Greedyfly Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 but that is it..you have to judge them on their merits and not just stats... he had a better points per game thing than WGS so would you say he was better for than WGS..? of course you would not..why is that..? as you base it on the merit of the circumstances at the time.. when burley got us to the playoff (which imo was the bare minimum) he did ok but doing that, he spent the most that summer out of the whole league, had a huge squad, had the likes of jones, bale, baird, with rasiak etc...like I said, we WERE the big spenders that summer and was only caught up by sunderland and derby in jan...and I still think we spent the most... I dont think in my 28 year of living I have ever recalled a saints manager being backed in relative term like burley was.. add that to his reputation (which was great as I was happy we got him) I really thought he was quite disapointing for us...especially the season he left..the fact he seemed to give up.. Can't swallow everything you say (but will defend your right to the death to say it blah blah blah) but with you a 100% on this one. Only Wigley managed to annoy me more as a Saints manager and I could almost let the guy off on the grounds that it wasn't entirely his fault. Only almost as clinging on for longer than he should of however bloody well was his fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHAPEL END CHARLIE Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Interesting and surprisingly candid comments from Saga , desperate to keep us up and not at all happy about being loaned to Aalborg . http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1152582/Southampton-3-Preston-1-Irvine-8217-s-fury-sloppy-Preston.html Good lad . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torres Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Why can we suddenly afford to play Saga ? 2 things to consider that just might help you solve this mystery: 1) that Saga's wages for half a season are approximately half the total for the entire season, close season excluded. 2) the possibility that nobody actually wanted to loan or buy Saga in the January window, so the management "team" decided that as he was here we might be well advised to play him. Quite why you feel the need to act as if there's some great conspiracy here is totally beyond me. Still, if it keeps you from getting bored, so be it.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
70's Mike Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 2 things to consider that just might help you solve this mystery: 1) that Saga's wages for half a season are approximately half the total for the entire season, close season excluded. 2) the possibility that nobody actually wanted to loan or buy Saga in the January window, so the management "team" decided that as he was here we might be well advised to play him. Quite why you feel the need to act as if there's some great conspiracy here is totally beyond me. Still, if it keeps you from getting bored, so be it.... but with no significant increase in income, has playing him and paying him pushed us closer or even in to admin. If not , why did we not play him all season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torres Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 but with no significant increase in income, has playing him and paying him pushed us closer or even in to admin. If not , why did we not play him all season Erm, if nobody wanted to take him off our hands then we didn't have much choice but to pay him.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Erm, if nobody wanted to take him off our hands then we didn't have much choice but to pay him.... Do you think it was a false economy to push him out of the door, given that results and respective attendances have dwindled, probably as a direct result to a lack of wins at home? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Dont know the true financial picture, nor the details of contracts, nor which of the loanees fom the bigger clubs were actually having their wages paid by thier parent clubs for match experience etc... all speculation so pretty impossible to make a judgement on this. Naturally it would ahve been better to have had Saga's experience all season, goes without saying, but not sure we know enough of the FACTS to start all this speculation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 It is probably a question of us not being able to afford not to play him now. At the start of the season we did not know we would be 2nd from bottom now. Decisions were made on keeping the club afloat which meant off loading the high earners. That was done. Obviously we have managed to avoid administration so the financial juggling must be working. Saga and Rudi have not found clubs elsewhere so they are back here. If we can't find another home for them it makes sense to play them doesn't it? If they are up for it (which apparently Rudi wasn't for part of the season). But once more we spend ages looking back, time to look forward. We have some players capabale of keeping us up, at the moment that is the only thing that matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Do you think it was a false economy to push him out of the door, given that results and respective attendances have dwindled, probably as a direct result to a lack of wins at home? Yep Unfortunately though, the world (was) ruled by accountants who looked at bottom lines in accounts ie they viewed history, not creators or visionaries who looked at how the bottom line could be made better. You don't have to look at us to see how wrong that model could have been, but you find it everywhere unfortunately. My worry now is how much faster we run out of cash to trade because they are playing - a double edged sword may now exist, we can't afford NOT to play them and get results but we can't afford TO play them as we don't have enough cash flow. Chicken and egg, and still need investment... Personally I think we should be playing them as while their is life there is hope. As I think once we are certainties to go down, ain't anyone (even Leon) who would see any way back for any more money poured into the bottomless pit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Do you think it was a false economy to push him out of the door, given that results and respective attendances have dwindled, probably as a direct result to a lack of wins at home? Quite. We had three strikers here who were all capable of scoring a hatful of goals, but who naturally were on higher pay as a result. It was crass stupidity of the highest order to loan all three of them out, expecially as two of them went to rivals of ours in this division. What a shame that we can't loan out our Chairman to other clubs in this division, but there are no clubs that would want him. He has always failed to appreciate that in this industry you have to speculate to accumulate sometimes. I'm run my own advertising company and the financial directors in a company are always difficult to pursuade that the cost of advertising can often be recouped by increased orders and sales if used prudently. Lowe with his background in the financial world is typical of the type and your analogy above is precisely what he cannot see. Additionally of course, neither can he see that if ticket prices reflected our current parlous situation, that we are no longer in the Premiership and were largely watching the youth team until recently, lower prices would help keep numbers up. But still, he won't change, as that would mean him admitting that he was wrong, which he could never do. He has never learned humility and even if he fails again and again, it would always be somebody else's fault, even the fault of the paying customer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 23 February, 2009 Author Share Posted 23 February, 2009 But once more we spend ages looking back, time to look forward. We have some players capabale of keeping us up, at the moment that is the only thing that matters. Maybe if your messiah had spent a little time looking back, he wouldnt keep repeating stupid mistakes. If all he has done has looked forward, it strikes me as asntonishing how he couldnt forsee the false economy of getting rid of all our strikers... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 You beat me to it, Phil, but we agree totally on the accountant mentality that drives Lowe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 23 February, 2009 Author Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Yep Unfortunately though, the world (was) ruled by accountants who looked at bottom lines in accounts ie they viewed history, not creators or visionaries who looked at how the bottom line could be made better. You don't have to look at us to see how wrong that model could have been, but you find it everywhere unfortunately. Dont you find it worrying that after a dozen years of association with SFC, Lowe was unsucessful in pointing it out to the bank (assuming of course he realised it himself, whioch I personally doubt) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torres Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Do you think it was a false economy to push him out of the door, given that results and respective attendances have dwindled, probably as a direct result to a lack of wins at home? Without knowing the exact details of our financial position, Sagga's wages or the details of the loan agreement with Aalborg it's impossible for anyone to say. Neither do we know who made the decision to send Sagga to Aalborg, or indeed why. If, on threat of pulling the rug from under our feet Barclays had insisted on a certain reduction in running costs and Sagga's wages were targetted to meet that reduction then no, it's not. If we're flush with cash and sent Sagga away because he's over 25 then yes, it would have been rather daft. So the short answer is, I don't know. It's also debatable whether the reduced attendances have been a result of the poor home form because if you listen to those who are more interested in who the chairman of the PLC is than football itslef, then you'll be led to believe that the missing 5000 are boycotting because of Lowe/Wilde Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torres Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Quite. We had three strikers here who were all capable of scoring a hatful of goals, but who naturally were on higher pay as a result. It was crass stupidity of the highest order to loan all three of them out, expecially as two of them went to rivals of ours in this division. What a shame that we can't loan out our Chairman to other clubs in this division, but there are no clubs that would want him. He has always failed to appreciate that in this industry you have to speculate to accumulate sometimes. I'm run my own advertising company and the financial directors in a company are always difficult to pursuade that the cost of advertising can often be recouped by increased orders and sales if used prudently. Lowe with his background in the financial world is typical of the type and your analogy above is precisely what he cannot see. Additionally of course, neither can he see that if ticket prices reflected our current parlous situation, that we are no longer in the Premiership and were largely watching the youth team until recently, lower prices would help keep numbers up. But still, he won't change, as that would mean him admitting that he was wrong, which he could never do. He has never learned humility and even if he fails again and again, it would always be somebody else's fault, even the fault of the paying customer. You know for a fact that it was one man's decision Wes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guided Missile Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 I love to read the words of wisdom, on what the true state of the club's finances are, from people without the benefit of up to date management figures. I also love to read how the highly qualified, university graduates provide us with an insight into how exactly the board should be running the club. I just have one question for these clever people whose only wish is to see our club prosper. If they are so clever, why aren't they rich? Rich, as in rich enough to buy the club and solve our problems. My guess is that they are not rich, or successful and because of that, their only option is to try and belittle other peoples efforts in the unpredictable and highly difficult job of running a business.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Just a wild guess. 1. Perhaps JP didn't want him afterall The 1st half team that started against Ujpest would tend to back up this theory.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidthesquid Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 so , for my simple mind, are you saying we were in sh1tcreek but are not now and that is why we are playing these older players. It does not stack up We are still up the creek, but as the moment for getting these players off the books has passed it would be very silly not to utilise them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 23 February, 2009 Author Share Posted 23 February, 2009 I love to read the words of wisdom, on what the true state of the club's finances are, from people without the benefit of up to date management figures. I also love to read how the highly qualified, university graduates provide us with an insight into how exactly the board should be running the club. I just have one question for these clever people whose only wish is to see our club prosper. If they are so clever, why aren't they rich? Rich, as in rich enough to buy the club and solve our problems. My guess is that they are not rich, or successful and because of that, their only option is to try and belittle other peoples efforts in the unpredictable and highly difficult job of running a business.... hohohohoho. Here we have Johnny speculating about how sucessful some of us are in our professions and decisions we make, for daring to speculate about how successful some others are in their professions and the decisions they make. :rolleyes::rolleyes: You really couldnt make it up.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 23 February, 2009 Author Share Posted 23 February, 2009 I love to read the words of wisdom, on what the true state of the club's finances are, from people without the benefit of up to date management figures. I also love to read how the highly qualified, university graduates provide us with an insight into how exactly the board should be running the club. I just have one question for these clever people whose only wish is to see our club prosper. If they are so clever, why aren't they rich? Rich, as in rich enough to buy the club and solve our problems. My guess is that they are not rich, or successful and because of that, their only option is to try and belittle other peoples efforts in the unpredictable and highly difficult job of running a business.... hohohohoho. Here we have Johnny speculating about how sucessful some of us are in our professions and decisions we make, for daring to speculate about how successful some others are in their professions and the decisions they make. :rolleyes::rolleyes: You really couldnt make it up.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 23 February, 2009 Author Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Without knowing the exact details of our financial position, Sagga's wages or the details of the loan agreement with Aalborg it's impossible for anyone to say. Neither do we know who made the decision to send Sagga to Aalborg, or indeed why. If, on threat of pulling the rug from under our feet Barclays had insisted on a certain reduction in running costs and Sagga's wages were targetted to meet that reduction then no, it's not. If we're flush with cash and sent Sagga away because he's over 25 then yes, it would have been rather daft. So the short answer is, I don't know. It's also debatable whether the reduced attendances have been a result of the poor home form because if you listen to those who are more interested in who the chairman of the PLC is than football itslef, then you'll be led to believe that the missing 5000 are boycotting because of Lowe/Wilde So, of course Poortvillet trotting out the same line when both Saga and Stern left about not being able to afford their wages was him saying it without Lowe's approval, wasnt it ? :rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 23 February, 2009 Author Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Without knowing the exact details of our financial position, Sagga's wages or the details of the loan agreement with Aalborg it's impossible for anyone to say. Neither do we know who made the decision to send Sagga to Aalborg, or indeed why. If, on threat of pulling the rug from under our feet Barclays had insisted on a certain reduction in running costs and Sagga's wages were targetted to meet that reduction then no, it's not. If we're flush with cash and sent Sagga away because he's over 25 then yes, it would have been rather daft. So the short answer is, I don't know. It's also debatable whether the reduced attendances have been a result of the poor home form because if you listen to those who are more interested in who the chairman of the PLC is than football itslef, then you'll be led to believe that the missing 5000 are boycotting because of Lowe/Wilde So, of course Poortvillet trotting out the same line when both Saga and Stern left about not being able to afford their wages was him saying it without Lowe's approval, wasnt it ? :rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scudamore Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 hohohohoho. Here we have Johnny speculating about how sucessful some of us are in our professions and decisions we make, for daring to speculate about how successful some others are in their professions and the decisions they make. :rolleyes::rolleyes: You really couldnt make it up.... Of course you could... You really do lack imagination alpine... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scudamore Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 hohohohoho. Here we have Johnny speculating about how sucessful some of us are in our professions and decisions we make, for daring to speculate about how successful some others are in their professions and the decisions they make. :rolleyes::rolleyes: You really couldnt make it up.... Of course you could... You really do lack imagination alpine... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyFartPants Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 hohohohoho. Here we have Johnny speculating about how sucessful some of us are in our professions and decisions we make, for daring to speculate about how successful some others are in their professions and the decisions they make. :rolleyes::rolleyes: You really couldnt make it up.... I am not sure you had a point there, and I have read it a few times now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyFartPants Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 hohohohoho. Here we have Johnny speculating about how sucessful some of us are in our professions and decisions we make, for daring to speculate about how successful some others are in their professions and the decisions they make. :rolleyes::rolleyes: You really couldnt make it up.... I am not sure you had a point there, and I have read it a few times now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scudamore Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 I am not sure you had a point there, and I have read it a few times now. If struggling for a point you can always use a few Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scudamore Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 I am not sure you had a point there, and I have read it a few times now. If struggling for a point you can always use a few Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torres Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 So, of course Poortvillet trotting out the same line when both Saga and Stern left about not being able to afford their wages was him saying it without Lowe's approval, wasnt it ? :rolleyes: That makes no sense in relation to the points of mine that you quoted but thanks for the effort anyway. :smt023 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torres Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 So, of course Poortvillet trotting out the same line when both Saga and Stern left about not being able to afford their wages was him saying it without Lowe's approval, wasnt it ? :rolleyes: That makes no sense in relation to the points of mine that you quoted but thanks for the effort anyway. :smt023 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torres Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 I am not sure you had a point there, and I have read it a few times now. I think the old boy might have had a rough night. He's not making a great deal of sense this morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torres Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 I am not sure you had a point there, and I have read it a few times now. I think the old boy might have had a rough night. He's not making a great deal of sense this morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 23 February, 2009 Author Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Without knowing the exact details of our financial position, Sagga's wages or the details of the loan agreement with Aalborg it's impossible for anyone to say. JP (meaning Lowe), made a disclosure of the situation Do keep up... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 23 February, 2009 Author Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Without knowing the exact details of our financial position, Sagga's wages or the details of the loan agreement with Aalborg it's impossible for anyone to say. JP (meaning Lowe), made a disclosure of the situation Do keep up... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 23 February, 2009 Author Share Posted 23 February, 2009 I think the old boy might have had a rough night. He's not making a great deal of sense this morning. It makes perfect sense to anyone with half a brain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 23 February, 2009 Author Share Posted 23 February, 2009 I think the old boy might have had a rough night. He's not making a great deal of sense this morning. It makes perfect sense to anyone with half a brain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyFartPants Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 If struggling for a point you can always use a few Good idea. Let me try it on you and see how it fairs. Dear Scudamore, what is the problem with Sterling going up against a failing Dollar and Euro at the moment? Given we are all failing, surely we are all winning too? Do you have any light on this subject? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyFartPants Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 If struggling for a point you can always use a few Good idea. Let me try it on you and see how it fairs. Dear Scudamore, what is the problem with Sterling going up against a failing Dollar and Euro at the moment? Given we are all failing, surely we are all winning too? Do you have any light on this subject? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torres Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 It makes perfect sense to anyone with half a brain. It doesn't make much sense to those of us with a whole brain though, I'm afraid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torres Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 It makes perfect sense to anyone with half a brain. It doesn't make much sense to those of us with a whole brain though, I'm afraid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyFartPants Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 It makes perfect sense to anyone with half a brain. That will explain it. If you found the other half you would be as flumaxed as us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyFartPants Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 It makes perfect sense to anyone with half a brain. That will explain it. If you found the other half you would be as flumaxed as us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scudamore Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Good idea. Let me try it on you and see how it fairs. Dear Scudamore, what is the problem with Sterling going up against a failing Dollar and Euro at the moment? Given we are all failing, surely we are all winning too? Do you have any light on this subject? Errrr...erm... You're not as clever as me... :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scudamore Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Good idea. Let me try it on you and see how it fairs. Dear Scudamore, what is the problem with Sterling going up against a failing Dollar and Euro at the moment? Given we are all failing, surely we are all winning too? Do you have any light on this subject? Errrr...erm... You're not as clever as me... :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torres Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 JP (meaning Lowe), made a disclosure of the situation Do keep up... But as we have no idea how much would have cost us had he stayed for the 1st half of the season or how much Aalborg paid us to take him it's impossible to say with any certainty whether or not it was a "false economy", as UP asked me. Surely that's not too difficult to grasp even for people like you with, by your own admission, only half a brain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torres Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 JP (meaning Lowe), made a disclosure of the situation Do keep up... But as we have no idea how much would have cost us had he stayed for the 1st half of the season or how much Aalborg paid us to take him it's impossible to say with any certainty whether or not it was a "false economy", as UP asked me. Surely that's not too difficult to grasp even for people like you with, by your own admission, only half a brain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyFartPants Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Errrr...erm... You're not as clever as me... :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: B*gg*r, thought I had you there. Back to the drawing board for thicky me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyFartPants Posted 23 February, 2009 Share Posted 23 February, 2009 Errrr...erm... You're not as clever as me... :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: B*gg*r, thought I had you there. Back to the drawing board for thicky me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 23 February, 2009 Author Share Posted 23 February, 2009 I assume the continual stream of trolling is because neither of you have a point to make ? GM was inferring that none of us have the right to make judgements about decisions made without knowing minuate of the financial context in which they were made. He then continued by making aspersions and judgements about the lives of those to whom his post was directed without having a clue about the persons involved or what they are doing professionally. Is that better now ? Do you understand now the essential hypocrisy of his post now that I havent used any long words or joined-up writing ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 23 February, 2009 Author Share Posted 23 February, 2009 I assume the continual stream of trolling is because neither of you have a point to make ? GM was inferring that none of us have the right to make judgements about decisions made without knowing minuate of the financial context in which they were made. He then continued by making aspersions and judgements about the lives of those to whom his post was directed without having a clue about the persons involved or what they are doing professionally. Is that better now ? Do you understand now the essential hypocrisy of his post now that I havent used any long words or joined-up writing ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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