um pahars

I don't think Sundance/Flashman/Nineteen/Bear was using his mental health issues as a justification for his trolling. Instead, I think he was asking for people to give him the benefit of the doubt/try and understand his position, as he accpeted his mental helath problems probably came through in some his postings. That said, IMHO we should be minded to steer of personal slights in this area, whilst still giving and taking the banter on a site like this.

Not really sure what you're saying, as we never looked like we were being sold either until we went into administration and there was a chance to get some of the debt wiped off. I assume the same will happen with Charlton in that people will always be thinking about buying them after a load of debt has been wiped off. I think what is different with them is that some of the debt is owed to Directors and also the new consortium is fronted by ex-Directors so may be there will be some negotations.

I can see where you're coming from, as if the new owners are willing to splash the cash then why not set our sights higher than Pearson. However, if they're going to be somewhat frugal, then Pearson certaiinly ticks a few boxes (not least his experience in Div 3 last season).

Then maybe you shouldn't have put me at the forefront of your reply then, because my posts on this thread aren't bandwagon jumping by any strecth of the imagination, instead just commenting on how I think such a move "could" be beneficial for the success of the team on the pitch.

My pre-requisite's for any successful team are a leader and then someone who would die for the cause (may even be the same player). I don't think we've had one/two in recent years so have to agree with you 100%. Could Wotton fulfil one of those roles? Personally not sure, so i would be out on the hunt for someone.

Mr Multiple Identity Boy, if only we'd JUST survived last year and if only we'd JUST avoided administration last season as well, what a year we would have had. JUST. JUST. JUST. Wotte and Pearson share a TION. Wotte = RelegaTION and AdministraTION Pearson = SalvaTION;) Keep on trolling:smt073:smt039

I haven't for one minute suggested we should be run as a charity, nor that we should be re-appointing ex employees for sentimental reasons, nor that they should be re-employed to spite Lowe and others etc etc etc. My rationale for re-employing Malcolm is solely down to seeing first hand the impact and effect he has around the Club, Staplewood and the high regard he is held in by many players, and then by thinking that could in some way contribute to success on the pitch. Of course that's my perception and it is all subjective and hypothetical, but having seen Malcolm in action first hand and spoken to many at the Club, then I think I am speaking from a reasonable position of strength in this issue. So with regards what the **** do I know?, then in this instance I would say quite a bit.

I do chuckle when people somehow see a Pearson love in, or claim they are seeing Pearson elevated to Messiah status etc etc etc. I think what you'll find is a recognition that Pearson did a pretty decent job here in keeping us up. He didn't prove himself to be the next big thing, he just simply did what was asked of him and installed a bit of belief and passion. I think you'll also find a recognition that Pearson did a pretty decent job in getting Leicester to win their league with relative ease in a similar style and manner as he did with us. And then as a result of those recent "successes" and his recent "history" with us, then you'll find alot of people thinking that it might actually be a pretty good fit. A manager who has recently worked here, knows the set up and knows many of the players, along with recent experience in getting out of what will probably be a tough league seems to tick quite a few boxes for me.

Why is it ridiculous? He is as active and capable as he was a year ago. He is still held in high regard by a number of players and there must be a simple way of accomodating him in the new set up without putting others noses out of joint. IMHO his experience and can do attitude particularly looking after the various needs of the players (way in excess of just sorting out the kit) would mean that for his relatively small salary we would see a very decent return. What is ridiculous is your blind rejection without any valid reason and without being privy to any relevant knowledge or information.

Well if you don't know him then why the jibes rearding his age (it could only be regarding his ability to do the job). With regards who does the job now, then the individual concerned was already employed at the Club and had to take on the extra duties. Given the sums involved (and Malcolm was willing to take a substantial pay cut before Lowe booted him out) I would have thought it was totally feasible to accomodate both of them. Malcolm was much more than just an old fuddy duddy kitman doing the washing, and the regard he is held in by a range of players (young and old) mean I would happily see him back in the fold. One of the reasons for his return is the camaraderie, the spirit, the respect and the support he gave many of our players over a number of years. A wealth of experience and empathy that probably paid for itself many, many times over. He was one of the few solid and reliable pillars during the revolving managerial door policies we have recently experienced.

So I presume you know Malcolm to be able to comment on his abilitied (or lack of them) to perform the duties, and I also presume you are aware of his relationship with the players?? Because if you do, then I doubt you would be saying the above.

That's what people were saying last close season;)

Then I have to say your suspicions are very wide of the mark. Pearson showed in his words down here and in his deeds at Leicester that he was more than willing to follow a route involving youth. His departure was inevitable, but not for the reasons you outlined, but more to do with the inevitability that Lowe thought he knew best.

Comparable, apart from the fact that as a part of the Revolutinary Coaching Set Up he delivered less than a point a game. And then comparable, apart from presiding over relegation and delivering a points per game return that if replicated over a full season would have seen us relegated. Pearson was no superstar, but Wotte failed to even match those "low" standards.

I don't think it has to be seen as sniping/undermining the new regime or for there to be an ulterior motive for trying to find out what attracted our new owners to the Club. I too would be interested to know just what made him go for us over a number of other clubs out there, why did he decide to get involved etc etc etc. If anything understanding his/their motivation for taking us on may actually highlight some positives and give us a feel for how they are going to run the Club and what is driving them. The only problem is we may nly get to hear what they want us to hear and give us the old cliches (akin to the new manager/player holding the scarf above his head for the obligatory new signing photo), but some outline may not be a bad thing. I'm as chuffed as nuts they have come in, particularly as really did fear the worst for long periods in recent months.

The Ashes in full swing, Hampshire at Lords and most importantly the 'Font in a relegation battle with Winterslow today means football comes off a poor second best at the moment!!!! Anyway, why do you owe me a pint?? Was it the "Pulis to play 15 games" thingy??

Small snippet here: http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/4487870.Lowe_had_to_go_____but_I_was_convinced_Saints_would_go_under/ but it's alot better in the flesh!!!!!!!! Have a long day at cricket today, so might type it all out for you as it makes good reading.

You're quite there. Nineteen/Sundance/Flashman/Third Man etc has been quite open with his mental health problems, so whilst we should happily have a banter/joke with him we should certainly refrain from going over the top (and getting personal etc). The thread the otherweek was OTT, but I'm sure that even allowing for his condition he won't mind with the odd ribbing.

With all your various user names you could field your own first 11:D

Of course the proof of the pudding etc etc etc will be who we get in, but I have to say I think we're a relatively appealing option for any rospective managers out there. A bit of a sleeping giant (relatively speaking of course), good set up, decent facilities, some promising youngsters and someone who appears to be willing to splash some cash. Obviously not up there with some jobs, but I reckon it's a fairly reasonable proposition. I don't think we'd get Pearson mind and probably wouldn't want him either (my sights are even higher than him!!!!).

I would agree 100% (and I said as much at the time when some others tried to claim that BT were stringing this out for their own benefit). Insolvency is a regulated profession and some of the claims thrown at BT & Fry don't hold water (and I haven't seen any of the creditors moaning or complaining to the Head of Regulation). As you have mentioned there are many IP's out there and if BT & Fry were seen to be putting their own interests before the creditotrs, then it wouldn't take long for word to get around the market place.

Let's just say I'm not holding my breath for a reply regarding the fact that once agin he appears to be talking out of his Arris:D All mouth and bolshy when putting his point across, and then all shy and retiring once he's been shown up to be a dinlo.

But I think you'll find that no one from the new group gave him any inkling one way or the other as to whether he was staying or going, and they were the only ones with any say in the situation. I think Wotte made a very big assumption that he was staying and was the one giving the press briefings regarding this. The new guys were non commital with regards his future. They appear to have let him know at the earliest opportunity and I fail to see how they could have told him any earlier.

No he didn't. Here's the facts: Pearson P 13 W 3 D 7 L 3 = 16 points from 13 games = 1.23 points per game OR if you include Plymouth P 14 W 3 D 7 L 4 = 16 points from 14 games = 1.14 points per game Wotte P 18 W 4 D 7 L 7 = 19 points from 18 games = 1.06 points per game As proved above he did not. Now if you've got a different set of record books or a special calculator that awards points for other reasons than winning or drawing then feel free to share it with us all.:rolleyes: Doulble standards, LMFAO, what a dinny you are. I have never hero worshipped Pearson, just corrected the many dinlo's (yourself included) who try and massage the facts for some reason. He was never here long enough to prove himself one way or the other, but: a) Ultimatley he did what he had to, and b) Compared to what followed (particularly Poortvliet), he was arguably better. And if we're talking about dumb, double standards and intellectual weakness, then pray tell how you can base your entire argument on a Points Per Game ratio which has no basis in fact. HTH

Surely that accolade has to go to Poortvliet????