Tamesaint Posted 5 February, 2009 Posted 5 February, 2009 Have you heard about Rupert's latest idea?? Apparently he was so impressed with the way that we played with 10 men against Swansea and Sheff Utd played with 10 men on Tuesday that next season Saints are only going to play with 10 men. If you only have 10 men you can make do with a smaller squad ... and this will keep the bank happy!! Its a cracker. He is going to announce this proposal later this week after first trying to persuade the FA to adopt it in all competitions. The OS is preparing an article trumpeting "what football can do to protect itself against the credit crunch." Nineteen "Jon Marland" Canteen is penning a 5,000 word essay on why Crouch and Mcmenemy are soooo antiquated in not accepting this proposal.... You think I am joking???? Well it is not any more far fetched than the idea of bringing a Rugby coach into your club and preparing him to be manager. It is no more far fetched than sacking a good, young, up and coming manager and replacing him with a non league Dutch manager. It probably makes more sense than lending the top scorers for the last 2 years to your rivals - one of whom is in direct competition with you to avoid relegation. It is no more far fetched than refusing to play the likes of Euell, Scacel and BWP in a "footballing revolution". Rupert's crazy idea about Woodwood and the disruption that it caused to the club was a major factor in our relegation and in our inability to bounce back when we had the parachute payment. The Dutch experiment looks like taking us down again. Why not play with just 10 men & see if a hattrick of relegations follows???
Pancake Posted 5 February, 2009 Posted 5 February, 2009 Woo hoo another Lowe bashing thread, been a long time since we had one of these!
lordswoodsaints Posted 5 February, 2009 Posted 5 February, 2009 Have you heard about Rupert's latest idea?? Apparently he was so impressed with the way that we played with 10 men against Swansea and Sheff Utd played with 10 men on Tuesday that next season Saints are only going to play with 10 men. If you only have 10 men you can make do with a smaller squad ... and this will keep the bank happy!! Its a cracker. He is going to announce this proposal later this week after first trying to persuade the FA to adopt it in all competitions. The OS is preparing an article trumpeting "what football can do to protect itself against the credit crunch." Nineteen "Jon Marland" Canteen is penning a 5,000 word essay on why Crouch and Mcmenemy are soooo antiquated in not accepting this proposal.... You think I am joking???? Well it is not any more far fetched than the idea of bringing a Rugby coach into your club and preparing him to be manager. It is no more far fetched than sacking a good, young, up and coming manager and replacing him with a non league Dutch manager. It probably makes more sense than lending the top scorers for the last 2 years to your rivals - one of whom is in direct competition with you to avoid relegation. It is no more far fetched than refusing to play the likes of Euell, Scacel and BWP in a "footballing revolution". Rupert's crazy idea about Woodwood and the disruption that it caused to the club was a major factor in our relegation and in our inability to bounce back when we had the parachute payment. The Dutch experiment looks like taking us down again. Why not play with just 10 men & see if a hattrick of relegations follows??? tbh honest i thought we were playing with 10 men against sheff utd as lallana was sh1t.
solentstars Posted 5 February, 2009 Posted 5 February, 2009 Woo hoo another Lowe bashing thread, been a long time since we had one of these! these threads are like bus,s there will be another one along soon:D
alpine_saint Posted 5 February, 2009 Posted 5 February, 2009 Have you heard about Rupert's latest idea?? Apparently he was so impressed with the way that we played with 10 men against Swansea and Sheff Utd played with 10 men on Tuesday that next season Saints are only going to play with 10 men. If you only have 10 men you can make do with a smaller squad ... and this will keep the bank happy!! Its a cracker. He is going to announce this proposal later this week after first trying to persuade the FA to adopt it in all competitions. The OS is preparing an article trumpeting "what football can do to protect itself against the credit crunch." Nineteen "Jon Marland" Canteen is penning a 5,000 word essay on why Crouch and Mcmenemy are soooo antiquated in not accepting this proposal.... You think I am joking???? Well it is not any more far fetched than the idea of bringing a Rugby coach into your club and preparing him to be manager. It is no more far fetched than sacking a good, young, up and coming manager and replacing him with a non league Dutch manager. It probably makes more sense than lending the top scorers for the last 2 years to your rivals - one of whom is in direct competition with you to avoid relegation. It is no more far fetched than refusing to play the likes of Euell, Scacel and BWP in a "footballing revolution". Rupert's crazy idea about Woodwood and the disruption that it caused to the club was a major factor in our relegation and in our inability to bounce back when we had the parachute payment. The Dutch experiment looks like taking us down again. Why not play with just 10 men & see if a hattrick of relegations follows??? Superb post.
Thedelldays Posted 5 February, 2009 Posted 5 February, 2009 Woo hoo another Lowe bashing thread, been a long time since we had one of these! luvvie (i agree with you)
Pancake Posted 5 February, 2009 Posted 5 February, 2009 luvvie (i agree with you) Dont call me luvvie, duckie.
Give it to Ron Posted 5 February, 2009 Posted 5 February, 2009 Woo hoo another Lowe bashing thread, been a long time since we had one of these! As opposed to an all the fans fault, Crouch, Wilde, Corbett, Trust bashing post even though the people left a year ago that never ever gets posted either.
Tamesaint Posted 5 February, 2009 Author Posted 5 February, 2009 Woo hoo another Lowe bashing thread, been a long time since we had one of these! I know - we are doing soooooowell under him aren't we??????
Thedelldays Posted 5 February, 2009 Posted 5 February, 2009 I know - we are doing soooooowell under him aren't we?????? that has nothing to do with it.. but there are 235346 threads about how crap lowe is...funny thing is...apart from about 2 posters, we all agree...
Pancake Posted 5 February, 2009 Posted 5 February, 2009 that has nothing to do with it.. but there are 235346 threads about how crap lowe is...funny thing is...apart from about 2 posters, we all agree... Exactly. Well done Duckie.
Torres Posted 5 February, 2009 Posted 5 February, 2009 Woo hoo another Lowe bashing thread, been a long time since we had one of these! And it adds so much insight to the debate too. Why has nobody brought up the Clive Woodward issue before? This needs more discussion, I think. :-k
VectisSaint Posted 5 February, 2009 Posted 5 February, 2009 Rupert's crazy idea about Woodwood and the disruption that it caused to the club was a major factor in our relegation and in our inability to bounce back when we had the parachute payment. The Dutch experiment looks like taking us down again. Why not play with just 10 men & see if a hattrick of relegations follows??? Don't get me wrong, I agree Lowe is insane, but blaming Woodward for our relegation is a bit daft, given he joined AFTER we were relegated. He was cause of much disruption when we were first in CCC, because he couldn't work with Saggy Chops, and introduced Simon wahtever his name was, who was clearly completely off his rocker. Lowe has done some stupid things, maybe the Woodward experiemnt was one of them, but it wasn't the cause of us being relegated...
Tamesaint Posted 5 February, 2009 Author Posted 5 February, 2009 QUOTE=VectisSaint;195579]Don't get me wrong, I agree Lowe is insane, but blaming Woodward for our relegation is a bit daft, given he joined AFTER we were relegated. He was cause of much disruption when we were first in CCC, because he couldn't work with Saggy Chops, and introduced Simon wahtever his name was, who was clearly completely off his rocker. Lowe has done some stupid things, maybe the Woodward experiemnt was one of them, but it wasn't the cause of us being relegated... Maybe. I certainly note that he was appointed after we were relegated. But it did seem to be an open secret in our last season in the Premiership that Woodwood was in Rupert's mind. From memory, Gary Linekar said something to that effect when we were on Match of the Day for the first match that season against Villa. Such an unusual proposal must have had an effect on the club. With hindsight, our best chance of returning to the Premiership was in our first season down when we still had the parachute payment and players like Delap, Higgy etc who have since proved they were Premiership quality . The disruption caused then by Woodwood cannot be underestimated.
Saint_clark Posted 5 February, 2009 Posted 5 February, 2009 I agree, but Woodward was brought in AFTER we were relegated.
70's Mike Posted 5 February, 2009 Posted 5 February, 2009 Problem was Woodward wanted 15 players on the pitch at the same time , it was a radical idea to ensure success
Mole Posted 5 February, 2009 Posted 5 February, 2009 Was it Neil Warnock who took one of his players off to make them play with 10 men because he felt they weren't working hard enough? Whoever it was i salute their style.
Torres Posted 6 February, 2009 Posted 6 February, 2009 Was it Neil Warnock who took one of his players off to make them play with 10 men because he felt they weren't working hard enough? Whoever it was i salute their style. Juande Ramos did it at Rayo Vallecano.
Thedelldays Posted 6 February, 2009 Posted 6 February, 2009 Was it Neil Warnock who took one of his players off to make them play with 10 men because he felt they weren't working hard enough? Whoever it was i salute their style. i can imagine you praising wotte if he did that...
eelpie Posted 6 February, 2009 Posted 6 February, 2009 these threads are like bus,s there will be another one along soon:D Unless it snows. If only it had snowed on Tuesday. And for every match this season. Then we would have had an equal chance of promotion resolved by a toss of a coin.. And Lowe would have been happy. He would have been able to enjoy his executive suite at SMS everyday without interuption. Instead of hiding away in his bunker.
eelpie Posted 6 February, 2009 Posted 6 February, 2009 Problem was Woodward wanted 15 players on the pitch at the same time ' date=' it was a radical idea to ensure success[/quote'] Not to mention rugby posts.
70's Mike Posted 6 February, 2009 Posted 6 February, 2009 Not to mention rugby posts. we would still have struggled to score
chocco boxo Posted 6 February, 2009 Posted 6 February, 2009 Do you know he calls it "bully off" as opposed to kick off. FACT.
Roger Posted 8 February, 2009 Posted 8 February, 2009 I agree, but Woodward was brought in AFTER we were relegated. soory but that isnt strictly true. He was unofficially very much here before that.
St_Tel49 Posted 8 February, 2009 Posted 8 February, 2009 Problem was Woodward wanted 15 players on the pitch at the same time ' date=' it was a radical idea to ensure success[/quote'] It might have worked!!!
hamster Posted 8 February, 2009 Posted 8 February, 2009 Well Hello, you must be Miss Roe? Sorry thought it was a caption competition.
saintwarwick Posted 8 February, 2009 Posted 8 February, 2009 soory but that isnt strictly true. He was unofficially very much here before that. I thought he was brought in after the Lions tour of 2005. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Tamesaint Posted 9 February, 2009 Author Posted 9 February, 2009 I thought he was brought in after the Lions tour of 2005. Please correct me if I am wrong. I think the key word here is "Unofficially". Officialy he only started after the Lions tour. The news that he was coming however was an open secret. Everyone knew he was coming. As I said in an earlier post on this thread Gary Linekar even said that he was coming on Match of the Day's first programme of the 2004/5 season. So technically you are correct. He only turned up in the late summer of 2005. In practice you are not, as the shock of his appointment and the disruption that it caused was well known well before then.
londonsaint1604 Posted 9 February, 2009 Posted 9 February, 2009 Lowe is actually doing a great job reducing our wage bill. Also some of the football I saw us playing in the first half of the season was superb, and that was clearly due to the dutch influence...
david in sweden Posted 9 February, 2009 Posted 9 February, 2009 Have you heard about Rupert's latest idea?? Apparently he was so impressed with the way that we played with 10 men against Swansea and Sheff Utd played with 10 men on Tuesday that next season Saints are only going to play with 10 men. If you only have 10 men you can make do with a smaller squad ... and this will keep the bank happy!! Its a cracker. He is going to announce this proposal later this week after first trying to persuade the FA to adopt it in all competitions. The OS is preparing an article trumpeting "what football can do to protect itself against the credit crunch." Nineteen "Jon Marland" Canteen is penning a 5,000 word essay on why Crouch and Mcmenemy are soooo antiquated in not accepting this proposal.... You think I am joking???? Well it is not any more far fetched than the idea of bringing a Rugby coach into your club and preparing him to be manager. It is no more far fetched than sacking a good, young, up and coming manager and replacing him with a non league Dutch manager. It probably makes more sense than lending the top scorers for the last 2 years to your rivals - one of whom is in direct competition with you to avoid relegation. It is no more far fetched than refusing to play the likes of Euell, Scacel and BWP in a "footballing revolution". Rupert's crazy idea about Woodwood and the disruption that it caused to the club was a major factor in our relegation and in our inability to bounce back when we had the parachute payment. The Dutch experiment looks like taking us down again. Why not play with just 10 men & see if a hattrick of relegations follows??? There you are all you Lowe bashers, another good idea condemneed before we have the chance to prove it ! 10 men CAN play better than 11. This man has got ideas he hasn't even tried out yet - wait I see... ...I have a strategy in mind, I have a strategy in mind ...
eelpie Posted 9 February, 2009 Posted 9 February, 2009 Lowe is actually doing a great job reducing our wage bill. Also some of the football I saw us playing in the first half of the season was superb, and that was clearly due to the dutch influence... So what happened since?
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now