Lowe's biggest mistake?

[um pahars]

I think they tried to gloss over the last one at the SISA meeting last year when Crouch burst their balloon by saying the PLC status has absolutely nothing to do with our current issues.

 

Not sure about the plural use of current issues.

 

The only mention with regards the PLC status was in response to a question posed regarding whether it was hampering the chances of getting investment.

 

Crouch's response was that he believed it wasn't deterring people any more than if we were a "private company".

 

So I don't want to burst your bubble, but your ditty above sounds quite a bit more expansive than what Crouch actually said.

 

All, some, or even none of our current issues may, or may not, be down to the PLC status, but that's not what Crouch said either way.

[jonah]

Not sure about the plural use of current issues.

 

The only mention with regards the PLC status was in response to a question posed regarding whether it was hampering the chances of getting investment.

 

Sorry yes, I forgot that's what he'd been replying to in particular rather than a generalisation.

 

All, some, or even none of our current issues may, or may not, be down to the PLC status.

 

Now that is probably far more accurate!

[um pahars]

Sorry yes, I forgot that's what he'd been replying to in particular rather than a generalisation.

 

 

 

Now that is probably far more accurate!

 

And as we're being so civil this fine morning, how about,

 

What do you think is/was Lowe's biggest mistake(s)?

 

And how do you now view the appointment of Poortvliet?

 

And what changes (if any) would you like to see at the Club, if (a) we stay up, or (b) we go down?

[jonah]

What do you think is/was Lowe's biggest mistake(s)?

 

Already answered earlier in the thread - he should have doubled prices, served canapes instead of pies, Pimms instead of Fosters and generally tried to improve the class of punter at SMS. Oh no wait, that's the secret plan... my answer was in fact, appointing Wigley. And close second, his failure to handle PR correctly (with the caveat that he has largely handled it well since his return - mainly by saying next to nothing).

 

And how do you now view the appointment of Poortvliet?

 

I view it with the benefit of hindsight. I thought it was a good idea, and to be honest I think that he was pretty unlucky really - we could easily have won a few more games, we were quite unlucky with some of the dodgy pens and red cards and with the rub of the green and fewer injuries we could easily have been a few places higher. I remain unconvinced that our plight down near the bottom is due to poor team management - last season I thought we were a mid-table team, this season I thought we'd be hovering just above the drop. So to be 4 points adrift in Feb is only slightly worse than I expected.

 

And what changes (if any) would you like to see at the Club, if (a) we stay up, or (b) we go down?

 

I would like the club's finances to be run on the same lines that RL has previously run them on, and I would *like* it if fans could concentrate on supporting the club and team instead of a part-time PLC chairman. Sadly I don't think the latter will ever happen due to a relentless element of our fan base - hence, I would probably be happy enough if the whole lot went, RL, AC, MW, LC, MC, LM et al. Apart from the "fan-friendly" PR they have nothing to offer in terms of actually running the club. But that's not going to happen either is it?

 

So what are we left with? Fans won't be able to help themselves in continuing to attack their own club, but nobody else will come in. That leaves either administration getting rid of the lot of them (still unlikely, I can't imagine they will all just walk away), or relegation leading to the start up of an AFC Southampton type alternative. And I can't see either of those happening either to be honest.

 

That just leaves my only remaining idea which is for all of those parties to agree to sell down their holdings below 3% - then none of them have notifiable interests and none of them appear to have any greater say in how the club is run than smaller shareholders. But again, there is no way LC would keep quiet, and since when did his selling nearly all his shares stop LM speaking to the Echo? And you'd still need to appoint CEOs which would become a political hot potato.

 

Which brings us full circle to the fact that the fans are really causing their own problems - nothing is going to change, so why not just leave the boardroom to run the PLC and SFC and get on with supporting the team. We have created a situation that is almost impossible to back out of now - it's become a catch 22.

[Fitzhugh Fella]

Mark, you talk about Lowe handling the PR well since his return - do you include his performance at the AGM in this and do you think going fishing and then skiiing in the same month missing 2 vital home matches good PR?

[Fitzhugh Fella]

If you write up the Swansea game from an historical perspective, why would you leave out the fact that there was an anti board march beforehand? Would you also leave out mentioning that crowd numbers have been dwindling beyond the level of almost every other club in the land % wise and not make a reasoned judgement as to why that was? Both things are plainly because of the unpopularity of Lowe and Wilde. This is not conjecture or opinion; it is fact. Anybody out there care to dispute it? Anything in that statement that wouldn't get past Lowe's lawyers? As the club's historian, I hope that you won't be depriving the club's future fans of the truth because of worries that the book won't be published on legal grounds.

 

It is tricky I admit. I mentioned the crowd unrest at the Ipswich match which sparked Lowe's first removal. Obviously I had to say something along the lines "the fans showed their displeasure at the way the Chairman was running the club". It is relevant but the on pitch issues are our main priority when writing a book like ITN, which is very statistic orientated. If you look at page 230 however which covers the Branfoot protests you will find the anti-protests are mentioned and crowd scenes with banners are featured and there is a picture of the Branfoot hope you die fanzine. SISA also get a mention. It's just a questiion of balance. At the time I don't recall anyone sticking up for Branfoot like there are some (on here in particular) now who would disagree with me and still support Lowe.

 

I do find it hard writing about Lowe objectively at present which is one reason I have an editor go over everything with a fine toothcomb. He seems to bring out the worst in everyone. (Lowe that is not David Bull)

 

So to sum up I would report fan unrest if it was significant and factual. The Swansea march may well feature in the end of season write-up depending I guess on what happens to us as a club and Lowe as Chairman. You can't write history in the present tense and a period of perspective makes things clearer.

 

Certainly since Lowe's arrival and the reverse takeover the political upheavels have increased 10 fold. In the old days a big crisis in the board room was when they ran out of salmon paste sandwiches or a director's wife over imbibed in the pre-match sweet sherry.

[Alain Perrin]

Mark, you talk about Lowe handling the PR well since his return - do you include his performance at the AGM in this and do you think going fishing and then skiiing in the same month missing 2 vital home matches good PR?

 

I agree with Jonah that Lowe's PR is better since his return, but the damage is done and not even Max Clifford can make that right.

 

Fishing / Skiing makes very little difference in the grand scheme of things, only the fans that look at the directors box rather than the pitch will have noticed. Far less damaging than pronouncements about Kilingons etc.

 

I wasn't at the AGM but, from what I've read, nobody came out of it looking good.

 

Lowe inflamed an already tense situation by reading out the letter (ill-udged, yes - but despite what has been said on here, I would be astounded were it not genuine). Regardless, it didn't help set a mature atmosphere.

 

Couch / LM et al followed it up with a shouting match / walkout, plus purile questions about boardroom pictures. Personally I was less inclined to support Crouch after what I read about the AGM, than before - prior to that I considered him to be viable (admittedly not my preferred) alternative, if a bit of a loose cannon.

[NickG]

that's my biggest criticism of Crouch - he makes it seem to personal between him and Lowe rather than Saints.

[Alain Perrin]

At the time I don't recall anyone sticking up for Branfoot like there are some (on here in particular) now who would disagree with me and still support Lowe.

 

FF, the big difference is that Branfoot was the manager. It makes the cause and effect easier to determine and judgements are easier to come by.

 

I'd also argue that the Internet helps minority (and majority) views be heard in a way that previously didn't happen.

 

FWIW, My support (with a small 's') of Lowe is based on not thinking there are viable alternatives, rather than belief in him as an inpirational leader.

[Frank's cousin]

 

Certainly since Lowe's arrival and the reverse takeover the political upheavels have increased 10 fold. In the old days a big crisis in the board room was when they ran out of salmon paste sandwiches or a director's wife over imbibed in the pre-match sweet sherry.

 

That made me chuckle - is that not really a sign of the times though Duncan, the money in the game having meant suits replacing the traditional fan-done-well-for-himself in the boardrooms and the politics of the game in general?

 

As fans, we welcome the money and the elevated gap between the top flight and the rest when we get our 'rightful' share, yet are also bitter when its lost to us. Lowe struggled to win fans over from the outset because his tenure began as we were all adjusting to the changes in the game and as a suit, seemed tied to that new culture more than most. He then failed to win us over - his biggest mistake. At they very start he should have been engaging, outlinig his vision strategy whatever and demonstrating that maybe whilst not 'traditional' was with FOOTBALLING aims in mind, even if not always apparent to the traditionalists. He failed to grasp the importance of the community culture that was retained despite the the advent of the mega bucks premierleague, and seemed not to understand that fan loyalty was not something that demonstrated stupidity - the willingness to spend hardearned whatever slop was served - but teh very backbone of what sepearts football from other sports, that its an intelligent choice and an unconditional love more akin to having kids - you love them despite what they may do, and thats a very positive strong thing. If he had recognised that correctly, he would have LEARNED to engage, to see fnas loyalty as the positive aspect it was not something to take for granted and thus alienate fans with off the cuff slurs .... instead of recognising the 1000s of fans who only ever wanted good and wanted success, he ignore them and listened only to the minority vocal gob****es who were quite clear in their prejudice - Lowes biggest mistake was perhaps using this minority for his model of a fans and treating them all with that contempt ever since.

 

Its why I do believe that only way to combat this now is by changing that perception if its not too late.

[Weston Saint]

Its why I do believe that only way to combat this now is by changing that perception if its not too late.

 

It is too late Frank, imo

[Frank's cousin]

It is too late Frank, imo

 

Its never too late Weston, because its the approach that is important, because we want to given respect and treated as intelligent fans with a real voice by whoever ends up in the power seat, not just at the moment whilst Lowe is still here. Its one of the reasons I struggled with Wilde and Crouch - because thhier blatent fan firiendly platitudes showed an equal disrespect for our intelligence, as if as long a sthey say the right thing we would not notice that what they were doing was less effective...

[jonah]

Mark, you talk about Lowe handling the PR well since his return - do you include his performance at the AGM in this and do you think going fishing and then skiiing in the same month missing 2 vital home matches good PR?

 

Duncan, I think Lowe's handling of the AGM was actually very professional and restrained given the general behaviour of various persons at the AGM - and I'm afraid I include you in this - which was downright childish and unacceptable. It was a company AGM, not a time for playground name-calling and mob-mentality behaviour. So Lowe read out a letter which backed him (and you can't honestly think he made it up, seriously), why shouldn't he? Why do you think he should only listen to a bunch of hypocrits dragging up old and irrelevant issues or using the AGM as some sort of personal soapbox?

 

You like to ask me questions about Lowe but seem unwilling to answer those posed back to you - so I'll ask again, why did you feel the need to address the board at the AGM to ask Lowe about apologising for relegation 4 years ago? Why did you ask the same old question when you've asked it before and been given the answer before - I know full well you've seen the quotes from Lowe apologising for it, so why bring it up again? And what did that have to do with company matters for 2007/2008? [Do you have shares now? I thought you didn't?]

 

As for the others who used the AGM as an excuse to soapbox, Crouch was an absolute embarassment with his ranting and raving, Lawrie makes Lowe's ego look miniscule and has a misty-eyed memory of certain facts (like the number of managers we went through with him on the board and dismantling the academy when Souness was there), Corbett shows why she shouldn't be within 200 miles of our boardroom and Chorley shows he's one sandwich short of a picnic. The only person who said anything sensible was Perry McMillan who wanted us to get more kids coming - a worthwhile idea, tempered only by the fact that as a parent I wouldn't want my kids anywhere near the bitter, resentful, unpleasant atmosphere you get at SMS.

 

With regards to Lowe going on hoilday - where exactly have you been for the last 2 years when Wilde came in and could only spend 90 days in the UK in the entire year?! It's massive hypocrisy to moan about Lowe going on holiday - what about Trant, one of those who lied through his teeth about putting in money, not even bothering to attend the AGM after he was elected? What about Wilde not bothering to attend *this* AGM? What about John Corbett spending the summer on his Isle Of Mull estate? Lowe is working part-time for the club [unpaid? I think only AC is drawing a part-time wage right?] he was turfed out of 2 years ago in an attempt to stop us going to the wall and you are picking holes in the minutae of his actions rather than considering the mess he inherited last summer and what might actually be best for the club. It's all personal and therefore it's all unbalanced.

[Whitey Grandad]

I thought it was a good idea, and to be honest I think that he was pretty unlucky really - we could easily have won a few more games, we were quite unlucky with some of the dodgy pens and red cards and with the rub of the green and fewer injuries we could easily have been a few places higher. I remain unconvinced that our plight down near the bottom is due to poor team management - last season I thought we were a mid-table team, this season I thought we'd be hovering just above the drop. So to be 4 points adrift in Feb is only slightly worse than I expected.

There was nothing unlucky about the red cards, they were all deserved and could probably be attributed to youthful inexperience. The dodgiest penalties that I have seen were by Wotton and McGoldrick. We've discussed this elsewhere, but luck only applies in the short term. The more games that you play, the more you get what you deserve.

[jonah]

We've discussed this elsewhere, but luck only applies in the short term. The more games that you play, the more you get what you deserve.

 

Yes I agree, hence you couldn't claim we'd been so unlucky we should be in the play-off spots, but a run of bad luck is enough to leave you a few points worse off. What about those recent pens, can't think of all of them but Plymouth and Man U were particularly bad. We need to start creating our own luck, but it's a fine between hitting woodwork and losing with dodgy pens, and scoring goals and escaping pens to win.

[SW11_Saint]

Yes I agree, hence you couldn't claim we'd been so unlucky we should be in the play-off spots, but a run of bad luck is enough to leave you a few points worse off. What about those recent pens, can't think of all of them but Plymouth and Man U were particularly bad. We need to start creating our own luck, but it's a fine between hitting woodwork and losing with dodgy pens, and scoring goals and escaping pens to win.

Although most managers rant and rave about decisions at the time, the fact is they tend to "even out" over a season. I cannot see we have been any unluckier than any other club in the CCC.

 

The table doesn't lie - we are where we are because we deserve to be - we simply aren't currently good enough to meet the standard in this division. Unfortunate, but true.

[Frank's cousin]

Although most managers rant and rave about decisions at the time, the fact is they tend to "even out" over a season. I cannot see we have been any unluckier than any other club in the CCC.

 

The table doesn't lie - we are where we are because we deserve to be - we simply aren't currently good enough to meet the standard in this division. Unfortunate, but true.

 

Think that is true - its also a squed perception. When we win or do well you forget those occasions when we missed pens, hit posts or had dodgy decisions - when you lose regularly, we tend to clutch at straws to draw some positives if possible so inevitably you focus on and remember those things that went against us, not those that went for us which we interpret as luck...

[Whitey Grandad]

The table doesn't lie - we are where we are because we deserve to be - we simply aren't currently good enough to meet the standard in this division. Unfortunate, but true.

I think that's why I find our situation so depressing.

[Handyman]

For me it's sacking Pearson.

I genuinely believe we would be pushing for the play-offs with him in charge.

(Yes, I know Pearson wasn't "sacked" as such).

 

Got to agree with that!

[um pahars]

Oh no wait, that's the secret plan... my answer was in fact, appointing Wigley.

 

At least we agree on one thing.

 

I never got my head around the appointment of Wigley, and given the fact it was never discussed or ratified at a PLC Board Meeting was astounding.

 

And close second, his failure to handle PR correctly (with the caveat that he has largely handled it well since his return - mainly by saying next to nothing).

 

Whilst he has been realtively quiet (by his own poor standards), he certainly hasn't been a church mouse by any stretch of the imagination. In opposition he popped up a few times on Solent, in The Echo and a number of times during the run in last season.

 

And last summer you couldn't move for the revelations of Total Football, the Revolutionary Coaching Set Up etc etc etc. His antics at the AGM were appalling and I have seen nothing that displays empathy or a willingness to engage with the supporters (the forums have gone by the by).

 

I think some of the reason he is keeping his head down is because it is going so horribly wrong (I don't even think Chris Iwelumo would say we're playing well nowadays!!).

 

I view it with the benefit of hindsight. I thought it was a good idea, and to be honest I think that he was pretty unlucky really - we could easily have won a few more games, we were quite unlucky with some of the dodgy pens and red cards and with the rub of the green and fewer injuries we could easily have been a few places higher.

 

I don't do luck, but I accept that in individual games we have had some decsions go against us (but by the same token, you have to accept we had decisions go for us in other matches).

 

However, over 28 games those injustices start to even themselves out and ultimately the table does not lie.

 

I remain unconvinced that our plight down near the bottom is due to poor team management

 

What would you put it down to then???

 

I struggle to reconcile your train of thought with what I saw during those 28 games.

 

I witnessed awful team selections, ignoring certain players, awful tactics, an unwillingness to change styles to match the opposition, or events in a game, comments such as the players only knowing one way to play (Wotte is now doing the opposite), saying the older players cant play with the youngsters (Wotte is now doing the opposite) etc etc etc.

 

On top of that, I thought his use of the transfer market and our minimal transfer budget was poor (but I'll cut him some slack there as I don't think he was in total control).

 

We never had the best set of players, nor the most amount of money to add to what we had, but I think our current position has loads to do with poor team management.

 

I would like the club's finances to be run on the same lines that RL has previously run them on,

 

I have never had a problem with living within our means and not overspending and although many would like to see us splash out and compete with the big spenders, I also think there is a fair degree of the acceptance of reality out there in the fanbase. We may moan that we want to kepp hold of Bridgey et al, but ultimately I think we accept our position in the pecking order and the spending power that goes with it.

 

But in addition to running the Club in a prudent manner, there has to be the ability to spend that money wisely.

 

Running the Club in a competent fiscal manner is only half the battle.

 

and I would *like* it if fans could concentrate on supporting the club and team instead of a part-time PLC chairman. Sadly I don't think the latter will ever happen due to a relentless element of our fan base - hence, I would probably be happy enough if the whole lot went, RL, AC, MW, LC, MC, LM et al. Apart from the "fan-friendly" PR they have nothing to offer in terms of actually running the club. But that's not going to happen either is it?

 

So what are we left with? Fans won't be able to help themselves in continuing to attack their own club, but nobody else will come in. That leaves either administration getting rid of the lot of them (still unlikely, I can't imagine they will all just walk away), or relegation leading to the start up of an AFC Southampton type alternative. And I can't see either of those happening either to be honest.

 

I think you're being over dramatic with regards the fanbase here and I believe that ultimately those in charge are judged solely on the results that are achieved under their tenure. There will always be a minority against the leaders of the day, but the vast majority are rational and sensible with their judgement of those in charge. I was more than happy to commend Lowe during the first half of his tenure at the Club and I still stand by the belief that he did many good things for us during the first part of his tenure.

 

Deliver a modicum of success and treat the fans with respect, and I think that respect and unity will flow both ways.

 

Lowe managed the first one for the first part of his tenure (he never managed the second, but success on the pitch brought him some leeway).

 

But towards the end of his tenure, and now in his second coming, he has failed on both parts and IMHO it is therefore ineveitable that he has lost the support of the majority of the fanbase.

 

In the absence of success on the pitch, Lowe does not have the ability to engender a spirit of unity and togetherness.

 

That just leaves my only remaining idea which is for all of those parties to agree to sell down their holdings below 3% - then none of them have notifiable interests and none of them appear to have any greater say in how the club is run than smaller shareholders. But again, there is no way LC would keep quiet, and since when did his selling nearly all his shares stop LM speaking to the Echo? And you'd still need to appoint CEOs which would become a political hot potato.

 

There might be some mileage in that, but why do you feel the need to bring LC and LM into it here. You could just have easily put RL or MW in there as well, as both of them were vocal when in opposition (it's these little slips that show you be less than objective at times).

 

Which brings us full circle to the fact that the fans are really causing their own problems - nothing is going to change, so why not just leave the boardroom to run the PLC and SFC and get on with supporting the team. We have created a situation that is almost impossible to back out of now - it's become a catch 22.

 

I see you've left the best bit until last.

 

The idea that the fans are causing their own problems is IMHO, ridiculous.

 

In almost every situation we are merely reacting to the poor decisions of others. I'm sure we have played our part in some events (be it protesting ot merely walking away fromt he club), but compared to other characters who have been on the scene, the fans are way, way, way down the list of those culpable for our demise.

 

Supporters are only involving themselves and aware of boardroom issues because those in the boardroom have run this Club so appallingly in recent seasons. Get a decent board who treat the supporters with respect and a modicum of success and the vast majority will turn their attention elsewhere.

 

The supporters have not created this situation by any stretch of the imagination. A rather ill conceived, ignorant and unnecessary response I'm afraid.

[Frank's cousin]

UP... Do we need a spirit of unity and togetherness to have success though? I think we need leadership, sound financial management and money! (fotballing nous naturally) - because Although its accepted that Lowe will forever divide us, success is what unites more than anything. It whether you believe the current or other candidates in the ring can deliver any success on teh pitch whenever that may be that is surely more important than the unifying powers of the man in charge or lack of them... alll that will do is speed up the return of the punters, who will take longer to come back if relying purely on the on teh pitch performances improving.

[um pahars]

Duncan, I think Lowe's handling of the AGM was actually very professional and restrained given the general behaviour of various persons at the AGM

 

I have spoken to numerous parties (press, SMS staff, supporters, fair minded individuals), including someone very, very close to Lowe, and if you think his handling of the AGM, and in particular how he opened the meeting was very professional, then I seriously have to question your judgement (and objectivity), because it is totally out of kilter with what others are suggesting.

 

If you want to we can move on to the way Crouch, Chorley and others also played their part in a tragedy of an AGM, but to suggest Lowe's handling was professional is astounding.

 

When you post such things, I can only either assume you're spoiling for a fight or that your support of Lowe is blinkered.

 

I do hope it is the former.

Edited 17 February, 2009 by um pahars

[um pahars]

UP... Do we need a spirit of unity and togetherness to have success though? I think we need leadership' date=' sound financial management and money! (fotballing nous naturally) - because Although its accepted that Lowe will forever divide us, success is what unites more than anything. It whether you believe the current or other candidates in the ring can deliver any success on teh pitch whenever that may be that is surely more important than the unifying powers of the man in charge or lack of them... alll that will do is speed up the return of the punters, who will take longer to come back if relying purely on the on teh pitch performances improving.[/quote']

 

I was saying that in the absence of success on the pitch you need something else, but then again I certainly also don't see unity and togetherness as a negative, even in the good times.

 

As I stated in that post, I think success on the pitch will suffice for the vast majority of the fans (and that should always be our first priority). Without it you will struggle, but you might be able to get by if everyone sees the common purpose and has faith and belief in those in charge.

 

We should always strive for the best possible results on the pitch and the best possible relationships off of it. You might get by with having one of those at any one time, but as we stand here today we appear to be a mile away from getting either!!!!!

Edited 17 February, 2009 by um pahars

[Thedelldays]

Dell Days, I am not knocking the trip to the final or the short jaunt into Europe. I enjoyed the Millennium (sp) experience as much as anyone but some on here use the fact that we beat a few also ran clubs inc Millwall, Wolves, Norwich and Watford to justify Lowe's ten years at the club. And Strachan screwed up the Final with his poor tactics, so he didn't come out of the whole run smelling of roses either.

 

oh my god...not good enough for you..if it was that easy then why do we lose to teams below us most years...pre and post lowe...and why dont we or havent we got to the final on far more occaisions..?

 

 

(I will admit the Spurs home tie was an exception to the above but it was a one off)

 

I happen to think we played very well at home to wolves that year too..and norwich...but hey, you can only beat who is in front of you...and most years we dont (cant see why, it seems to be nothing special)

 

 

you seem to think we were fortunate in 2003..and fair enough everyone needs luck to win the cup..unless you are man utd (and im sure they have a slice somewhere to the final)

why dont you go on about luck in 76..? the offside goal..? of course, it was not offside was it..

[hypochondriac]

I was saying that in the absence of success on the pitch you need something else, but then again I certainly also don't see unity and togetherness as a negative, even in the good times.

 

As I stated in that post, I think success on the pitch will suffice for the vast majority of the fans (and that should always be our first priority). Without it you will struggle, but you might be able to get by if everyone sees the common purpose and has faith and belief in those in charge.

 

Very true. It's the reason why I (and I suspect the majority of supporters.) were prepared to give Pearson time and would have been a lot more understanding and supportive because his decisions on the whole showed common sense and I agreed with them. With Jan and now Wotte he makes decisions that seem to have little logic to them. I'll never forget one game with Jan when the other team got the ball and every attacking SFC player was in the opposition box! Bizarre tactics.

[hypochondriac]

Dell Days, I am not knocking the trip to the final or the short jaunt into Europe. I enjoyed the Millennium (sp) experience as much as anyone but some on here use the fact that we beat a few also ran clubs inc Millwall, Wolves, Norwich and Watford to justify Lowe's ten years at the club. And Strachan screwed up the Final with his poor tactics, so he didn't come out of the whole run smelling of roses either.

(I will admit the Spurs home tie was an exception to the above but it was a one off)

Being the historian doesn't stop me expressing a view btw. I am also very careful with any criticisms in the books - you will not find anything anti Lowe in anything so far published or in the future - I have to concentrate on facts. For instance there is no mention of the pre-match march in my write up of the Swansea game or fans fighting fans v Doncaster.

 

Perhaps one day a book about the decline of Saints could be written but I doubt it would get past the lawyers. Crouch and Lowe's legal eagles would be all over it not to mention the execs.

 

I think that is very unfair Duncan. Knock people when they do badly but praise them when they do well. Remember also that it was Strachan's poor tactics which got us to the final and 4th in the Premiership! I mean come on we were playing Arsenal. I'm not sure that you can blame Strachan for that one.

 

I am annoyed by Lowe now but in 2003 things were going pretty great. I'm not prepared to write the success of as a fluke but I guess that's your opinion.

[jonah]

His antics at the AGM were appalling

 

I guess we have a different idea of what constituted appalling behaviour then, I think those on the floor were the ones who were an embarassment to the club,

 

What would you put it down to then???

 

We have a team/squad/finances that place us near the foot of the table. The only way to climb is to strike lucky with a better-than-average manager, get a better-than-average run of luck, or build upon what you have (which requires money and time). With WGS for example, we had a better-than-average manager and probably a better-than-average run of luck which led to a Cup Final and 8th place.

 

We never had the best set of players, nor the most amount of money to add to what we had, but I think our current position has loads to do with poor team management.

 

Of course it's easy to say that now, but equally if that's all it was and Wotte is doing the opposite of the problems you quote, then wouldn't you have expected us to do better than 2 pts from 4 games? So that argument doesn't even hold water yet.

 

the vast majority are rational and sensible with their judgement of those in charge

 

I'm not sure that's the case any more, the reactions have started to border on hysterical for a large section of our fan base. And there's bugger all rationale to it - which is why Wilde waltzed in without opposition and escaped any criticism whatsoever from people who then try to jump on Lowe when he does the same things. Ditto things like the reverse takeover, you know full well the lies people spread about that when the central characters like Gordon, Hunt, Wiseman and McMenemy were then paraded as Lowe's replacements.

 

There might be some mileage in that, but why do you feel the need to bring LC and LM into it here.

 

The reason I mentioned them was because we had been talking about their behaviour at the AGM, plus the fact that LM has a minimal shareholding having sold out after the reverse takeover, yet seems to think he is a majority shareholder.

 

Supporters are only involving themselves and aware of boardroom issues because those in the boardroom have run this Club so appallingly in recent seasons.

 

The supporters have not created this situation by any stretch of the imagination. A rather ill conceived, ignorant and unnecessary response I'm afraid.

 

It is not ignorant in any way - it might be different to your opinion, but I think I have enough knowledge and experience to form an opinion of my own thanks. When I say "supporters", I don't just mean punters at the turnstiles - I include people like LC, MC and LM in there. And you are unequivocably wrong to try to imply those same fans would have gotten involved at other times the club was run badly - if that was the case can you just imagine what the reaction would have been to the following "terrible acts of mismanagement" at the club:

 

* Employing an ex-guardsman with no experience of playing top-flight football who took us from 8th (?) in the league at Xmas to relegation from the top flight.

 

* 2 years in the wilderness of the 2nd division making no progress.

 

* Failing to "push on to the next level" after winning the Cup in 76.

 

* No investment after winning the cup in 76.

 

* Holidaying on private estates rather than running the club

 

* No investment after promotion in 78 - where was the ambition?

 

* No attempt to keep hold of Alan Ball?

 

* Failing to hold onto Keegan and cynically selling him after ST renewals (tut tut)

 

* Failing to "push on to the next level" or get investment after finishing 2nd in the league

 

* Failing to build a new stadium in 20 years of trying

 

* Negligent attitude to club's finances and contract structures

 

* Failing to back LM who left to go to Sunderland

 

* Failing to back Nicholl / failing to sack him sooner

 

* Appointing Branfoot

 

* Failing to sack Branfoot sooner

 

* Trying to sell MLT at least twice

 

* Failing to back Alan Ball and letting him leave

 

* The appalling treatment of Merrington

 

* Allowing the club to close down the academy

 

The list is never-ending. I'm not saying that's how I'd view those events above, but it's easy to do so and they are all to do with how the club has been run for decades - and I don't remember any fans turning any of those events into issues that had to be resolved at board level do you?

[jonah]

I have spoken to numerous parties (press, SMS staff, supporters, fair minded individuals), including someone very, very close to Lowe, and if you think his handling of the AGM, and in particular how he opened the meeting was very professional, then I seriously have to question your judgement (and objectivity), because it is totally out of kilter with what others are suggesting.

 

If you want to we can move on to the way Crouch, Chorley and others also played their part in a tragedy of an AGM, but to suggest Lowe's handling was professional is astounding.

 

When you post such things, I can only either assume you're spoiling for a fight or that your support of Lowe is blinkered.

 

I do hope it is the former.

 

I did not attend the AGM, I am going off the minutes - I have experience of hundreds of AGMs relating to dozens of companies, and IMO the way Lowe handles the baying mob is professional. I am not talking about a fans forum, I am talking about a company AGM which is for company business - personal squabbles and fights are a different matter. There is hardly any comparable with other companies, the closest you might get is a hostile shareholders rebellion but even then the floor acts with dignity and asks questions based on facts, there is no shouting and stomping and using the floor as a soapbox [and how many were even shareholders?]. Quite how you think a PLC chairman would react faced with that I'm not sure? What did you expect him to do differently?

[Frank's cousin]

I guess we have a different idea of what constituted appalling behaviour then, I think those on the floor were the ones who were an embarassment to the club,

 

 

 

We have a team/squad/finances that place us near the foot of the table. The only way to climb is to strike lucky with a better-than-average manager, get a better-than-average run of luck, or build upon what you have (which requires money and time). With WGS for example, we had a better-than-average manager and probably a better-than-average run of luck which led to a Cup Final and 8th place.

 

 

 

Of course it's easy to say that now, but equally if that's all it was and Wotte is doing the opposite of the problems you quote, then wouldn't you have expected us to do better than 2 pts from 4 games? So that argument doesn't even hold water yet.

 

 

 

I'm not sure that's the case any more, the reactions have started to border on hysterical for a large section of our fan base. And there's bugger all rationale to it - which is why Wilde waltzed in without opposition and escaped any criticism whatsoever from people who then try to jump on Lowe when he does the same things. Ditto things like the reverse takeover, you know full well the lies people spread about that when the central characters like Gordon, Hunt, Wiseman and McMenemy were then paraded as Lowe's replacements.

 

 

 

The reason I mentioned them was because we had been talking about their behaviour at the AGM, plus the fact that LM has a minimal shareholding having sold out after the reverse takeover, yet seems to think he is a majority shareholder.

 

 

 

It is not ignorant in any way - it might be different to your opinion, but I think I have enough knowledge and experience to form an opinion of my own thanks. When I say "supporters", I don't just mean punters at the turnstiles - I include people like LC, MC and LM in there. And you are unequivocably wrong to try to imply those same fans would have gotten involved at other times the club was run badly - if that was the case can you just imagine what the reaction would have been to the following "terrible acts of mismanagement" at the club:

 

* Employing an ex-guardsman with no experience of playing top-flight football who took us from 8th (?) in the league at Xmas to relegation from the top flight.

 

* 2 years in the wilderness of the 2nd division making no progress.

 

* Failing to "push on to the next level" after winning the Cup in 76.

 

* No investment after winning the cup in 76.

 

* Holidaying on private estates rather than running the club

 

* No investment after promotion in 78 - where was the ambition?

 

* No attempt to keep hold of Alan Ball?

 

* Failing to hold onto Keegan and cynically selling him after ST renewals (tut tut)

 

* Failing to "push on to the next level" or get investment after finishing 2nd in the league

 

* Failing to build a new stadium in 20 years of trying

 

* Negligent attitude to club's finances and contract structures

 

* Failing to back LM who left to go to Sunderland

 

* Failing to back Nicholl / failing to sack him sooner

 

* Appointing Branfoot

 

* Failing to sack Branfoot sooner

 

* Trying to sell MLT at least twice

 

* Failing to back Alan Ball and letting him leave

 

* The appalling treatment of Merrington

 

* Allowing the club to close down the academy

 

The list is never-ending. I'm not saying that's how I'd view those events above, but it's easy to do so and they are all to do with how the club has been run for decades - and I don't remember any fans turning any of those events into issues that had to be resolved at board level do you?

 

Of course you can view these things in this way... but the problem with LOwe was that he never built a relationship other than a negative one with the fans - which means he was never seen as anything positive... as they say, 'we are far more forgiving of the beutiful people' - Swap beautiful with 'in touch' and you get the picture.

[St Paul]

I did not attend the AGM, I am going off the minutes - I have experience of hundreds of AGMs relating to dozens of companies, and IMO the way Lowe handles the baying mob is professional. I am not talking about a fans forum, I am talking about a company AGM which is for company business - personal squabbles and fights are a different matter. There is hardly any comparable with other companies, the closest you might get is a hostile shareholders rebellion but even then the floor acts with dignity and asks questions based on facts, there is no shouting and stomping and using the floor as a soapbox [and how many were even shareholders?]. Quite how you think a PLC chairman would react faced with that I'm not sure? What did you expect him to do differently?

 

I have never heard of a PLC Chairman starting the AGM by reading out a letter about how wonderful he is and what a great job he's doing. Particulary when the results of the Company were heading downwards at such a rapid rate . Perhaps this has happened before, and you could let us know when, and at which Company.

[OldNick]

 

* Employing an ex-guardsman with no experience of playing top-flight football who took us from 8th (?) in the league at Xmas to relegation from the top flight.

 

* 2 years in the wilderness of the 2nd division making no progress.

 

* Failing to "push on to the next level" after winning the Cup in 76.

 

* No investment after winning the cup in 76.

 

* Holidaying on private estates rather than running the club

 

* No investment after promotion in 78 - where was the ambition?

 

* No attempt to keep hold of Alan Ball?

 

* Failing to hold onto Keegan and cynically selling him after ST renewals (tut tut)

 

* Failing to "push on to the next level" or get investment after finishing 2nd in the league

 

* Failing to build a new stadium in 20 years of trying

 

* Negligent attitude to club's finances and contract structures

 

* Failing to back LM who left to go to Sunderland

 

* Failing to back Nicholl / failing to sack him sooner

 

* Appointing Branfoot

 

* Failing to sack Branfoot sooner

 

* Trying to sell MLT at least twice

 

* Failing to back Alan Ball and letting him leave

 

* The appalling treatment of Merrington

 

* Allowing the club to close down the academy

 

The list is never-ending. I'm not saying that's how I'd view those events above, but it's easy to do so and they are all to do with how the club has been run for decades - and I don't remember any fans turning any of those events into issues that had to be resolved at board level do you?

Apart from that what have the Romans done for us.

[SW11_Saint]

* Employing an ex-guardsman with no experience of playing top-flight football who took us from 8th (?) in the league at Xmas to relegation from the top flight.

 

* 2 years in the wilderness of the 2nd division making no progress.

 

* Failing to "push on to the next level" after winning the Cup in 76.

 

* No investment after winning the cup in 76.

 

* Holidaying on private estates rather than running the club

 

* No investment after promotion in 78 - where was the ambition?

Good lord you are scraping the barrel now...!

 

Like several top 5 (and one top 2) finishes, and signing the European Footballer of the year, England goalie etc. etc. never happened.

 

Jeez... stop trying to rewrite history Jonah, it's make you look rather silly I'm afraid.

[um pahars]

I guess we have a different idea of what constituted appalling behaviour then, I think those on the floor were the ones who were an embarassment to the club,

 

His opening act of that AGM was the first thing that happened.

 

It was not a reaction to any event, instead a pre meditated decision. He could have held the moral high ground and brcik batted any of the stupid responses from the floor.

 

Insead, he set the tone of the meeting from the off.

 

That is not professional and certainly not the behaviour of a PLC Chairman.

 

A professional would have risen above insults, Lowe jumped into the gutter at the first opportunity.

 

To condone such behaviour, yet attack others for thier awful behaviour shows a clear lack of objectivity and even handedness.

 

Your uncompromising defence of Lowe has been robust in the past, but even you have surpassed yourself on this one.

 

We have a team/squad/finances that place us near the foot of the table. The only way to climb is to strike lucky with a better-than-average manager, get a better-than-average run of luck, or build upon what you have (which requires money and time). With WGS for example, we had a better-than-average manager and probably a better-than-average run of luck which led to a Cup Final and 8th place.

 

Many would have settled for an average manager, but sadly Lowe employed an absolute disaster.

 

Lowe should not be attacked for all every ill in the world, but to defend his antics at the AGM and then to defend his appointment of Poortvliet is stretching it somewhat.

 

It is amazing that you cannot accept that Lowe (and others) ccked up on the appointment of Poortvliet.

 

Talk about defending the indefensible (rational, objective and even handed, yeah right!).

 

Of course it's easy to say that now, but equally if that's all it was and Wotte is doing the opposite of the problems you quote, then wouldn't you have expected us to do better than 2 pts from 4 games? So that argument doesn't even hold water yet.

 

But I was just highlighting how poor Poortvliet was, to be coming out with such nonsense. Now of course if you're saying Wotte has got it wrong, then are you suggesting that this appointment is wrong LOL.

 

But you've also conveniently skipped over the various other problems I highlighted with regards watching Saints under Poortvliet.

 

28 games which apart from the odd game were some of the worst football (and results) I think anyone has probably ever witnessed (and I include the Branfoot era in this one) and you suggest the manager had no impact on what we witnessed (fck me, what's the point of having a manager if the team will just play how the team will play).

 

So many of those performances were down to tactics, team selection, strategy, subs, motivation, training etc, yet none of this ios anything to do with the manager.

 

Your grasp on reality is really slipping.

 

I'm not sure that's the case any more, the reactions have started to border on hysterical for a large section of our fan base. And there's bugger all rationale to it

 

I think your perception is somewhat more hysterical when compared to the reality of the situation.

 

Supporters will judge players, managers, boards and chairman by results. There will be some knee jerking, some animosity, some irrational hatred, but ultimately get success on the pitch and the peasants will be pacified.

 

The reason I mentioned them was because we had been talking about their behaviour at the AGM, plus the fact that LM has a minimal shareholding having sold out after the reverse takeover, yet seems to think he is a majority shareholder.

 

Unnecessary, irrational and not objective. Move along.

 

It is not ignorant in any way - it might be different to your opinion, but I think I have enough knowledge and experience to form an opinion of my own thanks. When I say "supporters", I don't just mean punters at the turnstiles

 

Well let's be clear about it then, because it is patently untrue to start blaming grass roots supporters for the dross that we have had to put up with in recent years.

 

- I include people like LC, MC and LM in there. And you are unequivocably wrong to try to imply those same fans would have gotten involved at other times the club was run badly - if that was the case can you just imagine what the reaction would have been to the following "terrible acts of mismanagement" at the club:

 

LC, LM, MC and others should be treated as directors, custodians, whatever the minute they entered the boardroom and were then privy to making decisions about the Club. At that point they should be judged by their deeds & actions and ultimately the results achieved under them (and I would argue they were, with much criticism - some just and some unjust - being made about them).

 

A director who is a fan, is no different to one who is not a fan. I'm not really sure what you're getting at, as all these people should be judged objectively and in the same manner, with no special dispensation just because they arer "fans". That status might hold sway with regards being empatheic to the supporters, but it holds no sway if things are going tts up on the pitch.

 

But ultimately, it is not the fans who have got us in this position so I would counter that your initial assertion was very wide of the mark.

[OldNick]

Of course you can view these things in this way... but the problem with LOwe was that he never built a relationship other than a negative one with the fans - which means he was never seen as anything positive... .

Well I dont believe that the club made any attempt to embrace us as fans when we were kids in the late 1960's early 70's. As I have stated before fans like myself as 8-10 year old kids being thrown out of the club car park while we waited for the players autographs.I suggest that John Corbett was our chairman at that time.

The club has been an old pals act for generations but only for commercial reasons did the club become 'family friendly' Obviously I have had my opinions formed by those days but it happened and so that is why i am cynical about it.

[OldNick]

Good lord you are scraping the barrel now...!

 

Like several top 5 (and one top 2) finishes, and signing the European Footballer of the year, England goalie etc. etc. never happened.

 

Jeez... stop trying to rewrite history Jonah, it's make you look rather silly I'm afraid.

but he is right, if those things happened now or under RL fans would be banging on about it.

[um pahars]

but he is right, if those things happened now or under RL fans would be banging on about it.

 

And people banged on about them then as well. Football always has been about putting the world to rights and arguing the toss down the youth club, pub or social club.

 

There's always been ups and there most definitely have been downs, BUT the downs of today appear to be much deeper, darker and dangerous.

 

I honestly don't think we have ever been close to the position we find ourselves in now.

 

We certainly have never been this low with regards league position in almost a lifetime. We certainly haven't had the potential worry of two relegations in such quick succession. We certainly have never been on the verge of administration with the disastrous consequences it will bring.

 

And worst of all, during most of the times that Jonah lined up, I think there was a degree of optimism around with almost all of them, something that we could hold on to and think that despite these setbacks, we can still see a way forward.

 

Now I know you're an optimist nickh, but I think for the vast majority of supporters, they can't see anything buit dark clouds.

[Graffito]

If this season plays out as I fear it might, Lowe's biggest mistake will be the so called total football experiment. I can see the rationale behind playing the younger players, given the club's circumstances and I admit to having been impressed with early season performances. But the problem was always going to be in the execution of Lowe's strategy, in particular selecting the right manager, an area in which I'm afraid Lowe has previous. This was a high risk strategy, a gamble with the club's future which shouldn't have been taken.

[SW11_Saint]

but he is right, if those things happened now or under RL fans would be banging on about it.

What, if we signed the European footballer of the year, assembled a squad of top class internationals and regularly qualified for Europe?

 

Damn right we'd bang on about it - we'd give him the keys to the City!!!

[jonah]

I have never heard of a PLC Chairman starting the AGM by reading out a letter about how wonderful he is and what a great job he's doing. Particulary when the results of the Company were heading downwards at such a rapid rate . Perhaps this has happened before, and you could let us know when, and at which Company.

 

I can't believe what a bunch of whingeing bl**dy women there are on this site - RL reads out a complimentary letter to start the AGM and you're all aghast. So he's a bit of a prat to read it out, so what, it was a letter and he wanted to read it... it's his perogative actually. It wouldn't surprise me if he did it on purpose to rub Crouch's nose in it - it's a shame you didn't get so uppity about having a chairman who couldn't spell the name of the club, who didn't even have the bottle to attend the AGM! And still you see nothing untoward in the antics of Crouch & Co? This is exactly why I think (some) fans are ruining the club.

 

Do you know where Newcastle United hold their AGM? Is it at their stadium at a convenient time for fans and local shareholders? No, they hold it first thing in the morning in the City. You think RL indulging himself by reading one piece of one letter at the AGM is outrageous? Try looking at some other companies where the chairman uses the AGM and annual report to give their thoughts on the world and politics.

[OldNick]

What, if we signed the European footballer of the year, assembled a squad of top class internationals and regularly qualified for Europe?

 

Damn right we'd bang on about it - we'd give him the keys to the City!!!

You may but many would complain that the free buses were topped the Itchen corner closed or we had signed last years Euro footballer of the4 year and not the current one.

Even under LM there were fans questioning his decisions including me I may add.

[OldNick]

I have never heard of a PLC Chairman starting the AGM by reading out a letter about how wonderful he is and what a great job he's doing. Particulary when the results of the Company were heading downwards at such a rapid rate . Perhaps this has happened before, and you could let us know when, and at which Company.

 

You should listen to the Steve Wright show in the afternoon. RL has nothing on him, unless you say how wonderful the show is etc you will never get a message read out.

[St Paul]

The great thing about football is we keep the score. It is not like a concert or play, where people can have different opinions as to whether it's any good. There are facts and results that tell us whether a team/Manager is any good.

 

You can not tell me Donny Rovers, Blackpool, Barnsley and others have a much higher wage bill than we did.With reasonable cut backs, sensible signings, and a proper Manager, we should have stayed in this league. The fact we're not going to, can only be down to the Manager and the people who run the Club.The buck must stop somewhere, you can not keep blaming supporters or previous regimes for mismangement THIS season.

[Fitzhugh Fella]

Duncan, I think Lowe's handling of the AGM was actually very professional and restrained given the general behaviour of various persons at the AGM - and I'm afraid I include you in this - which was downright childish and unacceptable. It was a company AGM, not a time for playground name-calling and mob-mentality behaviour. So Lowe read out a letter which backed him (and you can't honestly think he made it up, seriously), why shouldn't he? Why do you think he should only listen to a bunch of hypocrits dragging up old and irrelevant issues or using the AGM as some sort of personal soapbox?

 

You like to ask me questions about Lowe but seem unwilling to answer those posed back to you - so I'll ask again, why did you feel the need to address the board at the AGM to ask Lowe about apologising for relegation 4 years ago? Why did you ask the same old question when you've asked it before and been given the answer before - I know full well you've seen the quotes from Lowe apologising for it, so why bring it up again? And what did that have to do with company matters for 2007/2008? [Do you have shares now? I thought you didn't?]

 

As for the others who used the AGM as an excuse to soapbox, Crouch was an absolute embarassment with his ranting and raving, Lawrie makes Lowe's ego look miniscule and has a misty-eyed memory of certain facts (like the number of managers we went through with him on the board and dismantling the academy when Souness was there), Corbett shows why she shouldn't be within 200 miles of our boardroom and Chorley shows he's one sandwich short of a picnic. The only person who said anything sensible was Perry McMillan who wanted us to get more kids coming - a worthwhile idea, tempered only by the fact that as a parent I wouldn't want my kids anywhere near the bitter, resentful, unpleasant atmosphere you get at SMS.

 

With regards to Lowe going on hoilday - where exactly have you been for the last 2 years when Wilde came in and could only spend 90 days in the UK in the entire year?! It's massive hypocrisy to moan about Lowe going on holiday - what about Trant, one of those who lied through his teeth about putting in money, not even bothering to attend the AGM after he was elected? What about Wilde not bothering to attend *this* AGM? What about John Corbett spending the summer on his Isle Of Mull estate? Lowe is working part-time for the club [unpaid? I think only AC is drawing a part-time wage right?] he was turfed out of 2 years ago in an attempt to stop us going to the wall and you are picking holes in the minutae of his actions rather than considering the mess he inherited last summer and what might actually be best for the club. It's all personal and therefore it's all unbalanced.

 

 

Mark, I would like to correct some errors, speaking as someone who was there at the AGM. (At least you can't accuse me of being a cyber warrior who is unprepared to face up to the object of his criticism in person).

 

I wasn't going to say anything at the AGM - at least I had nothing planned. I attended a pre-meet of the anti Lowe speakers you mentioned and there was no pre-determined plan for them to act the way they did or say the things they did. Lowe by reading out the ridiculous letter that claimed he was the only one who could unite the club set the tone unfortunately by angering a large proportion of shareholders present (and yes I am a shareholder now, have been for quite a while). To now say he acted in a "very professional manner" Mark, makes me think you are mischief making and imo certainly undermines some of your more lucid points.

 

I was the first to speak after Lowe's recital of the anonymous letter and I did not ask him to apologise as you state, if my memory serves me well I asked him when he was going to accept some responsibility for our current situation. I spoke as calmly as anyone there and included the expression "with respect" when I asked him to resign. If you still think that my behaviour is childish and unacceptable then I can't help that but I would rather you based your accusations on what you actually saw and heard rather than believe the words of others. I believe I was perfectly polite and indeed he responded to me in a polite and calm manner even if he did not pick up on my question of accepting responsibility.

 

In hindsight LC could have maintained his temper but he was increasingly getting frustrated by Lowe not really giving him the chance to complete what he was saying.

Incidentally LM's statement/come question was made in a very dignified manner as was Mary Corbett's - the trouble is you just don't like what they said and you choose to accuse them of acting in a manner that is actually factually untrue.

 

And finally the straw that broke the camel's back for many at the meeting. Anne McMenemy asked the question about the photograph. Petty? A waste of time? Well you can argue until the cows come home on the validity but she made her point calmly and succinctly and, the very least Lowe could have done, was give her a civil reply. To answer that there was nowhere else to hang a picture of a train given to them by Doncaster FC was an insult. You may not like the Mcmenemys (and I accept he is far from whiter than white) but even you, Mark, I would hazard a guess, would not insult a woman old enough to be our parent.

As for Wilde - you are right - the oily coward long ago slipped beneath my radar - give me Lowe in the trenches standing next to me any day of the week. Trouble is right now the pair of them are standing clenched buttock to buttock - and talking of arses I hope Rupert is covering his.

[saint1977]

I guess we have a different idea of what constituted appalling behaviour then, I think those on the floor were the ones who were an embarassment to the club,

 

 

 

We have a team/squad/finances that place us near the foot of the table. The only way to climb is to strike lucky with a better-than-average manager, get a better-than-average run of luck, or build upon what you have (which requires money and time). With WGS for example, we had a better-than-average manager and probably a better-than-average run of luck which led to a Cup Final and 8th place.

 

 

 

Of course it's easy to say that now, but equally if that's all it was and Wotte is doing the opposite of the problems you quote, then wouldn't you have expected us to do better than 2 pts from 4 games? So that argument doesn't even hold water yet.

 

 

 

I'm not sure that's the case any more, the reactions have started to border on hysterical for a large section of our fan base. And there's bugger all rationale to it - which is why Wilde waltzed in without opposition and escaped any criticism whatsoever from people who then try to jump on Lowe when he does the same things. Ditto things like the reverse takeover, you know full well the lies people spread about that when the central characters like Gordon, Hunt, Wiseman and McMenemy were then paraded as Lowe's replacements.

 

 

 

The reason I mentioned them was because we had been talking about their behaviour at the AGM, plus the fact that LM has a minimal shareholding having sold out after the reverse takeover, yet seems to think he is a majority shareholder.

 

 

 

It is not ignorant in any way - it might be different to your opinion, but I think I have enough knowledge and experience to form an opinion of my own thanks. When I say "supporters", I don't just mean punters at the turnstiles - I include people like LC, MC and LM in there. And you are unequivocably wrong to try to imply those same fans would have gotten involved at other times the club was run badly - if that was the case can you just imagine what the reaction would have been to the following "terrible acts of mismanagement" at the club:

 

* Employing an ex-guardsman with no experience of playing top-flight football who took us from 8th (?) in the league at Xmas to relegation from the top flight.

 

* 2 years in the wilderness of the 2nd division making no progress.

 

* Failing to "push on to the next level" after winning the Cup in 76.

 

* No investment after winning the cup in 76.

 

* Holidaying on private estates rather than running the club

 

* No investment after promotion in 78 - where was the ambition?

 

* No attempt to keep hold of Alan Ball?

 

* Failing to hold onto Keegan and cynically selling him after ST renewals (tut tut)

 

* Failing to "push on to the next level" or get investment after finishing 2nd in the league

 

* Failing to build a new stadium in 20 years of trying

 

* Negligent attitude to club's finances and contract structures

 

* Failing to back LM who left to go to Sunderland

 

* Failing to back Nicholl / failing to sack him sooner

 

* Appointing Branfoot

 

* Failing to sack Branfoot sooner

 

* Trying to sell MLT at least twice

 

* Failing to back Alan Ball and letting him leave

 

* The appalling treatment of Merrington

 

* Allowing the club to close down the academy

 

The list is never-ending. I'm not saying that's how I'd view those events above, but it's easy to do so and they are all to do with how the club has been run for decades - and I don't remember any fans turning any of those events into issues that had to be resolved at board level do you?

 

The events of the 70s are before my time but LM was not popular early on I understand. We also kept players like Osgood, Channon etc who would have kept the entertainment value up. Also, we did get to CWC QF season after the FA Cup - my parents went to Anderlecht away. Saints did actually invest in players after promotion it seems - Ball had already joined and George was an ambitious signing (albeit he was never fit). We also got to the League Cup final in 1979 and then Keegan was a stunning signing in 1980 - current European Footballer of the Year.

 

Yes, Keegan and many others feel that with a bit more ambition, we'd have won the title and Keegan's departure caused a lot of anger at the time but remember, Shilton was signed on wages that I believe may have been the biggest in British football at the time. Heysel did for us and a number of medium-sized clubs that were regularly in the top 6 and the club stagnated a bit post-Woodforde although we brought high quality youngsters through and remained entertaining to watch. We were still signing good quality top flight players with the odd criticised signing - Forrest for example who actually wasn't too bad.

 

Towards the end of Nicholl's time onwards was grotty and some shocking decisions were made and the greed really got going. Who was Chairman? Guy Askham. Who runs Lowe's share proxy? Guy Askham. Spot the link everybody? Askham is directly culpable for the last 6 points you make Jonah and I mean directly culpable. Heck, he even gave Branfoot a 3 year deal and then Branfoot nearly gave MLT to Chelsea in a part-ex for Robert Fleck and WE would have paid a cash adjustment to Chelsea. Thank f@ck MLT and Fleck weren't up for it!

 

Regardless of everything else that is posted on here, I do not think it is reasonable to be asked by the club to support a candidate propped up by Guy Askham. That man should be banned from the club for life (and Wiseman and the others as well) after the George Bowyer incident and that will be Guy's grubby legacy. I hope when he snuffs it that the fans are not expected to observe a minute's silence for him?

[alpine_saint]

Duncan, I think Lowe's handling of the AGM was actually very professional and restrained given the general behaviour of various persons at the AGM - and I'm afraid I include you in this - which was downright childish and unacceptable. It was a company AGM, not a time for playground name-calling and mob-mentality behaviour. So Lowe read out a letter which backed him (and you can't honestly think he made it up, seriously), why shouldn't he? Why do you think he should only listen to a bunch of hypocrits dragging up old and irrelevant issues or using the AGM as some sort of personal soapbox?

 

 

This must rate as one of the most bizarre posts on here ever.

 

Jonah is either Roopie's love-child or a troll on a wind-up.

[Fitzhugh Fella]

I can't believe what a bunch of whingeing bl**dy women there are on this site - RL reads out a complimentary letter to start the AGM and you're all aghast. So he's a bit of a prat to read it out, so what, it was a letter and he wanted to read it... it's his perogative actually. It wouldn't surprise me if he did it on purpose to rub Crouch's nose in it - it's a shame you didn't get so uppity about having a chairman who couldn't spell the name of the club, who didn't even have the bottle to attend the AGM! And still you see nothing untoward in the antics of Crouch & Co? This is exactly why I think (some) fans are ruining the club.

 

Do you know where Newcastle United hold their AGM? Is it at their stadium at a convenient time for fans and local shareholders? No, they hold it first thing in the morning in the City. You think RL indulging himself by reading one piece of one letter at the AGM is outrageous? Try looking at some other companies where the chairman uses the AGM and annual report to give their thoughts on the world and politics.

 

The hypocracy of your first paragraph is breathtaking Mark. What's good for the goose etc. So Lowe can wind Crouch up but Crouch can't wind Lowe up?

[Lord Duckhunter]

I can't believe what a bunch of whingeing bl**dy women there are on this site - RL reads out a complimentary letter to start the AGM and you're all aghast. So he's a bit of a prat to read it out, so what, it was a letter and he wanted to read it... it's his perogative actually. It wouldn't surprise me if he did it on purpose to rub Crouch's nose in it - it's a shame you didn't get so uppity about having a chairman who couldn't spell the name of the club, who didn't even have the bottle to attend the AGM! And still you see nothing untoward in the antics of Crouch & Co? This is exactly why I think (some) fans are ruining the club.

 

Do you know where Newcastle United hold their AGM? Is it at their stadium at a convenient time for fans and local shareholders? No, they hold it first thing in the morning in the City. You think RL indulging himself by reading one piece of one letter at the AGM is outrageous? Try looking at some other companies where the chairman uses the AGM and annual report to give their thoughts on the world and politics.

 

 

You didn't answer his question though, did you?

 

You claim Lowe's conduct was "professional" and yet you then claim he read it out "on purpose, to rub Crouch's nose in it". That's hardly "professional" is it?

[jonah]

His opening act of that AGM was the first thing that happened.

 

See actually you're not even right about that. He first act was to apologise for losing his voice, and then to apologise for the late date of the AGM. Specifically he said:

 

"As the going concern note says it has taken this long to get all the various parties lending money to the club to agree and move forward. "

 

Let's just check what he's said there - the club's lenders had only *just* agreed how to move forward as a going concern. In response to that dire situation he then responded by saying he was coming back to resolve the issues and gave an example of someone saying "keep the faith". How about forgetting one sentence he read out from a letter and concentrate on the important details for a change. Who on earth is more concerned over a letter saying "keep the faith" than the fact the club had just been driven by other people to the brink of administration? What on earth are your priorities?

 

That is not professional and certainly not the behaviour of a PLC Chairman.

 

And you base that on what experience exactly?

 

The rest of your post is back to your normal level and barely makes any sense, I really can't bear to attempt to respond to it.

[SW11_Saint]

You may but many would complain that the free buses were topped the Itchen corner closed or we had signed last years Euro footballer of the4 year and not the current one.

Even under LM there were fans questioning his decisions including me I may add.

I think the thing you, and Jonah, seem to be misunderstanding is that this, in my humble opinion, is not a "Lowe v Crouch/McM" debate. Frankly, I do not think any of them are fit to run the club - we need an entire new board, with fresh ideas and god help us, Money! It's doubtful we'll get them.

 

If you held a gun to my head and asked who I thought the "lesser of the two (several) evils" were I'd probably have to plump for Crouch, but again, I think we deserve better than any of the current or recent past encumbents.

 

Of course fans will bicker about things (just listen to 606!), and the seriousness of the "problems" will vary depending on each clubs predicament - Man Utd fans probably ***** about how often they change their kit, not being able to get tickets to games etc. But to start casting back 20 years to prove that "Rupert is no worse than those who used to run the club" is a poor defence, and, as I mentioned, rather juvenile.

[Channon's Sideburns]

I guess we have a different idea of what constituted appalling behaviour then, I think those on the floor were the ones who were an embarassment to the club,

 

 

 

We have a team/squad/finances that place us near the foot of the table. The only way to climb is to strike lucky with a better-than-average manager, get a better-than-average run of luck, or build upon what you have (which requires money and time). With WGS for example, we had a better-than-average manager and probably a better-than-average run of luck which led to a Cup Final and 8th place.

 

 

 

Of course it's easy to say that now, but equally if that's all it was and Wotte is doing the opposite of the problems you quote, then wouldn't you have expected us to do better than 2 pts from 4 games? So that argument doesn't even hold water yet.

 

 

 

I'm not sure that's the case any more, the reactions have started to border on hysterical for a large section of our fan base. And there's bugger all rationale to it - which is why Wilde waltzed in without opposition and escaped any criticism whatsoever from people who then try to jump on Lowe when he does the same things. Ditto things like the reverse takeover, you know full well the lies people spread about that when the central characters like Gordon, Hunt, Wiseman and McMenemy were then paraded as Lowe's replacements.

 

 

 

The reason I mentioned them was because we had been talking about their behaviour at the AGM, plus the fact that LM has a minimal shareholding having sold out after the reverse takeover, yet seems to think he is a majority shareholder.

 

 

 

It is not ignorant in any way - it might be different to your opinion, but I think I have enough knowledge and experience to form an opinion of my own thanks. When I say "supporters", I don't just mean punters at the turnstiles - I include people like LC, MC and LM in there. And you are unequivocably wrong to try to imply those same fans would have gotten involved at other times the club was run badly - if that was the case can you just imagine what the reaction would have been to the following "terrible acts of mismanagement" at the club:

 

* Employing an ex-guardsman with no experience of playing top-flight football who took us from 8th (?) in the league at Xmas to relegation from the top flight.

 

* 2 years in the wilderness of the 2nd division making no progress.

 

* Failing to "push on to the next level" after winning the Cup in 76.

 

* No investment after winning the cup in 76.

 

* Holidaying on private estates rather than running the club

 

* No investment after promotion in 78 - where was the ambition?

 

* No attempt to keep hold of Alan Ball?

 

* Failing to hold onto Keegan and cynically selling him after ST renewals (tut tut)

 

* Failing to "push on to the next level" or get investment after finishing 2nd in the league

 

* Failing to build a new stadium in 20 years of trying

 

* Negligent attitude to club's finances and contract structures

 

* Failing to back LM who left to go to Sunderland

 

* Failing to back Nicholl / failing to sack him sooner

 

* Appointing Branfoot

 

* Failing to sack Branfoot sooner

 

* Trying to sell MLT at least twice

 

* Failing to back Alan Ball and letting him leave

 

* The appalling treatment of Merrington

 

* Allowing the club to close down the academy

 

The list is never-ending. I'm not saying that's how I'd view those events above, but it's easy to do so and they are all to do with how the club has been run for decades - and I don't remember any fans turning any of those events into issues that had to be resolved at board level do you?

 

Ah Jonah...thanks for reminding me of the architect of many of those errors.....

 

 

GUY ASKHAM...who supports.....you know who.