um pahars

The League will do a Leeds and make us agree not to take legal action in return for transferring the Golden Share. There's loads of articles relating to agreeing not to pursue legal action and the other member clubs voting against Leeds. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-474274/Leeds-slam-perverse-decision-uphold-points-penalty.html This is not a normal business transaction "dispute", this is a totally different ball game and although I'm massively oversimplifying it, the general gist is if we want to play ball we have to abide by their rules ad ad hoc decisions, as made by the league and its members. The League and the member clubs will quite clearly look at substance over form and see that although the Football Club never went into adminsitration, the parent company did as a direct result of the football club's trading position.

Well, I think the line: "if more people had ignored the fact that Lowe was the chairman and "supported" the team", was rather aimed at those who couldn't ignore the fact that Lowe was Chairman and not aimed at those that stayed away for a myriad of other reasons.

The biggest single factor on gates is success and so i'm sure that crap performances would have impacted on attendances. However, in the absence of that success there might be an opportunity to engender a spirit of unity and togetherness and maintain attendances (as shown by Norwich). Sadly, Lowe, Wilde, Wotte or Poortvliet were never ever going to be able to provide the figurehead/passion/spirit of unity, whereas given a more empathatic board it may have been possible.

I don't think people misinterpreted Steve's post, as Steve was clear that he was blaming those who put their hatred of Lowe before supporting the team. Steve never attempted to point out for whatever reason. "if more people had ignored the fact that Lowe was the chairman and "supported" the team, we wouldn't find ourselves in this complete ****up of a situation". He did not go into other valid reasons for staying away e.g. poor results, poor performances, poor value for money etc etc etc IMHO those that boycotted were the least significant with regards numbers and ££££'s, with those who stayed away due to poor performances and results easily outweighing them. And on top of that, falling attendances was only one part of a much bigger problem. The active anti-Lowe boycotters were a small part of the falling attendance issue, with falling attendances being only a part of a larger problem, which is why I find it hard to blame this small pocket for the mess we ended up with.

Patrick trainers, Patrick football boots, Patrick Kagools, patrick everything for a crazy two years LOL.

Managed to pull a sicky from school and heard the Radio Solent announcement live. The ran up to school at the end of the day to make sure everyone knew about it. The next 2 1/2 years was a Patrick haze!!!!!!!!!

But I don't think many people put their hatred/displeasure at Lowe being Chairman before supporting the team. Those that did numbered in the 100's, not the 1,000's and were not the main reason for our demise??? As is the case with 99% of teams, the main factor affecting attendances were results and perfomrances on the pitch, particularly at home. After the die hards you have to provide supporters with a reason to come and last season we failed miserably in making them turn up. And in the absence of decent results and performances there was nothing/no one at the Club who could engender a spirit of unity to try and get them to come to matches.

Truly wonderful. I don't think any Club's fans, with the possible exception of United and Cantona, can say they have experienced such spectacular goals from one player over a prolonged timeframe in recent years. Who else is there who could hold a candle to him??? Cantona at United Henry at Arsenal Wright at Arsenal Gerrard at Liverpool (some spectacular goals, but not the range) Shearer at Newcastle (see gerrard above) Di Canio at West Ham (only there for 4 years) Not bad company IMHO

Dutch coaches???

You do have to wonder just makes someone tick if they have to get their kicks from trolling these boards under various user names, sending unsolicited e-mails and generally getting enjoyment out of spamming forums (and that's before we get on to the sob sob stories :smt046). I have a very good picture of Sundance and it certainly fits your starting point;)

Well feel free to point us in the direction of all these posts, as in my book schadenfreude is gaining pleasure in another person's misfortune and I'm afraid I haven't seen that on this thread (nor on others). Sure some are suggesting Wotte shouldn't be near the first team because they think he is shyte, but that's not schadenfreude. Either you don't know the meaning of the word or as Ron has said you're reading things that just aren't there (and as you seem to be an expert on the latter then I'm guessing you know what schadenfreude means).

Who are all these people then?? You even tried to label me as one of them a few weeks ago, which couldn't be farther from the truth. As Give It To Ron has said, methinks that once again the problem is with the reader (i.e. you) who is seeing something that doesn't exist. The overwhelming majority of supporters appear to be basing their thoughts about Wotte solely on his performance as a part of the Revolutionary Coaching Set Up and then on his subsequent performance when he was solely in charge. You seem to be rather precious if you think football fans on a message board suggesting they don't want a "failed manager" in charge next season demonstrates schardenfreude.

Well you missed the thrust of my argument which was more to do with the bullsht eminating from the Club over his success to date and how his CV was embellished/massaged to make him sound more successful then he really was. There were omissions and gaping holes in it which delved further just highlighted how we had effectively appointed a rather poor lower/non league manager with some pretty low level experience. That would be a massive difference from judging the two you have mentioned as they would be at the start of their managerial careers and not someone who had spent the majority of their careers in the Low Countries ameteur leagues. Those two have no track record, whereas Poortvliet had a rather medicore track record (at best) in the Dutch lower and non leagues. And if you really don't think he was out of his depth, then I think I've just wasted two minutes of my life replying to you:rolleyes:

To be fair to Sparv he's spot on with his assessment. In the period when he was 17ish -19ish we did go through Sturrock, Wigley, Redknapp, relegation, Basset/Wise, Woodward, Burley, Burley bringing in players in summer of 2006 and everything that goes with it etc etc etc. Not the best background when you're developing as a youngster and trying to break through in the first team. That said, I think like many youngsters maybe he was not able to step up to the plate irrespective of the chaos in the background.

I totally agree that both Lowe and Wotte must also take their share of the blame. Lowe should never have appointed Poortvliet and should never have been involved in the footballing side. That was the fundamental mistake, appointing someone beyond their capability (he obviously didn't learn from his previous errors). And Wotte of course was a key player in the revolutionary Coaching Set Up in those early days, and whilst it was suggested Poortvliet had the final say you can rest assured that Wotte was right in the mix as well (along with Kim van Der Waals of course;)). I don't want to do a Wotte and hang Poortvliet out to dry, as the major problem lay with Lowe, but he really was awful!!!!!

Poortvliet surely has to be our worst manager ever (or at least in living memory). Whilst he was certainly more personable than Branfoot and came across better, I'm afraid I would even have to rate Branfoot above Poortvliet as Jan was just so out of his depth!!!!

You're quite right, in that it is a small minority, so my message would be not to let a couple of wakners on here let you think we're all dinlo's.

Well at least he's back to the circa 5,000 seat stadiums that he's used to!!!!! How did we ever end up with a manager with the gravitas of Poortvliet I'll never know.

Branfoot's form was probably better than the Revolutionary Coaching Set Up, but I'm not hearing many Bring Back Branfoot cry's!!!!!

So maybe you could explain why he was talking to Ismailythree weeks ago. Of course with everything being up in the air he has every right to sort his future out, but he was not going to go down with the ship he helped sink!!!!!!!!

Sounds as though Van Stee is about as happy with Wotte as Poortvliet was when he left!!!!!

Appointed January, relegated in May. Or are you suggesting we give the Revolutionary Coaching Set Up even more time. Then again you were all up for giving Poortvliet more time;)

I just found it rather amusing how your main thrust was that Leicester had kept their team intact, only then to say "actually I didn't pay to much attention to them";) I do think you're being somewhat pessimistic there (unless the new board appoint a joke like Poortvliet!!!) and although coming in late will make the job slightly harder, I just don't see Wotte as being able to do anything even if he has all pre season, given what we have seen of him. Even if this drags on to the start of the season and Fry is still in charge, then I reckon he would be up for pushing Wotte to the background and bringing in someone better.

It's not that difficult to find out about, Leicester didn't manage to impose a media blackout on their players and their appearances. Before trotting out stuff as fact, particularly if you "didn't pay too much attention to them", you could always go and do some digging. 20th June. Just type in "Pearson apponted Leicester". So if our new owners get their act together and pull this off they could appoint the new man at about the same time for this season. I'm sorry, but the idea we go with Wotte in preference to a better manager just because Wotte will have a longer pre season is IMHO absurd. I'm sure having a longer pre season would be of benefit to the new guy, but if that is not possible the he will just have to make do. I really can't think of one scenario where I'd go for the worse option, even if the new guy didn't rock up until the opening game of the season.

Should have stopped there;)