aintforever

True the side was not that great. But they are being replaced, on the whole, by players who were deemed worse by all the managers we had last season.

...from the squad at the end of last season. Not a bad side. R Wright Ostlund Lucketti Davies Vignal Viafara Safri Idiakez Licka Rasiak Saganowski Subs: Pericard Powell Hammill J Wright Makin

2-0 Derby. Saints kids' honeymoon over as the realities of the CCC hit home.

Might as well flog the whole ****ing lot and prepare for life in league 1 with a better bank balance. We are nailed on for relegation now so why not?

I expect the 10-15 point deduction would see us in league 2.

I never said ignore the books, there is obviously cuts that have to be made but my point is that certain relegation will mean losing alot more money than a few hundred grand on wages. It's all about getting the balance right, if we get relegated the club is finished, certain admin. If keeping one player at an outlay of say 7k a week saves the club millions in the long run by keeping us up it is a right thing to do even though the books look worse in the short term - surely your brain can understand that? If our finances were so desperate that we have to sell players or go into admin tomorrow why the hell would the bank let us gamble 1.5mill euros on a French kid? We have choices, simply balancing the books and ignoring the quality of the first team could mean losing much more in the long run.

Blimey, you've finally admitted that we didn't have to appoint Sturrock!!!!! The Sturrock appointment was awful - it only looked half decent because of the Wigley appoinment that followed.

I have said all along that administration or a Coventry situation is inevitable. We will have to be staring admin in the face before Lowe, Wilde or Crouch admit that their shareholdings are completely worthless - only then will it be worth someone buying the club (SISU style).

All this "the bank" is making the descisions is bull****, we have just spunked £1.5mill euros on an untried French kid. These player sales are all Lowe's descision.

I think we all understand that cost cutting and player sales has to happen, but what Lowe doesn't seem to understand is that cost cutting to the extreme where relegation is pretty much a certainty is pointless - a false economy. The only thing that matters is staying in this league, get relegated and it is administration regardless. When absolutely everything rides on us staying up it is worth being in the red if it gives us a fighting chance. Lowe's attitude has ALWAYS been balance the books, worry about the quality of team later. A short sighted and simplistic outlook which will result in relegation.

£1.3million is peanuts, it just can't make sense for us to flog our best player at such a knock down rate. If Lowe and Wilde had any brains they would have paid Davies wages out of their own pocket, kept a top quality player for a season that could have gone a long way to keeping us up, then flogged him for twice that amount next year. This deal doesn't make football or financial sense. A short sighted, suicidal descion IMO.

It's a good job Lowe n' co blew off the SISU deal - it wasn't quite right.

Relegation would mean administration regardless of wether we sell Surman now or not. If we sell Surman and Davies it would be basically cutting our own throat, completely pointless. We would be way better of keeping the level of debt and hoping we stay up - at least then we have a chance.

Lowe sacked Woggy even though he earned peanuts and offered to work for half wages -all in the name of cost cutting. Yet we still can't find out how many thousands he sucks out the club - great. What is the point in being a plc again?!?

Didn't Michael Wilde say that he could easily find a couple of million if it was needed? ****ing judas scum lying tosser ****.

Does anyone know how much Lowe and Cowan earn. Surely as a PLC we should be able to find how much they are taking out?

I expect the Shearer thing was just sombody putting putting 2+2 together and making 5 because of his links with Merrington. If a large multi-million pound consortium we going to take over I doubt they would just sit back and watch all our decent players leave for peanuts then take over. If Andrew Davies goes for a song we can guarantee that there is no takeover in process. Also I doubt any serious investors would choose Merrington to head it, likewise if he was involved I doubt he would be having to earn a few extra quid doing commentry for some two bob local radio station. However on a positive note, IMO if there was a serious money takeover then Shearer would the sort of person they would hire. I also think it's the sort of job Shearer would want. It's thinking like that which starts these sort of rumours though.

Probably made up by someone in a Shirley pub who heard about the make-believe Dave Merrington thing. It's all just collective wishfull thinking, when the ship you are in is sinkng fast you have to believe there will be somone saving you or you will just go nuts and top yourself.

That's exactly how I see it, Lowe never see's the value in keeping a player only the value of him when sold. It's completely poinless saving a few hundred grand here and there on wages if it results in relegation and the millions lost as a result, much better stay up and be in a bit more debt.

Phillips deserved all the abuse he got. It was obvious he would nick one though regardless of the abuse. The gibbon faced little **** always seems to be in the right place - except when his missus is getting boned.

You have to worry about our future if we sell him for that little. We did OK today but our squad is wafer thin, cashing in on Davies will prove to be a big mistake IMO.

teams on the verge of admin don't spend 1.5mill euros on an untried French kid.

He wasn't in a position at the club until after relegation but as Claus says in his testimonial programme, he was involved behind the scenes during our relegation season. No doubt if we had stayed up he would have taken his usual credit. "motivational genius inspires Saints to safety" sort of thing

Lose Rasiak and John and our chances of staying up go from small to zero. And despite what the wanna-be accountants on here say, it makes zero financial sense to condem the team to relegation, no matter how many 1000's you save on wages. Finishing bottom with nicely balanced books is way worse financially than finishing 4th bottom in debt.

But Redknapp has no problems motivating his pompey team, he also has no problems using sports science at pompey. The problem with Redknapp at Saints was that HE was not motivated. Woodward was involved in the club when we hired Redknapp (according to Lundekvam) and it was Woodward who pursuaded Lowe to give him a new contract after relegation (according to Clifford). If Woodward is such a genius at motivation why couldn't he spot what many of us on here spotted with ease - Redknapp just didn't want to be here.