um pahars

What makes you say he's been badly treated?? IMHO they have informed him of their decision pretty swiftly, as opposed to stringing him along. He got a rather nice send off on the OS. He's got a years pay off (I assume). And quite frankly, when judged on the results during the last year, then there was nothing from a footballing perspective that would have saved his bacon.

Football is a tough game and ultimately in this results driven business I think Wotte had to go. Footballing wise, I saw nothing of note during his stint as a part of the Revolutionary Coaching Set Up, which delivered less points than matches played, to suggest he was worth keeping on. And then when solely in charge, once again he failed to deliver and never inspired me one bit. I really didn't see anything in him that was worth persevering with. Maybe a role coaching the youngsters, but then again I don't think it would be a good idea to have an ex manager lurking in the shadows.

I always thought it was the prawn sandwich brigade;)

And the £40m is driven by relegation from the top flight and in the first year down we were cash negative depsite raking in £16m from player sales. Lowe left a business haemoraghing cash. Othe rmistakes were made following this initial loss, but you seem to struggle with the concept that when Lowe left the numbers were out by a fair few million.

How many more times are you goiung to get this wrong: His PPG record was 1.05, which is rather poor and relegation form. You either need a new calculator or a new history book.

My opinion hasn't changed in recent weeks (even months), in that Wotte is not the man to take us forward. I saw or heard nothing during last season to suggest that his involvement was anything other than a failure. With this new era of inspiration and looking forward, then I have to say Wotte should be consigned to the history books (or if I'm feeling generous, then let him work with the Academy)

There's nothing wrong or right about supporting a team. You support it how you want to and ultimately it is up to the Club to engender the loyalty and also to provide entertainment and value for money. With a few short term exceptions, every club's attendances will be be majorly impacted by success, performance, value for money, etc etc etc and to think we are any different is dinlo stuff. I do find it ironic talking about support and loyalty with someone who has supported more clubs than he has had user names though:D

And you can have Man City as well if you want (that's almost as many teams as you've had user names on here;)), but you can't get away from the fact that for the vast majority of clubs, attendances will ebb and flow with reference to performances, success and the opposition. As some of those other clubs have shown, there is a possibility to engender a spirit of togetherness in the absence of success on the pitch, but there was nothing or no-one at our Club last season who could engender that spirit. How did some of your other clubs (Charlton, Leeds, Villa, Aldershot et al) fare at diffferent times of their history???

IMHO I think most people recognised he had talent, after all he's socred almost 1 in 2 at international level, and also recognised his problems were a combination of injury and then attitude.

I've always found starting a thread with: Question for Alpine and other morons...... as a good way of engendering debate:rolleyes:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/b/birmingham_city/8138918.stm What is it with Ecuadorians, their dodgy knees and English clubs buying them LOL

I had to chuckle at the not so subtle inclusion of Crouch and the omission of Lowe from his little post;) I wonder if he'll start a thread like this again:D http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?p=347556#post347556 dinlo me up

Well he was stripped of his Chairmanship of the FA back in the 90's!!!!!

That's Southampton's finest coroner, Keith "The Welsh FA" Wiseman (not in your picture, but just behind Lowe and you can just make out the dagger he's about to put in his back)

LMFAO. The headline reads: "Club In Poor Performances Suffers Falling Crowds" shocker. So poor attendances had nothing to do with the low season ticket take up due to the dire season before? Then did attendances dwindle as a result of poor performances and results (particularly at home)? There was nothing there to inspire anyone but the diehards to turn up, but once again the fools on here look at the symptons as opposed to the cause of them. Why not lash out at the 95%+ of Sotonians who don't attend matches, why not have a pop at the 000's who left post relegation from the top flight???? Crowds are primarily driven by results and success on the pitch and to think/claim or pontificate otherwise is dinlo stuff.

Are we talking about how many times you've been banned and come back on this board:confused::confused:

He's my brother in law, but that aside I was merely correcting the numpty who was earlier getting all bolshy about Pearson's record and then started to get sarky when confronted with the fact he was talking ******. Pearson did not really prove himself here one way or the other, he merely did what was asked of him, but when put against Poortvliet and Wotte then he certainly looks a better choice.

Pearson's 13 game record of 1.23 PPG would have seen us something like 14th or 15th (even if you allow for the Plymouth game he would have kept us up with his PPG ratio). Both Poortvliet's and Wotte's ratios would have seen us relegated on their own, and the pair did a splendid job when combined;) What was that young lads name who you were ridiculing, as his Wotte Notte Gotte Clue claim doesn't sound that bad now does it?

You need to go and look at those record books young man, as Pearson's record is: P 13 W 3 D 7 L 3 = 16 points from 13 games = 1.23 PPG OR if you include Plymouth P 14 W 3 D 7 L 4 = 16 points from 14 games = 1.14 points per game http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/page/FixturesResults/0,,10280~2007,00.html

I did do the Maths, you're wrong. I did, and I still don't believe it. It is simple arithmetic and you're still not right. Wotte's Points per game : 1.06 points per game Pearson's Points Per Game : 1.23 points per game (or 1.14 if you include the Plymouth game) HTH

I would have to agree with you. I dont think personal attacks of this kind should be allowed, particularly when the poster involved has been open with his recent personal problems. This thread should really be closed.

I really struggle to believe that McMenemy is as divisive as you try to make out (certainly not on a par with others that have graced us with their presence in recent years). I think he shouldn't have any "hands on" roll in taking the Club forward, bar being wheeled out as an ambassador, but IMHO I think the vast majority of our fanbase still hold him in high regard. Of course he's always dining out on the past, but it was the best period in this Club's history!!!!! McMenemy may have a few stalkers on here, but I don't think he is the divisive figure you are trying to make out.

LMFAO with regards the irony of this coming from the comeback King himself!!! Presume this is your bedside reading;) http://www.ehow.com/how_2072335_.html

No it wasn't. Wotte got 19 points from 18 games = 1.06 points per game Pearson either got 16 points from 13 games = 1.23 points per game (or 16 points from 14 games, depending on lymouth away = 1.14 PPG) No it wouldn't. Wotte's PPG would have equated to 48-49 points over a season which would have seen us relegated. HTH

Revolutionary Coaching Set Up