Rupert Lowe on TalkSport radio...

[wild-saint]

So Pearson's wage was the same as JP's then? I'd like to see evidence of that.

 

I wanted Pearson to stay as much as anyone, but if his wage was say £300,000 and JP's was perhaps £100,000 then you are wrong - it was a financial decision. It may have been a short sighted one, but a saving of £200,000 is quite considerable.

 

It matters not, it was the wrong decision even if it was made for the right reasons (which as we can see is still debatable). Shame Lowe couldn't hold his hands up to that one. I'd have respected him a lot more if he had said:

 

"With hindsight perhaps we should have spent a bit more and retained Pearson. It was a false economy going for JP, but we had to cut every penny we could to save the club but in this case it backfired."

 

not only are you assuming that the wages were the same but also that Peasron would have got a better performance out of the same dog shyte players that JP had to play with. Remember JP didnt have saga, euell, JPS and Slacel at his disposal as wotte has had recently.

 

Personally I think Pearson would have done no better with the same kids that JP struggled with for so long.

[Frank's cousin]

The impact on finances is quite easy to sort, Pearson has openly stated he'd of taken a 'vastly reduced wage with a position based bonus', be very, very surprised if he was on more than Jan, Wotte, Gore and Killer put together anyway!

 

Same with the players, Lowe doing his normal transfer policy, quantity not quality. Could of kept Cork and John and not signed, Forecast, Gasmi etc!

 

We need details of contracts though, with basic, bonuses and then total - I would suggest JOhn was a big earner...

[beatlesaint]

For those that are worried that Lowe will make a third comeback lets look at this logically.

 

Whoever buys the club will want to make a go of it, they arent going to chuck their money down the drain. So to make a go of it they need big attendances, a decent manager and a successful team.

 

Now anybody buying into that knows that to build a decent team you need revenue, to obtain revenue you need bums on seats.

 

And even Lowe's closest allies know that there is no way you will get decent attendances if Lowe is involved in SFC again, certainly not until the club is pressing for promotion from whatever league we may be in, so in other words at the start of their ownership they are relying on the feelgood factor. Lets not be mistaken, most of RL's mates are led by one thing, and that is money, and money to these people is a bigger master than Rupert Lowe will ever be. Thats why I believe we will never have him darken our door again.

[70's Mike]

not only are you assuming that the wages were the same but also that Peasron would have got a better performance out of the same dog shyte players that JP had to play with. Remember JP didnt have saga, euell, JPS and Slacel at his disposal as wotte has had recently.

 

Personally I think Pearson would have done no better with the same kids that JP struggled with for so long.

 

may be he would have picked different kids to bring in on loan

[um pahars]

What could have been done was a convertible bond, whereby Leon "Hollow Words" Crouch could have put in his £2m as a loan to the club which would convert to shares if the loan wasn't repaid - ie. he gained an increased shareholding if his money wasn't repaid.

 

A very big risk, with absolutely no element control of how the money is spent in return for such a large sum of money (particularly when referenced to the market "value" of the Club at the time) does not sound very attractive to me.

 

And how's this for a little rumour that I know some on here are aware of (rumour mind, before we all go mental).

 

I heard that there was a letter whereby Crouch said he would commit his £2m (no idea what form it took though) as long as Lowe and Wilde relinquished control and Poortvliet got the boot (and not sure if he was meant to replace them or whether someone else would come in to run the Club)!!!!

 

Anyone else heard this?????

[um pahars]

That is the biggest problem with him and why he never will have any popular appeal of any note - the simple fact that he never accepts his part in all this. I do not as you will know, believe he is to blame for everything, nor do I believe his errors of judgement and mistakes have been made in anything other than good faith and in many respects out of his own belief that they would work out for the benefit of the club.... but some of these decisions have been naive at best and as many have pointed out when things do fail and teh consequences are diasterous it tends to be quickly called incompetence. I dont actually think Lowes biggest failings have been this year - because I still dont know how much impact the finances TRUELY had in making him take those decsions - his biggest error was believing wigley and the squad would ahve enough to keep us in the prem and realising too late that change was urgently needed. But thats all history.

 

I believe the truth is that what started under lowe (not with any malaice) was componded by Wilde (Not with any malice) and ignored by Crouch (letting heart rule head) in that he could have prevented Wildes slightly cavalier approach to the spending when chair of the football board....by the time Lowe came back, it was probably, looking at this now, too late - getting high earners off the books was only going to really work if they were sold off permanently - the loans were really only delaying the onset of the increasing overdraft.... how would we have reacted last summer had Lowe actually sold these players? Not well I guess and that's fair enough.

 

I know you believe at the very least we mmight have been better placed in the league had Crouch and Pearson stayed... Seriously unless you are a fortune teller this is impossible to predict because we simply dont know what squad he would have had left to pick from, or had Crouch kept the squad more compact but with teh experience how quickly we would have been in the same boat due to servicing those contracts - without access to such detail its simply impossible to determine the answers to this... and it would naive to think any direct communication on this would not have been tainted with a hint of bias....

 

Lowe in interviews will never back down and do the very things that have appeal to fans, humilty, acknowledgment of failings and importantly seek advice and help from greater footballing minds - ego is to big - and althiough thats not in itself a crime, if it prevents seeking appropriate advice it becomes a big problem - that would have been what I would have said to him - |I cant hate someone I dont know, and certainly not over football, es[pecially when the intent was not failure, just the result - he was certainly coming over as dissapointed and with some bitterness, which is at least an emotional response - anyone who truely never gave a flying feck about us would have just thought 'feck um'.

 

BUt to be honest its what awaits us in the future that now intrigues - Not sure if Mr Crouch will return in some guise, but the only thing i would say on that front is - get some bastard in with you who is prepared to take teh flak for the unpopular decisons that will be necessary for some time to come - and make sure hes disposable!

 

I almost liked bits of that Frank.

 

As for the piece in bold, I was not wedded to Crouch staying, but I was most definitely wedded to the idea of Pearson staying.

 

And of course we don't know what he could have done even if he was given the same hand as Poortvliet, but I also think it wouldn't be a totally unreasonable hypothesis to claim that Pearson would have got more out of the team than the useless Poortvliet did, even if it was under exactly the same conditions and constraints.

 

But you can't ignore the impact the decision to boot Pearson out and replace with the Revolutionary Coaching Set Up has had on the Club this season.

 

Of course it's hypothetical and subjective, but you don't need to be an expert to see it all went tts up and we suffered on and off the pitch because of it (hell if was working so successfully, then why did Lowe give Jan the El Bow).

[OldNick]

At 8,19? post nick..I'd suggest that you post, for postings sake, because you do tend to ramble my old son.

My logic is too high brow for you Ginge, If we had not had the overdraft reduced we would have been able to get a loan in.I was alos answering Umps suggestion about selling players.Read the sequence and then you will understand...perhaps.

[um pahars]

Well said.

 

It should also not be forgotten that the fall in attendances over the past year has significantly reduced income and therefore contributed to administration.

Well done those fans that boycotted home games?

 

We lost many, many, many more people through poor football and results (particularly at home) than we ever did through boycotts.

 

If we're going to blame an inidividual for boycotting, then I think it's only fair to first look further up the chain of command and see who has cost us thousands of bums on seats.

[supaimpy_returns]

I've heard RL say it twice now, SLH bounced cheques, and that they were for the GK coach, now that means SLH were paying the footballing staff, so thats the worry of 10 points out the way as thats what Luton apparently were guilty of and led to the bigger points deduction.

 

Thanks RL your need for exposure in the media has now pushed us over the edge, still don't understand from his interviews as to why they didn't take the points and admin the week before.

[Gingeletiss]

nickh

Full Member

 

 

 

Join Date: Nov 2006

Posts: 8,197

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by alpine_saint

Its mathematically possible I will win the Euro Lottery and buy SFC myself too.

 

If Barclays had not called the overdraft in we may have got a loan that could make the difference.Just 1 goal scored or goal stopped might make the difference.You have had us relegated rfor months and will come bakc with the told you so quotes.It is far from over and whilst it is now close to being the truth we still have fight unlike some fans.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

Not that highbrow...you in fact posted in response to alpine_saint.....but you are a master of rehashing what you said

[Stoozer]

http://http://www.skysports.com/video/clips/0,23791,15855_5161098,00.html

[Stoozer]

Not sure why that didn't work....

 

If you can stomach it cut and paste:

 

http://www.skysports.com/video/clips/0,23791,15855_5161098,00.html

[trousers]

I've heard RL say it twice now, SLH bounced cheques, and that they were for the GK coach, now that means SLH were paying the footballing staff, so thats the worry of 10 points out the way as thats what Luton apparently were guilty of and led to the bigger points deduction.

 

Thanks RL your need for exposure in the media has now pushed us over the edge, still don't understand from his interviews as to why they didn't take the points and admin the week before.

 

But, if the League have any faith in why they brought in the 'financial prudence' rules in the first place they will realise that this PLC vs Football Club malarkey is a red herring.

 

The rule was brought in to combat reckless and speculative spending on expensive players. We have not got into financial trouble for the reasons that the League brought in the rules ergo I have faith in the Football League to be clever enough to see this and ignore the false debate of PLC vs Football Club.

 

Trousers starts holding breath.....now.....

[Chez]

not only are you assuming that the wages were the same but also that Peasron would have got a better performance out of the same dog shyte players that JP had to play with. Remember JP didnt have saga, euell, JPS and Slacel at his disposal as wotte has had recently.

 

Personally I think Pearson would have done no better with the same kids that JP struggled with for so long.

 

 

What are you talking about? I was quite clearly suggesting that Pearson was more expensive than JP. As for suggesting Pearson would not have been able to have bettered JPs results with the same set of players, why do you think that? Pearson had turned a sinking ship around, had the layers respect and as he has shown at Leicester he is fully capable of handling youngsters and senior pros alike.

 

Contrast also the performance of Pearsons 21 year old signing Michael Morrison with that if JP's (or whoever it was) signing of Morgan Schniederlin or Robertson or Pekhart...perhaps ig Pearson had stayed we wouldn't have had so much ****e to work with.

[The Majestic Channon]

What annoyed me was when asked about the 10 mangers in 8 years or whatever it is he seemed to conviniently forget to mention gray, sturrock , jan, bollock chops and wigley, only mentioning strachan hoddle and dave jones , who he said 'left'.. made to leave actually, lowe started all this mess years ago with his meddling and ****e appointments causing instabilty. lowe's ego has been our biggest downfall, cant believe he's been given such an easy ride in these interviews, but lets forget all his **** ups, he's a toff thats why we really don't like him :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[OldNick]

nickh

Full Member

 

 

 

Join Date: Nov 2006

Posts: 8,197

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by alpine_saint

Its mathematically possible I will win the Euro Lottery and buy SFC myself too.

 

If Barclays had not called the overdraft in we may have got a loan that could make the difference.Just 1 goal scored or goal stopped might make the difference.You have had us relegated rfor months and will come bakc with the told you so quotes.It is far from over and whilst it is now close to being the truth we still have fight unlike some fans.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

Not that highbrow...you in fact posted in response to alpine_saint.....but you are a master of rehashing what you said

You took replies from 2 differing posts to different posters and different lines of debate and when they were to be implimentd.

So i will try and explain where I was coming from for you.

We had an agreed £5m overdraft, the bank then reduced it to £4m. Therefore we cut the expenses by a £1m. If our overdraft had still been £5m we had room to manouver and with that we could have got loans in. When the period that Um was talking about we were trying to get the 6.5m overdraft down to the agreed £5m. Different times.

I also do not think that if we did have the £5m level and had got down to £4m giving us some breathing space that Lowe would have spent much either.Perhaps 1 loan in, but that may have made a difference.

I hope I have made myself clearer for you.