The Observer's first paragraph....

[OldNick]

No Nick, more a reflection of RL's views towards fans - tell them something completely short of detail on the basis that they are, by and large, incompetent and unintelligent...

 

In my, limited, dealings with the man I have found him arrogant and of the opinion that football fans are not the broad-church of society but instead are made up of a different breed to those who 'lead' - forgetting that many of us run successful businesses with excellent relationship with all manner of humankind!

Ok thanks. His lack of communicating skills is a massive disadvantage. If he could have been less confrontational or giving then perhaps he would have had an easier time of things.

[Frank's cousin]

It is not easy FC, but the total ceiling catered for too big a squad.

 

Better to pay 20 players a million each than 30 players two thirds of the same...

 

This is Rupert's biggest issue - paying money to attract talent.

 

And yet it is (like it or not) the basis of most (if not all) genuinely successful football clubs - much as it is at the heart of most succesful businesses.

 

The best people in any industry command the highest wages.

 

Agreed in some respect but a million is only 20k a week! which Bridge and Beatts were certainly close to... Its a tricky one for sure and the answer probably lies somehwere in between the free for all and the fully controlled spend - so yes it did lack a degree of flexibilty.

[OldNick]

I wouldn't know what Bolton's accounts look like but they are a smaller club than us in a ****ty part of the country but are still in the Prem.

 

My point is that setting a wage ceiling of say 10k will mean that you can not sign ANY decent free transfer, which means you have to pay a fee for average players who are willing to earn peanuts.

 

We failed to adapt after the bosman ruling, we should have accepted that virtually all footballers are merceneries and had a flexible wage structure.

I think what you say is fair. The problem seems to be that we had a squad that was too full of mediocre players who were on big bucks. The CEO I assume is expected to back the manager and so bought them. If he set ceilings for wages then that would have cut the choice on offer.

It is hard toargue against budgetting the books though.I know it hurts us and so we should have ploughed on and overspent but sooner or later the chicken comes home to roost... although its taking a damned long time to come hoke at Pompey sadly

[krissyboy31]

I think what you say is fair. The problem seems to be that we had a squad that was too full of mediocre players who were on big bucks. The CEO I assume is expected to back the manager and so bought them. If he set ceilings for wages then that would have cut the choice on offer.

It is hard toargue against budgetting the books though.I know it hurts us and so we should have ploughed on and overspent but sooner or later the chicken comes home to roost... although its taking a damned long time to come hoke at Pompey sadly

 

The reason for this was the amount of mediocre managers we had, all aloud to bring in their own players (and some of Lowe's himself). Remember, both Strachan and Saggy Chops commented that they had "never seen so many players," when they took over.

[OldNick]

The reason for this was the amount of mediocre managers we had, all aloud to bring in their own players (and some of Lowe's himself). Remember, both Strachan and Saggy Chops commented that they had "never seen so many players," when they took over.

and they did what about it?

WGS especially had time to cut the squad.

[krissyboy31]

and they did what about it?

WGS especially had time to cut the squad.

 

You're right but you can only off load players other teams want to sign. The only ones that he could have sold were the ones he wanted to keep. He also had to bring in his own players, which added to the problem.

[OldNick]

You're right but you can only off load players other teams want to sign. The only ones that he could have sold were the ones he wanted to keep. He also had to bring in his own players, which added to the problem.

So you have summed up the problem we faced. The players on the books were on too good contracts and nobody wanted them. This was following on from Jones, Hoddle and a very short tenure of Gray. Who was culpable? RL was the CEO and should shoulder some of the blame but all the managers need to take some as well. WGS didd not invest in quality but liked the energy and enthusiasm of players like Ormerod and Telfer. I think you can dissect every club and point the finger, it just is that we are in a dire position and so it is more pertinent at present.

[St Landrew]

This simple modal verb tells it all. This whole argument is predicated on supposition. In fact it is based on a negative action; a non-action; nothing. It is not about an action that Lowe undertook; it is about something that he didn't do. He also didn't go around alpine saint's house and brutally rape him before distinguishing his life forever and p*ssing on his bruised and twisted corpse, but we don't make suppositions for what positive effect this may have on Saints had he done this. Because we simply don't know.

 

In your poetic way, you're suggesting that hindsight is a wonderful thing. If that's all that it was then I may agree with you. Even the densest football fan, if exposed to enough football, will eventually work out what is good for a team and what is not. However, amongst those that post on this football forum are plenty of intelligent and thoughtful people, who know that if a team does not seek to improve, season upon season, it will actually go into decline, and fall from its hard won position. In the summer of 2003, it didn't take hindsight for plenty of fans to realise that Saints were once again trying to find failure in the face of success. I remember listening to Dave Ford standing up at the AGM, wanting to know where the player signings were, that was going to make his hair stand on end. It brought a laugh because DF is bald, but the point was well made. Saints were not pushing on. They weren't even consolidating their position, but slowly ebbing away once again. On this occasion they didn't wake up in time, and the club's suicidal appointment of Steve Wigley, after an unambitious go with Paul Sturrock, landed Saints in a totally avoidable mess. The fact that Redknapp couldn't pull Saints out of the steep dive is neither here nor there. Saints need not have been in that position in the first place. All this was as plain as a pike staff to many Saints supporters, at the time. Not hindsight, not nostalgia, not rose tinted specs... At the time. And it is happening again, under the same decision makers.

[krissyboy31]

So you have summed up the problem we faced. The players on the books were on too good contracts and nobody wanted them. This was following on from Jones, Hoddle and a very short tenure of Gray. Who was culpable? RL was the CEO and should shoulder some of the blame but all the managers need to take some as well. WGS didd not invest in quality but liked the energy and enthusiasm of players like Ormerod and Telfer. I think you can dissect every club and point the finger, it just is that we are in a dire position and so it is more pertinent at present.

 

To say that Strachan didn't invest in quality is a little unfair because when he tried to, he was vetoed. Like all of the managers before him and certainly since (apart from the Wilde/Hone/Crouch's reigns), the quality of the players signed was dictated by Lowe's rigid wage policy.

[OldNick]

To say that Strachan didn't invest in quality is a little unfair because when he tried to, he was vetoed. Like all of the managers before him and certainly since (apart from the Wilde/Hone/Crouch's reigns), the quality of the players signed was dictated by Lowe's rigid wage policy.

I have read WGS's book and I cant recall him saying that he was vetoed in his spending. The salary cap must have been a hindrance, Im sure HR was not impressed by it.

[northam soul]

I remember having a letter published in the echo regarding quantity over quality at around the time we signed Peter Crouch , i think we had just signed about six or seven relatively cheap players for the single transfer of one of ours ( cant remember who ).

I remember saying how this policy was not right surely better to sign 2 good platers who will improve the starting eleven than six mediocre ones who might not even get a game.

I was very annoyed about the Crouch signing for which i was the first to admit i got it wrong and he was a good player for us but by the same token someone else got it wrong about the other 5 or six and that has always been our problem. For every Crouch / Niemi / Svensson there have been 5 or six Mccanns.

As for SMS as much as i want Lowe out i will not beat him with a stick over that. The ground was adequate for our needs and did generate a good atmosphere at times.

My company would of gone bust ages ago if i adopted a similar purchasing policy to what we have had here over the years.

[OldNick]

In your poetic way, you're suggesting that hindsight is a wonderful thing. If that's all that it was then I may agree with you. Even the densest football fan, if exposed to enough football, will eventually work out what is good for a team and what is not. However, amongst those that post on this football forum are plenty of intelligent and thoughtful people, who know that if a team does not seek to improve, season upon season, it will actually go into decline, and fall from its hard won position. In the summer of 2003, it didn't take hindsight for plenty of fans to realise that Saints were once again trying to find failure in the face of success. I remember listening to Dave Ford standing up at the AGM, wanting to know where the player signings were, that was going to make his hair stand on end. It brought a laugh because DF is bald, but the point was well made. Saints were not pushing on. They weren't even consolidating their position, but slowly ebbing away once again. On this occasion they didn't wake up in time, and the club's suicidal appointment of Steve Wigley, after an unambitious go with Paul Sturrock, landed Saints in a totally avoidable mess. The fact that Redknapp couldn't pull Saints out of the steep dive is neither here nor there. Saints need not have been in that position in the first place. All this was as plain as a pike staff to many Saints supporters, at the time. Not hindsight, not nostalgia, not rose tinted specs... At the time. And it is happening again, under the same decision makers.

I think that is true to a degree but HR had plenty of games to work his magic as Mr Houdini. the players assembled were of poor and weak character add that to BT wanting to go marsden and Bridge pairing gone and some poor signings.The biggest factor in the playing squad as far as i can see was not replacing Killer with a top defender.

RL has without a doubt been a major factor in our demise,but he is not the only person to have been responsible. We as a club have been cursed for a long time with some poor decision makers and i would like the lot to be rid of.

[Sheff Saint]

In your poetic way, you're suggesting that hindsight is a wonderful thing. If that's all that it was then I may agree with you. Even the densest football fan, if exposed to enough football, will eventually work out what is good for a team and what is not. However, amongst those that post on this football forum are plenty of intelligent and thoughtful people, who know that if a team does not seek to improve, season upon season, it will actually go into decline, and fall from its hard won position. In the summer of 2003, it didn't take hindsight for plenty of fans to realise that Saints were once again trying to find failure in the face of success. I remember listening to Dave Ford standing up at the AGM, wanting to know where the player signings were, that was going to make his hair stand on end. It brought a laugh because DF is bald, but the point was well made. Saints were not pushing on. They weren't even consolidating their position, but slowly ebbing away once again. On this occasion they didn't wake up in time, and the club's suicidal appointment of Steve Wigley, after an unambitious go with Paul Sturrock, landed Saints in a totally avoidable mess. The fact that Redknapp couldn't pull Saints out of the steep dive is neither here nor there. Saints need not have been in that position in the first place. All this was as plain as a pike staff to many Saints supporters, at the time. Not hindsight, not nostalgia, not rose tinted specs... At the time. And it is happening again, under the same decision makers.

 

That is the bigger picture in a nutshell. Well put.

[CB Fry]

In your poetic way, you're suggesting that hindsight is a wonderful thing. If that's all that it was then I may agree with you. Even the densest football fan, if exposed to enough football, will eventually work out what is good for a team and what is not. However, amongst those that post on this football forum are plenty of intelligent and thoughtful people, who know that if a team does not seek to improve, season upon season, it will actually go into decline, and fall from its hard won position. In the summer of 2003, it didn't take hindsight for plenty of fans to realise that Saints were once again trying to find failure in the face of success. I remember listening to Dave Ford standing up at the AGM, wanting to know where the player signings were, that was going to make his hair stand on end. It brought a laugh because DF is bald, but the point was well made. Saints were not pushing on. They weren't even consolidating their position, but slowly ebbing away once again. On this occasion they didn't wake up in time, and the club's suicidal appointment of Steve Wigley, after an unambitious go with Paul Sturrock, landed Saints in a totally avoidable mess. The fact that Redknapp couldn't pull Saints out of the steep dive is neither here nor there. Saints need not have been in that position in the first place. All this was as plain as a pike staff to many Saints supporters, at the time. Not hindsight, not nostalgia, not rose tinted specs... At the time. And it is happening again, under the same decision makers.

 

 

Agree with all of this, but it is also fair to stay we could have spunked gazillions on players and still gone down.

 

Middlesborough are doing all the things that are supposed to bring non stop glory - new stadium, dream chairman, double figure million transfers, not letting their biggest names go to Spurs, faith in the manager, stability in the boardroom and on the training pitch.....and.......and.....

 

almost certainly relegated.

 

Who knew?

 

Dowie was given £25m to spend at Charlton, but that over investment brought unbelievable pressure and implosion.

 

Portsmouth are finding "building on a cup run" (apparently the easiest thing in the world to do according to half the fans on here) is not quite that easy and are likely to finish lower than our season after our cup run (that we failed to build on).

 

 

You are right in where we went wrong, but there isn't a magic formula that would have kept us up forever, and those that think not having SMS would have guaranteed Premier League football forever are frankly retarded.

[Legod Third Coming]

Agree with all of this, but it is also fair to stay we could have spunked gazillions on players and still gone down.

 

Middlesborough are doing all the things that are supposed to bring non stop glory - new stadium, dream chairman, double figure million transfers, not letting their biggest names go to Spurs, faith in the manager, stability in the boardroom and on the training pitch.....and.......and.....

 

almost certainly relegated.

 

Who knew?

 

Dowie was given £25m to spend at Charlton, but that over investment brought unbelievable pressure and implosion.

 

Portsmouth are finding "building on a cup run" (apparently the easiest thing in the world to do according to half the fans on here) is not quite that easy and are likely to finish lower than our season after our cup run (that we failed to build on).

 

 

You are right in where we went wrong, but there isn't a magic formula that would have kept us up forever, and those that think not having SMS would have guaranteed Premier League football forever are frankly retarded.

 

 

These are all valid points. Because I drive well and concentrate does not make me immune from accidents...

 

Conversely, if I drive around with one hand tied to the wheel it does make accidents more likely!

 

Boro illustrate that it requires more than a box-ticking exercise - it still comes down to WHO the manager is, WHO he buys, HOW they are motivated and MANAGED.

 

But even then there is no magic formula.

 

Those clubs who find the right manager, support him and do everything else within their power to equip the manager with the best tools do best over time - that's all we can legitimately say.

 

Boro may or may not prosper in the long-run under Southgate as Bolton did under Sam and Charlton did (both backing their managers through relegation).

 

Pompey clearly made a mistake appointing Adams and appear to have rectified it. Interestingly (and annoyingly) the quality of their players will probably see them safe this season...

 

What we did - under Rupert - was fail to learn any of the lessons of countless teams who had been relegated. Mistakes that the man's arrogance have now seen repeated.

 

A great shame as it clouds some good things he was also responsible for.

[SW11_Saint]

In your poetic way, you're suggesting that hindsight is a wonderful thing. If that's all that it was then I may agree with you. Even the densest football fan, if exposed to enough football, will eventually work out what is good for a team and what is not. However, amongst those that post on this football forum are plenty of intelligent and thoughtful people, who know that if a team does not seek to improve, season upon season, it will actually go into decline, and fall from its hard won position. In the summer of 2003, it didn't take hindsight for plenty of fans to realise that Saints were once again trying to find failure in the face of success. I remember listening to Dave Ford standing up at the AGM, wanting to know where the player signings were, that was going to make his hair stand on end. It brought a laugh because DF is bald, but the point was well made. Saints were not pushing on. They weren't even consolidating their position, but slowly ebbing away once again. On this occasion they didn't wake up in time, and the club's suicidal appointment of Steve Wigley, after an unambitious go with Paul Sturrock, landed Saints in a totally avoidable mess. The fact that Redknapp couldn't pull Saints out of the steep dive is neither here nor there. Saints need not have been in that position in the first place. All this was as plain as a pike staff to many Saints supporters, at the time. Not hindsight, not nostalgia, not rose tinted specs... At the time. And it is happening again, under the same decision makers.

Spot on.

[OldNick]

Against WHICH law? I am an architect so would be very interested if you could point me in the direction of this legislation as it is essential for me to know, ignorance being no defence in the eye's of the law.

 

I suspect, however, that you are guessing from a position of ignorance, and anyway, in SMS's case ... 3 ambulances side by side?

 

I am sure it would be possible to argue with Building Control that if there were a situation where ambulances needed to enter the stadium that the game would be halted and the ambulances could drive on the pitch.

I e-mailed the football league regarding their rules and got this reply. As for the local planners I do not know their rules.

 

Appendix 1 (Membership Criteria) of The Football League’s regulations makes reference to the subject addressed in your email:

 

 

 

23.2 The shortest distance between touch-line and perimeter barrier to be ideally 2.75 metres, but no less than 2.25 metres.

 

23.3 The shortest distance between goal line and perimeter barrier to be ideally 2.75 metres, but no less than 2.25 metres.

 

 

 

Thank you for contacting The Football League.

[broncoboy]

The real issues behind the Saints decline was that we always ran at a £7m loss in the premiership which required us to sell at least one of our better players.

 

That combined with Ruperts wage policy meant we couldnt sign quality players and we couldnt hold players who knew better money was possible elsewhere. It was a shortsighted policy to prevent us having some key real quality players who were paid more than the rest of them

 

The inability to hold on to any of our better managers was I believe down to what we paid them, what resources they had ,and RL style of management.

 

What Rupert was trying to do was run a club that broke even in the Premiership in a siutation where wages exploded , near impossible if you make all the right decisions and impossible if you don't e.g Radio station. Clive Woodward etc etc

 

The bottom, line is the board had no money to invest to stabilise us in the premiership.

 

In the new world of high wages we needed years of investment and a stable manager before we were going to be a mid table club.

 

I do believe Rupert was brillaint at paying himself though. Seemingly for the turnover of the club he was right up there with Sir Alex

[OldNick]

Oh. I see, you took the answer the club gave. My guess is they knew you wouldn't know better so gave you a bland, unsubstantiated reply that you gratefully accepted without question.

 

 

More fool you.

Appendix 1 (Membership Criteria) of The Football League’s regulations makes reference to the subject addressed in your email:

 

 

 

23.2 The shortest distance between touch-line and perimeter barrier to be ideally 2.75 metres, but no less than 2.25 metres.

 

23.3 The shortest distance between goal line and perimeter barrier to be ideally 2.75 metres, but no less than 2.25 metres.

 

 

 

Thank you for contacting The Football League.

 

As an architect what would you say if the league put these restrictions on you? As of course you knew these regulations and would not be foolish like some to believe the clubs answer.

I dont know how far the perimeter fencing is from the pitch.From the Northam i suspect they are about the 2.75 m from the pitch although the hoardings do take up quite a bit of space. On a cost basis it would always be best that the stands linked and continuous, or is that wrong?

I myself would wish that the fans were closer to the pitch aka the Dell but if it is against the rules/law then you have to go with it.

[Legod Third Coming]

The real issues behind the Saints decline was that we always ran at a £7m loss in the premiership which required us to sell at least one of our better players.

 

That combined with Ruperts wage policy meant we couldnt sign quality players and we couldnt hold players who knew better money was possible elsewhere. It was a shortsighted policy to prevent us having some key real quality players who were paid more than the rest of them

 

The inability to hold on to any of our better managers was I believe down to what we paid them, what resources they had ,and RL style of management.

 

What Rupert was trying to do was run a club that broke even in the Premiership in a siutation where wages exploded , near impossible if you make all the right decisions and impossible if you don't e.g Radio station. Clive Woodward etc etc

 

The bottom, line is the board had no money to invest to stabilise us in the premiership.

 

In the new world of high wages we needed years of investment and a stable manager before we were going to be a mid table club.

 

I do believe Rupert was brillaint at paying himself though. Seemingly for the turnover of the club he was right up there with Sir Alex

 

 

How is that possible on £50m turnover and £26m wage bill?

[Frank's cousin]

TBH we actually if you look at the accounts broke even or made a very small loss or profit each year BEFORE player trading - and player purchases were usually offesst against player sales. Think we averaged about 8 mil a season in purchase against 6.5mil in sales etc.

 

Also Sir Alex was on about 3 mil a year, Lowe when in teh prem had a salary of £265000, + pension and bonuses

[Stirchleysaint]

After Strachan left the unambitious wage cap resulted in a huge squad of average players.

 

We had something like 33 first teamers, all of whom were probably on a fair whack.

 

That's where it all went wrong.

 

Everything since then has been somewhat inevitable.

We would have had more chance of staying up with 18 higher paid players and the kids. Instead we had a squad of equal averageness.

[Thedelldays]

whilst we all moan about the 33 average squad players...

 

it was this set up that got us to the cup final, 8th in the league, had 2 england players in the team and at one point gave us one of the meanest defence in the league

[um pahars]

These are all valid points. Because I drive well and concentrate does not make me immune from accidents...

 

Conversely, if I drive around with one hand tied to the wheel it does make accidents more likely!

 

I like that analogy and it is exactly where I was coming from with my post on this thread, in that whilst we always ran the risk of being relegated, we certainly increased that risk through the mistakes, poor strategies and poor leadership in those final seasons in the top flight.

[chi saint]

Speak for yourself.:---).Similar arrogance to the muppets on our board of Directors. Your too close to be objective.:smt049

Sandie Shaw comes to mind with your posts..time after time. A Saints fan or a muppet?:smt017

You have continually slated Saints fans...Most of the Rupert are ...at least

 

For the above instead read......"Sorry I don't have any arguement with which to challenge your well thought observations, therefore I will resort to inept ridicule in an attempt to deflect your points as they have the ring of truth and iv'e no real counter arguement or suitable response".

 

I think you speak volumes (pun intended) for that section of the attendees, not fans, who add nothing usuful to any debate.

 

Well done indeed.

[derry]

He goes onto say "Southampton's recent decline has been particularly sad, a tale of worsening results set against a seemingly never ending backdrop of boardroom upheavel. One murmer doing the rounds has them going into imminent administration..."

 

 

Interestingly, John Barnwell on Sky tonight said that good managers and players need a good stable club. Any club with a background of dissent is on an irreversible downward spiral.

 

We should change our name to Ego Disaster FC.

[OldNick]

Interestingly, John Barnwell on Sky tonight said that good managers and players need a good stable club. Any club with a background of dissent is on an irreversible downward spiral.

 

We should change our name to Ego Disaster FC.

I cant see us having a stable club until ALL the board members have departed.There will always be axes to grind with 1 or other of them whoever is at the top.

Me for example will not be able to stomach Askham and co eating from the trough even if RL goes. I would just about accept Cowen and Richards (mainly as I thought his letter to the fans when MW first arrived was very good) The rest who have been there for generations need to be gone as well.

[Frank's cousin]

Its quite tragic really that its come to this.... After Cardiff, I bought loads nearly all the papers to read what the 'journo's had to say about us and the fans and it made you swell with pride, and the most telling from my part was Henry Winter in the Torygraph, praising saints for not only having fans that had embraced the true spirit of the FA Cup, showing true sportsmanship, but praising teh club, that in an era where others were increasing their debt to fund players in a risky strategy for success, we had achieved this on the back of sound financial principles the way all clubs should be run.... what he neglected to say was that, its all well and good when you ahve 35mil of income guarranteed from TV rights, but try sustaining that stability with out it...

[Legod Third Coming]

I like that analogy and it is exactly where I was coming from with my post on this thread, in that whilst we always ran the risk of being relegated, we certainly increased that risk through the mistakes, poor strategies and poor leadership in those final seasons in the top flight.

 

Exactly. Why couldn't we observe the basic truisms of football success? It still might have ended in disaster. But we hastened our own demise.

 

More galling is that we STILL continue down a path that has already once proved our undoing.

 

This is not anti-Lowe - this is anti-bad business management.

 

I don't know if anyone saw Comic Relief the Apprentice? But Gerald Ratner (he of our products are 'cr4p' fame) described his team's product as 'sh!t or bust' - as though that's going to appeal to investors...! It's the same mistake AGAIN...

 

Some people seem incapable of learning from previous errors of judgement. An unwavering belief in one's own abilities is one thing. Dogmatic resistance to change, reluctance to listen to advice and other opinions is what makes for bad leaders, and in our case a badly run football club.

 

If that's anti-Lowe - sign me up. But it's the same reason I don't like any of the countless bad managers I've had the misfortune to deal with over the years...

[Victor]

I e-mailed the football league regarding their rules and got this reply. As for the local planners I do not know their rules.

 

Appendix 1 (Membership Criteria) of The Football League’s regulations makes reference to the subject addressed in your email:

 

23.2 The shortest distance between touch-line and perimeter barrier to be ideally 2.75 metres, but no less than 2.25 metres.

 

23.3 The shortest distance between goal line and perimeter barrier to be ideally 2.75 metres, but no less than 2.25 metres.

QUOTE]

 

So you can't find a law then, just some advice from the football league.

 

And you admit you know nothing about planning regulations (it would actually be the Building Regulations 2000 that were relevant - nothing to do with planning - but presumably you know nothing about those either).

 

And no mention of ambulances.

 

Thankyou for clearing that up.

[OldNick]

I e-mailed the football league regarding their rules and got this reply. As for the local planners I do not know their rules.

 

Appendix 1 (Membership Criteria) of The Football League’s regulations makes reference to the subject addressed in your email:

 

23.2 The shortest distance between touch-line and perimeter barrier to be ideally 2.75 metres, but no less than 2.25 metres.

 

23.3 The shortest distance between goal line and perimeter barrier to be ideally 2.75 metres, but no less than 2.25 metres.

QUOTE]

 

So you can't find a law then, just some advice from the football league.

 

And you admit you know nothing about planning regulations (it would actually be the Building Regulations 2000 that were relevant - nothing to do with planning - but presumably you know nothing about those either).

 

And no mention of ambulances.

 

Thankyou for clearing that up.

The laws/ regulations of the leagues dont count then. You design stadiums and then cant play in the leagues when they are built then as they contravein the rules Lol.

Even an architect would know that if you don't adhere to the rules you wont be able to use the facility. I would expect you would use the regulations before drwing up any plans or do you just steamroller through and not worry about such things? You also didn't answer the question regarding it being more cost effective to keep the stadium running in one rather than seperate stands.

Also the local planners would have their say in the health and safety issue regarding ground evacuation.

You are the architech and so would be able to access the rules/regulations for SMS easier than myself as i wouldn't know where to look.

You will also be able then to show me where the club lied to fools like me.

[Victor]

The laws/ regulations of the leagues dont count then. You design stadiums and then cant play in the leagues when they are built then as they contravein the rules Lol.

Even an architect would know that if you don't adhere to the rules you wont be able to use the facility. I would expect you would use the regulations before drwing up any plans or do you just steamroller through and not worry about such things? You also didn't answer the question regarding it being more cost effective to keep the stadium running in one rather than seperate stands.

Also the local planners would have their say in the health and safety issue regarding ground evacuation.

You are the architech and so would be able to access the rules/regulations for SMS easier than myself as i wouldn't know where to look.

You will also be able then to show me where the club lied to fools like me.

 

 

You said there WAS a law - I simply asked for a reference - I made no claims.

 

You also said the LAW (which doesn't exist) stated that there had to be room for ambulances but all you have come up with is an 'advised' dimension which would be totally inadequate for ambulance access (B.Regs. figure is 3.7m for a fire engine when they ask for access).

 

Details for making a building safe for occupation are the resposibility of Building Control via the Building Regulations - totally separate legislation from planning law.

 

Neither the football league nor the FA have ant statutory power.

 

Give up, you don't know what you are talking about and I was simply pointing out that you should not therefore make statements of fact about such matters.

 

You said it was law - it ain't!

[OldNick]

 

 

You said there WAS a law - I simply asked for a reference - I made no claims.

 

You also said the LAW (which doesn't exist) stated that there had to be room for ambulances but all you have come up with is an 'advised' dimension which would be totally inadequate for ambulance access (B.Regs. figure is 3.7m for a fire engine when they ask for access).

 

Details for making a building safe for occupation are the resposibility of Building Control via the Building Regulations - totally separate legislation from planning law.

 

Neither the football league nor the FA have ant statutory power.

 

Give up, you don't know what you are talking about and I was simply pointing out that you should not therefore make statements of fact about such matters.

 

You said it was law - it ain't!

League regulations or law are binding if you wish to enter the league. Therefore it is the laws put down by them which would have to be followed.It would be foolish not to abide by them.

Also the local authority have their own stipulations regarding giving planning approval. You have alluded that the club lied and so being in the 'trade' it is easy for you to show where the club did so by reading the planning that was required in getting the permissions and pointing out to us 'who know nothing 'where they did so.

Its very easy for you to say that believing what the club or officers who should know were lying to fob us off and then not give fair reasons why.

Your point about the width needed for fire engines perhaps reinforces the case that the club were not lying as I expect the gap between the stand and the emergency vehicle access is wide down both sides of the ground.

You have not addressed any of the matters but just tried to cover your initial post with waffle.

Come back and show where the club lied. I fully expect if you read the planning you would see that is why the track is so wide.

[krissyboy31]

League regulations or law are binding if you wish to enter the league. Therefore it is the laws put down by them which would have to be followed.It would be foolish not to abide by them.

Also the local authority have their own stipulations regarding giving planning approval. You have alluded that the club lied and so being in the 'trade' it is easy for you to show where the club did so by reading the planning that was required in getting the permissions and pointing out to us 'who know nothing 'where they did so.

Its very easy for you to say that believing what the club or officers who should know were lying to fob us off and then not give fair reasons why.

Your point about the width needed for fire engines perhaps reinforces the case that the club were not lying as I expect the gap between the stand and the emergency vehicle access is wide down both sides of the ground.

You have not addressed any of the matters but just tried to cover your initial post with waffle.

Come back and show where the club lied. I fully expect if you read the planning you would see that is why the track is so wide.

 

 

Nick, we've been through this before and there are rules about emergency service access and a minimum distance between stands and pitch (although this doesn't seem to apply for redeveloped stadia, such as Stamford Bridge, where the crowd are almost as close as we were at the Dell). However, the distances at SMS are much bigger than the minimum laid down by the FA/FL. As a regular visitor to Hull's KC stadium, built around the same time, all of their stands are much closer than ours and they've also got extra in-goal areas for the Rugby League.

Edited 24 March, 2009 by krissyboy31

[Ponty]

Can I just say, there's a bit of a difference between a fire engine and an ambulance, dimensionally as much as anything else.

[bridge too far]

Can I just say, there's a bit of a difference between a fire engine and an ambulance, dimensionally as much as anything else.

 

IIRC one is red and one is white.

[Thedelldays]

jesus

 

cant believe think the crowd are far from the pitch at sms...

lol

[CB Fry]

So what exactly are the wallies saying now?

 

Lowe overruled the architects and insisted the fans were as far away from the pitch as humanly possible, just to spite us all?

 

Don't tell me, Lowe was seen screaming "put the cu n ts half a mile away from the pitch half a mile away I tells yaaaa" during the architects design presentations?

 

Or maybe, just maybe, the fans are no further away at SMS than they are at, say, Pride Park, the Riverside and every other comparable modern stadium?

[trousers]

Lowe overruled the architects and insisted the fans were as far away from the pitch as humanly possible

 

You've seen the minutes of that meeting with the builders too then?

[ottery st mary]

So what exactly are the wallies saying now?

 

Lowe overruled the architects and insisted the fans were as far away from the pitch as humanly possible, just to spite us all?

 

Don't tell me, Lowe was seen screaming "put the cu n ts half a mile away from the pitch half a mile away I tells yaaaa" during the architects design presentations?

 

Or maybe, just maybe, the fans are no further away at SMS than they are at, say, Pride Park, the Riverside and every other comparable modern stadium?

 

Once the stadium was built Rupert fully expected to be in the side and performing at SMS..He just didn't want his faithful too close.

[up and away]

Originally Posted by Frank's cousin

But how could we afford more than 26 mil a year on wages at teh time? Sure we could have increased the individual ceiling, but that wouldhave opened another can of worms with more playesr wanting a slice and cost go up... I think given it was runmoured that Beats basic was about 20k a week, but with bonuses etc this averaged over 30K a week in 2003, i hardly think that was 'stingy'...

It is not easy FC, but the total ceiling catered for too big a squad.

 

Better to pay 20 players a million each than 30 players two thirds of the same...

 

This is Rupert's biggest issue - paying money to attract talent.

 

And yet it is (like it or not) the basis of most (if not all) genuinely successful football clubs - much as it is at the heart of most succesful businesses.

 

The best people in any industry command the highest wages.

 

What a total load of tosh. There are so many examples of why this will not work, top players do not want to go to clubs like Saints for reasons other than money. The prime example of Kaka and ManC highlights that point to a degree unimagineable a couple of years ago. Clubs without the pedigree do not have a high success ratio in signing the top players even when they have the money for the fee and the salary. What you end up getting is the Jimmy Hasselbanks of this world. When clubs like Newcastle, Spurs, Middlesbrough, Blackburn suffer, there is even more reason for us to suffer. The only way of getting hold of these top players is to take a punt in the transfer market or develop them from the youth system. That is our only chance of being able to obtain top players for a limited time.

Anyone who thinks we had a remote chance of getting a player like Saha at the time is off their trolley. We did extremely well in being able to attract Kevin Phillips, that's just the nature of a club like Saints and mirrored throughout the league.

[ottery st mary]

What a total load of tosh. There are so many examples of why this will not work, top players do not want to go to clubs like Saints for reasons other than money. The prime example of Kaka and ManC highlights that point to a degree unimagineable a couple of years ago. Clubs without the pedigree do not have a high success ratio in signing the top players even when they have the money for the fee and the salary. What you end up getting is the Jimmy Hasselbanks of this world. When clubs like Newcastle, Spurs, Middlesbrough, Blackburn suffer, there is even more reason for us to suffer. The only way of getting hold of these top players is to take a punt in the transfer market or develop them from the youth system. That is our only chance of being able to obtain top players for a limited time.

Anyone who thinks we had a remote chance of getting a player like Saha at the time is off their trolley. We did extremely well in being able to attract Kevin Phillips, that's just the nature of a club like Saints and mirrored throughout the league.

 

 

Yes your'e sure right about this. There is a big following in Southampton demanding we follow a Youth policy in the first team playing total football with possibly Dutch coaches...Rupert has another good plan...I look forward to it...AGAIN.:smt049

[um pahars]

What a total load of tosh. There are so many examples of why this will not work, top players do not want to go to clubs like Saints for reasons other than money.

 

I don't think anyone is under the illusion that we would (or could) compete with the "big" clubs for the "top" players.

 

We will never be in the market for the superstars who will of course follow the big money, but at the same time the strategy we followed meant we were never in the market for the next tier of players who may have helped us to maintain our top flight status.

 

A too rigid wage structure (on an individual basis), coupled with a speculative and sometimes scattergun approach to transfers, along with a revolving managerial door meant we never gave ourselves the best chance possible.

 

At one time our income was something like 9th in the Premiership, it's a pity we didn't have a strategy or a CEO/Chairman who could have capitalised on that instead of risking it all through a number of very poor decisions.

 

 

And as an addendum, this type of over the top sensationalising, mentioning Kaka and suggesting we need to get real as we have no chance of competng with the top clubs is just the kind of response that Lowe would come out with challenged. He would also miss the point, in that most fans don't expect to be signing the mega stars and competing with the top clubs for the best talent, but they did want us to be as competitive as was possible given our resources.

 

Although he would always say "We don't want to do a Leeds", it was an out of touch sentiment, as there weren't many supporters out there suggesting that we did go out and live massively beyond our means and spend extortionate amounts of money that we didn't have. But then again how ironic that under his leadership we are very close to "doing a Leeds" after going down his route.

Edited 25 March, 2009 by um pahars

[OldNick]

So what exactly are the wallies saying now?

 

Lowe overruled the architects and insisted the fans were as far away from the pitch as humanly possible, just to spite us all?

 

Don't tell me, Lowe was seen screaming "put the cu n ts half a mile away from the pitch half a mile away I tells yaaaa" during the architects design presentations?

 

Or maybe, just maybe, the fans are no further away at SMS than they are at, say, Pride Park, the Riverside and every other comparable modern stadium?

Lol

[Victor]

Visualise the scenario if you will.

 

There is trouble in the away section and people are injured; the ambulance enters the stadium and passes between the linesman (sorry, assistant referee) and the hoardings to reach the injured. It then proceeds around the pitch as it can't turn round without going on the playing area, but it cuts across the corner at the Chapel end as the driver isn’t sure he can get round the corner flag.

 

While this is going on the visiting side, attacking this end, scores the only goal of the game (highly probable) but Saints object to the league claiming that their players were distracted by what was going on. The league point out that the club had complied with their guidelines and there was plenty of room for the emergency services to get on with it unhindered while the match continued. Nickh appears as a witness for the league, stating that, in fact, having sufficient room is the law of the land.

 

Objection overruled.

 

There are a few murmurings in the press that maybe, just maybe, the referee was a tad insensitive in not stopping the game while people were being crushed and that maybe also the Local Authority should have had the common sense to allow emergency vehicles to go on the pitch in such circumstances, but they agree that the law is the law and, after all, the space was there..

 

Do me a favour!

[OldNick]

Visualise the scenario if you will.

 

There is trouble in the away section and people are injured; the ambulance enters the stadium and passes between the linesman (sorry, assistant referee) and the hoardings to reach the injured. It then proceeds around the pitch as it can't turn round without going on the playing area, but it cuts across the corner at the Chapel end as the driver isn’t sure he can get round the corner flag.

 

While this is going on the visiting side, attacking this end, scores the only goal of the game (highly probable) but Saints object to the league claiming that their players were distracted by what was going on. The league point out that the club had complied with their guidelines and there was plenty of room for the emergency services to get on with it unhindered while the match continued. Nickh appears as a witness for the league, stating that, in fact, having sufficient room is the law of the land.

 

Objection overruled.

 

There are a few murmurings in the press that maybe, just maybe, the referee was a tad insensitive in not stopping the game while people were being crushed and that maybe also the Local Authority should have had the common sense to allow emergency vehicles to go on the pitch in such circumstances, but they agree that the law is the law and, after all, the space was there..

 

Do me a favour!

Do you really think that we are talking about an incident being little Tommy has fallen over and scratched his arm.

If you are an architect and asked to draw up plans for a large public facility i will queue to have look it, Im sure it will be very educational.

I can imagine the planners when you tell them 'Dont worry about evacuation of the injured as the league rules mean nothing and as for your health and safety , forget them they know nothing.' We will form a queue of fans with buckets to quell any fire, the injured will be passed over the heads of the crowd and my mate Bob once was a cleaner at the St Johns ambulance brigade and still has a roll of bandages in his locker.'

'But Mr Victor remember the Valley Parade disaster where the emergency services couldnt get in.'

'Oh stuff and nonsense,the fans just weren't as stoic as they at SMS. if they are right up to the pitch it is less far to chuck them for the blankets that are used as stretchers will come into play.'

'but what about the league regulations that say the pitch is not to be any closer than 2.25m on new stadia and if we don't adhere to the rules we may well not be allowed to enter the league.'

'Won't happen we are SFC nobody would dare ban us.'

Of course it is not how you would put it but if you really think a game of football would carry on when an ambulance is required to get to an incident I'd be amazed. The stands were built as they were for good reason, and the club as far as Im still aware did not lie.

[Victor]

You just don't get it do you - I was trying to make the point that if there was an emergency the game WOULD be stoppped and the ambulances COULD go on the pitch and the distance between the pitch and the hoardings would be irelevant, you dimbo.

 

Anyway, you clearly know better, so I will conclude this correspondence only by saying that, although the fire brigade once insisted to me that a track to a farm should be widened to the full 3.7 metres, the decision is ultimately with Building Control, and I successfully won the case that it should not be widened in a 4-page report, one of my arguements being that the lane that led to the track was itself less than this dimension.

 

There are no laws - just accept that. The designer - for I suspect no actual architect was involved with SMS - has to take into consideration a whole rack of legislation, codes of practice etc. when designing a building, and at the end of the day, even if he complies with every one of them, still has a duty of care, and can be sued for negligence.

 

That's why I asked if you could help and advise me of the law you were quoting.

[up and away]

And as an addendum, this type of over the top sensationalising, mentioning Kaka and suggesting we need to get real as we have no chance of competng with the top clubs is just the kind of response that Lowe would come out with challenged. He would also miss the point, in that most fans don't expect to be signing the mega stars and competing with the top clubs for the best talent, but they did want us to be as competitive as was possible given our resources.

 

quote]

 

Over the top sensationalism?

 

"When clubs like Newcastle, Spurs, Middlesbrough, Blackburn suffer, there is even more reason for us to suffer."

 

Missed this bit did you?

[um pahars]

Over the top sensationalism?

 

"When clubs like Newcastle, Spurs, Middlesbrough, Blackburn suffer, there is even more reason for us to suffer."

 

Missed this bit did you?

 

No, I saw it and it made about as much sense as the drivel from you that I outlined.

 

HTH

[OldNick]

Anyway, you clearly know better, so I will conclude this correspondence only by saying that, although the fire brigade once insisted to me that a track to a farm should be widened to the full 3.7 metres, the decision is ultimately with Building Control, and I successfully won the case that it should not be widened in a 4-page report, one of my arguements being that the lane that led to the track was itself less than this dimension.

 

Well being a dimbo I would have realised that the farm track was existing and not a new build and so the rules put down would be different and so may have won the day.If I was designing a new build and didnt follow the league regulations or the planning departments wishes i may not get a game of football played, foolish of me but there you go.