three things Rupert did right...

[SaintRichmond]

1) He breathed in

2) He breathed out

3) He breathed in again

 

 

One thing he did wrong

 

1) He breathed out again

[Smirking_Saint]

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!).

 

They may have, i didn't, i think the main reason was that although these were good ideas (which brought in more money) he still didn't show a precedent for supporting the number one concern, the team on the pitch, which is why we are were we are today

 

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.

 

No, i seriously don't think i have a problem accepting that, i base my arguements from both sides thanks as you will see if looking back other previous posts on other threads. I can see how he has put some good into the club, i appreciate he balanced the books etc and seriously believe he came back this last time to try and help (albeit with a flawed management team) Unfortunately IMO of course i feel those things he has got right have been eclipsed by his monumental failures. Being dropping out of prem, dropping out of CCC, being in administration, and also running a PLC of which it's first priority is to reward shareholders. You can call me an anti-lowe or whatever you want, i am not going to be drawn into this, i am not blinded by pure hero or devil worship of the man, seeing it from both sides, he has ruined our club

 

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.

I appreciate this however can you not see that having something like a hotel, bar, restuarant etc would have provided extra revenue ?

 

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 )

 

Ok, i appreciate this point as as KP responded earlier, i didn't know how much it would cost and so you are right it probably was not viable.

 

.

 

Of course all IMO

[sandwichsaint]

It’s all ‘ifs’ and ‘ands’ now isn’t it Brian?

 

Stoneham would have made sense on a ‘diversification’ basis and clearly would have provided substantial non-football related income. But would almost certainly have been less of a ‘total football’ experience, think of the Ricoh for an example, fantastic stadium but nil ‘match-day atmosphere’. Likely to have attracted more ‘modern’ fans (families, women, etc) and the type of people who would be able and prepared to pay for a ‘leisure experience’, hence higher prices and less ‘traditional fans’. Under that model we certainly wouldn’t have had the intimidating atmosphere that people so miss from the Dell and which some blame the absence of at SMS for our decline.

‘If’ we had gone to Stoneham there is a completely hypothetical argument to say we wouldn’t be where we are now (2 divisions down, and skint).

 

As for SMS not being very good, where do you start? Good enough for me on dozens of occasions, good enough for us to play solidly in the Prem for a number of seasons, good enough for us to reach an FA Cup final, good enough for us to play in Europe, good enough for England to play there, good enough to win groundsman’s awards, good enough to generate plenty of hospitality income (at least for Prem football). It was sold as a ‘traditional inner-city location’ and on that basis it more than does the job, a beer in town and the walk-to-the-ground is a big part of the match day experience for a lot of people, you don’t get that at a Middlesborough or a Coventry do you?

 

Concourses a bit tatty? Yes they are but that doesn’t actually detract from going to watch a game of football does it? Is your match day experience ™ ‘better’ at Arsenal and Chelsea than it is at Wolves or West Brom?

Personally mine’s not, but each to their own.

 

No atmosphere in new grounds? You obviously didn’t go to the play off game at Derby then? The single best football match I’ve ever been to.

 

Moaning about SMS is rather like pulling Lucy Pinder for the night and then moaning to your mates next day that she did most things you wanted but she didn’t do absolutely ‘everything’ you wanted.

 

The underlying ‘problem’ with SMS was that it was built on a 100% mortgage, and that ‘mortgage’ was only ever sustainable with Prem football: no Plan ‘B’ beyond giving a hopeless drunk GBP 7m to **** up the wall.

 

LOL at people on here who were posting up to the 11th hour that we 'wouldn't go into admin' and that 'if we get shot of the big earners' we could 'comfortably cover our costs playing Div 3 football with crowds of 12k'.

 

Hard though it is to say, ‘our-ground’s-too-big-for-us’ (and we can’t afford it either). Maybe sometime fairly soon we will be playing much nearer to Eastleigh town centre than any of us would have wanted?

[Alain Perrin]

Of course all IMO

 

Apologies SS - I was somewhat trigger happy with my response to you and I do appreciate that you have more balance than most. I do think the one thing that is missing in this whole debate is reason - the arguments are too often based around the emotions of a football fan, not the realities of pros and cons or when an answer is only wrong when it doesn't work.

 

Although they'll hate this, posters like Alpine and FF are just ciphers of Nineteen Canteen or Scooby - just different ends of the spectrum. They egg each other on until everything is black and white, not the shade of grey it undoubtedly is.

 

In most of Lowe's decisions, I can see the rationale, if not the logic. For example, I understand why he went for JP over Pearson, not what I'd do, but I can see what he was thinking.

 

But no one can (perhaps 'should' is more appropriate) argue that he hasn't had his hands on a lot of what went wrong. Personally, I blame him more for the debacle that caused the Premiership relegation than I do this one (I see it more as a joint effort between Lowe, Wilde, Crouch and cronies). I think the current ship was already holed below the waterline when he took it back over (Pearson or no Pearson).

 

Anyway, here's to moving on and forgetting this sorry state of affairs.

[yorkie]

The only three things I can remember are:

 

1. We had the best catering in The Premiership & The Championship & now Division 1

2. He resigned on the eve of the EGM (2006/7)

3. He walked out of the club in 2009

 

They are the only three things to remember him for...

 

Then on the otherhand we have the whole Delgado debacle, Theo "could leave us for nothing" Walcott scenario, & I think we need a new Manager this month policy!

[Alain Perrin]

The only three things I can remember are:

 

1. We had the best catering in The Premiership & The Championship & now Division 1

2. He resigned on the eve of the EGM (2006/7)

3. He walked out of the club in 2009

 

They are the only three things to remember him for...

 

Then on the otherhand we have the whole Delgado debacle, Theo "could leave us for nothing" Walcott scenario, & I think we need a new Manager this month policy!

 

Bit churlish Yorkie.

 

The catering relates to the weddings, events management and corporate matchdays, not to the pie and a pint. All part of the diversified income needed to make money in a football club outside of the 25 fixtures a year.

 

Theo was one thing Lowe got right - whether that was more down to Theo's parents than Saint's treating him right, we'll never know.

[Crab Lungs]

Apologies SS - I was somewhat trigger happy with my response to you and I do appreciate that you have more balance than most. I do think the one thing that is missing in this whole debate is reason - the arguments are too often based around the emotions of a football fan, not the realities of pros and cons or when an answer is only wrong when it doesn't work.

 

Although they'll hate this, posters like Alpine and FF are just ciphers of Nineteen Canteen or Scooby - just different ends of the spectrum. They egg each other on until everything is black and white, not the shade of grey it undoubtedly is.

 

In most of Lowe's decisions, I can see the rationale, if not the logic. For example, I understand why he went for JP over Pearson, not what I'd do, but I can see what he was thinking.

 

But no one can (perhaps 'should' is more appropriate) argue that he hasn't had his hands on a lot of what went wrong. Personally, I blame him more for the debacle that caused the Premiership relegation than I do this one (I see it more as a joint effort between Lowe, Wilde, Crouch and cronies). I think the current ship was already holed below the waterline when he took it back over (Pearson or no Pearson).

 

Anyway, here's to moving on and forgetting this sorry state of affairs.

 

Good luck with championing reasoned debate, you don't get much of that from the froth-mouths here...

[Frank's cousin]

Apologies SS - I was somewhat trigger happy with my response to you and I do appreciate that you have more balance than most. I do think the one thing that is missing in this whole debate is reason - the arguments are too often based around the emotions of a football fan, not the realities of pros and cons or when an answer is only wrong when it doesn't work.

 

Although they'll hate this, posters like Alpine and FF are just ciphers of Nineteen Canteen or Scooby - just different ends of the spectrum. They egg each other on until everything is black and white, not the shade of grey it undoubtedly is.

 

In most of Lowe's decisions, I can see the rationale, if not the logic. For example, I understand why he went for JP over Pearson, not what I'd do, but I can see what he was thinking.

 

But no one can (perhaps 'should' is more appropriate) argue that he hasn't had his hands on a lot of what went wrong. Personally, I blame him more for the debacle that caused the Premiership relegation than I do this one (I see it more as a joint effort between Lowe, Wilde, Crouch and cronies). I think the current ship was already holed below the waterline when he took it back over (Pearson or no Pearson).

 

Anyway, here's to moving on and forgetting this sorry state of affairs.

 

100% in agreement - you manage to say verywell what I sometimes struggle to get across - with or without the tag Alpine and few others like to tie me with...

[Wes Tender]

Good luck with championing reasoned debate, you don't get much of that from the froth-mouths here...

 

Well, it just goes to illustrate how divisive our former chairman and his cronies were. As Alain Perrin states in his last line, "Anyway, here's to moving on and forgetting this sorry state of affairs."

 

That ought to be a possibility now, providing that none of those disruptive elements have nothing further to do with the club and nobody starts threads about them mischievously to antagonise the various factions.

[Lets B Avenue]

Bit churlish Yorkie.

 

The catering relates to the weddings, events management and corporate matchdays, not to the pie and a pint. All part of the diversified income needed to make money in a football club outside of the 25 fixtures a year.

 

Theo was one thing Lowe got right - whether that was more down to Theo's parents than Saint's treating him right, we'll never know.

 

But it all goes back to getting relegated under his enlightend chairmanship. If we had still been in the prem in Jan 2006, Theo would have signed a new contract for us and his future value to us, both playing-wise and financial, would have risen immesurably.

 

Mind you, he might not have liked Sir Clive and Simon Clifford.

[Crab Lungs]

Well, it just goes to illustrate how divisive our former chairman and his cronies were. As Alain Perrin states in his last line, "Anyway, here's to moving on and forgetting this sorry state of affairs."

 

That ought to be a possibility now, providing that none of those disruptive elements have nothing further to do with the club and nobody starts threads about them mischievously to antagonise the various factions.

 

I hope that this is possible, and damn, I like to have a positive outlook on things but we are becoming bitter and renowned whingers. True, we haven't had much to shout about in recent years but it just kinda feels the fans (as well as the club) are stuck in a negative cycle of depression.

 

I hope its broken soon... I really do... and the only way that will happen is with a completely fresh board at SFC minus all the hangers on and unsuitables; McMenemy, Crouch, Askham, Richards... as well as all the obvious candidates.

 

Fingers crossed, eh?

[Smirking_Saint]

Apologies SS - I was somewhat trigger happy with my response to you and I do appreciate that you have more balance than most. I do think the one thing that is missing in this whole debate is reason - the arguments are too often based around the emotions of a football fan, not the realities of pros and cons or when an answer is only wrong when it doesn't work.

 

Although they'll hate this, posters like Alpine and FF are just ciphers of Nineteen Canteen or Scooby - just different ends of the spectrum. They egg each other on until everything is black and white, not the shade of grey it undoubtedly is.

 

In most of Lowe's decisions, I can see the rationale, if not the logic. For example, I understand why he went for JP over Pearson, not what I'd do, but I can see what he was thinking.

 

But no one can (perhaps 'should' is more appropriate) argue that he hasn't had his hands on a lot of what went wrong. Personally, I blame him more for the debacle that caused the Premiership relegation than I do this one (I see it more as a joint effort between Lowe, Wilde, Crouch and cronies). I think the current ship was already holed below the waterline when he took it back over (Pearson or no Pearson).

 

Anyway, here's to moving on and forgetting this sorry state of affairs.

 

I can see the point you are making and TBH agree with it, i can myself see how the man was thinking, as much as he got things wrong.

 

I never though thought (how anyone can actually believe) that it was his main aim to bring SFC to it's knees, that is just rediculous. Unfortunately as we all know football clubs are different to running a business although running them as a said business seems to be the only way people know how.

 

TBF, i believe if we had just Wotte from the start and only Wotte we probably would not have gone down, as for pearson.. who knows ?? He may have had a disasterous second season, i don't actually think his performances and results towards the end of last year were actually that fantastic ? He is no messiah, just got the simple things right and we got f'n lucky.

 

Unfortunately though i have been told stories of people that have worked for the man (very closely not as in a tea-lady guys) and let me say the stories i have heard, i would not have wanted to have worked so close. This i suspect was his downfall, plus the reason that he got so many negotiations right, also brought him down... being stubborn.

 

Unfortunately though i think every one that has an arguement is biased to some extent, i will admit i air towards the side of anti-lowe (as much as i try to keep arguements balanced) but unfortunately, we are what we are. That is opinion. And thats what keep this site interesting.

 

:grin:

[The9]

The compact Dell atmosphere was a major factor in Saints sucesses over the years.

 

And a major factor in our failure to rise above perennial strugglers in the vast majority of the first 9 years of the Premier League era. At least doubling our income in 2001/2 gave us a chance for a bit...

[Ricky Redstripe]

1) Resigned.

2) Showed everyone on the planet what a waste of space he is.

3) Left the club when the administrators came in.

 

Thanks Rupert!

[david in sweden]

1) Resigned.

2) Showed everyone on the planet what a waste of space he is.

3) Left the club when the administrators came in.

 

Thanks Rupert!

 

Whoa !

...take it easy, you've found another 3 good things he did for the club.

that makes six. Carry on like this and you'll have people feeling sorry for him...!

[Wes Tender]

Whoa !

...take it easy, you've found another 3 good things he did for the club.

that makes six. Carry on like this and you'll have people feeling sorry for him...!

 

Personally, I couldn't feel sorry for him under any circumstances that I could imagine and I have an extremely vivid imagination, with all sorts of potential sticky ends for him going through my mind. Unfortunately, not a flicker of pity or sympathy enters my head for one second.

[SaintRobbie]

4. Left the club and never came back.

 

 

*prays*

 

The only thing he really did right. Would anyone else not have done the 3 suggested if they'd been in Lowe's position?

 

We really need a thread that says the 100+ things Lowe did WRONG.

[saintant]

History will show that Lowe budgeted for failure and that's what he got. His total lack of understanding of the mechanics of running a football club both as a business and in terms of building a squad to maintain Premiership status has been exposed for all to see. Lowe could not fathom the simple fact that to survive in the Premiership you must have a sprinkling of stars on high wages. Whether you get those players on loan or pick them up from abroad or on Bosmans you must have them. His strategy was to have a wage cap that meant our best players were driven away and the ones brought in were not good enough. Pretty soon he presided over the building of an ever expanding squad of mediocre/poor players that no manager could get a decent team out of. The wage bill for that large squad was probably as much or more than it would have been had he had the nous to sign some quality players. We found ourselves desperately trying to improve the team to get out of a self perpetuating mess. Add to that the revolving door managerial farce which partly resulted from his failure to authorise buying of decent player and the wheels for the demise of our fantastic club had been set in motion. The outcome was inevitable. From that point it was a sharp and slippery slope to where we now find ourselves. Budget for the lower leagues and that is inevitably where you'll end up. Reach up instead of down and you're planning for life on a park bench. The sad thing is, it aint rocket science.

Sorry, couldn't come up with three things he did right no matter how hard I tried. Nothing could compensate for the place he left our beloved club.

[eelpie]

History will show that Lowe budgeted for failure and that's what he got. His total lack of understanding of the mechanics of running a football club both as a business and in terms of building a squad to maintain Premiership status has been exposed for all to see. Lowe could not fathom the simple fact that to survive in the Premiership you must have a sprinkling of stars on high wages. Whether you get those players on loan or pick them up from abroad or on Bosmans you must have them. His strategy was to have a wage cap that meant our best players were driven away and the ones brought in were not good enough. Pretty soon he presided over the building of an ever expanding squad of mediocre/poor players that no manager could get a decent team out of. The wage bill for that large squad was probably as much or more than it would have been had he had the nous to sign some quality players. We found ourselves desperately trying to improve the team to get out of a self perpetuating mess. Add to that the revolving door managerial farce which partly resulted from his failure to authorise buying of decent player and the wheels for the demise of our fantastic club had been set in motion. The outcome was inevitable. From that point it was a sharp and slippery slope to where we now find ourselves. Budget for the lower leagues and that is inevitably where you'll end up. Reach up instead of down and you're planning for life on a park bench. The sad thing is, it aint rocket science.

Sorry, couldn't come up with three things he did right no matter how hard I tried. Nothing could compensate for the place he left our beloved club.

 

So right.

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

Ricardo Fuller for £90k does seem a bit of a bargain now it must be said .

[chocco boxo]

Lowe Fuller****

[alpine_saint]

History will show that Lowe budgeted for failure and that's what he got. His total lack of understanding of the mechanics of running a football club both as a business and in terms of building a squad to maintain Premiership status has been exposed for all to see. Lowe could not fathom the simple fact that to survive in the Premiership you must have a sprinkling of stars on high wages. Whether you get those players on loan or pick them up from abroad or on Bosmans you must have them. His strategy was to have a wage cap that meant our best players were driven away and the ones brought in were not good enough. Pretty soon he presided over the building of an ever expanding squad of mediocre/poor players that no manager could get a decent team out of. The wage bill for that large squad was probably as much or more than it would have been had he had the nous to sign some quality players. We found ourselves desperately trying to improve the team to get out of a self perpetuating mess. Add to that the revolving door managerial farce which partly resulted from his failure to authorise buying of decent player and the wheels for the demise of our fantastic club had been set in motion. The outcome was inevitable. From that point it was a sharp and slippery slope to where we now find ourselves. Budget for the lower leagues and that is inevitably where you'll end up. Reach up instead of down and you're planning for life on a park bench. The sad thing is, it aint rocket science.

Sorry, couldn't come up with three things he did right no matter how hard I tried. Nothing could compensate for the place he left our beloved club.

 

Excellent post.

[Professor]

The obsession with Lowe goes on and on, but through the red mist people seem to overlook the role of Michael Wilde, who climbed on the anti-Lowe bandwagon - changed the board at entirely the wrong time with his threatened EGM, appointed a bunch of nobodies to run the club incompetantly and allowed £7m to be wasted, then stood back while Leon Crouch oversaw the running down of the club's finances. As for Lowe, his biggest personal mistake was in coming back last year to try to save the club, but if he hadn't, does anyone seriously believe that things would have been any different if a different chairman and manager had simply meant that the club's insolvency had become apparant earlier in the season.

[Kingsbridge Saint]

The Stadium, is about all. And that is an asset for the city ultimately, that the club can use. Everything else he touched was a total disaster.

[david in sweden]

The Stadium, is about all. And that is an asset for the city ultimately, that the club can use. Everything else he touched was a total disaster.

 

Hopefully the Council may get SMS.

The facilities are top class for this type of amenity and it must be put to good use for the other 335 days of the years when Saints AREN'T playing matches there.

[Wes Tender]

The obsession with Lowe goes on and on,

Well, it's inevitable until we find new owners, as he was the chief architect of our demise but through the red mist people seem to overlook the role of Michael Wilde, Agreed. Nobody should forget for one minute the part played in all this by the Quisling.who climbed on the anti-Lowe bandwagon - changed the board at entirely the wrong time with his threatened EGM, When was the right time?appointed a bunch of nobodies to run the club incompetantly and allowed £7m to be wasted, The £7 million is a similar amount to that boasted by Lowe as being in his war chest when he was ousted.I'm presuming that you believe that having indicated that the money was there, he wouldn't have spent it. Well, knowing Lowe, you're probably right.then stood back while Leon Crouch oversaw the running down of the club's finances. Not true. As for Lowe, his biggest personal mistake was in coming back last year to try to save the club, but if he hadn't, does anyone seriously believe that things would have been any different if a different chairman and manager had simply meant that the club's insolvency had become apparant earlier in the season.Yes. It was not obvious that Lowe had only one course of action available to him and neither is it obvious that another Chairman or manager would have failed to either keep us in this division, or financially viable. Lowe's bizarre experiment and the useless managers he appointed put paid to us.

But with luck, we will never ever have to endure him or Wilde having anything to so with us again.

[eelpie]

The obsession with Lowe goes on and on, but through the red mist people seem to overlook the role of Michael Wilde, who climbed on the anti-Lowe bandwagon - changed the board at entirely the wrong time with his threatened EGM, appointed a bunch of nobodies to run the club incompetantly and allowed £7m to be wasted, then stood back while Leon Crouch oversaw the running down of the club's finances. As for Lowe, his biggest personal mistake was in coming back last year to try to save the club, but if he hadn't, does anyone seriously believe that things would have been any different if a different chairman and manager had simply meant that the club's insolvency had become apparant earlier in the season.

 

Yes.

 

We would have become insolvent earlier, but we would have been higher up the table because we would have been fielding a much more experienced blend of players, with a much better manager than the hapless Poortvliet - ie Pearson. There should have been more advanced warning that administration was going to be inevitable, giving us time to find a buyer - like Coventry did. And if we did not find a last minute buyer and consequently we were deducted 10 points, we would have probably amassed enough points to avoid the deduction next year in League 1.

 

Does this not answer your question?

 

(PS yes Wilde does share the blame equally)

[Gorgiesaint]

History will show that Lowe budgeted for failure and that's what he got. His total lack of understanding of the mechanics of running a football club both as a business and in terms of building a squad to maintain Premiership status has been exposed for all to see. Lowe could not fathom the simple fact that to survive in the Premiership you must have a sprinkling of stars on high wages. Whether you get those players on loan or pick them up from abroad or on Bosmans you must have them. His strategy was to have a wage cap that meant our best players were driven away and the ones brought in were not good enough. Pretty soon he presided over the building of an ever expanding squad of mediocre/poor players that no manager could get a decent team out of. The wage bill for that large squad was probably as much or more than it would have been had he had the nous to sign some quality players. We found ourselves desperately trying to improve the team to get out of a self perpetuating mess. Add to that the revolving door managerial farce which partly resulted from his failure to authorise buying of decent player and the wheels for the demise of our fantastic club had been set in motion. The outcome was inevitable. From that point it was a sharp and slippery slope to where we now find ourselves. Budget for the lower leagues and that is inevitably where you'll end up. Reach up instead of down and you're planning for life on a park bench. The sad thing is, it aint rocket science.

Sorry, couldn't come up with three things he did right no matter how hard I tried. Nothing could compensate for the place he left our beloved club.

 

History shows Lowe budgetted for failure - I know this means I'm gonna take pelters from the anti-Lowes but I don't agree.

 

Lowe has made many mistakes - his failures in choosing managers to work successfully within budgets is what has cost us. Surely the experience of the last 2 years demonstrates that working outside of your budget has disasterous consequences. Lowe had a budget & stuck to it. (I know there are then arguments about how much was siphoned off etc)

 

IMO we did not use the budget we had effectively - we had too many players who were not good enough - quantity not quality. At the end of the day, it can be argued whether that bloated squad is the fault of the manager or chairman, the chairman does pick the manager.

 

For that reason blame Lowe - but don't blame him for being prudent with the finances.

[saintant]

I think you miss the point Georgiesaint. I am not saying that Lowe should not have worked within a reasonable budget. My point is that his wage cap meant that, as you stated yourself, we ended up with a bloated squad of mediocre/not good enough players. That was his huge mistake in my opinion.

[Gingeletiss]

I think you miss the point Georgiesaint. I am not saying that Lowe should not have worked within a reasonable budget. My point is that his wage cap meant that, as you stated yourself, we ended up with a bloated squad of mediocre/not good enough players. That was his huge mistake in my opinion.

 

An opinion shared by many!!

[andymcrowe]

Nice to read a discussion about Lowe without all of the headbanger comments. I think the general thrust is right - he got us the stadium, the youth facilities and let's not forget getting to the FA Cup Final. But he made some dire manager appointments (usually when promoting from within and trying to do it on the cheap, which you simply can't in the Premiership) and we were let down by a succession of managers who walked away from the club. Yes he played a part and was has a big ego (though maybe not as big as Leon Crouch's) but I think that everybody needs to share the blame, including the fans who opposed the return of Hoddle.

[andymcrowe]

...and I think it's worth making quite clear that it was the LibDem Council at Eastleigh that opposed the stadium from the very beginning. Let's face it has anyone met a LibDem who likes football?!The extra facilities to make the development stand up financially were just an excuse for them to oppose it after the planning inspectorate gave it the go ahead (so the 'strategic gap' argument is irrelevant). We were bailed out by Southampton's Labour Council, who bent over backwards to support the club's search for a new ground.

Worth thinking about when you vote in a few week's time!

[eelpie]

I think you miss the point Georgiesaint. I am not saying that Lowe should not have worked within a reasonable budget. My point is that his wage cap meant that, as you stated yourself, we ended up with a bloated squad of mediocre/not good enough players. That was his huge mistake in my opinion.

 

Traditionally Saints have had a strong but small squad. The quality of the Ted Bates and LM's squads gradually got better on a shoe-string budget. This is the strategy that got us promoted to the top division (twice) and how we survived there. Strachan's teams were based on a core of 16 main players too.

 

Here is where I just don't understand why Lowe changed policy to one of gradually increasing the number of average players in the squad at the expense of quality. Overall costs did not decrease. The consequences were inevitable.

[Wes Tender]

...and I think it's worth making quite clear that it was the LibDem Council at Eastleigh that opposed the stadium from the very beginning. Let's face it has anyone met a LibDem who likes football?!The extra facilities to make the development stand up financially were just an excuse for them to oppose it after the planning inspectorate gave it the go ahead (so the 'strategic gap' argument is irrelevant). We were bailed out by Southampton's Labour Council, who bent over backwards to support the club's search for a new ground.

Worth thinking about when you vote in a few week's time!

 

Don't be such an arse without any concrete evidence to support your assertion. The Liberals desperately wanted the stadium as part of a sporting complex to rival those at Crystal Palace and Gateshead with the football stadium as its centre piece. But they wouldn't allow Lowe to dictate to them that we should have a cinema and a huge shopping development to help us finance it all. It was the Conservatives of HCC who were against it. Granted that Labour on Southampton City Council bailed Lowe out, but to blame the Liberals on EBC and try and tie that in to the forthcoming election is stupid. What are you suggesting? That we vote for the party who has made such a pig's ear of the current economic situation because of what they did nearly a decade ago for the club?

 

And just for the record, in case you think that I have any love for the Lib Dems, I'm a Conservative.

[Wes Tender]

Yes.

 

We would have become insolvent earlier, but we would have been higher up the table because we would have been fielding a much more experienced blend of players, with a much better manager than the hapless Poortvliet - ie Pearson.

 

Is it a nailed on certainty that we would have been insolvent earlier? Or could a reasonable case be argued that without Lowe, but with Pearson as manager this season that he would have achieved better results, therefore the crowds would have been greater, with the resultant extra revenue that would have generated? Another factor to aid that theory, was that there was undoubtedly an element who stayed away to boycott Lowe and those people would probably have added extra income too.

 

I agree though that even under those circumstances we would also have seriously have been looking for investment and had we managed to have achieved mid-table security, we would have been a much more attractive package. Under the current situation, it was not clear to most that we were for sale until the announcement of our administration.

[Whitey Grandad]

Is it a nailed on certainty that we would have been insolvent earlier? Or could a reasonable case be argued that without Lowe, but with Pearson as manager this season that he would have achieved better results, therefore the crowds would have been greater, with the resultant extra revenue that would have generated? Another factor to aid that theory, was that there was undoubtedly an element who stayed away to boycott Lowe and those people would probably have added extra income too.

 

I agree though that even under those circumstances we would also have seriously have been looking for investment and had we managed to have achieved mid-table security, we would have been a much more attractive package. Under the current situation, it was not clear to most that we were for sale until the announcement of our administration.

I agree entirely, FWIW

[um pahars]

Is it a nailed on certainty that we would have been insolvent earlier? Or could a reasonable case be argued that without Lowe, but with Pearson as manager this season that he would have achieved better results, therefore the crowds would have been greater, with the resultant extra revenue that would have generated? Another factor to aid that theory, was that there was undoubtedly an element who stayed away to boycott Lowe and those people would probably have added extra income too.

 

I agree though that even under those circumstances we would also have seriously have been looking for investment and had we managed to have achieved mid-table security, we would have been a much more attractive package. Under the current situation, it was not clear to most that we were for sale until the announcement of our administration.

 

And with 2,000 bums on seats equating to circa £1m it's not a massive leap of faith to see where you're coming from. And that's before we even look at the wasteful transfer policy this season and the other poor decisions that plagued last season.

 

Ending up where we are was not a fait accompli, as demonstrated by Lowe and Wilde coming back to save (LOL) the Club. Indeed, even midway through the season they felt there was still a chance to save the Club by changing the manager.

[Leicestersaint]

Rupert lowe presided over the decline and possible demise of our football club - founded 124 years' ago. Arguably, he presided over the worst period in our club's history.

 

We should all be judged on our achievements or failures -that is how we expect to judge politicians, bankers, heads of universities and companies, etc, etc. On this basis, Loew is a total failure.

[Gorgiesaint]

An opinion shared by many!!

 

No I agree with you - thats why I said quality not quantity was needed. What I disagreed with was that Lowe budgeted for failure - IMO he budgeted!!

[Mole]

Can't we all stop talking about this parasite now.

[Genk]

1) We could have been at stoneham; better site with room to expand if need be. Instead we have a "flat pack" stadium that is restricted in its expansion (not that we will be ready to expand any time soon)

 

I thought three of the stands could be expanded, i.e. another level. At the end of the day a club like ours only needs a stadium that can expand up to another 10,000. Thats all that is needed.

[Kenilworthy]

I thought three of the stands could be expanded, i.e. another level. At the end of the day a club like ours only needs a stadium that can expand up to another 10,000. Thats all that is needed.

 

Absolutely right. The foundations are already there on three sides apart from the Itchen Stand to support an increase in capacity to about 40,000. The current capacity of 32,000 was not dictated so much by ambition or budget, but by planning considerations relating to concerns about the capability of the transport and parking infrastructure to handle anything bigger. The initial idea was that once the club had proved it could handle 32,000 crowds ok without bringing the city to a gridlock then talks could open about expansion.

 

Stoneham was going to start at 25,000 with similar conditions about future expansion. Although it seems to have happened by default, in my view we ended up with a better option at St Mary's. And the traffic isn't that bad compared with other grounds. I have a 120 mile journey home and usually get back around 7.30 ish on a Saturday - and I always stay to the final whistle.

[Bearsy]

Lowe's tendancy to ignore wiser council and back his own judgement was the cause of our demise, but I've tried to think of 3 instances where it paid off:

 

1. The appointment of WGS

2. The signing of Peter Crouch

 

I can't think of a third - any ideas?

[eelpie]

Is it a nailed on certainty that we would have been insolvent earlier? Or could a reasonable case be argued that without Lowe, but with Pearson as manager this season that he would have achieved better results, therefore the crowds would have been greater, with the resultant extra revenue that would have generated? Another factor to aid that theory, was that there was undoubtedly an element who stayed away to boycott Lowe and those people would probably have added extra income too.

 

I agree though that even under those circumstances we would also have seriously have been looking for investment and had we managed to have achieved mid-table security, we would have been a much more attractive package. Under the current situation, it was not clear to most that we were for sale until the announcement of our administration.

 

You're right. With better performances and with the anti-Lowe 'stay-aways' in the ground we would have had bigger crowds, so it's anyones guess whether we could have avoided administration altogether. I'm sure though we would not have been in the relegation zone at the end of the season, and probably would have been more than 10 points above the drop zone.

[rpb]

Lowe's tendancy to ignore wiser council and back his own judgement was the cause of our demise, but I've tried to think of 3 instances where it paid off:

 

1. The appointment of WGS

2. The signing of Peter Crouch

 

I can't think of a third - any ideas?

 

Anti Niemi?

[Bearsy]

I thought Niemi was Strachan's shout? Crouch was all Lowe and I remember he got dogs abuse for it at the time.

[Alain Perrin]

I thought Niemi was Strachan's shout? Crouch was all Lowe and I remember he got dogs abuse for it at the time.

 

I think Niemi was a Lowe championed signing. Strachan wanted someone else I think.

 

The signings by panel approach (scouts, coaches, manager, chairman) got a bad rep under Lowe (a convenient stick to beat him with) but, in my opinion, it is the right way to go. The key issue is the balance of power (the manager must dictate what type/position of player is required, not the chairman), but either way it will be the chairman in any club who decides what can be afforded.

 

Picking up on the point about he Lowe stayaways. I really think this is over egged. The thousands that flooded back at the end of the season did so because of Saints' peril (financial and relegation), not because of the chairman leaving.

 

Many people used 'Lowe' as a reason for other reasons to stay away (cash, family, distance, job.... but most of all quality). And there's the nub, the biggest impact on attendances is the performance of the team and the quality of the opposition.

 

Yes, you can argue that Lowe's decisions had a negative impact on this, but it is a vicious circle (lower league position, less crowds, less money, worse players etc.).

 

Clubs like Man City and Newcastle will always come back because the fans will go even in the face of adversity, our support is less resiliant. That said, win a few in League 1 and things may improve.

[ThorpG]

I don't agree about the stadium. It is a very bad design. Very pleasant to be in, true, but the raking of the stands are not steep enough and so St Mary's lacks the intimidating atmosphere that The Dell did have, and even Poopey's stadium has. At Reading, for example, the steep tiers of the Madjeski have been of great benefit to their team, but at St Mary's our stadium has not been beneficial to us. Results prove this.

 

Consequently we have never really had the same home advantage that we had at The Dell, which imo cost us valuable points, and that cost us two relegations.

 

I am not sure that is true - for a while under Strachan we were virtually unbeatable and it was a fortress. The stadium is fine, Lowe just forgot to put any money into a decent management setup and a decent playinng squad to go with it. Too busy trying out continental structures, Woodward etc...

[kpturner]

4) He signed Peter Crouch

[rpb]

4) He signed Peter Crouch

 

That was number 2 on Bearsy's list (post 143)