks like its even remotely 'shady' get out goat.

 

I think what has happened is this. NOTHING legally dodgy happened.... If it had it would have been either refered to the FSA/Monopolies and Mergers commission and teh police - that is FACT. What hppened was what usually happens in these sorts of deals... the morality is questioned by those who have an emotional if not financial interest in the business transactions.

 

Its a case of teh accusations in teh program, these were speculation and allogations that whilst we may have found morally difficult to accept were not really making any legal challenge.... and whet we do often conveniently forget is that MC and family. LM etc all made money too from the deal - yes some got shafted as in most business deals, but not illegally so. And the degree of which depends on your own moral and ethical interpretation.

 

MOst of the stuff that is written since, has become clouded with prejudice and myth. But it could be said has become the ROOT of the nagativitythat has followed Lowe since that time - it swells when twe are doing badly on teh pitch and disipates when we do better , but is always there under teh surface bubbling away - because the likes of Richard Chorley refused to let it die - We have to ask ourselves was carrying that bitterness for so many years under the surface a positive factor for the club? Only for those who enjoy the schardenfreude when we are in teh mire and can really stick the boot in. That is I guess why I have tried to remain sat on the fence...

[Wes Tender]

It has taken a very long time for me to agree with anything NickH has written, but in this post I think he asks some very sensible questions.

For a man as litigious as Mr Lowe - I have always wondered why he never sued South Today over the programme that aired when the nursing home reversed into SFC.

They posed some very serious questions & some serious accusations were made which Lowe never responded too.

Why did the board at the time not ask more questions? I include McMenemy in that also.

 

Could it be that he didn't sue South Today or indeed Panorama over the allegations made in "The Shares game" programme because he was reticent to do so because then the whole affair would have been put firmly under the microscope?

 

He did however sue David Mellor for his opinion that the reverse takeover was "incentivised."

[Thedelldays]

so...did lawrie mac and Mary corbett make money from lowe in 1997..?

[Dicko]

It was interesting listening to her, but I was disappointed they didn't ask more challenging questions

 

Then again...........................challenging???...................Mark Dennis???

 

Maybe not

[Wes Tender]

so...did lawrie mac and Mary corbett make money from lowe in 1997..?

 

Yes, as they held these shares that were nominally valued at £1. As we know, the value of those shares rocketed after the reverse takeover and they benefitted too. But on the other hand, the idea was formulated by Askham and his mates, Richards, Gordon, Hunt etc and they would have had a majority to force it through even had the Corbett family or Lawrie been against it. Mary has said that her father was old and ill at the time, so I think that the family do have a valid excuse.

 

IMO, the reverse takeover took place with undue haste. There was no urgent hurry and it was rumoured at the time that as well as the Frost/Davis consortium, there were also an Arab and an Israeli consortium lining up bids.

[EastleighSoulBoy]

The one interesting fact that came out was that her father did not donate Jacksons farm, he bought it for them on the basis that the cost was paid back in time, and it was.

 

Just listening now and that hit me like a punch on the nose! All these years we have had this misunderstanding!

[St_Tel49]

Brilliant. The first "Get him out" post addressed to a potential buyer before he even buys, based on not buying sooner.

 

Only at Southampton!!

Yep - when you see the abuse that Lowe, Wilde and Crouch and pretty much anyone associated with the board have experienced here you would have to ask why the heck anyone would want to find themselves subjected to it - and be paying for the privilege. I wonder if any potential investors have been put off by the vitriol they see posted. Because, lets face it, if the new owners got off to a bad start it would not be long before the whingers and moaners were hammering on their keyboards again.

[WealdSaint]

 

 

Don't underestimate the resolve this board has and I fully expect it to get worse before it gets better but with the likes of Crouch and Corbett it will simply be a case of ignoring the iceberg and lots of fan friendly rhetoroic.

 

 

 

In some respects this is more depressing than our current home form

[Frank's cousin]

In some respects this is more depressing than our current home form

 

Uhm think that depends though on whether you believe the current board will fight tooth and nail to avoid admin at whatever cost as a good or bad thing - I have to admit, for me the avoidance of administration is more important than avoiding relegation - which is equally a horrific thought, but administration is the worst of the possble nightmares...

[Thedelldays]

Yes, as they held these shares that were nominally valued at £1. As we know, the value of those shares rocketed after the reverse takeover and they benefitted too. But on the other hand, the idea was formulated by Askham and his mates, Richards, Gordon, Hunt etc and they would have had a majority to force it through even had the Corbett family or Lawrie been against it. Mary has said that her father was old and ill at the time, so I think that the family do have a valid excuse.

 

IMO, the reverse takeover took place with undue haste. There was no urgent hurry and it was rumoured at the time that as well as the Frost/Davis consortium, there were also an Arab and an Israeli consortium lining up bids.

 

 

aaaahh..the old but.....they could have not sold their soul to lowe in 1997...yet that is all ok and "water under the bridge"...

 

it is these very people that allowed lowe to come here in the first place...

 

hence why I would rather the likes of corbett and co to shut up and clear off...

 

we need a clean slate

[Window Cleaner]

Just listening now and that hit me like a punch on the nose! All these years we have had this misunderstanding!

 

No it was explained to us last Summer by ones of superior knowledge. That nigh on everybody chose to ignore the fact and carry on thinking whatever suited their personal agenda is nor here nor there.

 

JF was discussed on this (or the other) forum last summer and this fact was made known to us, by who?I can't remember.

[up and away]

Originally Posted by corky morris

It has taken a very long time for me to agree with anything NickH has written, but in this post I think he asks some very sensible questions.

For a man as litigious as Mr Lowe - I have always wondered why he never sued South Today over the programme that aired when the nursing home reversed into SFC.

They posed some very serious questions & some serious accusations were made which Lowe never responded too.

Why did the board at the time not ask more questions? I include McMenemy in that also.

Could it be that he didn't sue South Today or indeed Panorama over the allegations made in "The Shares game" programme because he was reticent to do so because then the whole affair would have been put firmly under the microscope?

 

He did however sue David Mellor for his opinion that the reverse takeover was "incentivised."

 

According to Richard Chorley in his peice "The share game", he had plenty to say regarding the reverse take over. Surprisingly he never made any allegations about Lowe, maybe you would like to add them in?

 

"Messrs Askham, Richards, Hunt, Wiseman, Gordon and McMenemy all failed to do so. They have all committed criminal offences under the companies Act which could lead to their disqualification, heavy fines and /or imprisonment up to 2 years."

And as for LM selling his shares, according to the article

"The Clubs director of football Lawrie McMenemy saw an initial investment of just £400 pounds turn into a £200,000 pound profit on the first day of trading."

[WealdSaint]

Uhm think that depends though on whether you believe the current board will fight tooth and nail to avoid admin at whatever cost as a good or bad thing - I have to admit' date=' for me the avoidance of administration is more important than avoiding relegation - which is equally a horrific thought, but administration is the worst of the possble nightmares...[/quote']

 

I agree that administration is the worst thing that could happen to us. What worries me is the bunker like mentality of the current board could well lead us to the outcome.

[Professor]

You might want those things, but there is no way that you are going to get them.

 

Firstly, it is not a reasonable expectation that the vast majority of true fans will stand idly by and let the club go down the pan without at least attempting to do something about it. The close season will be too late. We will either be relegated or in receivership or both. There will be no watertight guarantee even that Lowe and Wilde would be gone either.

 

Secondly............

 

Very true! There is a body of fans who will make a lot of noise as they 'try to do something about it". That's what the same body of fans have been doing for the past 5 or 6 years with their obsessive anti-Lowe attitudes and just what has it achieved? The club was in the same position last year without with Lowe on the board as it is now. The problems for SFC are not solveable by any chairman who has to make the best of what we have. But as I have said before the anti-Lowe stuff does not help, it hinders, and probably makes things worse. That the team have a better record when they are not playing at home in front of a Saints crowd says something for how the players feel about home support, or lack of it.

 

The best thing the Alpines and Robbies and RockandRollers and Gordons.... (and I'm sorry if I've left you off the list) would be to put the anti-Lowe stuff away and concentrate on saying something good about the club, the manager, the players and, Yes, even the administrators. We need all of them to be motivated to DO THEIR BEST.

[trousers]

Nick I would like to put the record straight on Mary flying to see a friend who knew PA. Firstly, as I was initially responding to you when I made the comment, I am a little surprised that you seem to have 'spun' this story. It was the late Firefighter (sadly he vanished with all of his posts mysteriously deleted) who jumped on it and I regret mentioning it.

 

Hmmm...Firefighter. Another one of those loose ends you get on here fairly frequently. Why were all of Firefighter's posts deleted on TSF? This was never properly explained.

[OldNick]

Very true! There is a body of fans who will make a lot of noise as they 'try to do something about it". That's what the same body of fans have been doing for the past 5 or 6 years with their obsessive anti-Lowe attitudes and just what has it achieved? The club was in the same position last year without with Lowe on the board as it is now. The problems for SFC are not solveable by any chairman who has to make the best of what we have. But as I have said before the anti-Lowe stuff does not help, it hinders, and probably makes things worse. That the team have a better record when they are not playing at home in front of a Saints crowd says something for how the players feel about home support, or lack of it.

 

The best thing the Alpines and Robbies and RockandRollers and Gordons.... (and I'm sorry if I've left you off the list) would be to put the anti-Lowe stuff away and concentrate on saying something good about the club, the manager, the players and, Yes, even the administrators. We need all of them to be motivated to DO THEIR BEST.

I do hope you mean the administrators on this site not the....

[trousers]

I do hope you mean the administrators on this site not the....

 

Hmmm.....I spotted that 'slip of the tongue' too....

[CB Fry]

Yes, as they held these shares that were nominally valued at £1. As we know, the value of those shares rocketed after the reverse takeover and they benefitted too. But on the other hand, the idea was formulated by Askham and his mates, Richards, Gordon, Hunt etc and they would have had a majority to force it through even had the Corbett family or Lawrie been against it. Mary has said that her father was old and ill at the time, so I think that the family do have a valid excuse.

 

IMO, the reverse takeover took place with undue haste. There was no urgent hurry and it was rumoured at the time that as well as the Frost/Davis consortium, there were also an Arab and an Israeli consortium lining up bids.

 

Did these Arab and Iraeli consortiums line up bids for any other middling to small Prem league teams at the time - Coventry or Forest or Leicester or Derby or Ipswich or Norwich or Bolton?

 

Surely they wouldn't have just had their heart set on little old Saints? Just interested in what happened to them.

 

As for for Frost/Davis I think that is the single biggest urban myth in Southampton Football club history. Being that Davies is now a season ticket holder at the Emirates and he has had over a decade to realise his "dream" of owning Saints - it never was going to happen, and never will.

[OldNick]

Did these Arab and Iraeli consortiums line up bids for any other middling to small Prem league teams at the time - Coventry or Forest or Leicester or Derby or Ipswich or Norwich or Bolton?

 

Surely they wouldn't have just had their heart set on little old Saints? Just interested in what happened to them.

 

As for for Frost/Davis I think that is the single biggest urban myth in Southampton Football club history. Being that Davies is now a season ticket holder at the Emirates and he has had over a decade to realise his "dream" of owning Saints - it never was going to happen, and never will.

Frost is a forest fan as well I think you will find.

[CB Fry]

Frost is a forest fan as well I think you will find.

 

 

I think he had trials for Forest at one point, but I think he may be an Arse fan these days (I think media types can be quite loose when it comes to football teams - just look at Fiona "Saints till they are relegated...Chelsea till I die" Phillips. What a sl ag.)

 

Anyway, we agree on the main point - Frost and Davies as die hard Saints saviours - poppy****!

[OldNick]

I think he had trials for Forest at one point, but I think he may be an Arse fan these days (I think media types can be quite loose when it comes to football teams - just look at Fiona "Saints till they are relegated...Chelsea till I die" Phillips. What a sl ag.)

 

Anyway, we agree on the main point - Frost and Davies as die hard Saints saviours - poppy****!

that bint really annoys me, shes such a sycophant, i could have smashed the tv when she was interviewng Blair.

[Professor]

Hmmm.....I spotted that 'slip of the tongue' too....

"Administrators" was a chosen word and I don't exclude anyone from that. To wish anyone responsible for running any aspect of the club to fail, is hardly consistent with being a supporter. You can disagree with how people work and believe they will fail, but if in succeeding they prove you wrong, as a supporter you should be pleased if that happens. If Wotte saves the club from relegation, even those opposing his appointment will surely be pleased. Even many Lowe-haters have often said they would like to be proved wrong, which seems to be a fair enough attitude.

[RoswellSaint]

Hmmm...Firefighter. Another one of those loose ends you get on here fairly frequently. Why were all of Firefighter's posts deleted on TSF? This was never properly explained.

 

I seem to remember a comment from a mod that Firefighter requested all his posts be deleted. No idea why.

[um pahars]

The one interesting fact that came out was that her father did not donate Jacksons farm, he bought it for them on the basis that the cost was paid back in time, and it was.

 

Just listening now and that hit me like a punch on the nose! All these years we have had this misunderstanding!

 

No it was explained to us last Summer by ones of superior knowledge. That nigh on everybody chose to ignore the fact and carry on thinking whatever suited their personal agenda is nor here nor there.

 

JF was discussed on this (or the other) forum last summer and this fact was made known to us, by who?I can't remember.

 

This has been discussed at length as Window Cleaner has rightly pointed out, and the ownership/deal had been posted and debated on here under a few threads. It may have been Duncan Holley, but it was certainly made clear it was not a "gift".

 

It certainly was never portrayed as a "free" gift by anyone connected to the Corbett's, but then again a shrewd eye followed by an interest free loan is something not to be sniffed at (and something I'm, sure we could do with at the moment!!!). Additionally, John Corbett's regular contributions to funding the Club is noted regularly in the Hagiology books, including paying the Club's wages out of his own pocket on a number of occasions.

 

Maybe we could all do with reading what some put up here, because although at times this is a noddy internet message board with alot of ****** posted (alot of it by myself), there is also a very large amount of well informed information.

[SaintRobbie]

So debate aside... Mary came up with x2 points:

 

1. Lowe is a liar with regards to Pearson.

 

2. If we didnt have Lowe at the Club there is a chance of investment from someone in the City.

 

Have I missed anything else important?

[The Majestic Channon]

Not sure if this has been mentioned earlier in the thread but there was a funny moment when mary recalled lowelife reading out a letter at the AGM from 'anon' singing his praises, they think ( probably rightly) that he wrote it to himself

[INFLUENCED.COM]

So debate aside... Mary came up with x2 points:

 

2. If we didnt have Lowe at the Club there is a chance of investment from someone in the City.

 

Have I missed anything else important?

 

Depends if you consider important that Lowe was not at the club for 2 years yet noone from 'the City' or any other fu(kin City invested

[Wes Tender]

Very true! There is a body of fans who will make a lot of noise as they 'try to do something about it". That's what the same body of fans have been doing for the past 5 or 6 years with their obsessive anti-Lowe attitudes and just what has it achieved? The club was in the same position last year without with Lowe on the board as it is now. The problems for SFC are not solveable by any chairman who has to make the best of what we have. But as I have said before the anti-Lowe stuff does not help, it hinders, and probably makes things worse. That the team have a better record when they are not playing at home in front of a Saints crowd says something for how the players feel about home support, or lack of it.

 

The best thing the Alpines and Robbies and RockandRollers and Gordons.... (and I'm sorry if I've left you off the list) would be to put the anti-Lowe stuff away and concentrate on saying something good about the club, the manager, the players and, Yes, even the administrators. We need all of them to be motivated to DO THEIR BEST.

 

I'll take issue with the highlighted bits if I may.

 

The statement that our problems are not solveable by any chairman who has to make the best of what we have cannot be substantiated as it is purely conjecture and your opinion, nothing else. It is entirely possible that another chairman could have done considerably better than Lowe has. Just for starters, he might well have had a far better base of support from the fans, who Lowe divides. Surely I don't need to spell out that more fans = more revenue = better ability to keep good players or buy better players. I'm also fairly sure that a half decent chairman wouldn't have made the mistakes Lowe has regarding employing a couple of foreigners inexperienced in English football, nor the strategy of blooding too many youngsters before they were ready.

 

Next, you seem to contradict yourself when you say that the anti lowe stuff doesn't help, it hinders and probably makes things worse. Presumably if it doesn't help, it hinders, then how can it probably make things worse? Or did you mean that probably it doesn't help or probably makes things worse?

 

You really don't seem very sure about what effect it all has on the players, do you? It really is a bizarre set of circumstances when the team don't seem to be able to perform at home in front of a stadium of fans whose support has generally been unwavering at home, whereas they do better in front of away fans supporting the other team and booing anything they do.

 

When Lowe has gone and taken the Quisling with him, then I'm certain that you'll find all those people on your list will willingly unite behind the new chairman and the new experienced British manager. I for one will renew both of our STs and buy merchandise from the shop again. I had been to all home games apart from two I missed in January while away on holiday. But I boycotted the Sheffield United game, will also boycott the next game and quite possibly all the remaining games this season. If there are many others who have had enough, then the Bank will either pull the plug on us, or we will be in administration. I sincerely hope that Lowe and Wilde will fall on their swords and pave the way for an independent chairman and chief executive to be appointed before it is too late. If they are too stubborn and pig-headed to go for the good of the club, then although I will regret it, I will feel no pangs of conscience if the club goes under.

[rocknrollman no2]

Very true! There is a body of fans who will make a lot of noise as they 'try to do something about it". That's what the same body of fans have been doing for the past 5 or 6 years with their obsessive anti-Lowe attitudes and just what has it achieved? The club was in the same position last year without with Lowe on the board as it is now. The problems for SFC are not solveable by any chairman who has to make the best of what we have. But as I have said before the anti-Lowe stuff does not help, it hinders, and probably makes things worse. That the team have a better record when they are not playing at home in front of a Saints crowd says something for how the players feel about home support, or lack of it.

 

The best thing the Alpines and Robbies and RockandRollers and Gordons.... (and I'm sorry if I've left you off the list) would be to put the anti-Lowe stuff away and concentrate on saying something good about the club, the manager, the players and, Yes, even the administrators. We need all of them to be motivated to DO THEIR BEST.

 

Well Professor before i start on my response,thankyou for taking the time to mention me personally.Despite me never agreeing with anything you say,i have a respect for your opinions and this place would be the poorer without you.

Now lets address your points.

1-Yes the club was fighting relegation at the end of last season,but by the skin of our teeth,we beat it.If you were there,then you would have seen the passion of the players,coaching staff and the fans.By god we stayed up,but all that positive passion has been destroyed by Lowes petty mindgames,getting rid of Pearson.

Feelgood factor gone before the season starts.

2-Your second point about about no Chairman being able to do anything with what we have now,is laughable imo.

Its because of our Chairman,we are where we are now.

Who was the Chairman who wasted hundreds of thousands on SCW,Simon Clifford,An eye dome etc?Surely other clubs wouldve invested their parachute money on better players?

3-As for the players playing better away from home,then to be fair i am lost for words.But in my defence,i think the team has been supported fantastically at home this season,despite very poor home performances.

4-Your last point about finding something positive about the club.Everyone i know who is a Saints fan desperately wants to find positives about the club,but while Lowe is here and while he cuts the free bus passes,the corners of the stadium,plays the reserves,treats the fans with contempt,goes on holiday when we are in dire straights,gets rid of a popular manager and appoints a Dutch unknown,then sacks him and appoints Dutch unknown no 2,gets rid of good proven backroom staff and divides the fanbase,then i doubt anyone in their right mind will support this dictator of a Chairman.

5-As for concentrating on saying something good about the club,i will do better than that.I will actually go to games and support the team and cheer them on,though with Lowes "Total Football" experiment,we havent seen much success at home this season.

[OldNick]

Well Professor before i start on my response,thankyou for taking the time to mention me personally.Despite me never agreeing with anything you say,i have a respect for your opinions and this place would be the poorer without you.

Now lets address your points.

1-Yes the club was fighting relegation at the end of last season,but by the skin of our teeth,we beat it.If you were there,then you would have seen the passion of the players,coaching staff and the fans.By god we stayed up,but all that positive passion has been destroyed by Lowes petty mindgames,getting rid of Pearson.

Feelgood factor gone before the season starts.

2-Your second point about about no Chairman being able to do anything with what we have now,is laughable imo.

Its because of our Chairman,we are where we are now.

Who was the Chairman who wasted hundreds of thousands on SCW,Simon Clifford,An eye dome etc?Surely other clubs wouldve invested their parachute money on better players?

3-As for the players playing better away from home,then to be fair i am lost for words.But in my defence,i think the team has been supported fantastically at home this season,despite very poor home performances.

4-Your last point about finding something positive about the club.Everyone i know who is a Saints fan desperately wants to find positives about the club,but while Lowe is here and while he cuts the free bus passes,the corners of the stadium,plays the reserves,treats the fans with contempt,goes on holiday when we are in dire straights,gets rid of a popular manager and appoints a Dutch unknown,then sacks him and appoints Dutch unknown no 2,gets rid of good proven backroom staff and divides the fanbase,then i doubt anyone in their right mind will support this dictator of a Chairman.

5-As for concentrating on saying something good about the club,i will do better than that.I will actually go to games and support the team and cheer them on,though with Lowes "Total Football" experiment,we havent seen much success at home this season.

I think the SCW thing was never given a full chance to work and so we will never know if it would have been a waste.The results would have taken quite some time to filter through.We as football fans are blinkered and Allardyce used many 'new' ways at Bolton and that gave them some success. The indoor training faciities surely are something that shouldnt be criticised and I suspect the tenders were agreed before we were relegated.Clifford , well that is on the barmy side but again it was cut before any chance to see the results.

As for the fans at hiome games, i believe they have shown tremendous restraint and only during the Donny game did they turn. Swansea they were brilliant I dont know during the SU game as I couldnt make it.

[SaintRobbie]

Depends if you consider important that Lowe was not at the club for 2 years yet noone from 'the City' or any other fu(kin City invested

 

But Lowe WAS at this Club. He's like the IRA - 'hadnt gone away you know!' That's why he's back in charge.

 

And I would count SISU as a takeover that would certainly have rescued this club given the evidence for all to see at Coventry.

 

So I shall disagree with you there

[SaintRobbie]

Very true! There is a body of fans who will make a lot of noise as they 'try to do something about it". That's what the same body of fans have been doing for the past 5 or 6 years with their obsessive anti-Lowe attitudes and just what has it achieved? The club was in the same position last year without with Lowe on the board as it is now. The problems for SFC are not solveable by any chairman who has to make the best of what we have. But as I have said before the anti-Lowe stuff does not help, it hinders, and probably makes things worse. That the team have a better record when they are not playing at home in front of a Saints crowd says something for how the players feel about home support, or lack of it.

 

The best thing the Alpines and Robbies and RockandRollers and Gordons.... (and I'm sorry if I've left you off the list) would be to put the anti-Lowe stuff away and concentrate on saying something good about the club, the manager, the players and, Yes, even the administrators. We need all of them to be motivated to DO THEIR BEST.

 

You miss the point every time with your posts IMHO. You fail to see what might be without Lowe rather than what IS.

 

What IS = relegation, destruction, division, administration, desertion.

 

What MAY have been = possibly none of the above.

 

So you want a certain loser in charge - the evidence is rather compelling - or someone else?

 

I'm prepared to campaign for change. You keep rolling over Professor. Keep burying your head in the sand mate.

 

You need the reality tablet that not just me and others have taken but also the VAST majority of fans. Read todays Echo. http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/4108792.Saints__attendances_on_the_slide/We are voting with our feet for Rupert Lowe and his losers.

 

THIS IS REALITY - LOWE = NO CONFIDENCE AND IS A LIAR. FACT. Your little idealistic, incipid, world of fans returning and supporting him is utter nonsense. Accept reality, campaign for change, induce optimism and lets then get behind this team. BECAUSE IT ISNT GOING TO HAPPEN WITH YOUR PLAN PROFESSOR. WAKE UP.

 

I'm sorry, but I have never backed failures.

 

PEOPLE LIKE YOU ARE THE PROBLEM WITH THIS CLUB. NOT THOSE WHO SEEK SUCCESS. ROLLING OVER AND BACKING LOSERS IS NO LONGER REQUIRED AT SOUTHAMPTON FC.

Edited 7 February, 2009 by SaintRobbie

[OldNick]

I'm sorry, but I have never backed failures.

 

That is where i have issue with your post.You were Im fairly certain a major backer and trumpeter of the need for us to back the Wilde bunch. Nobody who was in that camp can EVER come out with a statement like you put after backing them.

RL is no good for our club in the longterm, in the shortterm he has to be brave and make the correct decisions.So far this season he has made a mess of leaving Jan in charge (although had we won 2 more home games this furore would not be around the club) to long and perhaps his next choice is no better, it is too soon to make a fair judgement on that, but if Wotte does turn things around and we do avoid admin then RL has done well.He will never win the fans over and so should do what he can and then move off and leave us to our fate.

[Viking Warrior]

Just listening to Corbett

 

Comes across as a bitter lady. speaks to her friends on first names even mike jellyfish wilde. terms and totally disrespectful to all others.

Like crouch she is lacking a great deal of integrity and professionalism

 

Mary is without doubt a genuine fan but what I am not hearing is her plans to get the great back into Southampton FC.

 

Blurting on about how much money crouch has put into the club corporate boxes and the statue. Wow I am in awe of Mr Crouch.

And now shes blaming dave Jones saying he authorised all expenditure

and not trant and crouch. **** thats ******** , they were in charge and

and would have had a huge say in what was spent at the club. If they gave sole responsibility to Jones they are bigger idiots than I give them credit for.

 

I want lowe out as much as the next fan, but what matters to me is what happens on the field and getting the team winning. Not once has she said anything about the team, she is constantly slagging off the board members intead of comming out with a coherent strategy to get the team winning.

 

Oh and you are deluded if you think Patrick Trant is the answer , then you are way off the mark

 

Mary I like you as a person having met you in the past , but your not helping matters by keep harping on about the current board. both side are acting like a bunch of children squabbling amongst each other.

There are always two sides to a story, Come on lowe come out and rebut what crouch and corbett have said if you have any balls or duck gizzards about you

 

Mary can I ask you to do something positive for the club and keep your own counsel instead of harping on about the current incumbents.

 

As for the interviewer , what a joke.

 

PS who is this guy John they keep referring to , Its not guide missile by any chance.

Edited 7 February, 2009 by Viking Warrior

[um pahars]

RL is no good for our club in the longterm, in the shortterm he has to be brave and make the correct decisions.So far this season he has made a mess of leaving Jan in charge to long

 

Fcking hell nickh!!!!!!!

 

I think the problem with Jan was not leaving him in charge for too long, but more the fact that he was employed in the first place.

 

The last three games may be what you have a problem with, the rest of us call it the first 28 games which left us in an appalling state on and off the pitch.

 

With that appointment and it's accompanying strategy Lowe has once again shown that he has been found wanting with regards the big decisions, even in the short term!!!!!!!!!!

[miserableoldgit]

Fcking hell nickh!!!!!!!

 

I think the problem with Jan was not leaving him in charge for too long, but more the fact that he was employed in the first place.

 

The last three games may be what you have a problem with, the rest of us call it the first 28 games which left us in an appalling state on and off the pitch.

 

With that appointment and it's accompanying strategy Lowe has once again shown that he has been found wanting with regards the big decisions, even in the short term!!!!!!!!!!

 

I posed this question on another thread. Bearing in mind that Lowe supposedly wanted Wotte as Manager a few years ago, why did he appoint JP as Manager/Head Coach/Lapdog over him this season?:confused:

[KMondo]

I posed this question on another thread. Bearing in mind that Lowe supposedly wanted Wotte as Manager a few years ago, why did he appoint JP as Manager/Head Coach/Lapdog over him this season?:confused:

 

Perhaps because Cees Lok was not available or not interested?

Or maybe something to do with Poortvliet's record of working with youngsters?

[OldNick]

Fcking hell nickh!!!!!!!

 

I think the problem with Jan was not leaving him in charge for too long, but more the fact that he was employed in the first place.

 

The last three games may be what you have a problem with, the rest of us call it the first 28 games which left us in an appalling state on and off the pitch.

 

With that appointment and it's accompanying strategy Lowe has once again shown that he has been found wanting with regards the big decisions, even in the short term!!!!!!!!!!

The appointment of Jan has turned out to be a mistake, read back to my posts all along and I have been sceptical about his appointment.It is not just the last 3 games I had called for him to be replaced sometime before that.His tactics and substitutions were useless and yes he had to go.

I also said for fan unity i wished for NP to stay but it is not in my control and like a lot of managers before they would not be my first choice. You may forget or not wish to recall ,if the fans had their way the greatest period in the clubs history would not have happened.

we are fans and have little control over the clubs appointments.

RL should leave as he will never win the fans over, he had his chance to wallow in glory when he got the stadium and we were at Cardiff,for various reasons it has gone down hil from there.

You may or may not but feel a bit responsible in a very small way for our demise like myself, as i was very vociferous in my not wishing for the return of GH. 'I'd rather we go down than have him back' were the words I spoke.I now live with the results of that, we may still have been doomed but like with NP, I suspect the results would have been better under him than what followed.