Mary Corbett on Radio Hants @6pm Thurs

[Saint_John]

...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.

 

I agree there was far too much hidden from the fans at that time.

 

However, the libel case notes prepared by Justice Eady says it was Matthew Harding not Arabs :-

 

Paragraph 98.

"It is pleaded that by mid-December 1996 the Southampton board were aware of at least four APPROACHES from investors willing to buy or invest in the club. Apart from a consortium led by Sir David Frost and Gavyn Davies, reference is made to the Secure offer itself and to OTHER OFFERS made in October 1996 by an Israeli consortium and by MATTHEW HARDING "shortly before his death"......"

[beatlesaint]

I agree there was far too much hidden from the fans at that time.

 

However, the libel case notes prepared by Justice Eady says it was Matthew Harding not Arabs :-

 

Paragraph 98.

"It is pleaded that by mid-December 1996 the Southampton board were aware of at least four APPROACHES from investors willing to buy or invest in the club. Apart from a consortium led by Sir David Frost and Gavyn Davies, reference is made to the Secure offer itself and to OTHER OFFERS made in October 1996 by an Israeli consortium and by MATTHEW HARDING "shortly before his death"......"

 

Four possibles.....and we ended up with this bloody shower ?

The biggest reason, for me, that Guy Askham and co. are the biggest culprits in the demise of Southampton Football Club.

[bridge too far]

I agree there was far too much hidden from the fans at that time.

 

However, the libel case notes prepared by Justice Eady says it was Matthew Harding not Arabs :-

 

Paragraph 98.

"It is pleaded that by mid-December 1996 the Southampton board were aware of at least four APPROACHES from investors willing to buy or invest in the club. Apart from a consortium led by Sir David Frost and Gavyn Davies, reference is made to the Secure offer itself and to OTHER OFFERS made in October 1996 by an Israeli consortium and by MATTHEW HARDING "shortly before his death"......"

 

How could Matthew Harding have had an interest, given that he owned Chelsea at that time? I thought that wasn't allowed :smt102

[Viking Warrior]

I to remember mathew harding being intereseted in saints. It was strongly rumoured that he was about to leave chelsea and he had avery big soft spot for saints

 

I thought Ken Bates owned chelsea not mathew harding

[bridge too far]

I to remember mathew harding being intereseted in saints. It was strongly rumoured that he was about to leave chelsea and he had avery big soft spot for saints

 

I thought Ken Bates owned chelsea not mathew harding

 

Sorry, my bad - you're right. He was vice-chairman.

[miserableoldgit]

I to remember mathew harding being intereseted in saints. It was strongly rumoured that he was about to leave chelsea and he had avery big soft spot for saints

 

I thought Ken Bates owned chelsea not mathew harding

He used to call us "Chelsea-on-Sea"!

[Delmary]

I agree there was far too much hidden from the fans at that time.

 

However, the libel case notes prepared by Justice Eady says it was Matthew Harding not Arabs :-

 

Paragraph 98.

"It is pleaded that by mid-December 1996 the Southampton board were aware of at least four APPROACHES from investors willing to buy or invest in the club. Apart from a consortium led by Sir David Frost and Gavyn Davies, reference is made to the Secure offer itself and to OTHER OFFERS made in October 1996 by an Israeli consortium and by MATTHEW HARDING "shortly before his death"......"

Souness was very much involved with this group. He had several meetings with them at the Hilton Hotel at Chilworth. Unfortunately, we ended up with Secure Retirement. Thanks Askham:(

[Dicko]

I to remember mathew harding being intereseted in saints. It was strongly rumoured that he was about to leave chelsea and he had avery big soft spot for saints

 

I thought Ken Bates owned chelsea not mathew harding

 

Matthew Harding's hero was Peter Osgood

 

When Ossie came to Saints, Harding admitted Saints became his second team.

 

That seemed to stay with him throughout his life

[Wes Tender]

I agree there was far too much hidden from the fans at that time.

 

However, the libel case notes prepared by Justice Eady says it was Matthew Harding not Arabs :-

 

Paragraph 98.

"It is pleaded that by mid-December 1996 the Southampton board were aware of at least four APPROACHES from investors willing to buy or invest in the club. Apart from a consortium led by Sir David Frost and Gavyn Davies, reference is made to the Secure offer itself and to OTHER OFFERS made in October 1996 by an Israeli consortium and by MATTHEW HARDING "shortly before his death"......"

 

Was the question asked of the board at the libel case why the board didn't properly investigate the other offers? As I infer, as far as I'm aware the board used some lame excuse such as the offers had been made too late. Under those circumstances I still hold the opinion that they acted with undue haste. Of course, the haste had nothing to do with the fact that the minute the reverse takeover made the club a PLC, the nominally valued £1 shares made millionaires of Askham, Richards, Gordon etc, while their shareholdings had cost only between £2000/£2500.

 

Useless speculating where we might have been now had the board waited a little longer to see what other offers might have arrived. Perhaps we might have been playing our home games in the Premiership in the magnificent Virgin stadium at Stoneham. Or perhaps we might have attracted somebody who was more useless than Lowe had been.

[Viking Warrior]

I don't think its been mentioned much in let blame lowe for all our ills.

 

Yes he has an equal portion of blame to whats happened, so have all the others. The ones that appear to be left out of the equation are Hone, Dalleu and Hoos.

 

I know Hone was despised at Celtic by the fans and didnt really leave them in a healthy state. He probably thought he could buy saints out of trouble like he did with Celtic.

The Only difference is that Celtic and rangers are the equivilant to moan utd etc down here.

Had he have tried to run Falkirk or motherwell the same way as he tried to run celtic or saints. the jags fans would hav elynched him

 

What I can't understand is why didnt crouch , corbett and come to that matter wilde do a thorough business check on them all. Instead they (Crouch, corbett and co) listened to scouser mikes flannel and beleived in his every word.

 

That is what angers me so much about all this *****ing, Its all well and good

crouch and corbett slagging off lowe , cowans , but they are equally culpable

or extremely niave when they came to takeover the club from lowe.

 

They are therefore in my humble opinion not fit to run the club.

But equally Hone and co and jellyfish wilde have to take most of the blame for what has happened.

 

I bet when this lot came to oust lowe. lowe would have been rubbing his hands with glee, seeing and knowing what a bunch of amateurs were running the club.

I bet he knew he would be back at the helm the moment he was ousted.

 

I certainly what Lowe out as much as the next , but we should change tact and oust wilde first. hes the joker in the pack.

[um pahars]

But equally Hone and co and jellyfish wilde have to take most of the blame for what has happened.

 

I think you'll find there have been a number of posts (and threads) on here, where they have been criticised, particularly for their behaviour around the SISU approach time and their failure to implement Plan B at around the same time.

 

But I think that criticism has to be put in context, looked at rationally and then also balanced fairly against the mistakes of others, (in fact, their first season could be called a relative success as costs were reduced, net debt reduced to it's lowest level for a few years and on the pitch we got to the play offs).

 

After doing that, I find it difficult to suggest that Hone and co should take most of the blame as you are suggesting. IMHO, whilst they are worthy of being blamed for some poor decision making, I think others are more culpable for the position we find ourselves in.

 

Relegation the first time around turned this Club upside down and relegation this time around will be the killer blow. Those acts will be the ones that killed this Club and Hone and co are/were not around for both.

 

Their actions at the end of their tenure were poor by anyones standards, but putting it in perspective, overspending by a few million (or a blip as David Jones called it at the AGM) is not what has brought this Club to it's knees.

 

It certainly never helped, but a few million overspend pales into comparison when judged against the millions lost from the top line and the calamitous decisions made this season which may well be the final straw.

Edited 7 February, 2009 by um pahars

[beatlesaint]

What I can't understand is why didnt crouch , corbett and come to that matter wilde do a thorough business check on them all. Instead they (Crouch, corbett and co) listened to scouser mikes flannel and beleived in his every word.

 

In fairness Mary Corbett had openly admitted it was a mistake not to have them checked out properly, but what could she have done even if she was unhappy with them ? She was only on the Football Club board, not the PLC, and Wilde bought them in, or mentioned them, after he had gotten Mary and co. on side. And as she, and many, readily admit, they were so keen to show Lowe the door that emotion blinded any logicical, in depth thinking like getting them checked out.

 

Its all well and good for the pro Lowes to keep throwing this train of thought up but what they fail to understand is that the majority were so desperate to get Lowe away from this football club even little green men in space ships would have been welcomed with open arms.

[SaintRobbie]

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.

 

I was a backer for change when Wilde arrived as it meant we got rid of a loser - Lowe. And when I say I dont back failures it is confirmed ones Nick. There is only one man at this club who has been a proven failure - Lowe.

 

Wilde does not have my backing now as he himself (for strange reasons yet to be revealed) has backed a loser.

 

Lowe isnt brave - he's no where to be seen, he's hiding. what's more there's a difference between taking the right difficult decision and one that revolves around a football fantasy plan you hatched 2 years ago whilst under the influence of the likes of Wotte, SCW and Clifford.

 

Lowe has NOT done well. He has made more mistakes in the short term this time round than last time. He is incompetent and hated. What's more as Mary Corbett has indicated - HE'S LIED TO US to undertake his silly fantasy.

 

Lowe = falling support in the ground, falling share prices for his shareholders and relegation AGAIN.

 

He is a loser, backed by a man who once had guts and pride but for some unexplained reason now acts like a broken poodle for Lowe.

 

Hope that clears up my position Nick