Consortium / Prospective buyer in now!

[um pahars]

Crouch started off with a crowd average of x after his first game in charge

 

LMFAO.

 

How the fck can you have an average crowd after one game :rolleyes: I think you'll find the average would be the same as the actual attendance:smt017.

 

 

 

So now we're backtracking and looking at individual games. You couldn't make it up fella.

 

Last game before Crouch took over was 18,125, and then for Crouch's first game it jumped to 23,267. Look how wonderful Crouch is:rolleyes:

 

Then it went down to 23,008 and then down again to 18,148. Look how bad Crouch is :mad:

 

Then it went shooting up to 25,449. Look how brilliant Crouch is:D

 

And of course we all know it ended on a high with 32,000 turning up, but we're not allowed too include that one are we?

 

 

Facts are that during Crouch's reign, avearge attendaces went up when compared to the proceeding games of that season (and still rose even if you start fannying about and excluding certain matches:)).

 

Barrel and fish.

[John B]

LMFAO.

 

How the fck can you have an average crowd after one game :rolleyes: I think you'll find the average would be the same as the actual attendance:smt017.

 

 

 

So now we're backtracking and looking at individual games. You couldn't make it up fella.

 

Last game before Crouch took over was 18,125, and then for Crouch's first game it jumped to 23,267. Look how wonderful Crouch is:rolleyes:

 

Then it went down to 23,008 and then down again to 18,148. Look how bad Crouch is :mad:

 

Then it went shooting up to 25,449. Look how brilliant Crouch is:D

 

And of course we all know it ended on a high with 32,000 turning up, but we're not allowed too include that one are we?

 

 

Facts are that during Crouch's reign, avearge attendaces went up when compared to the proceeding games of that season (and still rose even if you start fannying about and excluding certain matches:)).

 

Barrel and fish.

 

I thought before Crouch's first game we were heading for the play offs.

 

 

I thought before Crouch's last game we were heading for relegation

 

PS I think you have proved that Crouch had nothing much to do with the number of tickets sold

[mcjwills]

As for the possibility that he has wealthy friends and contacts who might bankroll a buy-out of the club from the administrators and put him in charge, I very much doubt that. These people didn't gain their wealth by putting people in charge of their businesses with a record of failure not once but twice. Thankfully, Lowe is a busted flush. Now all we have to do, is ensure that we rid the club of Askham too. Quite how he managed to inveigle himself into the directors' box on Saturday is beyond me. Let the parasite buy his own tickets like the rest of us.

 

The problem could be that if one of his cronies were to buy the club and got the ground for a knock down price the club could become quite profitable if we dont have to service a loan to barclays and avia and the average attendance would not need to be as high as it was. That is the fear that may lets the ****s back into our club.

 

We need someone to buy that means we have no stadium debt or monies owing to the bank. Then we can invest some of the season ticket money into the team!!!

[Nineteen Canteen]

Surely in the season when Crouch was Chairman the attendances were swelled by season ticket holders who bought tickets assumming SFC were going to be successful after reaching the play ofs.

 

The number of season tickets sold this season probably reduced because of a number of factors including the Lowe one.[/QUOTE]

 

Don't think so John as most like me would have renewed in March to take advantage of the discounted prices fully expecting Crouch to still be talking about investment in August at the start of this season.

[ottery st mary]

I think most indepedent Observers in the City think that Lowe was not totally responsible for driving SLH into administration.

 

Lowe is probably ****ed off that his efforts came to nothing with the bank not supporting him.

 

Everyone in the City is totally aware of Ruperts horendous problems at Sothampton Football Club and elsewhere....Those that are not aware are soon put straight by myself and many other Saints supporters that work in the city or connections to the city. Most other football clubs officials and supporters are very much confirming this with their city contacts as well......As someone said ....a busted flush.. who together with Askham should never be entertained at Southampton Football Club ever again....His pathetic attempt at DAMAGE Limitation is as everyone in the football/financial world knows, is a pathetic attempt to blame others for all his failings.:smt017

[John B]

Surely in the season when Crouch was Chairman the attendances were swelled by season ticket holders who bought tickets assumming SFC were going to be successful after reaching the play ofs.

 

The number of season tickets sold this season probably reduced because of a number of factors including the Lowe one.[/QUOTE]

 

Don't think so John as most like me would have renewed in March to take advantage of the discounted prices fully expecting Crouch to still be talking about investment in August at the start of this season.

 

The point I am making there were probably more season ticket holders in season 2007-2008 because of our relative success in 2006-2007.

[John B]

Everyone in the City is totally aware of Ruperts horendous problems at Sothampton Football Club and elsewhere....Those that are not aware are soon put straight by myself and many other Saints supporters that work in the city or connections to the city. Most other football clubs officials and supporters are very much confirming this with their city contacts as well......As someone said ....a busted flush.. who together with Askham should never be entertained at Southampton Football Club ever again....His pathetic attempt at DAMAGE Limitation is as everyone in the football/financial world knows, is a pathetic attempt to blame others for all his failings.:smt017

 

Your comment may well be wrong.

 

As most in the City realise the damage to the finances were made when he was not at the club which is something I find difficult to understand that you do not realise.

 

 

I dont care who watches Saints Play it is not for you and me to say who is or who is not allowed into St Mary's.

 

 

How long has Askham been watching the Saints sometime I would have thought

[Nineteen Canteen]

I'm certain that Lowe doing the PR rounds is because he is attempting to save face with his City cronies. It's an easy matter for him to blame those gormless knuckle draggers in the fan base and say that they didn't understand or support his plans to run the club efficiently and on a sound financial basis. I'm also convinced that there will be those of his contemporaries who will rejoice at his downfall, as he was probably obnoxiously smug that he had been one of the youngest chairmen of a Premiership club, gaining influence for a short while at the top table of the FA. Many might express sympathy to his face and smirk knowingly behind his back.

 

As for the possibility that he has wealthy friends and contacts who might bankroll a buy-out of the club from the administrators and put him in charge, I very much doubt that. These people didn't gain their wealth by putting people in charge of their businesses with a record of failure not once but twice. Thankfully, Lowe is a busted flush. Now all we have to do, is ensure that we rid the club of Askham too. Quite how he managed to inveigle himself into the directors' box on Saturday is beyond me. Let the parasite buy his own tickets like the rest of us.

 

Wes, I suspect Lowe is doing the rounds to ensure the full story is told in the interests of balance and not just by those who now try to seek political capital out of the situation. Crouch and McMenemy were nauseating on Saturday and Crouch is certainly doing the rounds locally so why shouldn't Lowe do the rounds nationally? Who is the better connected based on their media contacts and for that matter the more assured? Who in the long run would have been better for the club if some of those like yourself who strangely believed a boycott would be a good thing actually supported the team at teh turnstiles?

 

All water under the bridge now and surely the only way forward is to progress with no director of the last 15 years within a hint of the most tenuous link to any successful bid otherwise the circus will just keep rolling if it is allowed to of course. We have shot ourselves in the foot bigtime though but most are to embarrassed to admit it for fear of being lynched. Lowe was our best option short of a deep pocketed investor with 10's of millions.

[um pahars]

 

The point I am making there were probably more season ticket holders in season 2007-2008 because of our relative success in 2006-2007.

 

And I'm also sure that one of the reasons for the low take up for this season was the fact that last season was so poor. How many and how persuasive this reason was will never be proved.

 

(PS You're quite right as well in that I doubt Crouch had any real affect on ticket sales, but I'm also quite right in that Sundance's assertion was ppopycck;)).

[David Strover]

Doesn't the League ******s Committee meet tomorrow to decide when to deducted our ten or even twenty points?

 

You know like Luton Town so that the only people really punished are the fans and the next board who come in to sort the club out - the very people who had little if nothing to do with the 'financial mismanagement'. I say little because some posters on this board seem to think that the club's situation can be laid at the feet of some of the supporters.

 

Why don't the FA look at the people who get these clubs into financial trouble and then ban them from football sin die rather than punish the fans with instant struggle the next season?

 

Personally I hope Luton Town prove too strong for the Conference and make it a laughing stock by winning every single game about 8-0. I know they won't but it would be hilarious.

[ottery st mary]

Your comment may well be wrong.

 

As most in the City realise the damage to the finances were made when he was not at the club which is something I find difficult to understand that you do not realise.

 

 

I dont care who watches Saints Play it is not for you and me to say who is or who is not allowed into St Mary's.

 

 

How long has Askham been watching the Saints sometime I would have thought

 

 

Most everyone laughed at him for many years...Now most can't be bothered...

Some even feel sadness for a man who has absolutely no clue about Financial matters or football come to think of it.

 

Askham has got thick skin just like Lowe.....Both with big Egos and not one iota of interest in Southampton Football Club......Get Rid of Lowe, Askham and their cronies.

[Nineteen Canteen]

LMFAO.

 

How the fck can you have an average crowd after one game :rolleyes: I think you'll find the average would be the same as the actual attendance:smt017.

 

 

 

So now we're backtracking and looking at individual games. You couldn't make it up fella.

 

Last game before Crouch took over was 18,125, and then for Crouch's first game it jumped to 23,267. Look how wonderful Crouch is:rolleyes:

 

Then it went down to 23,008 and then down again to 18,148. Look how bad Crouch is :mad:

 

Then it went shooting up to 25,449. Look how brilliant Crouch is:D

 

And of course we all know it ended on a high with 32,000 turning up, but we're not allowed too include that one are we?

 

 

Facts are that during Crouch's reign, avearge attendaces went up when compared to the proceeding games of that season (and still rose even if you start fannying about and excluding certain matches:)).

 

Barrel and fish.

 

Indeed, do people know how obsessed you are with this forum? You have quite a retentive personality Um. You can't seem to understand a simple concept for fear of losing your grasp of reality. Average attendances declined game on game during Crouch's tenure - you seem obsessed with comparing it with other periods in time, please desist.

[um pahars]

Crouch and McMenemy were nauseating on Saturday and Crouch is certainly doing the rounds locally so why shouldn't Lowe do the rounds nationally? ?

 

Somewhat different motivations though.

 

Whilst Lowe looks to be trying to justify himself and is happy to drag up the past, Crouch is looking forward and trying to drum up the cash needed to keep this Club ticking over.

 

On almost every occasion on the radio tonight Crouch tried keep it forward looking and tried to avoid getting dragged into raking up the past.

 

What would be a lovely touch would be for Wilde, Cowen, Wiseman & Lowe to also match Crouch's money to ensure we still have a Club to sell.

[Nineteen Canteen]

Everyone in the City is totally aware of Ruperts horendous problems at Sothampton Football Club and elsewhere....Those that are not aware are soon put straight by myself and many other Saints supporters that work in the city or connections to the city. Most other football clubs officials and supporters are very much confirming this with their city contacts as well......As someone said ....a busted flush.. who together with Askham should never be entertained at Southampton Football Club ever again....His pathetic attempt at DAMAGE Limitation is as everyone in the football/financial world knows, is a pathetic attempt to blame others for all his failings.:smt017

 

He's only matched by those fans who chose to boycott the season and therefore equally culpable. :smt049

[um pahars]

Average attendances declined game on game during Crouch's tenure

 

So under your rules where you can use an average of one game, then the average attendance for the first game was 23,000 and the average attendance for his last game was 32,000.

 

HTH;)

[hughieslastminutegoal]

The problem could be that if one of his cronies were to buy the club and got the ground for a knock down price the club could become quite profitable if we dont have to service a loan to barclays and avia and the average attendance would not need to be as high as it was. That is the fear that may lets the ****s back into our club.

 

We need someone to buy that means we have no stadium debt or monies owing to the bank. Then we can invest some of the season ticket money into the team!!!

 

Why would Aviva sell the ground at a knock-down price if someone was buying the club? Where else would they play? If you were Aviva wouldn't you say "Buy the ground at a fair realistic price or rent it at a fair and reasonable rent"?

[Justin C]

I think the only way we were going to be taken over is if we went into admin. It will be better in the long run as we are now a bargain, especially if we stay up. I don't think the pain is over yet but we will hit rock bottom soon and then the only way is up.

[Gingeletiss]

What is the average attendance for 2008/9 ..... exclusively under Lowe ???

 

 

Including spikes..................

[ottery st mary]

He's only matched by those fans who chose to boycott the season and therefore equally culpable. :smt049

 

Yes I am one of those:smt049

[hughieslastminutegoal]

Wes, I suspect Lowe is doing the rounds to ensure the full story is told in the interests of balance and not just by those who now try to seek political capital out of the situation. Crouch and McMenemy were nauseating on Saturday and Crouch is certainly doing the rounds locally so why shouldn't Lowe do the rounds nationally? Who is the better connected based on their media contacts and for that matter the more assured? Who in the long run would have been better for the club if some of those like yourself who strangely believed a boycott would be a good thing actually supported the team at teh turnstiles?

 

All water under the bridge now and surely the only way forward is to progress with no director of the last 15 years within a hint of the most tenuous link to any successful bid otherwise the circus will just keep rolling if it is allowed to of course. We have shot ourselves in the foot bigtime though but most are to embarrassed to admit it for fear of being lynched. Lowe was our best option short of a deep pocketed investor with 10's of millions.

 

If only...if only...

People dislike Lowe, and blamed Lowe, so many stayed away as a result. Thats a fact. Therefore we'd have been better off had he not returned. And he should have known it. There's no "if only about it".

 

If only Republicans had trusted the Army, we'd not have had 30 years of troubles in Northern Ireland. If only people had not fallen out of love with Thatcher, we might still have the Tories in Government. But they didn't. Recognise the reality of a situation and stop pretending things could have been otherwise. They weren't.

[benjii]

I don't know Mike the exact numbers as I tend to go with my gut feel. My gut tells me fans did not return post the first Lowe era as we were led to believe. I leave it up to Um to crunch numbers and tell us they increased by many hundreds. The point remains that our crowds are far lower post relegation than those of many of our peers and therefore we will always be at a competitive disadvantage because of money and hence our organic grow your own policy developed to be one of the best under Lowe.

 

Ottery - loving your work and thanks for acknowledging that you are responding to me in your last post not Frank. Happy to let it go the first time but since you asked. It not easy for any of us least those trying to believe the right thing has happened. Even the players don't believe it which is fairly crucial.

 

 

Gates fell by 1,563,000% under Lowe and we averaged 0.001357 points.

 

Under Crouch our avergae attendance was 499,222.

 

Of course there's no evidence in support of this but it is fact. I go on gut feel.

 

If I am later shown to be talking nonsense I will just ignore these figures and plough on regardless with my weird, obsessive hobby.

[um pahars]

What is the average attendance for 2008/9 ..... exclusively under Lowe ???

 

Including spikes..................

 

Plus you have to let me know what games you don't want to include so that you ensure you get the answer you want;)

 

We can even do a "one game average attendance" if you want (some people call this one the "Official Attendance":D)

[offix]

Under Crouch our avergae attendance was 499,222.

 

That's one hell of a big stadium

[Gingeletiss]

Wes, I suspect Lowe is doing the rounds to ensure the full story is told in the interests of balance and not just by those who now try to seek political capital out of the situation. Crouch and McMenemy were nauseating on Saturday and Crouch is certainly doing the rounds locally so why shouldn't Lowe do the rounds nationally? Who is the better connected based on their media contacts and for that matter the more assured? Who in the long run would have been better for the club if some of those like yourself who strangely believed a boycott would be a good thing actually supported the team at teh turnstiles?

 

All water under the bridge now and surely the only way forward is to progress with no director of the last 15 years within a hint of the most tenuous link to any successful bid otherwise the circus will just keep rolling if it is allowed to of course. We have shot ourselves in the foot bigtime though but most are to embarrassed to admit it for fear of being lynched. Lowe was our best option short of a deep pocketed investor with 10's of millions.

 

 

You bleat on and on, uttering the same old cr*p, but wait, what is this:smt017

(I suspect Lowe is doing the rounds to ensure the full story is told in the interests of balance) this from the same man, who issued gagging orders for fun, to stop the truth comming out. SB19, I'd give it a rest, just move on, he's a busted flush.

Edited 6 April, 2009 by Gingeletiss

[benjii]

That's one hell of a big stadium

 

Lowe built it himself.

[Johnny Bognor]

These are the attendance figures from the website match reports (Games marked with an 'N' are night games - which historically attract a smaller gate). Cup games are excluded.....

 

PRE CROUCH

Palace = 25,054

Stoke = 20,300

Colchester = 18,713 (N)

Barnsley = 19,151

West Brom = 21,967

Cardiff = 20,796

Charlton = 23,363

Wolves = 19,856

Blackpool = 21,075

Sheff Wed = 17,981(N)

Hull = 18,125

 

 

CROUCH'S TENURE

Preston = 23,267

Watford = 23,008

S****horpe = 18,146

Norwich = 18,004(N)

QPR = 22,505

Plymouth = 17,806(N)

Ipswich = 23,299

Leicester = 17,741(N)

Coventry = 22,014

Bristol = 22,890

Burnley = 21,762

Sheff Utd = 32,000

 

 

 

OK, here's my take on it:

 

Night games always produce a lower gate, so taking these out reduces the night time effect. The first game of the season is always a spike (after a long summer) as is the last game (for obvious reasons)

 

Pre-Crouch Average = 20,580

Pre-Crouch Average (excluding night games) = 21,076

Pre Couch Average (excluding night games and 1st game) = 20,579

 

 

Crouch Average = 21,870

Crouch Average (excluding night games) = 23,210

Crouch Average (excluding night games and last game) = 22,111

 

 

Whatever way you look at it, attendances under Crouch were improved - despite the fact that league position in the latter half of the season was worse than the first half.

 

UM PAHARS - you are spot on.

The sour grape brigade can twist the facts all they like, but the truth always outs in the end.

Edited 6 April, 2009 by Johnny Bognor

[darren]

move on for **** sake

[yorkiesaint]

yes, this getting at UP has gone a bit far, just because he understands statistics...

[Johnny Bognor]

move on for **** sake

 

 

Now the numbers are there for everyone to see - the argument is settled.

 

Time for the sour grapes brigade to find something else to moan about.

 

..but like the Murphy's (just in case there is mileage in the Heineken rumour), I'm not bitter.

[NickG]

so in summary.....

 

 

.....we have neither and are in administration.

[darren]

Now the numbers are there for everyone to see - the argument is settled.

Time for the sour grapes brigade to find something else to moan about.

 

..but like the Murphy's (just in case there is mileage in the Heineken rumour), I'm not bitter.

 

exactly

[Viking Warrior]

Can someone confirm what Um Pahars does for a living. Is he either an accountant, a bookie or Maths teacher or is he just a lecherous old fool with an eye for figures? Only joking steve:cool:

[mulletsaint]

Who effin cares, they're all a bunch of assholes. Hopefully the club has a future and can move on. It would be nice if some of the "fans" on here could do the same…

[Tamesaint]

Can someone confirm what Um Pahars does for a living. Is he either an accountant, a bookie or Maths teacher or is he just a lecherous old fool with an eye for figures? Only joking steve:cool:

 

and what does 19 Canteen do???

 

The only person who would employ him is Rupert. I wonder if Rupert is allowing him a place in the bunker.

[Amesbury Saint]

can confirm this from another source, sadly lowe is involved!

 

most people seemed to miss, this as they debated who can **** higher

 

in what capacity is Lowe involved?

[Ed Rooney]

No one in their right mind would work with Lowe or want Lowe involved. That would just mean on the wrong foot at Day 1. Lowe will never again be involved with our Football club

[benjii]

No one in their right mind would work with Lowe or want Lowe involved. That would just mean on the wrong foot at Day 1. Lowe will never again be involved with our Football club

 

I agree with the premises; however the conclusion depends on the relevant interested party being of sound mind and is thus uncertain!

[um pahars]

yes, this getting at UP has gone a bit far, just because he understands statistics...

 

I haven't got a clue when it comes to statistics, just a little bit more knowledge than Flashman/Sundance or whoever he is this week (which isn't that difficulT) and I do just a little bit more research than Jonah who has all of a sudden gone quiet on the overdraft front;)

 

Can someone confirm what Um Pahars does for a living. Is he either an accountant, a bookie or Maths teacher or is he just a lecherous old fool with an eye for figures? Only joking steve:cool:

 

Correct on all 4 fronts, although my success rates on (2) being a bookie and (4) an eye for figures haven't been up to scratch recently;)

 

Anyway, I think we should all be moving on and trying to work out exactly who is doing what and what we should be doing (if anything), as I don't think anyone has really answered what the current situation is ref donating, not donating, chipping in to a consortium, etc etc etc.

 

I wonder as to whether the Administrator is keeping quiet for fearing of alerting the League to how skint the Football Club is, as I'm still not sure what to make of the Crouch revelation that we need £500k just to fill a hole.

[corsacar saint]

Where in any of these threads are the words consortium or takeover used?

[Northant Saint]

"Smug" is totally the wrong word.

 

Relieved at being right

Pleased at being vinidcated

Outraged thinking back on the abuse and having our intelligence insulted.

 

Wonder if anyone will have the good grace to apologise if we get bought in the next couple of weeks....

 

I will openly apologise to you if both of these conditions are met.

1. We receive no points deduction, this season or the next.

2. We are bought before the club goes bust.

[Gemmel]

I haven't got a clue when it comes to statistics, just a little bit more knowledge than Flashman/Sundance or whoever he is this week (which isn't that difficulT) and I do just a little bit more research than Jonah who has all of a sudden gone quiet on the overdraft front;).

 

Still not as much fun as when "up and away" chips in on the finances front.

I get those Ricky Gervais moments, cringing desperately for him, but laughing my arse off at the same time

[Frank's cousin]

No offence nickh, but like Frank you tried to jump into a debate that wasn't yours and started to try and move the goalposts (in addition to asking the same question you had asked only a few weeks earlier).

 

It wasn't a debate on attendances, on whether they wold be higher or lower in the future, whether a) would have pulled more than b) as those type of arguments are merely hypothetical and never able to be proven one way or the other.

 

I was merely countering the incorrect assertion by Sundance that attendances went down under Crouch when this was not the case.

 

Were there a myriad of reasons for this??? Of course, some positive and of course some negative, but I was not going down the route of whys and wherefores, just merely pointing out that Sundance's original assertion was wrong.

 

Of course if you wanted to suggest he was correct, then far enough, but to start trying to blur the issue is another debate entirely.

 

and thats fair enough, and sundance did score a bit of an own goal, but its pretty clear really, that the attendences fell sharply from 2006/7 to 2007/8 seasons and again 2008/2009 - as our performances on teh pitch declined and the credit crunch hits home. Sure because of the views held on Lowe, this also contributed to a further small decrease, and did provide a good excuse - personally, I dont think fans need an excuse, if they cant afford it or justify the price, then that is a PERFECTLY sound reason fro reducing teh games you attend - and the if we are honest its also bound to be influenced by perceived value for money.

 

 

You will probably argue that had Lowe not returned and we had kept Pearson, gates would have been bigger, weven if results had been the same? I would disagree, I think we would ahve seen the same fall off this year if we had had the same results - You may not believe we would be in the same position had Pearson/Crouch been here, as he would have kept on the likes of Saga, Euell, Rasiak etc... Now Having no direct access to the books, I cant comment on what was and what wasn't necessary re cut backs, but it cant have escaped your notice that the facts seem to dictate, that pre Christmas when some of the more experienced players were out on loan, we were holding our own financially, and after Christmas when we cant palm them off, the situation gets worse and admin follows - what i want to understand is what happened, and was there anything else that could have been done to avoid it?

 

We dont need to be naive about, we know Wilde only wanted back in to get control of his own destiny, he did not like the idea of Crouch dictating things especially during that phase of potential club sale or asset sell off, his only way was go in with Lowe who would have been desperate to save his shareholding value and probably ego driven to be seen as some sort of saviour. You seem convinced that had Crouch and Pearson stayed, we would not now be in this position - I disagree, I think it became inevitable as soon as Wilde and his old board approved teh 7.5 mil spend that year and we failed to get promoted as those contracts bled us dry as soon as the parachute payments stopped... I dont think there is anything different really that Crouch could have done, even if he had kept Pearson and not got the extra kids in, we would still have had to ship out the biggest earners.

 

Had Crouch prevented the Wilde splurge (because he must have had an inkling that the Wilde 'investors/manifesto' was full of holes) before hand when he was involved on the football board with Lawrie, It would have been unpopular with fans BUT he would have had my respect for it, because it was not the time to blow a huge hole in the accounts - but neither he nor the football board recognised that folly, and that is ultimately why I have always had issues with him, because this can be interpreted as a heart ruling head or populist approach, rather than the need for prudent pragmatism.

 

darn... gone down an off topic route, but it all ties in. Fans will ALWAYS be more naturally supportive of the risk takers - percieved as showing 'ambition' - but the flip side of that risk was an overdraft that was as we have seen has become unsustatinable with the player contracts that this brought in. Lowe, was always going to be unpopular when coming back, let alone when cutting the squad to pay kids, and not keeping Pearson on - a decision that was certainly in part based on his own ideas of Youth development, but also in a major way no doubt because of the cost. The crowds stayed away, because the effect this had on the football as early promise dissipitated. So yes you could blame Lowe for this years decreasing crowds, but only if you completely ignore the financial pressure we were under brought on by Wildes initial overspend... something Mr Crouch could/should have had an influence over - but he 'we had our club back' and football first policies to uphold so everything was rosey....

 

To me it shows we are well rid of ALL of them, but also why I hope if Crouch is involved an any rescue bid, he has someone at his side that WILL be prepared to make the unpopular decisions and have teh authority to do so, because it would be naive to think that any rescue package is suddenly going to make us winners again overnight and see big cash injections into the playing squad.

[JustMike]

Its pointless trying to show nineteen the figures, he deals with gut feels, didnt you say that you "didnt want to embarass me"?

 

Look, its plain and simple, attendances have been fluxuating pre crouch, post crouch etc etc, but they did drop when Lowe returned with Wilde, maybe partly because it was those two, but coupled with the poor choice in manager (again) and this stupid experiment of only playing the kids under JP's reign. People just got fed up, and i for one don't blame them

[SaintRichmond]

I think the only way we were going to be taken over is if we went into admin. It will be better in the long run as we are now a bargain, especially if we stay up. I don't think the pain is over yet but we will hit rock bottom soon and then the only way is up.

 

Don't you get it yet ?????

 

Even if we win enough matches to stay up, the League will dock us 10 points, which will mean RELEGATION

 

It is Div 1 next season, the League Rules will make sure of that

[um pahars]

and thats fair enough' date=' and sundance did score a bit of an own goal,[/quote']

 

And that's all I was countering, as for me attendances and pretending you definitely know what would happen in hypothetical situations is all down to personal opinion and no one will ever be right (or wrong), but if you start mentioning facts, then you need to be able to back them up.

 

but its pretty clear really' date=' that the attendences fell sharply from 2006/7 to 2007/8 seasons and again 2008/2009 - as our performances on teh pitch declined and the credit crunch hits home. [/quote']

 

There are so may factors affecting attendances, that there will always be argument and debate.

 

I would say that our initial attendances in this division weren't bad and held steady(ish), although they were lower than I had hoped.

 

But once again they probably reflect our performances and only one season so far have we had any semblence of success.

 

The drop this year was a number of factors, and as I said on another thread recently, only a fool would ignore the impact such a poor season last year had on sales. But I also think the "Lowe" factor is in there somewhere as well.

 

You will probably argue that had Lowe not returned and we had kept Pearson' date=' gates would have been bigger, weven if results had been the same? [/quote']

 

But I would take it slightly further and counter that I don't think results would have been the same, as I would like to believe that Pearson would not have been as bad as Poortvliet.

 

I have always said the two things that would most increase attendances are:

1. Good results, particularly at home.

 

It's quite a simple concept (but I accept one that is sometimes hard to deliver), but people will undoubtedly come along if they think they're going to get goals, be entertained and see the team win.

 

We never managed that from the off this season due to some very poor decisions regarding the replacement/appointment of managers added to a very suspect strategy with regards tactics, starting line up, formation, transfer dealings etc etc etc.

 

And in absence of that:

 

2. Engender a spirit

of togetherness and community spirit.

 

IMHO there was no way Lowe (or Wilde) were going to be able to pull this one off. IMHO they have no pull on the suporters and they do not command the respect and support of the grass roots of this Club. They were not the tow figureheads that people were ever going to rally around in this Club's hour of need.

 

In fact, on too many occasions , Lowe has sought to confront and antagonise the support base. Additionally, their appaling footblling decisions (in 1. above) meant that seeking people's support was always going to be an uphill challenge.

 

 

 

[miserableoldgit]

Wes, I suspect Lowe is doing the rounds to ensure the full story is told in the interests of balance and not just by those who now try to seek political capital out of the situation. Crouch and McMenemy were nauseating on Saturday and Crouch is certainly doing the rounds locally so why shouldn't Lowe do the rounds nationally? Who is the better connected based on their media contacts and for that matter the more assured? Who in the long run would have been better for the club if some of those like yourself who strangely believed a boycott would be a good thing actually supported the team at teh turnstiles?

 

All water under the bridge now and surely the only way forward is to progress with no director of the last 15 years within a hint of the most tenuous link to any successful bid otherwise the circus will just keep rolling if it is allowed to of course. We have shot ourselves in the foot bigtime though but most are to embarrassed to admit it for fear of being lynched. Lowe was our best option short of a deep pocketed investor with 10's of millions.

Whilst I couldn`t actually hear what Crouch and McMenemy were saying (due to the dodgy PA system), I did hear the vast majority of the 28000 crowd cheer and applaud them - or was this just the "plastics"?:confused:

[Wes Tender]

He's only matched by those fans who chose to boycott the season and therefore equally culpable. :smt049

 

I boycotted the STs for me and my son when Lowe and the Quisling returned, as I had boycotted the STs in protest at Lowe getting us relegated earlier. I renewed them when he went the first time and provided that he does not return in any shape or form from now on, I will renew them both again for next season, regardless of which division we are in. Incidentally, although not holding STs, I had attended all home matches until fairly recently, when it became clear that watching a team comprising the youngsters, managed by a lower league Dutch manager, losing all of their home matches but one, it was no longer worth paying Premiership prices for the privilege. At that point, I assessed that a mass boycott would rid the club of the parasites in charge and then I missed the only two other home wins. Had the mass boycott taken place several weeks earlier, instead of the largely ineffectual protest marches, we would have had more time to put in place our plans for survival.

 

Almost certainly we would have been relegated and then gone into administration under Lowe sooner or later, so the numbers boycotting have helped force the issue on us sooner. In the opinion of many, if we are taken over by people with even the business accumen to run a tight ship, but also with the footballing knowledge and fan friendly rhetoric, we will be better off than before, as many who would not attend under Lowe will come back to support the club in their hour of need. But if those new people actually have some money to put in the pot, then we will be much better off than we were a couple of weeks ago.

 

Like you though, I am perfectly happy that nobody previously associated with the club should be in positions of power in future. What's done is done. Let's look to the future, which for me looks brighter than it has for some time, as once the bickering has stopped about who was to blame for our current circumstances, hopefully there will now be a unity of purpose throughout the club for the first time in years.

[Frank's cousin]

And that's all I was countering, as for me attendances and pretending you definitely know what would happen in hypothetical situations is all down to personal opinion and no one will ever be right (or wrong), but if you start mentioning facts, then you need to be able to back them up.

 

 

 

There are so may factors affecting attendances, that there will always be argument and debate.

 

I would say that our initial attendances in this division weren't bad and held steady(ish), although they were lower than I had hoped.

 

But once again they probably reflect our performances and only one season so far have we had any semblence of success.

 

The drop this year was a number of factors, and as I said on another thread recently, only a fool would ignore the impact such a poor season last year had on sales. But I also think the "Lowe" factor is in there somewhere as well.

 

 

 

But I would take it slightly further and counter that I don't think results would have been the same, as I would like to believe that Pearson would not have been as bad as Poortvliet.

 

I have always said the two things that would most increase attendances are:

1. Good results, particularly at home.

 

It's quite a simple concept (but I accept one that is sometimes hard to deliver), but people will undoubtedly come along if they think they're going to get goals, be entertained and see the team win.

 

We never managed that from the off this season due to some very poor decisions regarding the replacement/appointment of managers added to a very suspect strategy with regards tactics, starting line up, formation, transfer dealings etc etc etc.

 

And in absence of that:

 

2. Engender a spirit

of togetherness and community spirit.

 

IMHO there was no way Lowe (or Wilde) were going to be able to pull this one off. IMHO they have no pull on the suporters and they do not command the respect and support of the grass roots of this Club. They were not the tow figureheads that people were ever going to rally around in this Club's hour of need.

 

In fact, on too many occasions , Lowe has sought to confront and antagonise the support base. Additionally, their appaling footblling decisions (in 1. above) meant that seeking people's support was always going to be an uphill challenge.

 

 

 

 

Fair points - where I disagree is to the importance/relevence of the 'togetherness' and community spirit. Yup these are important and yes they can be influenced by the board 0- but ....only if we let it. There are many soundbites and cliches banded around in football and too often they are sghouted one minute and ignored the next as its convenient to do so... the best of these here would be how 'fans ARE the club, its life blood, its soul' etc - well if that is true, then the fans should be able to be together and in good spirit irresepective of which clowns are in the board room and what they are up to.... we as fans DO have that abilty to make teh atmosphere if we chose to... its simply too easy to blame someone else for our own frailities and lack of enthusiasm when the going is tough. If sainst fans want to demonstrate how they are so good they can do, irrespective of the chairman.

 

What is so often overplayed (and not without agenda in MHO) is that fans have been 'divided' - bollx. Thats just another cliche tused to either support or undermine the board - the reality has always been that a few of us on here arguing the same old same old has little impact on teh atmosphere at teh club, the protest of a 1000 or so are popular because its a spirit of togtherness for sure, but for the vast majority, its not divisions, its simply different POV which encourages healthy and often entertaining debate over a pint pre and post match - the only reason it gets so 'heated' is because of the interwebnetflameablity and a few stirrers on both sides - the rest of us would be doing this with a smile and pint - and it certainly wont stop uus going and cheeriong and CREATING the right atmosphere when we go to matches. Sure, bad form, bad results cause fan misery, but thats been going on since the first ball was kicked and teh first miserable moraose fans turned up to watch! ;-) its nothing new. Again it becomes even more frustrtaing when you believe something could be done with different controllers in the boardroom, but the reality is the lifeblood of the club should be pumping through the fans whatever division we are in as it did in tey old 3rd division south days as well as the 'glory' of the prem.

 

We the fans cant do anything about who now buys us, we cant suddenly make bad players good, or change poor manger decisions, but we CAN and SHOULD take the responsibilty for the atmosphere we create, for the spirit and sense of community we feel, because thats the one thing THEY CANT TAKE AWAY, because we should be dicttaing it, NOT the board. It belongs to us, and I think too many of those who became bored with the losses, poor entertainment, or genuinely simply could not afford to go as often have had a convenient excuse in Mr Lowe.

 

One thing is for sure. Next seasson, if we still exist, that excuse will be gone

Edited 7 April, 2009 by Frank's cousin

[slickmick]

I keep looking on this thread to see if any more rumours have surfaced about a take over and all we get is some crap about which chairman had the best attendance record, over and over again.

[Guided Missile]

...as I had boycotted the STs in protest at Lowe getting us relegated earlier...

Why do you keep peddling this total ******, Wes?