Solent news.

[SaintRichmond]

Our problems started at the time of the reverse take - over, (and no this is not an anti-Lowe rant) and from that point until around 2003 we muddled through with a combination of luck, having MLT and certain amount of good stewardship. Sadly the continual "revolving door" of managers, lack of sensible investment in the team led to relegation. Despite some people saying that relegation was inevitable, it wasn`t. No club has a divine right to be in the Premiership but we could quite easily have still been there how many points were we away from safety?). Since relegation it has been one catalogue of disasterous boardroom decisions. All of the participents in the soap opera that has taken place at SMS must take their proportion of blame. Wilde for changing sides, Lowe for his continual "experiments" (SCW, the Dutch Revolution et al) and belief that he was some sort of football guru, Crouch etc for the gamble they took to get promotion before the parachute payment ran out and Hone, Hoos and all of the others for their "Mitchell Brothers" contribution. To suggest that the reason for all of our problems is because of the "mis-management" during the months that Crouch was in the Chair is simplistic. It didn`t help but it was just part of the horrific jig-saw that Saints have become. It is a bit like saying that WW2 happened because Hitler was a naughty boy. We all know that situations like this are far from simple

 

 

Why isn't it ..... it was the pivotal moment in SFC's history which started us on the road to decline

 

.... "Reverse Take Over " ...... a means by which all the Board members made money for themselves and NOT SFC .....

 

.... Led at the time by Lowe

[Frank's cousin]

Why isn't it ..... it was the pivotal moment in SFC's history which started us on the road to decline

 

.... "Reverse Take Over " ...... a means by which all the Board members made money for themselves and NOT SFC .....

 

.... Led at the time by Lowe

 

NOt quite true, it was certainly a way for the old board to make money for themselves and for Lowe its was merely his original secure rtd shares being transferred to new SLH shares and he was topgeter with Wilde and CRouch someone who made no money out of them whatsoever...

[bridge too far]

Why is it that every thread on this forum degenerates into a blame game / mud slinging competition?

 

Why can't we just discuss the thread topic? Why can't we let byegones be byegones and move on?

 

I despair sometimes :sad:

 

[SaintRichmond]

A lot of supporters alienated themselves IMO.

You were gagging for us to go into administration telling us it was the promised land as we would be bought as we were such a bargain.It doesnt feel like that from where im sitting.

it is foolish mindsets like that that has contributed to our demise.Add to that Rl MW LC abd all the others and you have the set.

 

 

Yes, I was "gagging" for Admin .... but a LONG time before it happened, when things were much rosier ..... in fact I started on about it when we were still in the Prem

 

Times have changed, of course they have, but the circumstances of HOW and WHEN we went into Admin are clear, or are they

 

WHY did we go into Admin ONE week after the League deadline ??

WHO pulled the plug ?? Barclays ??

WAS it when Lowe wrote a Dunlop cheque ???... If so WHY did he write it, knowing full well that it would trigger something catastrophic

 

Yes, I did want Admin .... but certainly not in the circumstances that Lowe engineered it ...... He did it for a reason, mark my words

[Frank's cousin]

He did it for a reason, mark my words

 

Sorry that is just plain ******... why wite off your own shares, effectively sack yourself and damage your reputation as a chairman/director ...spite? Come on if you are making sweeping accustaion like that at least provide some sort of eveidence or facts to back it up otherwise its just plain bullSH!t

[SW11_Saint]

Think you hit the nail on the head with some of the antagonism - I can fully understand that and as I said previously, its sometimes incredibly frustrating and difficult to stand up and defend an idea or concept that LOwe initiated, when it fails because of either **** poor implementation, bad timing or inexperience or just plain wrong for the circumstances - especially when he compounds it with his his appalling PR and arrogance, but that does not make 'prudence' and living within our means, or investment in youth or even a continental system wrong in totality and thats the sort of thing that I do try and defend - not the man initiating them. Lowe's name attached does bring its own set of problems though

 

There will always be times when as fans we support ideas that later turn out to have been wrong and most sensible folk are happy to admit 'I got that one wrong' - but too often teh sense of schardenfreude or simple nasty 'I told you so's' makes it pretty difficult to admit - or more commonly the actual situation is more complex. The classic is teh one you refer to - the Dutch Duo and youth - risky and 'barve' or stupid and ignorant? you take your pick - I thought its was a combination risky and certainly brave, but also Lowe had misread the positive feeling fans had following Perasons survival run in - dropped a clanger, but would have been oK had the Duo delivered and there were early positive signs of encouragement - sure the obvious is it wont work, as has been proven, but should fans feel ashamed of being SUPPORTIVE and POSITIVE about a new season and new approach even if eventually doomed? and does that somehow mean we are suddenly Lowe supporters because we suppoted the team and were excited by teh possibilty? sorry i dont believe that is so.

 

Finally it works all ways- so far I have for example resited 1) taking the **** out of all those who 'got it wriong about Wilde 2) all those who thought admin was a good idea...why? because its easy to see positives in these things and thus feel compelled to believe, its not naiveity but passion ruling head and there is nothing bad about that.

 

As for CRouch I will happily (and have always done) give him the credit for the good he has done and is doing (if he has in deed dipped in again he is a legend for that), but I simply struggle with his big gob and 'showey' attitude that is ego driven... as I struggled with Lowes arrogance and dismissiveness towards fans... cant really see where Alpine gets his vitriol from, but it takes allsorts I guess...

You're right, we can all admit we were wrong - I was caught on the tide of optimism that Wilde brought with him (first time around), how wrong we were. But if you listened to what they were saying, it all made sense, it sounded ambitious, it sounded acheivable, so people could be forgiven for believing it.

 

The issue with Lowe is that he tends to take us on 'experimental' tangents which even the most risk prone person would think, "um, this is a bit of a gamble" (appointing Rugby coaches as DoF, appointing a guy playing "Brazilian style" with 13 year old kids to coach senior players, appointing two lower league Dutch coaches to implement a revolutionary "total football" scheme (with kids!) in a cloggers league). So the reason Lowe gets more anger, frustration etc. from everyone, is that even someone with a modicum of football knowledge understands that most of his plans were just ridiculous. We hoped he'd have learned, but clearly not, and the "Dutch experiment" was one too far, and one we certainly didn't need this season. We are now playing the price.

 

Personally, I am NEVER going to forgive Lowe for what he has done to MY club. NEVER. And if you're waiting for anger to subside, it probably will do (as hopefully the club move onto better times), but the pain we are feeling now will never go away, and Lowe has cemented his place in history as the man who relegated us twice and took us into administration (which negates all of the good stuff he did - and even I can see he actually did do some good!).

 

I remain convinced that this years relegation, and possibly administration, could have been avoided if we hadn't gone down the ridiculous route of imposing a brand new 'youth first/continental' policy with two totally inexperienced coaches in English football. We could have, under Nigel Pearson, cut our cloth accordingly, brought through the best of the kids, unloaded some of the non-performing higher earners and had a half decent, consolidating season. And you know what, Lowe might have come out with a few more on his side. Of course, that didn't happen, and he rolled out the old "I know best..." routine, with the obvious results. In short HE is responsbile, HE is accountable, and HE will continue to get anger, frustration etc. from the majority of Saints fans.

[The9]

That is just unbelievable.....

Can you remind me who was chairman when we signed Delap, Delgado, Neil McCann, Van Damme?

 

Marsden, Crouch, Beattie, Niemi, Michael Svensson, Kenwyne Jones...

 

...not to mention setting up the infrastructure that helped attract and then bring through Walcott, Bale, Baird and to a lesser extent Blackstock, Best and Dyer.

 

I'm no fan but that's a poor attempt at a stick to beat him with. The problem was quantity over quality. By all means complain about the quality of the likes of Mikael Nilsson, Bleidelis, Arias and Jakobsson, but Delap was with us for 5 years and Delgado was a proven international who was just always injured and that we didn't have the ability to support and integrate.

[Give it to Ron]

You're right, we can all admit we were wrong - I was caught on the tide of optimism that Wilde brought with him (first time around), how wrong we were. But if you listened to what they were saying, it all made sense, it sounded ambitious, it sounded acheivable, so people could be forgiven for believing it.

 

The issue with Lowe is that he tends to take us on 'experimental' tangents which even the most risk prone person would think, "um, this is a bit of a gamble" (appointing Rugby coaches as DoF, appointing a guy playing "Brazilian style" with 13 year old kids to coach senior players, appointing two lower league Dutch coaches to implement a revolutionary "total football" scheme (with kids!) in a cloggers league). So the reason Lowe gets more anger, frustration etc. from everyone, is that even someone with a modicum of football knowledge understands that most of his plans were just ridiculous. We hoped he'd have learned, but clearly not, and the "Dutch experiment" was one too far, and one we certainly didn't need this season. We are now playing the price.

 

Personally, I am NEVER going to forgive Lowe for what he has done to MY club. NEVER. And if you're waiting for anger to subside, it probably will do (as hopefully the club move onto better times), but the pain we are feeling now will never go away, and Lowe has cemented his place in history as the man who relegated us twice and took us into administration (which negates all of the good stuff he did - and even I can see he actually did do some good!).

 

I remain convinced that this years relegation, and possibly administration, could have been avoided if we hadn't gone down the ridiculous route of imposing a brand new 'youth first/continental' policy with two totally inexperienced coaches in English football. We could have, under Nigel Pearson, cut our cloth accordingly, brought through the best of the kids, unloaded some of the non-performing higher earners and had a half decent, consolidating season. And you know what, Lowe might have come out with a few more on his side. Of course, that didn't happen, and he rolled out the old "I know best..." routine, with the obvious results. In short HE is responsbile, HE is accountable, and HE will continue to get anger, frustration etc. from the majority of Saints fans.

 

Great post and exactly on the same wavelength as you. Lowe did not need to come back personally and could of employed a proper CEO who would of paid for himself with cost cuts and directing the money more wisely than he did. We employed 4 Dutchmen so the money was there.

[bridge too far]

So - what's the latest Solent news then?

 

:smt075

[miserableoldgit]

Why isn't it ..... it was the pivotal moment in SFC's history which started us on the road to decline

 

.... "Reverse Take Over " ...... a means by which all the Board members made money for themselves and NOT SFC .....

 

.... Led at the time by Lowe

Because it is too easy to turn everything into an anti-Lowe rant. I didn`t just want to say "It`s all Lowes fault" because it really isn`t that simple, which is the point I was responding to. IMHO Lowe bears the majority of the blame for what has happened to our club, but he is not alone. Wilde is not far behind and Crouch and all of the rest must take their share too.

[Give it to Ron]

Marsden, Crouch, Beattie, Niemi, Michael Svensson, Kenwyne Jones...

 

...not to mention setting up the infrastructure that helped attract and then bring through Walcott, Bale, Baird and to a lesser extent Blackstock, Best and Dyer.

 

I'm no fan but that's a poor attempt at a stick to beat him with. The problem was quantity over quality. By all means complain about the quality of the likes of Mikael Nilsson, Bleidelis, Arias and Jakobsson, but Delap was with us for 5 years and Delgado was a proven international who was just always injured and that we didn't have the ability to support and integrate.

 

It was not a stick to beat him with but to point out that Wilde/Hone/Wilde were not alone in bad transfer deals as pointed out in John B post.

Wilde/Hone/Crouch also bought in Wright, Lucketti, Perry, Cork, Bennett....

I have championed the academy set up by Lowe for many years but this was ruined by Lowes obsession with seeing youth only and ruining and setting back many of the youngsters he bought through the academy.

[Verbal]

Why is it that every thread on this forum degenerates into a blame game / mud slinging competition?

 

Why can't we just discuss the thread topic? Why can't we let byegones be byegones and move on?

 

I despair sometimes :sad:

 

 

Me too.

 

I also despair at the imprecision of the abuse. Let's get some facts straight. The term 'moron' was invented by the American psychologist H H Goddard. It was intended to be one rung down the ladder from 'normal', one rung above 'idiot', and two above the most stupid: 'imbecile'. (On this basis, using IQ tests, Goddard worked out that most of the US infantry in the first and second world wars were in fact morons.)

 

So if you want to abuse someone, do it properly, you imbeciles.

[The9]

"A lot of supporters alienated themselves."

 

Are you joking. I can't think of a more nonsensical statement than that,.

 

Thats right the supporters decided not to love their club and pick a fight with the management.

 

That's pretty much what happened from where I'm sitting - actually I still refuse to believe much of the "boycott" drivel (with certain exceptions), so what actually happened was a load of people found a convenient excuse not to go because they couldn't afford it or just plain didn't want to watch us being below average in a league that didn't involve us playing the likes of Liverpool, Arsenal and Man U occasionally. Once the novelty of the first CCC season had worn off and people had seen the likes of funny little Barnsley beat us they weren't coming anyway.

 

There are no attendance figures to support or destroy the "boycott" theory because when Lowe left we had a cut-price match and then two critical relegation battles and figures were skewed by that, so we'll never know.

 

What I do know is that a load of people I know stopped going and it had nothing to do with Lowe at all - and I also know two who did stop due to Lowe alone, but kept going to away games. But as none of them actually protested about it for the first 6 months, what did it achieve other than costing the club money ?

[miserableoldgit]

So - what's the latest Solent news then?

 

:smt075

Sadly (or maybe not) there doesn`t seem to be any. I listened to Solent sports bulletins this morning and we weren`t even mentioned.

[The9]

It was not a stick to beat him with but to point out that Wilde/Hone/Wilde were not alone in bad transfer deals as pointed out in John B post.

Wilde/Hone/Crouch also bought in Wright, Lucketti, Perry, Cork, Bennett....

I have championed the academy set up by Lowe for many years but this was ruined by Lowes obsession with seeing youth only and ruining and setting back many of the youngsters he bought through the academy.

 

If you have Bennett down as an example of a good transfer I think we'll have to leave this one.

 

Fair point on the Academy crashing and burning this season though, just as the vast majority assumed would be the case.

[Frank's cousin]

You're right, we can all admit we were wrong - I was caught on the tide of optimism that Wilde brought with him (first time around), how wrong we were. But if you listened to what they were saying, it all made sense, it sounded ambitious, it sounded acheivable, so people could be forgiven for believing it.

 

The issue with Lowe is that he tends to take us on 'experimental' tangents which even the most risk prone person would think, "um, this is a bit of a gamble" (appointing Rugby coaches as DoF, appointing a guy playing "Brazilian style" with 13 year old kids to coach senior players, appointing two lower league Dutch coaches to implement a revolutionary "total football" scheme (with kids!) in a cloggers league). So the reason Lowe gets more anger, frustration etc. from everyone, is that even someone with a modicum of football knowledge understands that most of his plans were just ridiculous. We hoped he'd have learned, but clearly not, and the "Dutch experiment" was one too far, and one we certainly didn't need this season. We are now playing the price.

 

Personally, I am NEVER going to forgive Lowe for what he has done to MY club. NEVER. And if you're waiting for anger to subside, it probably will do (as hopefully the club move onto better times), but the pain we are feeling now will never go away, and Lowe has cemented his place in history as the man who relegated us twice and took us into administration (which negates all of the good stuff he did - and even I can see he actually did do some good!).

 

I remain convinced that this years relegation, and possibly administration, could have been avoided if we hadn't gone down the ridiculous route of imposing a brand new 'youth first/continental' policy with two totally inexperienced coaches in English football. We could have, under Nigel Pearson, cut our cloth accordingly, brought through the best of the kids, unloaded some of the non-performing higher earners and had a half decent, consolidating season. And you know what, Lowe might have come out with a few more on his side. Of course, that didn't happen, and he rolled out the old "I know best..." routine, with the obvious results. In short HE is responsbile, HE is accountable, and HE will continue to get anger, frustration etc. from the majority of Saints fans.

 

Thanks...just simple thanks...for being one of the few who disagrees with me who actually takes the time to present your opinion with insight, obvious passion and intelligence.

 

I have always had this niggling irritation about the Pearson thing... on the one hand I liked to think it could be exciting and works and thsoe early games game showed promise - but instead of it being a platform for kicking on, we simply got sussed out and rumbled... and Lowe's mis reading of the fan support and positives surrounding Pearson was his biggest blunder for sure - Not convinced we would have staved off admin due to the financial mess being impossible to resolve given the contracts in place, but had Pearson continued wher he left off and given us a fighting spirit on the pitch we may have seen a greater response from fans... My argument for trying to understand what is really at fault stems from this hypothetical situation: Say Pearson had stayed on but with the same outcome eg relegation and admin would fnas have:

 

1) Blamed Pearson for being inept

2) Blamed Lowe for keeping pearson when it was obvious CRouch had only got him in to do a job, hense teh break clause

3) Blamed Lowe for not supporting him financially

4) Blamed LOwe for sending the best players out on loan (due to not being able to afford the wages)

 

Now it may well be that Lowe IS really to blame and he could have done some of those thngs differently, but all I want to be able to do is know for sur based on facts, not rumour, gossip or speculation that is in many cases or has been driven by prejudice because its a convenient scapegoat rather than taking teh time to analyse the errors and what went wrong or why... Personall, I cant see the problem or issue with that, but sadly some do. Maybe its teh anger, pain etc which is fair enough and Lowe should have at the very least realised he could have healed a few wounds by supporting Pearson - (Still sems such an odd decision because even if wedded to teh continental thing - he had waited years to do that that another 12 months would have done no harm....)

[bridge too far]

Sadly (or maybe not) there doesn`t seem to be any. I listened to Solent sports bulletins this morning and we weren`t even mentioned.

 

I know, MOG, I know.

 

I was trying to be sarcastic because I'm fed up with all the bloody sniping.

 

The Saints part of my life is depressing enough without this fan on fan warfare STILL going on.

 

And they say women don't know when to give up an argument - jeez!

[miserableoldgit]

I know, MOG, I know.

 

I was trying to be sarcastic because I'm fed up with all the bloody sniping.

 

The Saints part of my life is depressing enough without this fan on fan warfare STILL going on.

 

And they say women don't know when to give up an argument - jeez!

But women don`t know when to give up an argument!

[bridge too far]

But women don`t know when to give up an argument!

 

Oh yes they do

[miserableoldgit]

Oh yes they do

Oh No They Don`t. I think you get the idea there (in a Harry Hill voice).

[miserableoldgit]

I know, MOG, I know.

 

I was trying to be sarcastic because I'm fed up with all the bloody sniping.

 

The Saints part of my life is depressing enough without this fan on fan warfare STILL going on.

 

And they say women don't know when to give up an argument - jeez!

TBF I agree with you totally, but it is difficult not respond when something contenious, naive or plainly aggravating is posted.

[PaulSaint]

MODS - Please can you change the title of this thread to "Lets argue about who was to blame for the 500th time"

[Shroppie]

You're right, we can all admit we were wrong - I was caught on the tide of optimism that Wilde brought with him (first time around), how wrong we were. But if you listened to what they were saying, it all made sense, it sounded ambitious, it sounded acheivable, so people could be forgiven for believing it.

 

The issue with Lowe is that he tends to take us on 'experimental' tangents which even the most risk prone person would think, "um, this is a bit of a gamble" (appointing Rugby coaches as DoF, appointing a guy playing "Brazilian style" with 13 year old kids to coach senior players, appointing two lower league Dutch coaches to implement a revolutionary "total football" scheme (with kids!) in a cloggers league). So the reason Lowe gets more anger, frustration etc. from everyone, is that even someone with a modicum of football knowledge understands that most of his plans were just ridiculous. We hoped he'd have learned, but clearly not, and the "Dutch experiment" was one too far, and one we certainly didn't need this season. We are now playing the price.

 

Personally, I am NEVER going to forgive Lowe for what he has done to MY club. NEVER. And if you're waiting for anger to subside, it probably will do (as hopefully the club move onto better times), but the pain we are feeling now will never go away, and Lowe has cemented his place in history as the man who relegated us twice and took us into administration (which negates all of the good stuff he did - and even I can see he actually did do some good!).

 

I remain convinced that this years relegation, and possibly administration, could have been avoided if we hadn't gone down the ridiculous route of imposing a brand new 'youth first/continental' policy with two totally inexperienced coaches in English football. We could have, under Nigel Pearson, cut our cloth accordingly, brought through the best of the kids, unloaded some of the non-performing higher earners and had a half decent, consolidating season. And you know what, Lowe might have come out with a few more on his side. Of course, that didn't happen, and he rolled out the old "I know best..." routine, with the obvious results. In short HE is responsbile, HE is accountable, and HE will continue to get anger, frustration etc. from the majority of Saints fans.

 

Agreed totally. That's pretty well precisely what I've wanted to say but haven't had the energy or time to do so. Thanks for such an excellent summary.

[Master Bates]

Anything been on Solent today? i've just missed it.

[OldNick]

WHY did we go into Admin ONE week after the League deadline ??

WHO pulled the plug ?? Barclays ??

WAS it when Lowe wrote a Dunlop cheque ???... If so WHY did he write it, knowing full well that it would trigger something catastrophic

 

That is the questions we should be aiming at Fry at barclays. I would like to know the circmstances of why he bounced cheques when he did.

[StInky]

WHY did we go into Admin ONE week after the League deadline ??

WHO pulled the plug ?? Barclays ??

WAS it when Lowe wrote a Dunlop cheque ???... If so WHY did he write it, knowing full well that it would trigger something catastrophic

 

Good questions. The 6 month figures needed to be lodged by 31st March. Without the Bank's support SLH could not claim to be a "going concern" and it would all be over. My guess is that there was a game of brinkmanship between Lowe and Fry at Barclays. Perhaps Lowe assumed that Barclays would back down and offer their support at the last minute. In which case it was a misjudgement. Or perhaps Lowe, realising that he'd lost the Bank's support, just wanted to create as much damage as possible by calling in the administrators after the League deadline (I don't subscribe to this view by the way). It was Lowe that called in the Administrators on 2nd April, although I imagine Begbies would have been advising Lowe in the period leading up to administration. It would be interesting to know what had been going on behind the scenes.

[OldNick]

. It would be interesting to know what had been going on behind the scenes.

Especially what led up to the decision at Barclays.

[70's Mike]

That is the questions we should be aiming at Fry at barclays. I would like to know the circmstances of why he bounced cheques when he did.

 

i asked the same question a few weeks back and never really heard a plausible explanation.

who sent out cheques making us overdrawn and why ?

[itchen]

So - what's the latest Solent news then?

 

:smt075

 

I should give up if I were you. No-one knows anything so it's all deteriorated into the usual "it's all Rupert's fault/oh no it isn't" bickering. Neither side will change their minds so this will run and run.

 

I'll come back when there's something interesting about what is happening now as opposed to going over what happened in the last ten or eleven years.

[OldNick]

i asked the same question a few weeks back and never really heard a plausible explanation.

who sent out cheques making us overdrawn and why ?

People dont want to think it could be anyother persons fault except RL. They of course could be right but i dont believe RL would have acted as it has been portrayed as he loves his money and recklessly putting us into administration was to cost him it all.he would have sold players in Jan if he knew his money was in jeopady.It doesnt ring true.

[Weston Super Saint]

People dont want to think it could be anyother persons fault except RL. They of course could be right but i dont believe RL would have acted as it has been portrayed as he loves his money and recklessly putting us into administration was to cost him it all.he would have sold players in Jan if he knew his money was in jeopady.It doesnt ring true.

 

LOL.

 

Exactly how much money did he lose?

 

He got his shares for almost nothing, and earned over a million pounds while working - and that was just his salary, who knows how much more in 'expenses'.....

[OldNick]

LOL.

 

Exactly how much money did he lose?

 

He got his shares for almost nothing, and earned over a million pounds while working - and that was just his salary, who knows how much more in 'expenses'.....

Well if you dont think he lost any money then I wouldnt like you to guide me.

[Weston Super Saint]

Well if you dont think he lost any money then I wouldnt like you to guide me.

 

Enlighten me then, let me know [approximately] how much money he lost during his tenure in charge.

 

No need to offset it against how much he earnt, just give me a ballpark figure of how much cash he lost and what he lost it on.....

[OldNick]

Enlighten me then, let me know [approximately] how much money he lost during his tenure in charge.

 

No need to offset it against how much he earnt, just give me a ballpark figure of how much cash he lost and what he lost it on.....

The day we went into administration he lost all he had invested/owned in his 6% shareholding.

[ALWAYS_SFC]

The day we went into administration he lost all he had invested/owned in his 6% shareholding.

 

He invested nothing....

[Block 5]

Why is it that every thread on this forum degenerates into a blame game / mud slinging competition?

 

Why can't we just discuss the thread topic? Why can't we let byegones be byegones and move on?

 

I despair sometimes :sad:

 

 

So - what's the latest Solent news then?

 

:smt075

 

What he said......

[saint michael]

lots of syptoms...lack of the right leadership is the cause

[Ken Tone]

What he said......

 

Quite. I thought it might get better after we went into administration, but there are about 10-12 regular posters on here who seem to be interested in nothing except arguing about who was to blame when. Lowe v Wilde v Crouch v Askham v ....

 

What bloody difference does it make?

 

All I care about is whether I will have a club to support next year.

 

Please will the serial arguers keep off threads that start with something approaching news and stick to threads with titles such as "Lowe is crap. Oh no he isn't. Oh yes he is ..."? Then maybe the rest of us won't have to read pages of their vitriolic irrelevances in our futile attempt to find out something that actually matters.

 

K.

[solentstars]

A lot of supporters alienated themselves IMO.

You were gagging for us to go into administration telling us it was the promised land as we would be bought as we were such a bargain.It doesnt feel like that from where im sitting.

it is foolish mindsets like that that has contributed to our demise.Add to that Rl MW LC abd all the others and you have the set.

 

oh dear this thread has turned into another lowe hateing thread,never mind that lowes gone and the club is on the verge of meltdown. why do you worry about replying to the lunatic fringe they are not important and have no respect on here ,

some of the lunatic fringe saints posters even called for admin and even wanted saints to lose and we all know their names..

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

You say bigger crowds would have kept us afloat? I don't agree. An extra 5000 fans at every home game would have made Saints a piddling £1.68m a year. That's BEFORE you take off any costs for stewards, police, staff, utilities, business rates etc.

 

Erm, how did you get those figures?

 

5000*£26 = £130000

 

£130,000*23 = circa £3m

 

Which would not have kept us up, but would have most definitely have stopped us going into administration.

[ALWAYS_SFC]

oh dear this thread has turned into another lowe hateing thread,never mind that lowes gone and the club is on the verge of meltdown. why do you worry about replying to the lunatic fringe they are not important and have no respect on here ,

some of the lunatic fringe saints posters even called for admin and even wanted saints to lose and we all know their names..

 

I thought Lowe lived in Gloucestershire not the "sunny south coast";)

[solentstars]

Quite. I thought it might get better after we went into administration, but there are about 10-12 regular posters on here who seem to be interested in nothing except arguing about who was to blame when. Lowe v Wilde v Crouch v Askham v ....

 

What bloody difference does it make?

 

All I care about is whether I will have a club to support next year.

 

Please will the serial arguers keep off threads that start with something approaching news and stick to threads with titles such as "Lowe is crap. Oh no he isn't. Oh yes he is ..."? Then maybe the rest of us won't have to read pages of their vitriolic irrelevances in our futile attempt to find out something that actually matters.

 

K.

amen to some sanity i just hope we survive and can support my team ,all the rest is meaningless.

[Jez]

 

- jeez!

 

Yes?

[solentstars]

I thought Lowe lived in Gloucestershire not the "sunny south coast";)

lets hope he stays there;)

[SFKA South Woodford]

I stopped trawling through everything when the arguments and slanging matches kicked in, so apologies if this has already been posted, but the BBC Sports article now has the full recorded interview with Lynam for you to listen to, which is a bit more revealing than the snippet on the original Solent News bulletin: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/s/southampton/8055407.stm

 

I've just listened to that interview, and would say that in my opinion, he didn't sound emotional but was walking whilst he was talking.

 

He does sound fairly sure that even with some of the investors getting cold feet, they will still be able to make bid for the club.

 

So although things look a little darker, there is still a little ray of hope.

[Alain Perrin]

Erm, how did you get those figures?

 

5000*£26 = £130000

 

£130,000*23 = circa £3m

 

Which would not have kept us up, but would have most definitely have stopped us going into administration.

 

Nice idea, but there was an article in the Echo saying that the average price paid for tickets (once you take into account children/OAPS/concessions etc.) was £14. Happy if you manage to convince everyone to pay full price though...

 

I stand by my figures sir!

[OldNick]

He invested nothing....

Of course not Lol.

[SW11_Saint]

Thanks...just simple thanks...for being one of the few who disagrees with me who actually takes the time to present your opinion with insight, obvious passion and intelligence.

 

I have always had this niggling irritation about the Pearson thing... on the one hand I liked to think it could be exciting and works and thsoe early games game showed promise - but instead of it being a platform for kicking on, we simply got sussed out and rumbled... and Lowe's mis reading of the fan support and positives surrounding Pearson was his biggest blunder for sure - Not convinced we would have staved off admin due to the financial mess being impossible to resolve given the contracts in place, but had Pearson continued wher he left off and given us a fighting spirit on the pitch we may have seen a greater response from fans... My argument for trying to understand what is really at fault stems from this hypothetical situation: Say Pearson had stayed on but with the same outcome eg relegation and admin would fnas have:

 

1) Blamed Pearson for being inept

2) Blamed Lowe for keeping pearson when it was obvious CRouch had only got him in to do a job, hense teh break clause

3) Blamed Lowe for not supporting him financially

4) Blamed LOwe for sending the best players out on loan (due to not being able to afford the wages)

 

Now it may well be that Lowe IS really to blame and he could have done some of those thngs differently, but all I want to be able to do is know for sur based on facts, not rumour, gossip or speculation that is in many cases or has been driven by prejudice because its a convenient scapegoat rather than taking teh time to analyse the errors and what went wrong or why... Personall, I cant see the problem or issue with that, but sadly some do. Maybe its teh anger, pain etc which is fair enough and Lowe should have at the very least realised he could have healed a few wounds by supporting Pearson - (Still sems such an odd decision because even if wedded to teh continental thing - he had waited years to do that that another 12 months would have done no harm....)

Thanks Frank. Like so much with Lowe's managerial "comings and goings", I guess we'll never really know the full truth, so as you say most of what we debate is supposition.

 

Any/all of your scenarios above might have come to pass - again, we'll never know, and we can only deal with what we know here and now, that RL/MW/JP/MWotte were the guys at the helm during this worst year in our history (imo).

 

I have argued on here with others that it is fact that Pearson kept us up - by the skin of his teeth, but kept us up nonetheless - and I just felt, as many others did, that he'd earned the chance to carry on in the job. I think all anyone was expecting from this season was consolidation - oh how fantastically boring that would have been! - that he didn't was a great shame, and I believe the boards first error. The second error was appointing the Dutch due and going so completely into Lowe's experimental setup - wrong time, wrong league, wrong personnel. I agree with you - he could have let Pearson run on for a year, then if he failed, made changes afterwards.

 

I have to also hold my hands up and say that I was totally p*ssed off about Pearson's appointment when it happened - for some time in fact (I had wanted us to appoint Dowie or Coleman) - but he won me over. Not because I felt he was a new Mourinho or anything, but just because I thought he was the solid, dependable, organised and hard working character we needed at that time and in that Division.

 

Anyway, what's done is done on the managerial front. We're living with the consequences - let's hope we get to better days, and soon!

[Ponty]

On the bright side, "No news is good news", right?

[St.Patrik]

Always Ponty - always. Its better that its quiet then we hear alot of rumours. The silence means that they are working thier asses of getting a deal as soon as possible. At least I hope so...