Why didn't Crouch save us from administration?

[Wes Tender]

Dainty can I confirm what you are saying? Crouch never suggested he would offer £2m but would put in a third of £6m?

 

Yes, that was what I understood; he would put up £2 million provided that Lowe and Wilde matched it.

 

How is that different form me suggesting that Crouch offered to invest £2m if Lowe and Wilde could match his contribution? Semantics isn't it?

 

You stated, as FACT, on your original post that Wilde and Lowe rejected the SISU bid and by ommission suggested Crouch, until Sarnia Saints rightly corrected your somewhat misleading post.

 

If Lowe or Wilde couldn't match Crouch's offer (can this be proved?) and Crouch was publicly willing to splash his cash why didn't he when it became desperate for him to do so?

 

Because a situation of offering £2 million provided that Lowe and Wilde reciprocated, is vastly different to putting in the money regardless of whether the other two contributed. Simple really. You see, £6 million was required, so £2 million is not enough by itself. Get it?

 

I don't think Rupert would have rejected Crouch's offer for a cash loan of £2m given Crouch could have been offered the role he covets.

 

How do you know that? It is pure conjecture.

 

Rupert Lowe did not want this club to fail and neither would any businessman what the negative connations for which Lowe has now unjustly been hounded for IMO. So I think my premise is a reasonable point of view.

 

Put it the other way around then. Lowe wouldn't want the club to fail, but then why didn't he take Crouch up on his offer to put in £2 million each togehter with Wilde? Couldn't they afford it, or are there other reasons? If so, why should they expect Crouch to bail them out?

 

Dainty you seem concerned with semantics, smokescreens and mirrors. £2m or a 3rd of £6m, I think most people understood where I was coming from and sorry if I am just a fan asking difficult questions but you are going to have to try harder than that to convince me about what went on.

 

Agreed, most on here know exactly where you care coming from, but most don't think that you are asking difficult questions at all; most believe that you are asking stupid questions.

[dubai_phil]

These things do have a habit of finding their way down the food chain, so to speak.

 

There's all sorts of stuff that's been doing the rounds which would put the other side of the argument in a very different light.

 

The PROBLEM though Steve is that this forum and it's predecessor killed off any attempts by anybody to tell any of their stories to a wider audience.

 

The initial appalling lack of care, attention and confidentiality by many posters when we first started going through those "wonderful weekly Friday Takeovers" has led to a culture on here of ITK'ers are as bad as Lowe/Atilla The Hun/Ghengis Khan etc.

 

Also, with the club in such a mess at the moment, raking over old stories, breaching confidentiality etc may also do great harm to people who are trying to get us out this mess.

 

The problem with 19C is that he does have a point about "it is not just Lowe" but he manages to put that across so single-mindedly that he just gets everyone's back up, so who in their right mind would even BOTHER to start to type out the "I had dinner with xyz on abc date and they said" type stories that back all of this up when you know he'll post and divert the thread or you'll just get a sh*t load of abuse.

 

Let 19C make a mess of getting his simple point across - in some ways it's good he just brings out the worst in others, it stays away from sensible threads these days!

Sure, it wasn't ONLY Lowe, but right now it must be best to wait until the mess is sorted out and the old companies, the old NDA's become irrelevant, the older protagonists march off into the sunset with the paintings and statues, then the stories can be told, and there are a hell of a lot of them as many of us are learning.

 

Of course, should one of the amigos or even hangers on think it sensible that they should stay and play train sets again, then I am sure the gloves would truly be off and you better check your anti-libel spamware licences

 

I reckon the best place to start the story telling will be in the bar after the Forum match - ain't gonna be no trolling over a pint or 6!

[Wes Tender]

To be fair Wes that is 'speculation and opinion' rather than 'common knowledge'

 

Agreed, Frank. It is the counter opinion to Nineteen's assertion that Lowe would have been prepared to move aside to give Crouch the Chair, provided that he stumped up £2 million. There is no evidence for supposing that was the case either, so hopefully you will be prepared to chide Nineteen for suggesting that Lowe would do that, without any evidence to support it.

[Frank's cousin]

Agreed, Frank. It is the counter opinion to Nineteen's assertion that Lowe would have been prepared to move aside to give Crouch the Chair, provided that he stumped up £2 million. There is no evidence for supposing that was the case either, so hopefully you will be prepared to chide Nineteen for suggesting that Lowe would do that, without any evidence to support it.

 

True, If Lowe had been prepared to move aside, even to just a CEO role, he and Wilde would have been forming a borad teh first time round and we would a) not have seen the orangeman and his cronies b) probably not have spent 7 mil when we should have saved it....but he is a stubborn bastard... I think he may have moved aside this time though if it menat saving some of the share value?

[Nineteen Canteen]

Perhaps it's time to stop this silly bickering. What is being argued here is whether or not Leon Crouch could have done more for the club. It has moved on from that original question, to name calling and flights of fancy from participants. My opinion,as that's all it is, just like most others on here, is that the club needs any of the holy trinity like a hole in the head, or more accurately another hole in the a..e. Having spent my formative years in Hampshire, Saints were and still are my club of choice, if from a distance. I still get upset about the way the club has spiralled out of control. Surely the time for egoes has long gone and we should be united in getting behind the club in it's, in my memory, lowest ebb. Apart from that,what the f... am I going to do if there is no club to support and no forum to read next season?

 

Stop the bickering I agree with but I think it is important the questions raised are answered because like you it would be very unwelcome to say the least if any of the holy trinity returned. The way Crouch has positioned himself then it is not beyond the realms of a reasonable conclusion that he could at least be involved with a consortium and return to a position on the board he clearly covets.

 

If he was not involved in anyway as of today and had disappeared over the horizon like Wilde or with a few parting shots like Lowe but still headed in the opposite direction oF SMS then all well and good but unfortunately for us he hasn't. Therefore, I think it is time that Crouch's role is scrutinised or we have a public statement confirming he will not be involved with the club in any capacity other than a fan and/or corporate client.

 

In my personal opinion I do not believe a word the man says and that stems from pretty much the start of his chairmanship up until now and the whole £2m has been circumvented by the usual well would you invest retorts? The answer is no but neither would I have made it public in the first place. Crouch maybe a genuine and well meaning fan and ex-director who has always acted in good faith but his PR in that case has been an absolute disaster. A parody of PR IMO and wise businessmen IMO usually keep their counsel with regard to charitable donations and significant offers to help out should be kept private otherwise be able to withstand scrutiny, like understanding why he went public with his original offer for starters.

[JustMike]

It was well documented prior to administration that Crouch offered to invest £2m into the club under the condition that Lowe and Wilde match his contribution. It is reasonable to assume Lowe or Wilde did not have that amount of cash available and it was well known right up till the last minute Lowe was franticly searching for investment to satisfy Barclays and save the club.

 

Assuming I am correct in my understanding I find it inconceivable Lowe would not have approached Crouch and asked him to at a minimum loan the club £2m in order that we could get back within our operating limits imposed by the bank.

 

Do you think Lowe contacted Crouch?

Did Crouch refuse his request and if so was he aware that his refusal to invest unconditionally would be put the club into or on the brink of administration? Do you think he MUST have known it?

 

Finally as we know Crouch and McMenemy travel to games together can we still believe McMenemy's comment on the OS that he was unaware of the perilious state the club was in?

 

Are those who are held in such high regard by many fans acting as we would expect them to in accordance with that position of respect they are afforded?

 

I don't know but I would like these questions clarified.

 

could switch this around couldnt we.."why didnt Lowe or wilde save us from administration"?

[Nineteen Canteen]

Agreed, Frank. It is the counter opinion to Nineteen's assertion that Lowe would have been prepared to move aside to give Crouch the Chair, provided that he stumped up £2 million. There is no evidence for supposing that was the case either, so hopefully you will be prepared to chide Nineteen for suggesting that Lowe would do that, without any evidence to support it.

 

Wes, Crocuh wanted to be involed in the Football side of things, why i don't know because what credentials did he or any of them have. Nonetheless, would it not be reasonable to conclude that Crouch was offered a role he would have liked in return for a £2m loan to keep the club afloat? Only 2 people and their closest confidants can answer that question and i would prefer to know before Crouch slinks his way back in if he can.

 

There is no evidence on either side just an element of doubt or concern that perhaps something could have been done to stop administration and therefore worth considering IMO. Rebuke me all you like but I am not suggesting anything just asking the questions to see if this could be better understood. Plenty of negative comments and questions have been fired in Lowe's direction and rightly so but that should not be a smokescreen to other equally important questions on the other side of the coin.

 

The attempts to ridicule me or 'chide' me simply fires my concern. Of course if the orginal offer of £2m or his third of £6m and been kept as a private offer between the 3 of them we woudl be having this debate now would we? So who is in the wrong for raising the debate?

[um pahars]

In my personal opinion

 

What personal opinion is this???

 

Sundance Mk I, Sundance Mk II et al, The Bear's many opinions, Flasman's vaious personalities various opinions and now 19C's multiple personas.

 

It's all so confusing Sundance, sorrty19C:rolleyes::smt119:rolleyes:

[Nineteen Canteen]

could switch this around couldnt we.."why didnt Lowe or wilde save us from administration"?

 

That's right Mike but they didn't publicly offer a conditional cash injection, plus I think you'll find a separate thread along with many others to discuss this, even one suggesting David Speedie the agent could have saved us. Not though Chris McMenemy, perhaps he didn't have the client base.

[um pahars]

So who is in the wrong for raising the debate?

 

Trouble is that I don't know which one of you to direct the answer to:D

[dubai_phil]

OK here are some facts about SISU bid

 

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/investing-and-markets/article.html?in_article_id=425927&in_page_id=3

 

There was also alleged to be some content in the bid that they required proxy rights over some of the shares rather than actually purchasing them. In simple terms they did not have enough money to buy the club and fund it's debts, speculation around it seems to focus that in fact the method of the bid was by rights issue without

existing shareholders able to protect the value of their own stake.

 

In simple terms it was under capitalised and did nothing for the shareholders. Of course, hindsighht is a wonderful thing and now today they'd probably have taken it, but then if I had known last weekend's lottery numbers I'd have won.

 

Now as FC has stated that all 3 main shareholders signed the rejection letter. The bid was discussed by all 3 parties at a meeting in a hotel in Brockenhurst. This was one of two meetings, the other being held in Runnymede.

 

At the time of the bid only one of the 3 partners had full access to the bid which was sent to the PLC Board (Jim Hone as stated on here).

As a result only one of those shareholders held office in the PLC at that time and only one had access to the bid at that time.

 

Guess who it was?

 

Now this is not that relevant, but this was at the time when the political infighting started to cause wider issues and damage to the club, but that story is another day

[Wes Tender]

........ like understanding why he went public with his original offer for starters.

 

A bit like Lowe often saying during the Premiership years that he was quite prepared to stand aside as Chairman if somebody were to come in and put £25 million on the table. But now you reckon that he would be prepared to stand aside as Chairman if Crouch put £2 million on the table? My word, how the mighty are fallen!

[Nineteen Canteen]

Agreed, most on here know exactly where you care coming from, but most don't think that you are asking difficult questions at all; most believe that you are asking stupid questions.

 

Wes you don't believe a cash loan of £2m would have saved the club? I think it might have.

 

Are we now saying Barclays were going to withdraw the entire facility hence the need for £6m? Wes I acknowledge these may be stupid questions as I am no expert or in a position of being ITK. In my experience though its sometimes the stupid questions that are hardest to answer and anyone who has brought up their can kids can testify. Those with the most limited knowledge can ask the most challenging questions so please ridicule me for being stupid if it helps.

[Daren W]

I think the point here is why should he?

After being singled out by Lowe as almost the only reason why Saints are in the financial schtuck, why should he pay £2 million of his money which will basically vanish??

 

If i was Crouch, no way would I just give away a fortune just on the say so of...

 

1) Rupert Lowe, the man who will preside over TWO relegations

and

2) Michael Wilde, the man who apart from his shares has contributed nothing to this club.

 

I'm sure that all three parties are all culpable in all of this but to me the rabildly pro Lowe brigade are really ****ing up stream in trying to slag Crouch off for not WASTING £2million whilst the other protagonists do nothing!

Hell, why not! Let's build a bonfire of £2million in £20 notes!

 

Is there no end to the amount of people Nineteen Beast will try to blame before he finally realises that presiding over one relegation could be viewed as unlucky but two is just plain careless??

 

But why let that get in the way of good Lowe arse licking?

 

I'll say one thing. If Nineteen/Sundance thinks dwindling attendances are primarily to blame for our finanical plight, I'll counter that by saying that perhaps, just perhaps, it's blinkered happy clappy fans like him, who stuck their heads in the sand, that are just as culpable.

 

Many, many fans have posted on here stating that they felt Lowe didn't know what he was doing towards the end of both tenures and were roundly told that they knew nothing, were thick, were rabid anti Lowe numpties who had no grasp of the finer financial details.

 

They may have been a bit extreme in their dislike of Lowe... but were they wrong? To some the club's ever increasing distance from the common fan was what alienated people. The feeling that they were a number, a customer, not a fan whose voice or opinion really count. Lunatic fringe anyone?

 

Now if people staying away is to blame for our plight (which is rather like blaming the customers for Woolworths going bust) what share will the "heads stuck in sand" fans take?

 

Nah, let's just pin the blame on Crouch not burning money eh?

[Wes Tender]

Wes you don't believe a cash loan of £2m would have saved the club? I think it might have.

 

Are we now saying Barclays were going to withdraw the entire facility hence the need for £6m? Wes I acknowledge these may be stupid questions as I am no expert or in a position of being ITK. In my experience though its sometimes the stupid questions that are hardest to answer and anyone who has brought up their can kids can testify. Those with the most limited knowledge can ask the most challenging questions so please ridicule me for being stupid if it helps.

 

Are you attempting to excuse your questions on the grounds that they are childish? Hehehe You walked right into that one, Nineteen

[um pahars]

I'll say one thing. If Nineteen/Sundance thinks

 

I'll say two things.

 

1. You missed out all his other trolling names LOL:D

 

2. Are you really suggesting he/she/it thinks :smt119:rolleyes::smt119

 

[Daren W]

I'll say two things.

 

1. You missed out all his other trolling names LOL:D

 

2. Are you really suggesting he/she/it thinks :smt119:rolleyes::smt119

 

 

You had me at troll....

[Frank's cousin]

Many, many fans have posted on here stating that they felt Lowe didn't know what he was doing towards the end of both tenures and were roundly told that they knew nothing, were thick, were rabid anti Lowe numpties who had no grasp of the finer financial details.

 

They may have been a bit extreme in their dislike of Lowe... but were they wrong?

 

I would agree with pretty much all you said in you post but feel the need to respond to this point - The reason for the many numpty jibes was probably to fair because most of those making the points on finance and controls were the same who had previoslu and quite recently been advocating a spend spend policy and had been critical of any prudence as it lacked 'ambition' - It woudl be also fair to assume that NO chairman can be blamed for the difficulties faced on relegaton when you suddenly see 30mil income loss - blame for relegation yes, but its the Prem/football league income set up that cause the financial mess to start with - not financial incompetence - and he was criticised by same said 'numpties' for having relegation clauses in players contracts agains because fans felt it sent teh wrong message - the reality is should be a motivator - performance related pay and all that ;-)

 

This second time its tricky to judge as we dont know how bad things had got - I suspect our fate was sealed the moment we did not sell of loan out the higher wage earners in Jan as form what I have heard thats when the OD started increasing again...

[jonah]

Oh dear 19C, you've brought out one of the Crayon Kid stalkers again... that must mean you have made a valid point.

 

The issue is not whether Lowe or Wilde could have put in the cash to save the club, because neither of them (for whatever reason) claimed to have the cash to do so this season. Crouch was the one shooting his mouth off again saying he had £2m cash he would willingly put into the club - just not willingly enough to save it from administration and even possibly it's death it seems.

 

I would quite happily file Crouch away as yet another gobsh!te loadsamoney who never actually put a penny into the club after boasting they would (like Wilde, Trant, etc), except he isn't stepping down and sitting back to let new people come in - he's still in the mix, still on the pitch demanding fans cough up to support the club and still acting like he owns the club. That's a problem because as we've seen since Wilde first came along, the last thing we need now are more hollow promises and fan-friendly rhetoric. Fingers crossed he really can't afford to buy into the club again and fingers doubly-crossed we get a new owner who isn't stupid enough to include any of the ex-Directors in future plans.

[Give it to Ron]

This second time its tricky to judge as we dont know how bad things had got - I suspect our fate was sealed the moment we did not sell of loan out the higher wage earners in Jan as form what I have heard thats when the OD started increasing again...

 

Unsurprisingly FC I disagree....for me our fate was sealed when we appointed a Dutch revolutionary set up and not kept up the good feeling that we had at the end of the season. Lowe was in a cannot lose situation here with Pearson but just had to go that route.

We IMO would of had higher gates and still could of loaned out one or two high earners but we have totally wasted our loan market with 7 players and that has to be due to having management that do not know this league.

For every Pericard there was a Wright, Lucketti...and could of bought in some old freebies to supplement the youngsters we had to play.

[SP Saint]

I agree with everything Daren says above.

 

Why the hell should Crouch throw yet more money in to prop up the idiots who have kicked him in the teeth time and time again.

 

If Leon has £2 million more that he wants to spend on Saints, he would be far better spending it via a purchase of Southampton Football Club Ltd from the Administrators, possibly as a part of a consortium.

 

Who's to say he isn't already in the prcess of doing this even if he hasn't had the courtesy to tell Somedunce C*nteen or Alpine Saint.

 

I don't know why but I have this mental image of Somedunce going through obscure dictionaries in his sordid basement bedsit looking for more potential user names.

[hughieslastminutegoal]

When you say "nobody else has heard it", presumably you mean "and I've not heard it"?

 

Some people are happier to divulge that sort of information, others prefer to keep their counsel for various reasons - on here, I suspect that's mostly because people like you who won't even entertain that their side of the argument might not all be sweetness and light accuse the messenger of being "paid".

 

What's the point in putting information in the public domain if it's just going to be rubbished without any sort of reasonable thought process behind it other than "I don't like him/the person he's backing, therefore he must be talking crap"?

 

It might be an idea if people like 19C actually said what they want to say about that side of the story rather than asking "questions" for others to answer. Why can't he (and you) be up front and not keep coming at things obliquely?

[dubai_phil]

Originally Posted by Daren W

Many, many fans have posted on here stating that they felt Lowe didn't know what he was doing towards the end of both tenures and were roundly told that they knew nothing, were thick, were rabid anti Lowe numpties who had no grasp of the finer financial details.

 

They may have been a bit extreme in their dislike of Lowe... but were they wrong?

 

Think this is a victim of the phony war going on at the moment.

 

Some people are telling everybody everything, but so far nothing has come out about our "final days" from inside the club.

That could be because of politics, it could be because some of the information may damage the work of Mark Fry

 

So far the only inside the club type leaks we are hearing are about the financial short term problem or the number of ticket sales.

 

Wiser readers of the forum should understand that historically there are always more than one side to everything that has gone on at Saints and that we see a part of it as stories get told.

 

There is more to come, rubbishing Lowe at the moment and also some of our posters is simple a symptom of the helplessness that we all feel.

 

I think all of us deep down just want to RANT at the whole damned STUPID BLOODY MESS I know I do, but then we can only rant based on our view of one bit of history.

[um pahars]

I suspect our fate was sealed the moment we did not sell of loan out the higher wage earners in Jan as form what I have heard thats when the OD started increasing again...

 

I think you're about 6/7 months out!!!!!!!

 

Our fate was sealed the moment we dumped Pearson and went for the madness that was Jan Poortvliet. IMHO that appoinment had the single biggest impact on results on the pitch, attendances at SMS and £££££'s in the bank.

 

This Club was salvageable, make no mistake about that (Lowe and Wilde did not come back to preside over a funeral), but to salvage it would need a modicum of success on the pitch, something that Poortvliet failed to deliver and/or a spirit of togetherness off of it, something that Lowe/Wilde found it impossible to achieve.

 

We were in a very delicate position, but administring a dose of Poortvliet with Lowe as Chief Nurse is not the best treatment when you're in ICU.

 

Quite simply, it was a misatke for him to come back last summer.

[Victor]

 

In my personal opinion I do not believe a word the man says and that stems from pretty much the start of his chairmanship up until now and the whole £2m has been circumvented by the usual well would you invest retorts? The answer is no but neither would I have made it public in the first place. Crouch maybe a genuine and well meaning fan and ex-director who has always acted in good faith but his PR in that case has been an absolute disaster. A parody of PR IMO and wise businessmen IMO usually keep their counsel with regard to charitable donations and significant offers to help out should be kept private otherwise be able to withstand scrutiny, like understanding why he went public with his original offer for starters.

 

What the f... does a 'parody of PR' mean?

 

Anyway, PR is bull**** by definition and Lowe is the expert. Intelligent people will make up their minds from a number of sources and over a period of time and certainly won't do so from the contrived, agenda-ridden questions of a poster on this forum.

[um pahars]

Crayon Kid stalkers again... that must mean you have made a valid point.

 

About as valid as your quote about the overdraft under Crouch;)

 

Cue the silence:smt119

[John Smith]

So, at the eleventh hour, in the middle of the night, Crouch gets a knock at the door. Through the darkness, Crouch can make out the figure of a poor street urchin, face thick with coal and rags for clothes. As the urchin holds out his cap, he asks Crouch:

 

'Please Sir, can I have some more?'

 

Even though the face of Lowe on the image of a street urchin, begging for money, does put a wry smile on my face, thanks 19C! I don;t think for one single minute that Lowe would've gone on a begging mission in the eleventh hour, with cap in hand, to the man he despises, and chopped from the board. And in taking that money, would relinquish ANY power whatsoever in SLH.

 

The question surely remains, why was Lowe SO stubborn, that he INSISTED on getting Wilde (of all people) to knock Crouch out the way, promise us stability, tell us that he was the messiah and he would save us from Admin, push for promotion (yes he did claim this), and then, when everything was falling down around him, sat at his desk and DIDN'T even ask.

 

Lowe, cap in hand to Crouch, don;t make me laugh!

[SP Saint]

...the last thing we need now are more hollow promises and fan-friendly rhetoric.

 

Well the opposite way of doing things didn't work out too well either did it?

 

Your mate Rupert made a promise to bring us a Dutch revolution and actually delivered on it but it didn't seem to bring the punters back or the results did it?

 

He also didn't bother with fan-friendly rhetoric when he felt his time was better spent saving the club.

 

Fingers crossed he really can't afford to buy into the club again and fingers doubly-crossed we get a new owner who isn't stupid enough to include any of the ex-Directors in future plans.

 

That may or may not be the best option. Surely you of all people haven't forgotten the time when we thought anyone new was better than the incumbent regime?

 

I could live with Leon being involved again as long as Wilde and Lowe go back to their respective retirement homes and tax havens.

[Frank's cousin]

I could live with Leon being involvd again but he would have to preferably remove himself from Lawries backside first and drop all the fan friendly rhetoric in favour of ofa bit of serious managemnet decisions.

[dubai_phil]

I could live with Leon being involvd again but he would have to preferably remove himself from Lawries backside first and drop all the fan friendly rhetoric in favour of ofa bit of serious managemnet decisions.

 

Sorry Frank, I disagree with you on this one.

 

There is still a lot of laundry out there that needs washing. Do you honestly believe that if Leon walks in with his look at me grin I saved us that we will not have many more months of sniping attacks and damaging leaks?

 

From my analysis Crouch doesn't have the funds to get the club out of admin AND fund the continuing losses next season. I seriously hope that if this "front running" bid of Salz does get control, for OUR sakes, he makes his "buddy" take a back seat.

 

All In or All Out, as has been my position all along. This will never stop, the acrimony between the 3 of them will never rest and this club IF it survives will never be able to move on

[Frank's cousin]

I think you're about 6/7 months out!!!!!!!

 

Our fate was sealed the moment we dumped Pearson and went for the madness that was Jan Poortvliet. IMHO that appoinment had the single biggest impact on results on the pitch, attendances at SMS and £££££'s in the bank.

 

This Club was salvageable, make no mistake about that (Lowe and Wilde did not come back to preside over a funeral), but to salvage it would need a modicum of success on the pitch, something that Poortvliet failed to deliver and/or a spirit of togetherness off of it, something that Lowe/Wilde found it impossible to achieve.

 

We were in a very delicate position, but administring a dose of Poortvliet with Lowe as Chief Nurse is not the best treatment when you're in ICU.

 

Quite simply, it was a misatke for him to come back last summer.

 

Uhm, not surprizingingly I cant agree 100%, because we have no way of telling the outcome had pearson stayed with same restrictions on playing staff. JPs result show he was a mistake - after the fact you cant argue against that even if you felt it was a reasonable idea to start with, but I still dont think we would have had enough revenue generated by the gate if we had the same resuts under Pearson and its speculation to assume we would have done better - simply put folk lost interset because of the lack of success and CCC football - Had JP had success and we were in the playoffs under Lowe we would have had 22-25 k average same as we would had the same crap gate under Crouch and Pearson had the results been the same as we have now - as fans got worn doen by successive lack of success in teh CCC - thats the true comparitor. In MHO anyway and as speculation goes its equally valid as assuming Pearson would have had us even mid table with the same restrictions ....

 

 

What to really thinnk our average gate would have been this season if:

1. Lowe / JP - automatic promotion position

2. Lowe /JP - Playoff postion

3. LOwe/JP Mid table

4. Lowe /JP relegation fodder - 15k

5. Lowe/ Pearson - automatic promotion

6. Lowe/Pearson - palyoff

7. LOwe /pearson mid table

8. LOwe/Pearson relegation fodder - 15 k

9. Crouch Paerson - automatic promotion

10.Crouch/pearson playoff

11 CRouch pearson mid table

12. Crouch Pearson - relegation fodder - 15 k

Edited 17 April, 2009 by Frank's cousin

[Frank's cousin]

Sorry Frank, I disagree with you on this one.

 

There is still a lot of laundry out there that needs washing. Do you honestly believe that if Leon walks in with his look at me grin I saved us that we will not have many more months of sniping attacks and damaging leaks?

 

From my analysis Crouch doesn't have the funds to get the club out of admin AND fund the continuing losses next season. I seriously hope that if this "front running" bid of Salz does get control, for OUR sakes, he makes his "buddy" take a back seat.

 

All In or All Out, as has been my position all along. This will never stop, the acrimony between the 3 of them will never rest and this club IF it survives will never be able to move on

 

Uhm I know what you are saying, but for me its always been about what these guys ahve done and not personalities, so if they drop the crap and turnover new leaves and genuinely live up to the 'new m' stuff, I say fairs fair - life is too short to bare grudges especially over something like football. If it means its teh only offer that preventsliquidation surely it would not matter who it came from? (as a starting point) - we no longer have teh luxury of choice anyway - its someone appointed by teh administrtaors or bust and if we are serious about Saints and care abouts its long term survival we will support the team who ever is in the boardroom and in spite of them if they turn out to me more numpties....

[SW11_Saint]

It is reasonable to assume Lowe or Wilde did not have that amount of cash available

Why is it reasonable to assume that? Both have amassed a personal fortune, Wilde certainly.

 

Interesting angle 19/Guided - trying to pin blame on Crouch now for Administration for not making this loan.

 

Really fella, time to give it up and move on. He's gone. Have a cry if that helps, but he's gone.

Edited 17 April, 2009 by SW11_Saint

[dubai_phil]

Uhm I know what you are saying' date=' but for me its always been [b']about what these guys ahve done[/b] and not personalities, so if they drop the crap and turnover new leaves and genuinely live up to the 'new m' stuff, I say fairs fair - life is too short to bare grudges especially over something like football. If it means its teh only offer that preventsliquidation surely it would not matter who it came from? (as a starting point) - we no longer have teh luxury of choice anyway - its someone appointed by teh administrtaors or bust and if we are serious about Saints and care abouts its long term survival we will support the team who ever is in the boardroom and in spite of them if they turn out to me more numpties....

 

about what these guys ahve done This is the problem - we don't KNOW yet what they have done. We have some supposition, and we have widely held opinions. Just imagine somebody posting - "Lowe had investment and Leon screwed it up" or "we kept going longer because Leon had said he would help out" (Total suposition before I get drowned out but as a BIG "for instance" not as an actual) we'd explode but then what if some proof came out.....

 

they drop the crap and turnover new leaves lol - you didn't really think that through - Rupert turn over a new leaf :cool:

 

I agree that there is ONE over-riding issue at this time

 

SURVIVAL.

 

But sometimes, I feel as if we've been in a recurring groundhog day nightmare with all of this for years and the concept of surviving but staying in that twilight zone just depresses the hell out of me.

 

What did WE as FANS ever do wrong in this or a previous life to deserve all of this CRAP?

[um pahars]

Uhm' date=' not surprizingingly I cant agree 100%, because we have no way of telling the outcome had pearson stayed with same restrictions on playing staff. JPs result show he was a mistake - after the fact you cant argue against that even if you felt it was a reasonable idea to start with, but I still dont think we would have had enough revenue generated by the gate if we had the same resuts under Pearson and its speculation to assume we would have done better - simply put folk lost interset because of the lack of success and CCC football - Had JP had success and we were in the playoffs under Lowe we would have had 22-25 k average same as we would had the same crap gate under Crouch and Pearson had the results been the same as we have now - as fans got worn doen by successive lack of success in teh CCC - thats the true comparitor. In MHO anyway and as speculation goes its equally valid as assuming Pearson would have had us even mid table with the same restrictions ....[/quote']

 

Of course it is totally hypothetical to suggest that Pearson would have performed any better, and of course it is possible that under Pearson we would still be languishing in the bottom three (just as it was possible for us to be top of the table under him!!!).

 

BUT of course whilst it is totally impossible to prove either way, if you reckon your speculation that Pearson would have performed just as badly as Poortvliet is just as valid, then I think if people had to line up behind Pearson or Poortvliet, then I'm guessing that your queue would be pretty short;)

[jonah]

Your mate Rupert

 

You see it's hard to even start to take you seriously when you have to say things like that. It's like S4E all over again.

 

made a promise to bring us a Dutch revolution and actually delivered on it but it didn't seem to bring the punters back or the results did it?

 

He also didn't bother with fan-friendly rhetoric when he felt his time was better spent saving the club.

 

Quite right - I don't remember any b*ll*cks about "we got our club back" or hollow promises of putting in cash, just a statement that he would try his best to get the club out of the mess it was in. But of course you're trying to steer a conversation about Crouch round to one about Lowe, anyone would think people were obsessive about the bloke...

 

I could live with Leon being involved again as long as Wilde and Lowe go back to their respective retirement homes and tax havens.

 

Personally I think he's pushing Wilde in terms of unsuitability:

 

* Burst onto the scene by claiming he would make "significant financial investment" in Saints in January 2006

* Paid 20% over market price and quickly showed he didn't really know what was going on at the club

* Promised to proxy 100,000 shares to the Saints Trust but never did

* Having bought the right to choose the future of the club's direction, failed to do any due dilligence on Wilde and fell for the most blatant lies about investment in the history of football (well nearly :-))

* Having brought Wilde to power, started to make hollow promises of £2m cash (since 2007 or so?)

* Together with Wilde hid behind the Takeover Panel as an excuse for not being able to invest in the club

* Having then become chairman, still wouldn't put any money into the club despite being in charge - if you won't do it then Leon, when will you?

* Having stated in the program notes that we were "financially secure and don't need to release players", he errr, released players - Skacel and Rasiak out on loan (though as chairman he obviously left it to Hoos to tell us that)

* Naive claims we were heading for the playoffs

* Appointed Dodd & Gorman as the best management team to take us forward despite previously criticising the appointments of Gray and Wigley

* Backtracked on that pretty quickly and plucked someone from obscurity to lead our fight for the playoffs, sorry I mean relegation

* Lo and behold that "obscurity" was actually on the books of McMenemy & Co Agency

* Crowed about his appointment of Pearson when we scraped survival in the last 20 minutes of the season thanks to other teams' failure to win - quite some result that given we were heading for the playoffs when he appointed D&G 3 months earlier

* Continually told fans we were getting investment in 3 months. Or was it 6 months. Sometimes it was 9 months. He even stated "it's Paul Allen" as a fact

* Ranted and raved at the company's AGM, behaviour so impetuous and childish that the AGM itself was nearly stopped, culminating in a grown man stomping to the front of the room and demanding that others (sheep) in the room walk out of a formal company meeting with him. Ah yes, the club's best interests at heart there again Leon

* Continually claims to have £2m cash available to invest in the club, but still fails to save the club and lets it fall into administration

 

So given so much nonsense in such a short period of time, it's hard to know what makes him so unsuitable - the poor PR, the lack of integrity, the poor decisions, or just generally opening his gob and having an opinion without thinking it through. No doubt some people are going to evangelise the bloke now, and others will somehow think addressing Crouch's flaws relates to Lowe (obsessives). I think these facts speak for themselves though.... I don't want Crouch anywhere near the club other than in an expensive box as a fan.

[um pahars]

about what these guys ahve done This is the problem - we don't KNOW yet what they have done. We have some supposition, and we have widely held opinions. Just imagine somebody posting - "Lowe had investment and Leon screwed it up" or "we kept going longer because Leon had said he would help out" (Total suposition before I get drowned out but as a BIG "for instance" not as an actual) we'd explode but then what if some proof came out.....

 

they drop the crap and turnover new leaves lol - you didn't really think that through - Rupert turn over a new leaf :cool:

 

I agree that there is ONE over-riding issue at this time

 

SURVIVAL.

 

But sometimes, I feel as if we've been in a recurring groundhog day nightmare with all of this for years and the concept of surviving but staying in that twilight zone just depresses the hell out of me.

 

What did WE as FANS ever do wrong in this or a previous life to deserve all of this CRAP?

 

Have to agree and disagree Phil.

 

I agree that we really have to try and move on and look to the future and IMHO the future would be brighter without anyone tainted from recent history.

 

I still have no idea why Crouch and Richards are being wheeled out, but at the same time am grateful for their £50k and ?k respectively. Is there a belief that no one else is capable or willing to do the work?? What work are they doing?? What is the alternative?? Is it due to the administrator trying to be at arms length from the football club??

 

And the part I disagree with is if the case is we are soon to be beggars then we may not be able to do much choosing. I said quite a while back that if the alternative was Lowe or the Wessex Premier, then I would take his money.

[Frank's cousin]

Of course it is totally hypothetical to suggest that Pearson would have performed any better, and of course it is possible that under Pearson we would still be languishing in the bottom three (just as it was possible for us to be top of the table under him!!!).

 

BUT of course whilst it is totally impossible to prove either way, if you reckon your speculation that Pearson would have performed just as badly as Poortvliet is just as valid, then I think if people had to line up behind Pearson or Poortvliet, then I'm guessing that your queue would be pretty short;)

 

Thats assuming you know which queue I was in UP! ;-)

[Daren W]

I would agree with pretty much all you said in you post but feel the need to respond to this point - The reason for the many numpty jibes was probably to fair because most of those making the points on finance and controls were the same who had previoslu and quite recently been advocating a spend spend policy and had been critical of any prudence as it lacked 'ambition' - It woudl be also fair to assume that NO chairman can be blamed for the difficulties faced on relegaton when you suddenly see 30mil income loss - blame for relegation yes, but its the Prem/football league income set up that cause the financial mess to start with - not financial incompetence - and he was criticised by same said 'numpties' for having relegation clauses in players contracts agains because fans felt it sent teh wrong message - the reality is should be a motivator - performance related pay and all that ;-)

 

This second time its tricky to judge as we dont know how bad things had got - I suspect our fate was sealed the moment we did not sell of loan out the higher wage earners in Jan as form what I have heard thats when the OD started increasing again...

 

Oh I agree frank and I think if any fan was criticising Lowe after Cardiff and before Strachan walked then they really would have been numpties but I do feel, with hindsight, that the way the club was run was a recipe for disaster. All too often we bought cheap and yes, sometimes they proved to be absolute bargains.... But sometimes they proved to be absolute donkeys. It's been often refered to on here that whilst in the premiership, transfers in equalled transfers out so if you look at the very high profile big transfers out we had (Wayne Bridge, Dean Richards, James Beattie, Peter Crouch, Kevin Davies) then surely we must have had a fair amount of players we gave away. Now whilst £6million for Wayne Bridge obviously sounds great business, it's not if his replacement is a step backwards or if another 6 players are given away. We are talking about £1 million here, the sort of sum that some now think if Crouch would give gift wrapped we'd all be happy as larry.

[um pahars]

Thats assuming you know which queue I was in UP! ;-)

 

Maybe you need to start a new thread along the lines of:

 

"Add your name here if you think/thought we would still be in the relegation zone had Pearson been kept on (even if he had the same parameters to operate in)????".

 

Would you sign up???

 

Our fate was sealed the minute this experiment failed to produce the results some beleved it would. Even a modicum of success and/or a spirit of unity could have enabled us to slowly trade ourselves out of our tough predicament.

 

Success on the pitch drives a football club, and as wehave seen failure also decimates it.

 

Lowe and Wilde did not return to preside over a funeral, they realised we were salvageable. It was always going to be a tough ask, but one that was made all the more harder by some crass decisions that began last summer and just continued throughout this dire season.

 

The changes instigated by Lowe and Co. last summer have simply failed.

[KMondo]

Crouch said.... "He was informed as a major shareholder the night before the shares were being suspended". Now Crouch could always be telling porkies, but if Lowe had asked Crouch for a bail out and he had declined, i'm sure lowe would have told us about it during his media rounds

 

Why the hell should Crouch throw yet more money in to prop up the idiots who have kicked him in the teeth time and time again. If Leon has £2 million more that he wants to spend on Saints, he would be far better spending it via a purchase of Southampton Football Club Ltd from the Administrators, possibly as a part of a consortium.

 

I don;t think for one single minute that Lowe would've gone on a begging mission in the eleventh hour, with cap in hand, to the man he despises, and chopped from the board. And in taking that money, would relinquish ANY power whatsoever in SLH.

 

I think these guys have said more than enough here to put this whole "Crouch could have saved us from administration" nonsense to bed.

[miserableoldgit]

This BS is getting boring and more than a bit stupid. For once I will post something that is more than an opinion - this is FACT! They were ALL responsible for our demise to some degree or another. The only debate is the allocation of the blame. NOBODY is blame free. For the Lowe/Wilde camp to blame Crouch/McMenemy for all of our ills is as bad as the Crouch/Mac crowd pointing the finger at L/W. As for those blaming the fans for all of the problems.......:confused::mad:

 

I realise that if you want a BALANCED view of the situation, with the exception of a handful of posters, TSW is probably not the place to look, but for goodness sake can we have less of the Pantomime Villain histrionics please?

[Frank's cousin]

Maybe you need to start a new thread along the lines of:

 

"Add your name here if you think/thought we would still be in the relegation zone had Pearson been kept on (even if he had the same parameters to operate in)????".

 

Would you sign up???

 

 

The changes instigated by Lowe and Co. last summer have simply failed.

 

LOL... would I sign up - possibly and thats no disrespect or slur on Pearson - you know I have repeatedly said I rate him , like him and would have been more than happy to see him be given a chance - but like most fans, you try and see positives in most things and get behind the man in the hot seat and support the lads whatever is thrown at you. ...and yes I admit I could see logic in 'Kids + dutch model shocker' - same as there was very strong logic for 'got a good un, lets keep him on'

 

... yes the changes have failed us, cant argue with our position or predicament - most of us hoped they would work... for the sake of the club - not out of some blind loyalty for Lowes decision... but weve been there before.

[bridge too far]

This BS is getting boring and more than a bit stupid. For once I will post something that is more than an opinion - this is FACT! They were ALL responsible for our demise to some degree or another. The only debate is the allocation of the blame. NOBODY is blame free. For the Lowe/Wilde camp to blame Crouch/McMenemy for all of our ills is as bad as the Crouch/Mac crowd pointing the finger at L/W. As for those blaming the fans for all of the problems.......:confused::mad:

 

I realise that if you want a BALANCED view of the situation, with the exception of a handful of posters, TSW is probably not the place to look, but for goodness sake can we have less of the Pantomime Villain histrionics please?

 

It's not the only thread that's getting boring MOG.

 

Every single thread sinks into constant argument and blame. Some people on here just won't let things go, will they.

 

They say women hold their spite and vitriol for a long time but I reckon most women would fall by the wayside in comparison with some posters.

 

We are where we are - can't we just all move on without delving into the archives?

 

There's a club to save FFS :mad:

[SaintRobbie]

It was well documented prior to administration that Crouch offered to invest £2m into the club under the condition that Lowe and Wilde match his contribution. It is reasonable to assume Lowe or Wilde did not have that amount of cash available and it was well known right up till the last minute Lowe was franticly searching for investment to satisfy Barclays and save the club.

 

Assuming I am correct in my understanding I find it inconceivable Lowe would not have approached Crouch and asked him to at a minimum loan the club £2m in order that we could get back within our operating limits imposed by the bank.

 

Do you think Lowe contacted Crouch?

Did Crouch refuse his request and if so was he aware that his refusal to invest unconditionally would be put the club into or on the brink of administration? Do you think he MUST have known it?

 

Finally as we know Crouch and McMenemy travel to games together can we still believe McMenemy's comment on the OS that he was unaware of the perilious state the club was in?

 

Are those who are held in such high regard by many fans acting as we would expect them to in accordance with that position of respect they are afforded?

 

I don't know but I would like these questions clarified.

 

I think Crouch knew we'd see the back of Lowe and Wilde forever only through Administration. The man's a genius and a true fan... no further discussion necessary.

 

Bring on the new owners and onwards and upwards!

[Frank's cousin]

It's not the only thread that's getting boring MOG.

 

Every single thread sinks into constant argument and blame. Some people on here just won't let things go, will they.

 

They say women hold their spite and vitriol for a long time but I reckon most women would fall by the wayside in comparison with some posters.

 

We are where we are - can't we just all move on without delving into the archives?

 

There's a club to save FFS :mad:

 

Oh stop your whining ;-) Its actually been quite good natured really - I guess a sense of gallows humour is seeping in - you are both right - we are in the mess and it may still get worse and now how we got tere is irrelevent in the grand scheme of things -apart from a big report required for any new board if we are lucky with 'Lessons learned' in bold across the cover.

[um pahars]

apart from a big report required for any new board if we are lucky with 'Lessons learned' in bold across the cover.

 

Wishful thinking I'm afraid!!!!!!

 

I reckon the football industry must have the highest ratio of nutty owners/bosses/blaggers/shysters per business of any business sector.

[Window Cleaner]

Wishful thinking I'm afraid!!!!!!

 

I reckon the football industry must have the highest ratio of nutty owners/bosses/blaggers/shysters per business of any business sector.

 

You've obviously never been down to the Portobello Rd on market days.

 

"Put it down Clive ,we ain't got a begging licence" one of my favourite quotes of all time.They were still using pounds shillings and pence well into the 80's.

Always 2 bob each, never 10p.

[OldNick]

Why should LC save the club anymore than me or anybody else. There was a board and many hangers on who have had plenty out of the club. They would have known the situation and as a WHOLE should have taken the measures.It is easy pushing forward the most generous person forward to foot the bill. LC I have criticised on occasions but I do not see why he should be held accountable any more than the others who have so let us down for decades.

I and many others have trudged to games for 40 years , never getting as much as a complimentary cup of bovril and looked down upon from the centre of the stands as just a cash cow. A fool who had become so ingrained in loving the club and in turn treated like a mug.

Yes i know I volunteered for it ,I was not forced into supporting Saints, or forced into having near fights with people who dared to question SFC's name, having heated conversations about MLT being lazy, or how our former manager had been 2nd in command and overseen one of the generations greatest players being overlooked and Carlton Palter or Geoff Thomas player in his place.

LC should not have lost another £2m for his love of the club and it is wrong now genuine well meaning people are being encouraged to put their hard earned money into it now.

If he was wanting to buy the club and had overseen us going into administration so he could buy it as a snip is another matter of course.

[OldNick]

You've obviously never been down to the Portobello Rd on market days.

 

"Put it down Clive ,we ain't got a begging licence" one of my favourite quotes of all time.They were still using pounds shillings and pence well into the 80's.

Always 2 bob each, never 10p.

My favourite was a collegue when he was offered a low price for an item looked the lady up and down and said 'These are not the proceeds of a burlary madam.' and promptly snatched the item back and pushed them out of his shop