um pahars

But that's the problem when you're trolling and posting anything for a bite, as you often forget just what princples you're sticking up for today;) Who else has received one of his abusive PM's:smt084 NineSunThirdFlashTeen CanDanceManBearBeastTeen in "Shoots himself in foot Shocker (again)":D:D

I often do enter in to discussions and debates with those across the Saints supporting spectrum, just not with trolls who have too many user names that it is impossible to keep up with. Are you also logged on to the Charlton, Leeds, Basingstoke, Andover, Salisbury & Villa forums??? Do you have multiple ID's on there as well???

I find it very difficult with you as I have no idea which one of your many personalities are on the board and so we are swamped with opinions;) Were all your previous monikers banned, or do you just pop under new ones for a giggle:D????

I totally agree that some stayed away out of sheer bloody mindedness, or even hatred of Lowe, but my defence was aimed at those "true" boycotters who did something they believed in. I'm not saying they were right or wrong, as ultimately everyone has to be responsible for their own actions. I also don't really see the point of this thread, as we really should have moved on by now and to be honest I wasn't really going to bother posting on it until I saw your post having a pop at your fellow fans. Everyone has the right to do what they feel is right for them. We really should have moved on and TBH the OP isn't/wasn't necessary.

I don't think any Saints fan would be happy that we found ourselves in such a precarious position last Friday, not least those who would argue they made the ultimate sacrifice. They would probably argue that following the abject failure that was last season, then their stance was vindicated as their belief that Lowe & co were not the way forward was proved to be correct. They could also argue that had more people taken their stance then the madness of last season may have been nipped in the bud earlier. Of course it's very difficult talking on behalf of other people, but I certainly wouldn't call their actions bloody mindedness as they probably didn't believe their actions to be stubbornly obstructive.

NineSunThirdFlashTeenDanceMan CanBeatBearManTeen will support anyone the majority aren't keen on and conversely have a pop at those who the majority are in support of, regardless of the merits of debate one way or the other, as it is classic trolling technique. Expect many more pops at anyone in order to create some "Scooby" type of fun:rolleyes:

And they would counter that they were witholding their financial support as they did not want to prop up a regime which they believed was not in the best long term interests of the Club. That's not bloody mindedness, that's holding and supporting a very valid point of view. It may not be one that you believe in, it may have been right or it may have been wrong (and it may have been 10's or 1000's), but I certainly wouldn't call it bloody mindedness as it is very much a valid stance IMHO.

No need to worry, Matty is as tough as nails:D

Cheapskate!!!!!!!!!! Buy a new one, if not I'm shipping one over. Then again, given it's almost 15 years old I reckon it's older than some of the buildings over your way:D

I don't think anyone (apart from the resident troll) has too much of a problem with people not being able to justify spending their hard earned money on total rubbish. Beyond the die hards you need a good reason to attract the next tranche of supporters and last season we failed to do that. Everyone supports the Club in their own way and I don't think it is right for anyone to judge whether that way is right or wrong, as ultimatley it's right for them. But can't you see that they also believed that what they were doing was in the best long term interests of the Club??? I'm not going into whether they were right or wrong to hold that view, (as ultimately they felt they had to do what they did), or how many it involved, but I find it hard to understand why you can't accept they had every right to hold that view.

I'm afraid I would have to disagree Phil. It was a very poor business decision and before people suggest it was a "subsidised fan service" then I'm afraid they're wide of the mark as it 's original intention (noted throughout a number of Annual Reports and statements) was for it to be a profitable enterprise. Instead it drained money out of the Club. Around that time I had been involved in a number of football media initiatives (ITV Digitial, Leeds cable TV, Granada's, NTL's and Carlton's investments in football) and it was hard enough making some of them work, so the idea that we could turn a profit from a radio station linked to a provincial club was always wishful thinking. Apprently when Lowe & co offered ££££'s for the licence the look on the owners faces was akin to Seth Johnson and his agents when Risdale offered him that outrageous contract!!!!!!

I also think the constant changing of managers is a huge problem. Three in the season we bombed out of the top flight, bombing out Pearson at the end of last season and then kicking out his replacement 6 months or so later was always going to cause us problems, but I would argue it is the selection and appointments in the first place that have been the bigger problem!!!!! Sticking with a duffer of a manager in the name of stability is a big no no for me.

We were relegated even without the ten points deduction, and still ended up 7 points from safety (with the divisions worst goal difference). The real killer blow to the team occurred some ten months earlier when Pearson made way for the Revolutionary Coaching Set Up. Poortvliet's tenure of less than a point a game was an absolute disaster (yes, even worse than Wigleys!!!) and Wotte's follow up was pretty poor as well, only just getting above a point a game. Wotte's points per game across a whole season would have seen us relegated and the way we ended the season with that "diamond formation" in midfield did us no favours whatsoever. Along with many of the players, he talked the talk far too much last season.

So how come you're sounding like his mother and getting all upset about it. You need to try and rise above things Frank, because you come across as all blinkered and bitter (someone pt a link up here the other day about bitterness being a medical condition, maybe you should have another look). Wotte underperformed as a part of the Revolutionary Coaching Set Up and also on his own, and for that IMHO deserves to get the boot. It's not about personalities or who hired him, it's solely down to results and performances on the pitch. I'm not getting any pleasure out of that, as ultimately it means our Club has suffered, but I won't be shedding any tears for him either. Football's a tough, ruthless business and having been sacked before I'm sure Wotte knows that better than you or I. So to try and score some cheap points and accuse me of taking pleasure in Wotte's demise is low, even by your standards. Just for the record one more time, I don't take any pleasure in suggesting Wotte should get the sack. This is simply football and there are managerial casualties all the time. So get down from your high horse and stop being so sanctimonious. A football supporter calling for the managers head, how very, very, very dare you!!!

Behave yourself. Football is a tough business and anyone who enters into it knows the benefits and the pitfalls. They should be tough enough to be able to face the bad times as well as the good times. And quite frankly if they haven't got the mettle to deal with such adversity then they really shouldn't be in this tough business. If we're going to be all nicey nicey, then maybe we should still have Wigley at the helm. And darn anyone who suggested Poortvliet should get the boot. What is pathetic is your effort to shoot some cheap shots when at the end of the day calling for a change of manager is par for the course in the world of football. Shock, horror, football fan suggests manager should get the sack. Faux outrage abounds. Maybe you should have been saying the same to Lowe and Wilde when you were speaking to them a year ago about not booting Pearson out.

What is odd is thinking we will only be able to employ a manager who has to be worse than Wotte, and even then he will only be able to be employed 2 days before the start of the season. It's a big wide world out there you know, and there are slightly more alternatives and possibilities than you would seem to like us to believe. Your line is that if the choice is Wigley or Poortvliet being appointed 2 days before the season, then you would rather go with Wotte. Quite frankly, so would I, but it's a rather noddy line to take.

We could always talk about Zimbabwe, then you culd really flex your muscles;)

Oh, LOL, the classic chestnut of I'd rather have him than employ someone like Wigley (or even Poortvliet). Quite frankly, if Wotte is the best we can attract or hope for, then I think we're fcked anyway. Let's just settle for someone who was integral to the last shambles of a season, because in that big wide world out there there is no one better who we could get. Let's all go provincial!!!! Has to be one of the most pss poor reasons for sticking with a failed manager - at least he knows why we're sht (how about we're sht because he played such a big part?). I wouldn't mind if people came up with valid reasons to justify their opinions but (a) we may not get anyone better and (b) he knows where we're crap is rather lame. That young lad on the marches got Wotte right. A joke as a part of the Revolutionary Coaching Set Up, and no change when he went it alone.

The only thing I can remember is the ludicrous comments you've been making on here for ages, including the 50% wages bill (we're still not at that level three or four years on LOL) and how the Executives played it with a straight bat. When it comes to financial stuff, I'd probably give Jackson the benefit of the doubt over you LMFAO. Spiralling;)

That's the same kind of ****** that was trotted out as reasons for keeping Lowe (fat lot of good that did LOL). We're still a good catch and if things go well we may actually go into next season with a new found vibrancy about the place. But don't worry, stick with someone who was up to his neck in probably the worst season in our history because there might not be anyone better out there! Consistency of what???? Consistency of relegation, sh1te and failure. Yeah right, let's keep him on so we can benefit from his consistency (hang on, didn't we do that around January time???).

Totally agree. If he had any semblence of character, any pride and if he really does like us, then he would quietly trot off back to Holland, the Middle East etc etc etc. A failure, and involved with all the failings of this failed season.

Half term coaching courses for me. Seems as though that young lad who led the marches called it right;)

Officially??? Nowhere

But with some of the deal relying on contingent payments (some just staged, some dependent on promotion & other milestones), then the creditors and the Administrator need to be looking further than just cash in hand as we stand here today. I understand what you're saying in that the administrator's priority is to the creditors, but as this deal hass an element of contingent payments to it, then it is everyone's interest for it have some legs.