Alanh

IMO the board issues are too big to be resolved in the sort of timeframe that we need to act in order to avoid relegation. Replacing a manager can be done in 24 hours if necessary and I would support it immediately provided the new appointment was external and had experience of creating winning teams in this division. Dowie, Boothroyd and Pardew are all available and have that record. We could easily be better off if we replaced JP. He clearly can't instill the sort of organisation and confidence in this set of players to be a competitive team for any more than the occasional game, usually away from home. Anyone who can achieve that would be better. I don't agree with the theory that Lowe has too big an ego to go back on his Dutch experiment. He knows that staying in this division is of paramount importance to the club and I don't believe he would simply sit back and let relegation happen given his previous record of acting when managers are screwing up. As of today we need to be putting pressure on the board to replace JP as he's obviously not up to the job. The focus on changing the board can wait until we are secure in this division.

Agreed. He didn't look great, a bit nervous perhaps, but he did look like he was playing in the right position and knew where he needed to be most of the time. Once he settled in he looked OK and coped with the move to 3 at the back quite well. Listening the Radio Hampshire on the way to the ground JP said that he thought 1 or 2 players would leave before the end of the month. I'm putting my money on Skacel being one of them (no inside knowledge, just my opinion) and that's why we've brought in LM.

Got to agree with the OP. I decided after the Forest match that JP needs to go. The players look like they are technically competent but they have no confidence and more importantly are not organised enough to compete. For me the most important things that a manager brings is those two things that we are missing. He convinces the players that they can win and the sets them up in such a way to compete. JP sounds like a nice guy and says a lot of the right things. Personally I'm a fan of his formation, but he isn't bringing anything to the team on match day. There are so many decent CCC managers out of work at the moment - Dowie, Boothroyd, Pardew, Cotterill, Roeder. I'd take almost any of them - probably in that order of preference - over JP and trust them to organise the team and instil some believe in their own ability. Agreed to resolve the divisons in the club Lowe needs to go, but the top priority is to survive in the CCC this season and I'd happily put that battle on ice until the summer.

If true I'd say it almost certainly means we will be looking to move Saga on. Not sure whether that's a risk worth taking. Saga's been a low scoring striker for a while now so if Lupoli scores a few he'll be of more value to us.

It's easy to say that with hindsight though and I agree that they would both have had a lot more chances in our first team over the last season and a half than anyone probably anticipated at the time they actually left. At the time they left they both thought leaving would further their careers and in terms of bank balance it probably has even though they are both now playing at the same level as Saints. I would definitely have kept Crainie based on his composure on the ball and versatility. Shame he decided that the big money on offer from Portsmouth was a better option than fighting for his place here.

I'll waste one of my 3 posts apologising if it makes you feel happy! 4 years ago they were an U8 team and over the course of the last 4 seasons have progressed to become the U12 team they are today.

I want five teams to win most weekends: Saints Salisbury - because I was born there Woking - because I live near there and watch them a couple of times each season Whoever Portsmouth are playing My son's U12's team I think only once in the last 4 years (since the last of the list started) have all five results gone my way.

I thought there was a ban on tobacco advertising in F1 now. How come Ferrari can still have Marlboro as a title sponsor? Also, just saw the new Ferrari in the Guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2009/jan/13/formula-one-motor-sport-ferrari. It doesn't look as bad as I thought the cars might look for this year. There are more photos in the paper.

It would be great if he did stay and hopefully losing the wages of John (out of contract) Rasiak (sold / released) and probably Skacel (sold / released), should free up some wages budget to be able to afford KD.

It's not really odd. SMS is built right next to the water so benefits from slightly higher temperatures than anywhere inland, also we have a cover that protects the pitch in bad weather. I think they can pump hot air under it. Also with SMS being an enclosed stadium I'd expect that the chances of frost really penetrating the pitch would be a lot less than at any stadium with gaps between stands.

I would guess it's professional pride. He's a city boy who has been educated to make a commercial success out of business. He owns and represents shares in an ailing company and believes that he has to do whatever he can to save the company. I agree that money is his key motivator because in the world he has come from success or failure is always judged on a balance sheet. Whether he is going about things the right way will only be known in the future.

About 10 years ago Woolies was the number one retailer of music, DVD and toys in the country. In those categories they were an incredibly important retailer who got the best terms and the best service from suppliers. Across the country their shops are all in High St (so expensive) locations, but for many small towns they were the only toy / entertainment / kids clothes retailer. Unfortunately the growth in power and influence of the supermarkets in these key non food categories destroyed Woolies market position, along with the rise of the internet retailers and of music downloads which took away the singles buying market. Woolies did not adapt to the new competition and that's why they have failed. They could have taken on the grocers by adding a limited convenience food category to their stores, they could have taken on the cheap clothes retailers had they expanded beyond just kids clothes or they could have brought in franchises like a department store to give themselves diversity. Shame really but the end was inevitable and I guess for the majority of the country it will be no great loss.

Problem is that, as you have already stated, you are a season ticket holder, so your ticket for the match will already be counted. According to official figures there would be at least 9,500 people at each home match (the number of season ticket holders) even if there was no-one in the stadium. If you want a truly effective matchday action it has to be a mass rally outside the stadium after the match. You'll never get enough people to leave their seats for 10 minutes, or walk out early, as suggested by others on this thread. The most effective boycott is to not buy a season ticket and not attend home matches. That way you take away your financial support for the team / club. Perhaps buy an away season ticket if you still want to watch the team but that way the money goes to the opposition, not Saints. If you want to get rid of Lowe personally I think the most effective route is to put pressure on the major shareholders and demonstrate to them that the company would be better off financially without him at the helm. If you could get enough people to promise to buy new season tickets , or persuade all season ticket holders to withhold their renewal until his removal, then you've got a mechanism to apply economic pressure on the key stakeholders.

Perhaps JP wanted as much experience in defence as possible for this match. Introducing LM would have made it 3 youngsters in the back 4 and I think we would all have thought that was too many. I hope he gets a match on Saturday and Skacel is played further forward.

Not sure which match the OP was watching. It was definitely the same formation we've been playing all season. McG did look a lot better playing in the hole and showed how good he can be with a player to play off. Loads of good footwork and great workrate. MOM for me thans to the goal.

Completely agree about Lallana's indiscipline contributing to the lack of width on the right. In the formation we play the protection for the defence should be coming from the defensive midfielders, but I don't think Cork or Surman are ideally suited to the role as they both want to carry the ball out of the defensive positions rather than pick a pass and set the attackers off. Schneiderlin and Gillett are much more suited but obviously we've lost both to injury and have suffered as a result. I'd also defend Lloyd James as I think he's a decent footballer who is playing out of position - I'm sure he's more of a midfielder - and is being exposed to the oppositions attacks down their left because of the lack of right midfield. Personally I'd continue with the same formation, rather than go 4-4-2, but move Cork to RB, play two of Wotton, Gillet, Schneiderlin or James at DM, with an instruction to stop all breaks from the opposition midfield and cover the full backs when the attack. I'd move Surman to attacking mid, and play the most in form combination of Lallana, BWP, McG, Holmes, Thompson, Patterson and any other attackers I've forgotten in the winger and CF positions. I think our defence is playing pretty well and I'd be relatively happy with Cork, Pearce, Perry and Skacel, but as we know Cork and pearce are due to leave soon and Skacel looks like he's off, to be replaced by the Everton lad. We may well end up having another conversation about how the defence needs sorting out again when we get to the end of January.

Held off posting until now because I didn't want to just post a knee jerk reaction. Saturday's performance was the worst I have see this season. At least in previous matches the players have looked like they were trying, had a gameplan and had created chances. On Saturday there was no discipline, no commitment, no determination, little skill, no understanding and no shape. I heard callers on the Third Half moaning about the formation, but for me the problems run far deeper than whether we are playing 4-4-2 or 4-2-3-1. the players had no confidence and didn't seem to know how to take control of the game. I think that the rubbish we saw on Saturday was caused by a collective psychological problem resulting in any mental strength evaporating. I am deeply concerned that these players can't cope with the pressure that they are under. The manager can only do so much in that situation because if he's got a bunch of bottlers on his hands then no amount of coaching is going to prepare them for stepping out in front of a big crowd on a Saturday. The problem is that JP has got to be the one to turn this around. he has to be able to inspire confidence in them. If he can't do that then he's of no use to the club whatsoever. Judging by his reaction to the match it sounds like he doubts his or the players ability to turn this around and if that's the case I would say relieve him of his duties ASAP. There are loads of managers who would love to be at Saints so I can't see a problem replacing him and if we can get someone else in before January they will have the cup game to focus on as a means of inspiring the team.

In fairness the 5 loanees and the extra coach aren't all here to either compensate for Stern or as a result of him being farmed out. Only Peckhart and Robertson could be said to be replacements for him. The new coach is the third new person on the coaching team (with JP and Wotte) after the departures of Pearson, Dodd and Gorman last season. The other loanees are covering missing players in other areas - Smith is covering Holmes, but got injured himself, then found himself behind a relatively in form BWP, so hasn't done the job he was brought in to do. Pearce and Cork are in to replace the defenders we have lost - Claus, Powell, Ostlund, Vignal, Lucketti - from the end of last season. In fact Pearce was only brought in when it became apparent that Svensson couldn't play enough games. When you compare the cost of bringing these people to the club to the wages of all the players they are replacing rather than just Stern I think you have a fairer comparison. Whether we've improved is debatable in each case.

I think the shutting up shop issue is more to do with the mentality of the players rather than the system or formation that they are playing in. To a degree it's a learning experience as they get used to the idea of how to cope with teams throwing everything at them and also learning when to clear it out of defence rather than try and pass it out. IMO we should, with disciplined positional play and committed tackling be able to hold teams at bay by deploying 5 in our own midfield, and allowing our defensive midfielders to shield the defence - cutting out the sort of opportunities that Tudgay scored from for Sheff Wed. Unfortunately the team is young, rarely settled, and still getting to grips with the number of games, the intensity of the games and at home, the awareness of a relatively poor record. Where I'd like to see a change in formation is when we are chasing a game in the last few minutes - perhaps switch to 3 at the back, push the fullbacks forward and have another out and out striker. Thanks to Bungle, LGTC and mprobert for their agreement to my original post!

Highly unlikely IMO. JP plays a continental style which is a version of 4-4-3 with one target man supported by wingers and at least one attacking midfielder. That's why when we attack we generally have 3 or 4 players in the opposition box. If Lallana were sold then we could retain the 4-3-3 shape by using Euell or DMG just behind the striker. Personally I don't see playing 4-4-2 as a solution to the problems that we are facing. 4-4-2 is just as likely to result in a more defensive strategy with two banks of four players rigidly stretched across the field. The key issue that we've got is we have no natural goalscoring threat, not the formation that the players are playing. I don't see our system as rigid in the slightest, in fact it should be incredibly flexible, with 5 in midfield and one in attack when we are defending or under pressure, but 3 in midfield and 3 in attack when we are on top. Add to that the flexibility in positions that the players can play - DMG and Lallana switching positions between AMC and RM - and we've got loads of flexibility. Obviously that's just the way I see things and I'm sure others will be more frustrated by what they perceive to be 'one up front', but I just don't see it that way.

I'll rephrase for the avoidance of confusion - at the start of the season our wage bill was unsustainably high and as a result we needed to shift some of the higher earners. If I could edit my posts I would change my original post to put that first sentence into the past tense. In terms of lower paid squads than our current one, nope I agree, we are probably down towards the bottom of the list. Possibly Plymouth, Barnsley Notts Forest, Swansea and Donny, but I'm guessing really.

Obviously I'm saying that we had a ridiculously high wage bill prior to loaning out the likes of Saga, Stern and Greg, and the reason for loaning them out was because we needed to get their salaries off the bill. I'd guess we have to get more off the wage bill in January as well, hence the rumours about Skacel leaving for Ipswich. Based on who we've got now I'd say we've got a squad nearer a sustainable cost, however things will improve (in terms of flexibility in the salary bill) as several of the higher earners contracts expire at the end of the season.

I shouldn't think we're the most hard up, but we've got a ridiculously large wage bill compared to our turnover, and our turnover is falling. We've also got a large mortgage to service on our loan for the stadium so we need to generate cash to pay the interest. That's something that few other clubs in the CCC have to do. I reckon that next season we'll be in a much better position because we'll lose most of the high earners from the wage bill and that will free up space in the salary budget for a few more experienced CCC players on more sensible wages. It's always possible to find another player cheaper than the ones you've got. You will generally pay for it in terms of less quality or less experience, but I reckon we could replace the likes of Rasiak, Stern and Saga with the sort of players who have scored against us regularly in the last year or so for a lot less wages.

So you are saying that because bad things have happened over the last 5 years then it's productive to predict further perceived bad things might happen in the future. What is the point? It's not like any St R is advocating any form of discussion, all he's doing is stating as if it is fact that things are going to be worse in February after we have sold off all our decent players.

Sorry mate, but I just don't see why you are worrying. If we sell players in Jan we will be just about the same as every other club in the country. Personally I hope we won't sell Surman or Lallana, and would rather see Saga, John, Dyer, Euell, or Skacel leave before them, but I do know there is no point in worrying about it at all because I can't affect it and I will still go and support the 11 lads in R&W when we play Sheff Utd on Feb 3rd, whoever is in the team. We have all gone into transfer windows before fearing the worst and come out the other side realising that our fears were unfounded and actually some positives came along. I'd say there is as much chance of that happening as the doom & gloom scenario you seem to be falling for. In what way can RL or MW only being interested in the PLC (alledgedly) be a negative for the football element of the club. Pretty much the only purpose of the PLC is to run the football club. If the PLC is successful so is the club and vice versa. Just about all the money created by the PLC over the last 12 years has been pumped into the football side of the organisation. I guess you are a pessimistic kind of person with regard to Saints, or perhaps you really just wanted to join in the 'Lowe Out' subtext of the OP, but to answer your final point, I think St Richmond gets stick because he is essentially scaremongering and we've heard it all before.