Minty Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 Minty, do you not have any questions, how, in the space of three years, we have gone from a well run (not in the Red) premiership club, to collecting player wages in a bucket. Do you not have a wish to see where the money went..............'cause I f*****g well do. Fair point, and yeah, if we were to get ACCURATE figures and explanations for what happened, then of course I would be interested to see it. I'm just not sure how accurate any figures in the public domain actually are at present. But then, beyond that, I maintain my point. Maybe it's just me, but I just don't care about analysing it all because I have grown so tired of it all. I really do hope that anyone who has made a mistake or contributed to our downfall, will learn from it, but if those people are to no longer be at the club (I hope) then I want to move on and let new people run the club as they see fit. Each to their own... obviously I understand people wanting to know more about what went on, but not me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 nickh....here's novel approach............stop worrying yourself to death, wait and see what the outcome is.I think deeply about things, it can be a failing but also has served me well in my business and personal life. If you can close your mind to such issues then fine, but the clubs survival is not yet assured Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ponty Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 For those of you fed-up with the mug-slinging, why dont you avoid the thread. Some of us are not fed up with it, and some of us want the full story of the last 5 or 6 years out in the open. Then every event can be put into its proper context. I would love somebody to write a comprehensive book about the PLC years, or at least about the time since the FA Cup Final. Dunc ? Not advice that you can direct at me, I'm afraid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ponty Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 Also, one day I'd love nothing more than to sit down with a book about the 1997-2009 years, full of every piece of insipid and underhanded work which may or may not have taken place at The Dell and SMS, but RIGHT NOW I'm more concerned about the immediate future. The idea that not learning from the past will cause the same to happen in the future is irrelevant to all of us on here at this time. We cannot influence the decisions of the administrators by b*tching about Crouch, Lowe and Wilde on this forum. It does nothing to heal the division between supporters and it does nothing towards improving relations on this forum. It's a past that needs revisiting in the future, not before the future is even safe from extinction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clapham Saint Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 Clapham I have enjoyed reading your take on the administration.It has helped me ease my worries and then give me more. Would you say from the administrator side opf the fence that you are confident that things will go forward or are you concerned that the people who have made the offer may walk as it is starting to take too much time. I do understand that they would have invested x amount and so will perhaps stay for the long haul but I hate to think they throw their hands up in despair and walk. I hate starting responses like this (but seem to all the time on this forum unfortunately) but "it depends". I don't think that the "administration side" of things should make any difference to potential investors willingness to see a deal through to completion. If they get fed up and walk away now then they probably would have done so if the administration hadn't happened anyway. Buying companies takes time if they are serious they will have known this before they started. One of the advantages of the administration process is that it can offer a clean break. A purchaser doesn't have the buy the club warts and all he/she can buy just the elements that they want to take forward. If you ignore the football league complications administration makes things easier in many respects. A purchaser can just buy the assets that he wants without taking on any of the liabilities. A purchaser is dealing with a single person (the Administrator) and does not have to get around division of opinion at board level or other conflicting shareholders etc The only real complication is that there is a point at which if the Administrator does not think that a deal can be done he will accept that there is no buyer and close the club down. In my opinion however the eventuality where the club is closed for good is very very unlikely. At the moment Mr Fry is incurring costs in keeping the club going. The next big payment will be wages due at the end of the month. I'm pretty confident that Mr Fry will have no intention of paying those wages. He will want to sell the club before then and leave the wages to the new owner. Lets say there are 3 interested parties in negotiations. They will each have their own business plans and their own level of funding. At the moment Mr Fry will be trying to get them to out bid each other increasing the price as high as possible. Slowly but surely the bidders will either up their bids in competition or they will pull out leaving the way clear for the other consortium(s). If all 3 (?) bidders pull out it will be a disaster for Mr. Fry. Not only will he have raised nothing at all for the creditors he will have incurred a bucket load of expenses (player wages/ solicitors fees/ his fees/ the milk man etc)) in doing so. The longer than this drags on the greater the urgency to complete a deal for all concerned. My advice if you aren't ITK and want to stay sane is to try to calm down and wait and see. (Bit of a ramble but I can't really be bothered to go back through re-ordering the points so I hope it doesn’t read too badly.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 I hate starting responses like this (but seem to all the time on this forum unfortunately) but "it depends". I don't think that the "administration side" of things should make any difference to potential investors willingness to see a deal through to completion. If they get fed up and walk away now then they probably would have done so if the administration hadn't happened anyway. Buying companies takes time if they are serious they will have known this before they started. One of the advantages of the administration process is that it can offer a clean break. A purchaser doesn't have the buy the club warts and all he/she can buy just the elements that they want to take forward. If you ignore the football league complications administration makes things easier in many respects. A purchaser can just buy the assets that he wants without taking on any of the liabilities. A purchaser is dealing with a single person (the Administrator) and does not have to get around division of opinion at board level or other conflicting shareholders etc The only real complication is that there is a point at which if the Administrator does not think that a deal can be done he will accept that there is no buyer and close the club down. In my opinion however the eventuality where the club is closed for good is very very unlikely. At the moment Mr Fry is incurring costs in keeping the club going. The next big payment will be wages due at the end of the month. I'm pretty confident that Mr Fry will have no intention of paying those wages. He will want to sell the club before then and leave the wages to the new owner. Lets say there are 3 interested parties in negotiations. They will each have their own business plans and their own level of funding. At the moment Mr Fry will be trying to get them to out bid each other increasing the price as high as possible. Slowly but surely the bidders will either up their bids in competition or they will pull out leaving the way clear for the other consortium(s). If all 3 (?) bidders pull out it will be a disaster for Mr. Fry. Not only will he have raised nothing at all for the creditors he will have incurred a bucket load of expenses (player wages/ solicitors fees/ his fees/ the milk man etc)) in doing so. The longer than this drags on the greater the urgency to complete a deal for all concerned. My advice if you aren't ITK and want to stay sane is to try to calm down and wait and see. (Bit of a ramble but I can't really be bothered to go back through re-ordering the points so I hope it doesn’t read too badly.) Not a ramble and very easy to understand Ta. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 Then why are you on this thread Nick? same reason as the people I was agreeing with but you aren't questioning! intriguing title mainly! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plumstead_Saint Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 At the moment Mr Fry is incurring costs in keeping the club going. The next big payment will be wages due at the end of the month. I'm pretty confident that Mr Fry will have no intention of paying those wages. He will want to sell the club before then and leave the wages to the new owner. The Sunday Times claimed that the wages bill is around £500,000 and falls due on the 3rd Thursday of the month. So is Mr Fry's deadline 21 May? Oh and BTW, are there any other beans spilled in the Echo today - for the people like me who can't buy a copy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strangely Brown Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 We'll find out if libel writs start flying in from the Cotswolds, wont we ?? Not if he has to use his own money he won't! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windmill Arm 2 Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 TBH, the mud-slinging has all got very boring. I'm far more concerned with the future than with the past. If a loved one of mine became the victim of a serious life threatening assault or even murder I would want as much detail about the event in order to help the grieving process, and or prevent the situation arrising again. Any thing that may keep that toffee nosed **** away from football needs to be made public. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boxosponge Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/leagues/championship/southampton/5274338/Southampton-City-Council-should-rescue-its-football-club-in-their-darkest-hour.html good article from the torygraph Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clapham Saint Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 The Sunday Times claimed that the wages bill is around £500,000 and falls due on the 3rd Thursday of the month. So is Mr Fry's deadline 21 May? Oh and BTW, are there any other beans spilled in the Echo today - for the people like me who can't buy a copy? I am as far away from being even close to ITK as it is possible to get but that would be my guess. Its quite possible though that there may be other big payments coming up that we haven't thought of or that Mr. Fry has set his own deadline just to speed things up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Braunton Saint Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 Surely its only right as 'supporters' (sounds better than 'customers') of the club that we know some of the 'truth' behind what has gone on at our club for all these years. It has to be the truth though not a directed 'duck shoot' at anyone whose universally unpopular. It might do us all good to put rumours to bed and finally know where it all when so badly wrong and get a idea of who was at fault! As a previous poster said knowing Lowe's taste for litigation I would have thought that the Echo would double check anything they print. Then, bring on the future! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dalek2003 Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 Seconded........buy buy buy!!!!!!!! It seems that alledgedly....Cowen voted against the return of Hoddle......um!! Lowe split the board with the appointment of SCW Appointment of Dodd and Gorman due to Prospective investers stating thay would want their own man!!!!! If Cowen voted against hoddle then he has played a massive part in the downfall of this club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 If Cowen voted against hoddle then he has played a massive part in the downfall of this club. What complete nonsense. Hoddle has been an abject failure at every club he's been at since he left us for the simple reason that the man is a ****. Players are perceptive of managers who are ****s and Hoddle commands no respect because of it. Once his past reputation for being a great player had waned and he was seen for the person he is he lost any respect he might once have had. In short he's like Lowe - burnt out and past it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dalek2003 Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 He did alright for us and you cannot deny that ! He would most likely have kept us in the Premier league ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 If Cowen voted against hoddle then he has played a massive part in the downfall of this club. http://www.glennhoddle.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ottery st mary Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 Hoddle is yesterdays news and does not want to manage us again....My Auntie Eileen told me this last night. Can you imagine MLT being our manager and he would be ten times better than Doddle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dalek2003 Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 Hoddle is yesterdays news and does not want to manage us again....My Auntie Eileen told me this last night. Can you imagine MLT being our manager and he would be ten times better than Doddle. When we have a serious study of where the club began to decline the failure to appoint Hoddle will be seen as one of the most crucial decisions. A small minority of fans influneced that decision. They know that it was a big mistake but they won't own up to it !!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ottery st mary Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 When we have a serious study of where the club began to decline the failure to appoint Hoddle will be seen as one of the most crucial decisions. A small minority of fans influneced that decision. They know that it was a big mistake but they won't own up to it !!!! I suppose him and Twaddle could make us a few bob by singing in the lounges...At least we could afford his wages. Pass the bucket around and all that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 He did alright for us and you cannot deny that ! He would most likely have kept us in the Premier league ! Paul Sturrock would most likely have kept us in PL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dalek2003 Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 Well PS did keep plymouth in the CCC.....just !!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solentstars Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 He did alright for us and you cannot deny that ! He would most likely have kept us in the Premier league ! they do deny it, your talking to the usual suspects who loving posting their bile and who took pride in wanted saints to lose games last season for their warped logic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 If Cowen voted against hoddle then he has played a massive part in the downfall of this club. Will you apologise for blaming the fans then? (not that it's relevant in any way at all to anything really...) Odd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Landrew Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 Paul Sturrock would most likely have kept us in PL. I agree. Typically unambitious choice by Saints, but if PS had stayed on, I think he would have kept us up, and perhaps a little more. Certainly had the tactical nous IMO, just not the required image of a Premiership manager. Couldn't take the stress though, so they say. I think the first signs of his Parkinson's was waiting in the wings. Wrong manager, but he got my respect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ottery st mary Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 they do deny it, your talking to the usual suspects who loving posting their bile and who took pride in wanted saints to lose games last season for their warped logic. Sorry solent have I missed the bile...wot you on about...please explain your little rant or have I misunderstood your Lowe rant... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 Will you apologise for blaming the fans then? (not that it's relevant in any way at all to anything really...) Odd. Shush. We must wait for the "serious study" to start before any of us, except Dalekio is allowed to comment. Diamond Lights . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solentstars Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 When we have a serious study of where the club began to decline the failure to appoint Hoddle will be seen as one of the most crucial decisions. A small minority of fans influneced that decision. They know that it was a big mistake but they won't own up to it !!!!at the end of the day its the directors who bottled it ie cowen its in todays echo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dalek2003 Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 Will you apologise for blaming the fans then? (not that it's relevant in any way at all to anything really...) Odd. I will NOT apologise for blaming the vocal minority who helped to scupper the saints. Who do I apologose to anyway, they are too ashamed to own up ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocknrollman no2 Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 they do deny it, your talking to the usual suspects who loving posting their bile and who took pride in wanted saints to lose games last season for their warped logic. You call it bile,but most on here would call it truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 Unless Hoddle was the only prospective appointment better than Wigley.... OBVIOUSLY NOT, then the whole argument is entirely moot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 Sorry solent have I missed the bile...wot you on about...please explain your little rant or have I misunderstood your Lowe rant... He's one of Ruperts original groupies. He denies it now though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 The two most interesting things that came out of The Echo's stuff tonight were: a) The salary comparisons of Burley, Pearson and Poortvliet. I'm all up for saving money but spending £60,000 on your manager (actually head Coahc) is somewhat asking for trouble. And if you're on that much then I'm not sure I believe that he paid the Helmond compo!!!!!!! That had to be one hell of a false economy. b) The other interesting fact was that Crouch had managed to get Norwich Union to agree to some sort of holiday/derferral of the stadium "loan" costs bring it down from £2.4m per year to £1m per year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dalek2003 Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 at the end of the day its the directors who bottled it ie cowen its in todays echo. Bottled it because of a very vocal but misguided bunch of fans that put a petty vendetta above the bigger picture. Pompey fans were able to welcome back Saggy Chops because they knew he could do a job. Where there is a need etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solentstars Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 Sorry solent have I missed the bile...wot you on about...please explain your little rant or have I misunderstood your Lowe rant... the lowe gang ottery and stanley:p your the one who mentioned lowe again. what a suprise ,you make a good team . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dalek2003 Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 Unless Hoddle was the only prospective appointment better than Wigley.... OBVIOUSLY NOT, then the whole argument is entirely moot. There was not a great field at the time. Hence, why PS was chosen....or what other reason was he chosen ? PS was a totoally biszzare choice ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 I will NOT apologise for blaming the vocal minority who helped to scupper the saints. Who do I apologose to anyway, they are too ashamed to own up ! I admit, I am ashamed for not wanting a religious maniac, ego driven, inarticulate, 80s haired, tight shorted, permatanned, Le God maltreating, "one of them things", guru reliant, oddballs as our manager. Damn me and my destructive influence. What I would have liked is any manager who is reasonably competent. That could have been Paul Sturrock. It could have been David Moyes. It could have been Sam Allardyce. **** it - it could have been Glenn Hoddle actually. It certainly wasn't Wigley. When you can point at the fans that lobbied loudly for Wigley to be appointed, and when you can point at a shred of evidence that any fan's views were consdired at board level you might have the tiniest hint of a raison d'etre for your strange obssession. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ottery st mary Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 the lowe gang ottery and stanley:p your the one who mentioned lowe again. what a suprise ,you make a good team . Sorry solent but you said bile..where.. when ..wot.....You my son do not have to mention Lowey...I can see the luv in your eyes.:heart:..like shining stars over the solent as you think of the big boy... Anyway enough of this leg pulling.:smt075...You are only joking as is Dalek....SURELY:p.. Sorry.. I mentioned Lowey...:smt075 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solentstars Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 Bottled it because of a very vocal but misguided bunch of fans that put a petty vendetta above the bigger picture. Pompey fans were able to welcome back Saggy Chops because they knew he could do a job. Where there is a need etc. agree but most clubs have vocal fans but also some deadheads just like pompey have john westwoods who did not want harry back at all. mandric saw the bigger picture but its the directors at our club who failed to appoint hoddle who must take the blame and going for a 3rd division manager,not the fans, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solentstars Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 Sorry solent but you said bile..where.. when ..wot.....You my son do not have to mention Lowey...I can see the luv in your eyes.:heart:..like shining stars over the solent as you think of the big boy... Anyway enough of this leg pulling.:smt075...You are only joking as is Dalek....SURELY:p.. Sorry.. I mentioned Lowey...:smt075 i forgive you:heart: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 Le God maltreating. A lot of people forget the way Hoddle treated Matt Le Tissier. Hoddle tried to sign him when he was Chelsea boss and because Le Tissier turned him down he shunned him when he was England manager. That's the type of person Hoddle is and why i'll always despise the man with a passion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dalek2003 Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 A lot of people forget the way Hoddle treated Matt Le Tissier. Hoddle tried to sign him when he was Chelsea boss and because Le Tissier turned him down he shunned him when he was England manager. That's the type of person Hoddle is and why i'll always despise the man with a passion. Yes, a manager that is strong, makes a decision and wins over the changing room. When you are a leader you have to make a decision and you have to be strong. The worst type of leaders are those with no authority and who pander to the masses ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alain Perrin Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 The two most interesting things that came out of The Echo's stuff tonight were: a) The salary comparisons of Burley, Pearson and Poortvliet. I'm all up for saving money but spending £60,000 on your manager (actually head Coahc) is somewhat asking for trouble. And if you're on that much then I'm not sure I believe that he paid the Helmond compo!!!!!!! That had to be one hell of a false economy. b) The other interesting fact was that Crouch had managed to get Norwich Union to agree to some sort of holiday/derferral of the stadium "loan" costs bring it down from £2.4m per year to £1m per year. False economy or not, it kind of proves how much **** we were in. I'd suspect there were clauses in the contract to reward more heavily based on performance etc. From JP's point of view, even if it was the same salary as before, the opportunity / future opportunities that would result from doing well would make it attractive. As it was, it screwed both parties. On the stadium loan, the accounts show the debt went up last year by a million or so, so that would suggest some kind of restructuring (lengthening the term, payment holidays etc.). It becomes more apparent that this year was about making cash flow match expenses. Signing Forecast on a long contract, or buying Morgan on a staggered basis all had to fit within those constraints. The Forecast contract is an interesting length for a reserve keeper - made up figures but £4K per week for 3 years or £3K a week for 5 years. Perhaps the 5 year contract is a win win from a cashflow perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 Yes, a manager that is strong, makes a decision and wins over the changing room. When you are a leader you have to make a decision and you have to be strong. The worst type of leaders are those with no authority and who pander to the masses ! So Hoddle shunning Le Tissier for England because of what went on when he was Chelsea boss is the sign of a strong leader? I'd say it's the sign of an utter ****. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 False economy or not, it kind of proves how much **** we were in. I'd suspect there were clauses in the contract to reward more heavily based on performance etc. From JP's point of view, even if it was the same salary as before, the opportunity / future opportunities that would result from doing well would make it attractive. As it was, it screwed both parties. On the stadium loan, the accounts show the debt went up last year by a million or so, so that would suggest some kind of restructuring (lengthening the term, payment holidays etc.). It becomes more apparent that this year was about making cash flow match expenses. Signing Forecast on a long contract, or buying Morgan on a staggered basis all had to fit within those constraints. The Forecast contract is an interesting length for a reserve keeper - made up figures but £4K per week for 3 years or £3K a week for 5 years. Perhaps the 5 year contract is a win win from a cashflow perspective. What? It was a crock of ****e waste of money. End of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 False economy or not, it kind of proves how much **** we were in. I'd suspect there were clauses in the contract to reward more heavily based on performance etc. From JP's point of view, even if it was the same salary as before, the opportunity / future opportunities that would result from doing well would make it attractive. As it was, it screwed both parties. Whlilst there are always exceptions, I think it is fair to say that generally you get what you paid for. The manager is the single most important person at a football Club. Everything revolves around him, and going for the "cheap" option and employing someone so utterly out of his depth, with minial experience and contacts in the English game was just barking mad!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 Yes, a manager that is strong, makes a decision and wins over the changing room. When you are a leader you have to make a decision and you have to be strong. The worst type of leaders are those with no authority and who pander to the masses ! Glenn Hoddle has never won over any dressing rooms. That's why he is one of the most disliked figures in English football, with a queue of players forty miles long with a grudge against him. And not, before you even think it, in a "he demands the best" Alex Ferguson way. Very much in a "he is an arrogant jumped up **** with no people skills whatsoever" kind of way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocknrollman no2 Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 Yes, a manager that is strong, makes a decision and wins over the changing room. When you are a leader you have to make a decision and you have to be strong. The worst type of leaders are those with no authority and who pander to the masses ! Didnt Le Tissier score a hat trick for the England reserves,even single handedly taking on the defence before banging the ball into the back of the net,yet Hoddle still didnt pick him for the England first team? Seems to me he either didnt know as much about football as he thought he did,or he was petty and vindictive. Either way im glad he didnt come back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sotonist Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 When we have a serious study of where the club began to decline the failure to appoint Hoddle will be seen as one of the most crucial decisions. A small minority of fans influneced that decision. They know that it was a big mistake but they won't own up to it !!!! Credit is due for your dogged determination in sticking to this stupid gimmick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alain Perrin Posted 5 May, 2009 Share Posted 5 May, 2009 and when you can point at a shred of evidence that any fan's views were consdired at board level you might have the tiniest hint of a raison d'etre for your strange obssession. I have sympathy with Dalek, although I think he verges onto obsession. Fan's attitudes clearly had sway on the board. They were publicised in the media ( http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2004/feb/11/newsstory.sport7 ) and the subsequent refusal of the board to sanction Hoddle, or at least make it clear to Lowe they wouldn't ( http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/football/football_league/article520806.ece ) is well publicised too. Hoddle probably wouldn't have got us relegated, but Sturrock probably wouldn't either. It's interesting that the circumstances behind Sturrocks demise haven't been clearly explained. The word is that senior pros were instrumental in removing him and I'd like to hear more about this cloudy period. I stnad by my position that Lowe is responsible for many mistakes made at Saints, just not all of them. If we are to wash our dirty laundry, we should learn from all of the mistakes - not just those of this forum's favorite whipping boy. Part of me agrees with Ponty though, I'm not sure what we will gain at the end of it. Different times, different league, different owners, different players, different fans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now