aintforever Posted 13 May, 2009 Share Posted 13 May, 2009 I agree, Stoneham would have been rubbish. Lowe has to take credit for getting SMS sorted because no one managed to get it built previously. However I think most credit has to go to Sky TV because if it wasn't for their millions it wouldn't have been built. Second in line for credit has to go to Matt le Tiss for keeping us on the Prem gravey train. Lowe can hardly be considered a genius for getting it built, every other club up and down the country, from Bournemouth to Middlesboro have managed to build a new stadium in the last few years. It's hard to think of a club who havn't at least transformed their stadia, even Fratton Park has a roof on the away end now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crab Lungs Posted 13 May, 2009 Share Posted 13 May, 2009 The compact Dell atmosphere was a major factor in Saints sucesses over the years. Yes, arguably it was. But see my point above.... there are plenty of teams out there who move to new grounds and perform OK, sometimes above expectations. I'd say it's got plenty more to do with the manager and players instilled then the fans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crab Lungs Posted 13 May, 2009 Share Posted 13 May, 2009 (edited) I agree, Stoneham would have been rubbish. Lowe has to take credit for getting SMS sorted because no one managed to get it built previously. However I think most credit has to go to Sky TV because if it wasn't for their millions it wouldn't have been built. Second in line for credit has to go to Matt le Tiss for keeping us on the Prem gravey train. Lowe can hardly be considered a genius for getting it built, every other club up and down the country, from Bournemouth to Middlesboro have managed to build a new stadium in the last few years. It's hard to think of a club who havn't at least transformed their stadia, even Fratton Park has a roof on the away end now. Not a genius, no, but I think the biggest point here is that he got it done and was pro-active. Unlike our former slimeball chairman... Edited 13 May, 2009 by Crab Lungs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctoroncall Posted 13 May, 2009 Share Posted 13 May, 2009 (Not having a go at you directly so I apologise, but) is it just me or does anyone else get baffled by this perpetuated story about not backing WGS with appropriate funds after the cup final? Where was all this money supposed to come from? Here we are on the brink of liquidation because the board took a £6-7m punt on promotion that we could not afford, and yet people still think the root cause of our demise was not taking a punt (that we equally could could not afford) on taking the team up a level after the cup final. WGS did make signings at that time (Phillips?) but he didn't have mega bucks to spend - but perhaps that is because we didn't have mega bucks available. I don't know the details of the finances but that is how I perceive things were at the time. That's the trouble with a plc, it has shareholders to please in the way of dividends and he was one of the highest paid chairman in the EPL. Unfortunately, money was put into other schemes other than first team football. Some well thought out (the academy - although we were previously doing OK), others not (radio, finance companies, SCW etc). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted 13 May, 2009 Share Posted 13 May, 2009 He made some good decisions, he made some average decisions and he made some bad decisions. Like all of us then. Time to move on eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocknrollman no2 Posted 13 May, 2009 Share Posted 13 May, 2009 Not a genius, no, but I think the biggest point here is that he got it done and was pro-active. Unlike our former slimeball chairman... Ha! I dont see Lowe trying to save Saints now.In fact all i see Rupert doing is blaming everyone from the fans to the tealady,to why we are in this mess. Lowes presided over two relegations and one administration and yet people on here still think hes done some good. Priceless! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fitzhugh Fella Posted 13 May, 2009 Share Posted 13 May, 2009 Many things right, many things wrong - mostly on the footballing side, hense the impacton performance and relegation. Same as some of the Right things will have been down to luck, some of the wrong will have been down to bad luck or poor timing rather than wholsesale bad ideas - thats the problem because its never IMHO been so black and white as so many seem to be willing to accept... which is oddly translated as support ...... a few things right, many things wrong. showing his face at Forest was not a bright move, but finally proved to me the guy was completely barking. I simply cannot believe that here we all are literally on the eve of destruction (cue Barry McGuire) and some bright spark decides to start a "three things Rupert did right thread". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crab Lungs Posted 13 May, 2009 Share Posted 13 May, 2009 Ha! I dont see Lowe trying to save Saints now.In fact all i see Rupert doing is blaming everyone from the fans to the tealady,to why we are in this mess. Lowes presided over two relegations and one administration and yet people on here still think hes done some good. Priceless! Yes, I know he has done alot of things wrong, I have acknowledged that... as I do acknowledge some of the things he did right. It's called 'balance' - there's defo the need for some people to get that on here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fitzhugh Fella Posted 13 May, 2009 Share Posted 13 May, 2009 Cup final, European football, highest premier league finish, in Svennson and Niemi possibly signed the best defensive pairing in the Prem...we have had SOME good things to cheer about during his time. Cup Final - lost (rather pathetically as it turned out) Europe - qualified as losers followed by half-hearted participation which led to elimination at the first hurdle. highest Prem finish, big wow there - we finished 2nd in the old 1st. So he "signed" two players you liked - firstly he should never have been "signing" players and what about the duds - there were plenty more of those. But you don't ever dwell there do you Bern? Probably because you never bother to watch live football at SMS. So even as this club teeters on the edge of the precipice tonight there are still ferkin King Canute idiots like you prepared to defend the delusional idiot that put us there. Rupert Lowe was/is a walking disaster area. Nick Leeson/WH Ireland/Saints you name it, wherever you look there is discord, unhappiness, rancour and poor judgement. He is the single biggest reason we are looking at this club ceasing to exist and still people from like you, who can't be bothered to get off your arse and actually witness the decline first hand, defend him as if he is the mesiah. Quite frankly you and him deserve each other. Come back and pontificate when you have actually watched a few matches and put a few bob into the coffers. I sound angry Bern. Yeah damn right. For the last 6 weeks it has been gut wrenching to know the club I still support (thats actively by the way) are fighting for survival. Every night I go to bed thinking will I wake up with a club still to support. I guess you wake up thinking how can I wind up a few people with yet another pro Lowe post. When the club dies the blood will be well and truly on your hands and all those other "head in the sand" merchants who thought it was just a "blip". Now go back to your armchair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eelpie Posted 13 May, 2009 Share Posted 13 May, 2009 Yes, arguably it was. But see my point above.... there are plenty of teams out there who move to new grounds and perform OK, sometimes above expectations. I'd say it's got plenty more to do with the manager and players instilled then the fans. In order of importance (imho): Manager first Players second Ground third But none of course any good with a crap MD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eyes k8 Posted 13 May, 2009 Share Posted 13 May, 2009 ........can't think of too many more....... 1) Building SMS . I'd spent most of my supporting days at The Dell - and loved every moment of it.....but St.Mary's is a WONDERFUL stadium . Can't get away from that. In the previous 40 years - not once did the previous Boards get antwhere near even breaking the ground. I know people said we were " given " the site cheap etc, etc, but at least it got built and we can be proud of that - even in League 1. It seems Crouch / Beattie and a few more contracts had sell -on clauses. 2) RL inserted " sell-on " clauses in many deals when we sold players. No-one else seemed to have thought of it - and we got some extra for that. (Just read MW on the Dyer/Swansea story.Seems like RL foresaw possibililties. 3) RL also inserted clauses in players contracts about reduced salaries if relegated - and many will argue that he was responsible for the relegations...but at least we won'r have to retain players on enormously high slaries. That would have made the situation EVEN WORSE! Difficult to find too much more to enthuse about RL....except his departure, but even so....how much worsd eoff would we be WITHOUT the thrre items above? 4) Keeping the books balanced- This is not entirely a positive, there is a down side to this as well. The positive side is that lowe was always a cost cutter, book balancer. He would never have sanctioned the spending levels seen under Wilde, Dulieu, Hone etc which have bankrupted the club. However this has to be tempered with the appointment of Wigley as a cost cutting exercise which went a long way towards relegating the club, and having Redknapp without money was pretty bizarre. It also has to be said that the books were balanced in order to gradually milk the club. Clearly this would have some detrimental effect on the clubs spending power and consequently competitiveness Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SFC Forever Posted 13 May, 2009 Share Posted 13 May, 2009 The thing I like about SMS is that viewing is much better to that of the Dell. Give us something to cheer and our crowd can come to life just as in the old home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brmbrm Posted 13 May, 2009 Share Posted 13 May, 2009 ...and who said football fans are fickle?? Come on, we spent years at the Dell dreaming of a decent stadium and now that we have one we want to pick holes in it. Sure, there are some negatives but I still think its a great facility compared to what we were used to. Of course it is similar to all the others built by Barrs (Walkers, Pride Park?) but compared to the Dell (and many other grounds we will see this season if we stay afloat) it is wonderful. Fickle? Bollerx. You go to 100 "major" footy stadiums built in the last 12 years and where's SMS? Pretty much average, or a bit below i would say (although i haven't been to 100, more like 25, so excuse the extrapolation). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teamsaint Posted 13 May, 2009 Share Posted 13 May, 2009 The compact Dell atmosphere was a major factor in Saints sucesses over the years. and its small capacity held us back financially. There was no lack of atmos at SMS when we were doing well- in fact I think it was pretty awesome at times. I loved the Dell on an emotional level, but it was a terrible stadium.And on a bad day the atmos could be poor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legod Third Coming Posted 13 May, 2009 Share Posted 13 May, 2009 Three things Rupert did for us: 1) Relegated us 2) Relegated us, again 3) Bankrupt us But apart from that, brilliant, enjoyed every moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 13 May, 2009 Share Posted 13 May, 2009 Fickle? Bollerx. You go to 100 "major" footy stadiums built in the last 12 years and where's SMS? Pretty much average, or a bit below i would say (although i haven't been to 100, more like 25, so excuse the extrapolation). I'd like to see you name 50 football stadiums in the last twelve years that are significantly better than SMS if we are so terribly average out of the 100 that have been built. In fact, just name 50 stadiums that have been built over the last 12 years in this country. What exactly is wrong with it, apart from "Lowe was involved so therefore it was rubbish"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legod Third Coming Posted 13 May, 2009 Share Posted 13 May, 2009 I'd like to see you name 50 football stadiums in the last twelve years that are significantly better than SMS if we are so terribly average out of the 100 that have been built. In fact, just name 50 stadiums that have been built over the last 12 years in this country. What exactly is wrong with it, apart from "Lowe was involved so therefore it was rubbish"? Exactly - old romantics might miss the Dell, but the reality is SMS is a perfectly good Premiership stadium, just a shame about the team!! PS: do you know your namesake was a commentator on Test Match Special!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Fan CaM Posted 13 May, 2009 Share Posted 13 May, 2009 Its all about balance and Lowe got that wrong - completely. He needed to recognise that primarily fans don't look at the stadium - they look at a patch of grass and the quality of the players running on it over 90mins. No good having a s****y 40,000 seater stadium if nobody wants to go there. He lost his customers because he allowed the product to deteriorate significantly. He didn't get it so failed to invest in the right areas = he did nothing right (in my book). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 13 May, 2009 Share Posted 13 May, 2009 The strategic gap is a total red herring and was never an issue that reared its head when the Stoneham project was being considered apart from some local objections from NIMBYs. Funny that the Rose Bowl was allowed to be built in the strategic gap between West End and Hedge End, eh? I strongly suspect that many of the very same NIMBYs at Stoneham enjoy going to watch bloody Cricket in my back yard. What killed it stone dead was Lowe's intransigence over what he wanted to go with it. You're right about Lowe's attitude, but there was a lot of concern at the time that if the south-west corner of the motorway intersection were to be developed then the other three would soon follow. Add to that the locals' concerns about parking and 'hooliganism' and there were enough negatives that when the present site was proposed everybody breathed a sigh of relief. There were a lot of concerns from the Town Centre about a big retail development just a mile down the road. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lets B Avenue Posted 13 May, 2009 Share Posted 13 May, 2009 Exactly - old romantics might miss the Dell, but the reality is SMS is a perfectly good Premiership stadium, just a shame about the team!! PS: do you know your namesake was a commentator on Test Match Special!!! Dont think so, Matey. CB Fry (world long jump record holder and almost King of Albania) died in 1956. TMS started a year later. They were celebrating their 50th anniversary in 2007 also against the Windies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintBobby Posted 14 May, 2009 Share Posted 14 May, 2009 What a ridiculous headline from the OP. Three things Hitler got right: 1. The trains ran on time 2. Sales of Cyclon B were enhanced. 3. He got his name in the history books. This discussion is the logical (although, monumentally trivial) equivalent of Germans in 1946 arguing who should have been executed in what order at Nuremberg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 14 May, 2009 Share Posted 14 May, 2009 What a ridiculous headline from the OP. Three things Hitler got right: 1. The trains ran on time 2. Sales of Cyclon B were enhanced. 3. He got his name in the history books. This discussion is the logical (although, monumentally trivial) equivalent of Germans in 1946 arguing who should have been executed in what order at Nuremberg. A rather tactless and extreme analogy, but I catch your drift.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 14 May, 2009 Share Posted 14 May, 2009 What a ridiculous headline from the OP. Three things Hitler got right: 1. The trains ran on time 2. Sales of Cyclon B were enhanced. 3. He got his name in the history books. This discussion is the logical (although, monumentally trivial) equivalent of Germans in 1946 arguing who should have been executed in what order at Nuremberg. Well, FF did write a humourous and clever thread stating that in fact it was Hitler's fault that we are where we are today so I suppose this is a fair analogy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ponty Posted 14 May, 2009 Share Posted 14 May, 2009 Wasn't the trains thing down to Mussolini? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 14 May, 2009 Share Posted 14 May, 2009 Stoneham would have been ****ing awful. Souless dealthless stadium in the middle of absolutely nowhere and you'd have to drive or get the bus. And a damned sight easier to access from all those fans who don't live in Southampton, but thanks for ignoring half of the fan base. Even living at West End, I have to drive or catch a bus now. It's a minor inconvenience. Try and get some bloody perspective. Great. The people moaning about it like Stoneham would have been the Bernabeu and The Old Den rolled into one would be moaning a hell of a lot more if Lowe had secured Stoneham with his Hotel/Cinema/Shopping complex bolted on the side of it. Try and keep up. The Cinema and shopping complex would never have been permitted by EBC. And who has claimed that it would be like Bernabeu or the Old den? Or do you 'tards really think the true spirit of Southampton football club would be best captured by commercial leisure facilities a retail park and a branch of Subway? Just what Ted Bates would have wanted When somebody has to resort to insulting anybody who does not share your opinion, you know that they have lost the argument. So by your inference, the spirit of Southampton is the stadium, eh? Anyway, what makes you such an authority on what Ted Bates may or may not have wanted? Stop moaning you dinlows. St Mary's is a very good city centre stadium built at the heart of our city and you can stroll to it from the city centre. Or if you live outside the City, struggle through the traffic congestion, find it difficult to park and hard to get out of the city after the match, you dinlow. Boo hoo, what a ****ing outrage We want a hotel, we want a hotel Well, it might have been nice to have had additional revenue streams like the ones I had mentioned, instead of having to resort to Insurance companies and radio stations which actually proved to be a drain on resources. Boo hoo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 14 May, 2009 Share Posted 14 May, 2009 You're right about Lowe's attitude, but there was a lot of concern at the time that if the south-west corner of the motorway intersection were to be developed then the other three would soon follow. Add to that the locals' concerns about parking and 'hooliganism' and there were enough negatives that when the present site was proposed everybody breathed a sigh of relief. There were a lot of concerns from the Town Centre about a big retail development just a mile down the road. And there weren't any concerns from the locals near the current stadium? Of course there were. And for crissakes, I wish that it would sink into some posters heads that there was never going to be a big retail development at Stoneham. Lowe might have wanted one, but EBC would never have allowed it and that was what sank Stoneham, Lowe's intransigence. He tried to play poker with them thinking that he had a strong hand. He didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david in sweden Posted 14 May, 2009 Author Share Posted 14 May, 2009 a few things right, many things wrong. showing his face at Forest was not a bright move, but finally proved to me the guy was completely barking. I simply cannot believe that here we all are literally on the eve of destruction (cue Barry McGuire) and some bright spark decides to start a "three things Rupert did right thread". Oops - I seemed to have upset you on that one, Duncan As I was reminising over my 50 years as a Saints fan, I tried to take a unbiased view though the smoke of the recent years. Few people will argue that RL was well-liked, or even vaguely likeable. I've met many people in my time from rogues to royalty, and I always felt RL manner was very condescending and HIS management style- totally ruthless. The three things I mentioned were, I concluded, the most positive (from the clubs point of view). The Stadium (obviously) has more potential as a venue than the 30 odd days a year when Saints play there. The other two items were shrewd and brought in the extra income to the club. I can't help feeling that we should have had that acumen when selling Alan Shearer (£3.3 mill to Blackburn) who later sold him to Newcastle for £16 million.(Total incompetence by the Board of that time). 20% of that " sell-on " was lost. ...and to this day .. I don't know how he engineered the Walcott deal, when TW was legally entitled to walk away and join Arsenal for nothing ! Others have also added that the emergence of the Academy was a big plus and I don't argue that although, I think there were other factors, too.Nearly all his management appointments were plagued with some problem or another and apart from (then) Hoddle and later Strachan - there is little to enthuse over. I didn't say I liked him (RL). I'm pleased he's gone but I'm glad to think that even in League 1 - we won't have to play home games at The Dell again. (Wonderful though it was - at the time). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hughieslastminutegoal Posted 14 May, 2009 Share Posted 14 May, 2009 There was no chance that the stadium would ever have been built at Stoneham. It would have filled in the 'strategic gap' between Southampton and Eastleigh. Perversely, the proximity to the M27 also counted against it. The car park was originally mooted at 6,000 spaces, later reduced to 3,000, but even that figure would have led to queues of nearly two hours to get out of the ground. And that still didn't stop Lowe wanting a shoppig centre and multiplex there as well. It all just proves he NEVER really had football as a priority. He believed the reverse takeover bought him into into a golden goose. In my view, though his 2 years away possibly accellerated our decline, Lowe's approach would always have ended up in failure, albeit maybe slightly slower. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 14 May, 2009 Share Posted 14 May, 2009 I agree, Stoneham would have been rubbish. Lowe has to take credit for getting SMS sorted because no one managed to get it built previously. Credit goes to Lowe for f*cking up Stoneham. Credit for St Mary's goes mainly to Southampton City Council, who had an available site earmarked for social housing and realising that its local football club did not have a home once Lowe f*cked up Stoneham, they had the imagination to offer that land for the stadium. Had they not done so, there was little or no alternative land available, so we would have had to try and shoehorn another few thousand into the Dell. Seemingly, some who believe that the Dell was instrumental in the spirit of Southampton would have liked that eventuality. Nobody had taken the initiative to sort out a new stadium before partly because it had only become an imperative after the law forced all top flight stadia to become all seater. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marsdinho Posted 14 May, 2009 Share Posted 14 May, 2009 (edited) Stoneham would have been ****ing awful. Souless dealthless stadium in the middle of absolutely nowhere and you'd have to drive or get the bus. Great. The people moaning about it like Stoneham would have been the Bernabeu and The Old Den rolled into one would be moaning a hell of a lot more if Lowe had secured Stoneham with his Hotel/Cinema/Shopping complex bolted on the side of it. Or do you 'tards really think the true spirit of Southampton football club would be best captured by commercial leisure facilities a retail park and a branch of Subway? Just what Ted Bates would have wanted Stop moaning you dinlows. St Mary's is a very good city centre stadium built at the heart of our city and you can stroll to it from the city centre. Boo hoo, what a ****ing outrage We want a hotel, we want a hotel Well, it might have been nice to have had additional revenue streams like the ones I had mentioned, instead of having to resort to Insurance companies and radio stations which actually proved to be a drain on resources. Boo hoo. CB Fry seems to judge stadiums by how easy it is for him to "stroll" to... Would be interesting to see how many football grounds are located in city centres. Edited 14 May, 2009 by Marsdinho Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorgiesaint Posted 14 May, 2009 Share Posted 14 May, 2009 And there weren't any concerns from the locals near the current stadium? Of course there were. And for crissakes, I wish that it would sink into some posters heads that there was never going to be a big retail development at Stoneham. Lowe might have wanted one, but EBC would never have allowed it and that was what sank Stoneham, Lowe's intransigence. He tried to play poker with them thinking that he had a strong hand. He didn't. and to think we criticise Lowe for not learning from his mistakes - he wouldn't be stupid enough to repeat this one again would he, against say somebody like Barclays......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRichmond Posted 14 May, 2009 Share Posted 14 May, 2009 ........can't think of too many more....... 1) Building SMS . I'd spent most of my supporting days at The Dell - and loved every moment of it.....but St.Mary's is a WONDERFUL stadium . Can't get away from that. In the previous 40 years - not once did the previous Boards get antwhere near even breaking the ground. I know people said we were " given " the site cheap etc, etc, but at least it got built and we can be proud of that - even in League 1. I agree St Mary's is a Great Stadium, BUT LOWE did NOT build it. He was simply "involved" in negotiations, and by all accounts, very nearly Kocked those up. He had already FAILED to clinch the Stoneham Project, the one we should have had, which would have been a muti function complex, near the Motorway, Airport, and Railway ..... Tha site was the most Logical to many The problem(s) with St Mary's are these It is a "stand alone" Stadia - It only attracts income from Football and the Odd concert only It is awkward to get to, with no direct access road, yet right next to a railway line which, again, Lowe failed to develop It IS a great Stadium .... built in the wrong place as a one off unit Yet another example of Great forward thinking Business accumen from Lord Lowe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redkeith Posted 14 May, 2009 Share Posted 14 May, 2009 I'm not so sure about the genius of cutting players salaries after relegation. I can remember Lowe stating before relegation, that SLH would be OK because he inserted pay cut in some players contracts, yet we managed to make a net loss the first season down, despite the sales of Niemi, Quashie, Crouch and Walcott. Add that to the fact that most of Harry's signings the previous season, the retirement of Dodd and Le Saux and letting Anders go on a Bosman, we started the season with only half of the team that got us relegated. Contrast that with Birmingham City, who keep their squad together each time they go down, and go straight back up again. I fear that the genius of pay cut's could result in James, Gillet, and McGoldrick etc all leaving us for 'Big Payers' like Blackpool or Barnsley. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rallyboy Posted 14 May, 2009 Share Posted 14 May, 2009 Three things might be pushing it but I suppose the relegation wages and sell on clauses were shrewd.... Then again, Harold Shipman cured a few people and Fred West was behind the wheel for some incident-free hitch-hiking journeys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRichmond Posted 14 May, 2009 Share Posted 14 May, 2009 Stoneham would have been ****ing awful. Souless dealthless stadium in the middle of absolutely nowhere and you'd have to drive or get the bus. Great. The people moaning about it like Stoneham would have been the Bernabeu and The Old Den rolled into one would be moaning a hell of a lot more if Lowe had secured Stoneham with his Hotel/Cinema/Shopping complex bolted on the side of it. Or do you 'tards really think the true spirit of Southampton football club would be best captured by commercial leisure facilities a retail park and a branch of Subway? Just what Ted Bates would have wanted Stop moaning you dinlows. St Mary's is a very good city centre stadium built at the heart of our city and you can stroll to it from the city centre. Boo hoo, what a ****ing outrage We want a hotel, we want a hotel Stoneham would have been ****ing awful. Souless dealthless stadium in the middle of absolutely nowhere and you'd have to drive or get the bus. If it is the same Stadium, but in a different place, how would it be souless ?? As regards driving or grtting the bus, that's no different from walking from the City centre to the ground Great. The people moaning about it like Stoneham would have been the Bernabeu and The Old Den rolled into one would be moaning a hell of a lot more if Lowe had secured Stoneham with his Hotel/Cinema/Shopping complex bolted on the side of it. Why would people have moaned about that. Those sort of "additions" attract more trade, and extra revenue. Eastleigh have now got the "extras", which is a joke, because had the Stoneham project materialised, there would hardly have been any gap between them Or do you 'tards really think the true spirit of Southampton football club would be best captured by commercial leisure facilities a retail park and a branch of Subway? Just what Ted Bates would have wanted It's 2009, not 1809. A "Stand Alone " building such as St Mary's CANNOT be self sufficient. It needs other add ons. Stop moaning you dinlows. St Mary's is a very good city centre stadium built at the heart of our city and you can stroll to it from the city centre. Boo hoo, what a ****ing outrage Enjoy the stroll, (Not that you'd give a monkeys, but you would have been able to get to Stoneham in just the same amount of time that it takes for your stroll ) We want a hotel, we want a hotel A Hotel ??? .. No..... not right next to an Airport and Railway, with easy access to a Motorway ????... THAT's what you should be crying about ... THE LOST OPPORTUNITY Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foghorn Posted 14 May, 2009 Share Posted 14 May, 2009 1. Got us St Marys 2. Left 3. Left Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 14 May, 2009 Share Posted 14 May, 2009 Hmm here's one possible one - Deciding to try and fight the "Let's go Wilde" takeover.... Sure he was way past his stay by date then and I stood up at that Ipswich game like everyone else, BUT... As the forum loves it's "what if's"... What MIGHT have happened if Leon had chosen to side with Lowe and work to change things in a less revolutionary way. There is no doubt that his kicking out was flawed - he managed to come back, but what IF he had talked the "wavering Crouch" around..? (FWIW I still think it would have ended in tears, but maybe not quite so calamatously) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marsdinho Posted 14 May, 2009 Share Posted 14 May, 2009 If it all ends in tears, it doesnt matter how you get there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 14 May, 2009 Share Posted 14 May, 2009 And there weren't any concerns from the locals near the current stadium? Of course there were. And for crissakes, I wish that it would sink into some posters heads that there was never going to be a big retail development at Stoneham. Lowe might have wanted one, but EBC would never have allowed it and that was what sank Stoneham, Lowe's intransigence. He tried to play poker with them thinking that he had a strong hand. He didn't. And here we can agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cabrone Posted 14 May, 2009 Share Posted 14 May, 2009 Top 3 Lowe Actions: 1. Leaving in 2006. 2. Leaving in 2009. 3. Saying that he wasn't interested in coming back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Posted 14 May, 2009 Share Posted 14 May, 2009 Who cares Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 14 May, 2009 Share Posted 14 May, 2009 Who cares \\:D/:smt041:smt041:smt041:smt041:badgrin: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpb Posted 14 May, 2009 Share Posted 14 May, 2009 Wasn't the trains thing down to Mussolini? That's what they claim - I think Hitler was responsible for the autobhan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kpturner Posted 14 May, 2009 Share Posted 14 May, 2009 Fickle? Bollerx. You go to 100 "major" footy stadiums built in the last 12 years and where's SMS? Pretty much average, or a bit below i would say (although i haven't been to 100, more like 25, so excuse the extrapolation).You missed the point entirely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 14 May, 2009 Share Posted 14 May, 2009 The compact Dell atmosphere was a major factor in Saints sucesses over the years. Disagree, the small stadium meant the players we attracted were those that really wanted to be here - and that was the biggest influence on success...and when you have greater demand than supply and every game is sold out that is bound to craete a better atmosphere - we have done it at SMS, just not as frequently... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smirking_Saint Posted 14 May, 2009 Share Posted 14 May, 2009 As was said on here, Lowe ****ed up stoneham, we managed to get the St Mary's site. Which TBH is a sh!thole and i am not surprised the council gave it away, they may have got use of where the dell was knocked down (i don't know). IF we had managed to bolt extra revenue streams onto either stadium it would have helped to keep us affloat, especially through the non-football months. If he had managed top get a station built ? (any genious would have seen this as beneficial) it would have been miles easier to get to, plus may have stopped some of the congestion. So IMO, the one glarring thing that everybody has said he got right.... he managed to almost **** up and not do as good a job as he could of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kpturner Posted 14 May, 2009 Share Posted 14 May, 2009 If he had managed top get a station built ? (any genious would have seen this as beneficial) it would have been miles easier to get to, plus may have stopped some of the congestion.Whilst I understand the point you are making, it is not that simple to just "get a station built". The reason the line was shut down in the first place was that it was not commercially viable, and having a football stadium there that only gets used once a fortnight for about 10 months does not make it any more commercially viable. I did see a figure quoted for the cost of reopening the line and it was surprising - sadly I can't remember what it was - but suffice to say it was not practical or affordable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alain Perrin Posted 14 May, 2009 Share Posted 14 May, 2009 As was said on here, Lowe ****ed up stoneham, we managed to get the St Mary's site. Which TBH is a sh!thole and i am not surprised the council gave it away, they may have got use of where the dell was knocked down (i don't know). IF we had managed to bolt extra revenue streams onto either stadium it would have helped to keep us affloat, especially through the non-football months. If he had managed top get a station built ? (any genious would have seen this as beneficial) it would have been miles easier to get to, plus may have stopped some of the congestion. So IMO, the one glarring thing that everybody has said he got right.... he managed to almost **** up and not do as good a job as he could of. What a load of arse. When Lowe did create extra revenue streams (through award winning catering, the radio station and insurance services), the Anti-Lowelifes lambested him - "We are a football club, not a business etc". (Ironic though that those things could have justified to the Football League that SFC shouldn't have a points deduction!). Credit where credit's due, Lowe got some things right - accept it. He also got a hell of a lot wrong - you seem to have no problem accepting that. But to criticise the stadium (location, or facilities) is pointless. Look around (Derby, Leicester, Sunderland etc. etc.) None are integrated developments, just because they've got an Allied Carpet's next door doesn't make the club any money. A station would have cost something in the region of £5m (I think that was the number) to be used 20 times a season. Do the maths (we're a football club, not a transport company ). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRichmond Posted 14 May, 2009 Share Posted 14 May, 2009 Top 3 Lowe Actions: 1. Leaving in 2006. 2. Leaving in 2009. 3. Saying that he wasn't interested in coming back. He's said No 3 quite a few times .......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eelpie Posted 14 May, 2009 Share Posted 14 May, 2009 He's said No 3 quite a few times .......... ... and still came back. What is this magnetic attraction that we peasants have for Rupert? 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