NickG Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 just reading a few threads, such as Skacel and Pearson ones. It seems that several posters whenever they see a post they disagree with they go on about Luvvies etc. I don't think any of the people are actually backing Lowe but some (probably immature and lacking of intelligence) hide from discussion resorting to name calling. Thought it might help if all of these supposed Lowe luvvies identified themselves? So, Do you want Lowe to stay? Do you think Lowe is the best for the club? Do you like him? I am no for all three, as I am guessing most are. Doesn't stop anyone having different views on players, tactics, managers etc. Please don't turn every post into playground name calling about Lowe - it is boring.
Mole Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 Please don't turn every post into playground name calling about Lowe - it is boring. ...and doesn't fit with NickG's agenda.
Denzil Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 NO NO and NO. It's not even up for debate ffs. Anyone who claims to like and agree with Lowe needs sectioning under The Mental Health Act.
Andy_Porter Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 Do you want Lowe to stay? No Do you think Lowe is the best for the club? ahahaha Do you like him? No
INFLUENCED.COM Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 Do you want Lowe to stay? Do you think Lowe is the best for the club? Do you like him? No but has anyone put themselves forward recently to replace him ? No too divisive but has anyone put themselves forward recently to replace him ? Don't know him
NickG Posted 11 February, 2009 Author Posted 11 February, 2009 ...and doesn't fit with NickG's agenda. see they don't exist, are you scared of monsters under your bed as well?
bungle Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 I would rather Lowe run the club than Stanley.
NickG Posted 11 February, 2009 Author Posted 11 February, 2009 if it shuts up the childish Lowe luvvie debates!
bridge too far Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 I don't want him to stay I don't think he's best for the club I don't know him so I can't say whether or not I like him. But I don't like what he's doing to the club
alpine_saint Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 What's the point of this thread ? A re-statement of the bleedin' obvious ?
NickG Posted 11 February, 2009 Author Posted 11 February, 2009 to try and make a point to those on other threads, there are no luvvies, get over it!
JohnnyFartPants Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 I don't like any of the Big Three involved with the club and can't see a benefit in a reshuffle. This doesn't mean I like/love/or lust after Lowe. It equally doesn't mean I want Crouch back either. I want new ownership in and until then I want stability from whatever muppet is incharge, which at the moment is Lowe.
dubai_phil Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 Do I like Lowe. Why yes of course as long as he is running Zimbabwe, not our club, which is the ONLY way I could see him being better than anybody else on the planet at anything. Meanwhile I want all 3 of the failures gone as one at the same time and NEVER to come back. I don't want one of them instead of another one - BECAUSE WE DID THAT AND IT DIDN'T WORK. All of them are as bad as each other and all of them are responsible for the mess we are in. End of
SaintRobbie Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 No, No and wouldnt be able to contain my anger long enough to get to know him as a person but gut instinct is I'd think he was an arrogant idiot.
Big Bad Bob Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 Do I like Lowe. Why yes of course as long as he is running Zimbabwe, not our club, which is the ONLY way I could see him being better than anybody else on the planet at anything. Meanwhile I want all 3 of the failures gone as one at the same time and NEVER to come back. I don't want one of them instead of another one - BECAUSE WE DID THAT AND IT DIDN'T WORK. All of them are as bad as each other and all of them are responsible for the mess we are in. End of 2nd'd and with that, I unsubscribe from this thread!!
Mole Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 to try and make a point to those on other threads, there are no luvvies, get over it! I love it how you're trying to re-invent yourselves. Unfortunately many of us have been following these forums long enough not to be fooled.
Toomer Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 Don't like him, don't trust him, he is keeping to quiet for my liking.
JohnnyFartPants Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 I love it how you're trying to re-invent yourselves. Unfortunately many of us have been following these forums long enough not to be fooled. It's blinkers off time Stanley. Everyone (okay, most) have been saying for ages that there just doesn't seem to be another option so it is felt we will support the current lot through lack of options. This has been explained to you over and over, but you instantly call those doing that Lowe Luvvies.
Thedelldays Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 like lowe... hmmm, one or two people on here are past liking lowe..they need lowe
Mole Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 like lowe... hmmm, one or two people on here are past liking lowe..they need lowe We don't know what you think from one day to the next. You change your mind more often than Michael Wilde!
Thedelldays Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 We don't know what you think from one day to the next. You change your mind more often than Michael Wilde! i change my opinion as I see fit..things change and I put my opinion out there... you on the other hand are obsessed..you even stated you would have manderic than lowe and refused to back wotte if he (did the impossible and) kept us up.. weirdo
Mister Neil Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 do you want lowe to stay? do you think lowe is the best for the club? do you like him? No, No & thrice No!!!
NickG Posted 11 February, 2009 Author Posted 11 February, 2009 I love it how you're trying to re-invent yourselves. Unfortunately many of us have been following these forums long enough not to be fooled. so hard to reply without insults! try to be more open minded.
St Landrew Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 I don't want him to stay I don't think he's best for the club I don't know him so I can't say whether or not I like him. But I don't like what he's doing to the club Sums up my thoughts exactly.
Frank's cousin Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 Can of worms... Like? never met him, but going on some of teh things he's said publically, the arrogance and his UKIP politics its extremely doudtful that I would want to talk to hiim let alone like him Want him to stay? - this is where I get most crap slung in my direction - but in my defence your honour, I have never said nor do I think he should stay- I have however acknowledged the bits hes doen well and where there is logic in what has been suggestted or tried .... even if it failed - that is only fair - but because I cant see any logic in CRouchs approach and dont want him either, its assumed I musty be behind Lowe - most posters see that but some seem to stick their fingers in their ears and go wibble blah wibble balh because its easier to dismiss me as a LOwe luvvie than to provide any positive arguments against my criticisms of crouch - Stand up Alpine. Do I think he is best for the club - NO - irrespective of what he has achieved historically that was good, or whatever logic I see in some of his approaches - and yes I liked the IDEA of sports science, woodward in an appropriate roll and even the IDEA of a dutch duo - its now got to the stage where he needs to stake a sidewasy step - if only to help get teh club united again - I have no issue with him still being involved in an appropriate way but its time for new leadership that can galvanise the fan base and reinvigorate teh club - .... but its not Crouch IMHO.
Mole Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 i change my opinion as I see fit..things change and I put my opinion out there... you on the other hand are obsessed..you even stated you would have manderic than lowe and refused to back wotte if he (did the impossible and) kept us up.. weirdo Of course i'd rather have Mandaric than Lowe. Any sane person would rather have a chairman that puts money into their club than have a paracite like Lowe at the helm.
Frank's cousin Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 I love it how you're trying to re-invent yourselves. Unfortunately many of us have been following these forums long enough not to be fooled. Feck me this really takes the usicuit - jeez this is tantamount to saying, feck off you cant support saints because you dont agree weith me.... you spend way to much time ranting about how crap LOwe is and attacking those who have a slightly different opinion, yet also attack them when you see their opinion changiong with time or thier stance softening - WTF?????? that is the whle point of being balanced and rationale - if teh situation cahanges or the mistakes are compounded their should be a change of attitude - same goes for if suddenly something good were to miraculously happen... That is the only difference between what the idiots who believ their are Luvviesa nd the so called luvvies is... the so called luvvies support what is good irrespective of who initiated it and criticise what ITHO is bad irrespective of who initiated it - with you guys its Lowe Bad everything the devils C*ck etc, or 'Crouch every thing good , I want him to bend me over and give me his hot man love' .... jeez and you have the feckin cheek to question our intelligence...you could not make it up.
Mole Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 Feck me this really takes the usicuit - jeez this is tantamount to saying, feck off you cant support saints because you dont agree weith me.... you spend way to much time ranting about how crap LOwe is and attacking those who have a slightly different opinion, yet also attack them when you see their opinion changiong with time or thier stance softening - WTF?????? that is the whle point of being balanced and rationale - if teh situation cahanges or the mistakes are compounded their should be a change of attitude - same goes for if suddenly something good were to miraculously happen... That is the only difference between what the idiots who believ their are Luvviesa nd the so called luvvies is... the so called luvvies support what is good irrespective of who initiated it and criticise what ITHO is bad irrespective of who initiated it - with you guys its Lowe Bad everything the devils C*ck etc, or 'Crouch every thing good , I want him to bend me over and give me his hot man love' .... jeez and you have the feckin cheek to question our intelligence...you could not make it up. No offence FC, but anychance of an edited version. I never read your posts because you bore me senseless.
Thedelldays Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 Of course i'd rather have Mandaric than Lowe. Any sane person would rather have a chairman that puts money into their club than have a paracite like Lowe at the helm. what good is it to put all the money in and still get relegated...lol great idea stanley..
Mole Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 what good is it to put all the money in and still get relegated...lol great idea stanley.. I'd swop places with Leicester right now. If we still have Lowe next season you mark my words we'll be in a relegation fight at the bottom of League 1.
ottery st mary Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 Admin is here shortly and therefore I want him and his cronies gone and never to return. It is not what I personally advocated but now it is about to happen then we have to make the most of our situation. Lowe and his mob must have no part hereafter. NO, I do not like the man or his cronies and hopefully anyday now they will be gone, hopefully never to return....There is hope from the ashes.
Thedelldays Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 I'd swop places with Leicester right now. If we still have Lowe next season you mark my words we'll be in a relegation fight at the bottom of League 1. swapping places with leicester (in league 1) is not a great advert for manderics' astute acumen as a chairman who (and I quote) wanted (and funded) a return to the prem last season... what a brilliant chairman he is..
Big Bad Bob Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 Of course i'd rather have Mandaric than Lowe. Any sane person would rather have a chairman that puts money into their club than have a paracite like Lowe at the helm. I know I shouldn't but you always get this wrong and it's starting to annoy me......it's parasite There, feel better now
Mole Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 swapping places with leicester (in league 1) is not a great advert for manderics' astute acumen as a chairman who (and I quote) wanted (and funded) a return to the prem last season... what a brilliant chairman he is.. Leicester have far better prospects for a return to the top flight than we have. For one they will only be one division away whilst we're floundering in League 1 next year.
Scudamore Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 i change my opinion as I see fit..things change and I put my opinion out there... you on the other hand are obsessed..you even stated you would have manderic than lowe and refused to back wotte if he (did the impossible and) kept us up.. weirdo I second that emotion! For the record i don't like Lowe. Certainly don't hate him though. No time for that. And i echo the sentiments that the "big" three should all up sticks and eff off...
OldNick Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 Never met him but his media persona doesnt make me wish to.I know through business a few people who hunt and fish with him and they say he's Ok and his father also.
Mole Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 I know I shouldn't but you always get this wrong and it's starting to annoy me......it's parasite There, feel better now I'll have to remember to keep spelling it wrong.
Big Bad Bob Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 I'll have to remember to keep spelling it wrong. use FireFox, there's a built in spell checker!!
1976_Child Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 No. No. No. That being said, I have never actually met the bloke. For all I know he might just be an arrogant t()sser when he is in business mode but a really stand up kinda guy down the wine-bar. Although some how I doubt it.
Scudamore Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 No. No. No. That being said, I have never actually met the bloke. For all I know he might just be an arrogant t()sser when he is in business mode but a really stand up kinda guy down the wine-bar. Although some how I doubt it. Wine-bar? Get her.
saintjay77 Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 lol its funny how the usual suspects that highjack any thread that is not about Lowe refuse to answer a simple question on a thread that is just about lowe! No to all 3 from me. As much as I think he has at least tried to do what he thinks is right for our club he has failed in far to many areas for anyone to realisticly want to keep him here.
Frank's cousin Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 No offence FC, but anychance of an edited version. I never read your posts because you bore me senseless. Too many big words hey, or whould you prefer cartoons? If you think my posts are boring fair enough, but it pales into insignificance to the inane blinkered drivel that is pounded out by you and Alpine. I woudl say open you miind, but would question whether there is anything there....
Frank's cousin Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 (edited) lol its funny how the usual suspects that highjack any thread that is not about Lowe refuse to answer a simple question on a thread that is just about lowe! No to all 3 from me. As much as I think he has at least tried to do what he thinks is right for our club he has failed in far to many areas for anyone to realisticly want to keep him here. Not really funny at all saintJay... quite sad really because it shows we do have our quota of dence f**kers as all clubs do.... Edited 11 February, 2009 by Frank's cousin
londonsaint1604 Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 I think the more pertinent questions are: Do you want Stanley to stay? Do you think Stanley is the best for the club? Do you like him? I like him but his presence is clearly having a divisive impact on the fanbase and I think he should leave the club.
JohnnyFartPants Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 Not really funny at all saintJay... quite sad really because it shows we do have our quota of dencer f**kers as all clubs do.... Quota is better than quote but is there such a word as dencer?
Frank's cousin Posted 11 February, 2009 Posted 11 February, 2009 Quota is better than quote but is there such a word as dencer? Uhm darn two finger typing ******... i have corected said error just for you.
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