um pahars

With all due respect shouldn't you be supporting your local team anyway:D I very much doubt the bells of St Mary's can be heard from the By-Pass Ground!!!!!

Eastleigh started off as a Southampton team, Swaythling Athletic, so we could just end up borrowing them to get us going again (I don't remember any controversy rebranding Eastleigh Airport as Suthampton Airport )

I think they broke the mold when Lowe popped out (luckily for the world ).

I'd hate to see Lowe's "Bad Plans" when you consider that his "Good Plan" has resulted in two relegatons, administration and a possible -25 points for the future!!!! He was a bounder that Mr Lowe.

I would have serious concerns over the judgement of any potential owners if they included Lowe anywhere near their consortium!!!!!!!! Talk about scoring an own goal!!!!!

And there was me thinking the Revolutionary Coaching Set Up was being trumpeted as the first step in a bright new future, a long term plan that would see Total Football and Style & Steel be the future of the Club:rolleyes::confused:. I just wonder what Lowe really meant when he said this was a long term plan (he wasn't lying was he??? You may have to confer to one of your other alter egos as you weren't posting around that time were you LMFAO). And of course at the AGM he thought things were already looking good with: "Building the foundation was always going to be the hardest part but we have achieved this":smt117 Bottom line is that some swallowed the bullsht. (you can say you didn't as you can blame Sundance or Flashman or whoever you were back then LOL)

I wouldn't bother with him. His analysis is so biased it's unbelievable. Although the Execs were clearly in charge when Plan B was postponed he still tries to blame Crouch for what he "might have done" and fails to apply the same criteria to the Execs who he claims "played it like a straight bat".

If you are talking about his latest tenure, then these figures do not relate to them. These are Years ending June of each year (i.e. our first three seasons down).

One HUGE MASSIVE mistake in your post above is the timing of who was in control of the purse strings and who was ruling the roost during this period. From the moment that Wilde was booted out of the Club midway through the second parachute season the Club was effectuvely run by Jim Hone who was given his power with the support of Hoos, Jones and Dulieu who also held the casting vote, as there was only 4 Non Execs lined up against him (Trant, Crouch, Wiseman & Hunt). This situation became even more entrenched with the resignation of Hunt and the appointment of Oldknow to the PLC board, giving Hone a free reign. So when the parachute payments came to an end and Plan B should have been implemented, Hone was making all the calls on expenditure, and certainly not Crouch. When Hone and co were finally booted out in December 2007 our overdraft had already risen to £6m. So maybe you would like to edit your post, because although you can obviously read the accounts, you do need to line it up with who was in control of the PLC purse strings for it to be credible.

Lowe and co., Wilde & co., Hone & co., Crouch & co. and Wilde & Lowe may be all manner of things to all different people, but I very much doubt that any of them has committed any act of fraud or dodgy dealing with regards this "£40m". Firstly this £40m is probably only money received. The annual cash flows show the following amounts received from player sales 2006 = £16m 2007 = £11m 2008 = £11m A total of £38m So you at least have to net off the cost of bringing in players following relegation. In the same three years we have spent £22m acquiring players (£5m, £7m & £4m) After that, in simplistic terms, you have the balance received from player sales partially funding the Operating Losses of a Club whose Income does not cover it's costs (with the balance being made up by increasing the overdraft). Hopefully the spacing will work out (and there have been some roundings and some costs aren't "cash", but you get a flavour of how we have been running at a loss. ----------------2006-------2007-------2008------ Income----------26---------23----------15------- Wages----------(14)--------(11)---------(12)----- Other COS------(12)--------(11)---------(10)----- Admin Costs-----(7)----------(6)----------(5)----- Interest---------(2)----------(2)----------(2)----- Total Costs-----(35)-------(30)--------(29)----- Op Loss---------(9)--------(7)---------(14)-----

But with all due respect that was the line trotted out last summer, in that "he was our only hope". Some hope that turned out to be. We would have been better off with Bob.

I do have a look in on their website from time to time (also fun to read TT's American stories LOL), but Granty should take most of the credit for arranging the sponsorship (along with a couple of others). Understand they're doing alright this year.

SLH PLC will need to sort out a CVA at some point (won't they???). And as the League have already declared that SFC Ltd and the PLC are one and the same, and that the other provisions of their insolvency policy apply, then any fall out from the PLC's CVA will impact on the football club. If we don't get the CVA approved, then just as we got -10 for administration, we will be getting a further -15 as a result of that..

Maybe the Norwich win with Robertson's good goal, but even then it was a pitiful crowd and the odd win just papered over the gaping cracks in the Revolutionary Coaching Set Up. By far the worst season in living memory and one that can't end soon enough for me.

I could counter that woth success on the pitch under Pearson then gates wouldn't have dropped so low and therefore we could well have pulled in enough money to have avoided administration. To record you second home win in February is going to have a massive impact on attendances.

His suntan made Ken Dulieu look positively albino!!!!!! He wanted too much commission so went with Paul Stretford instead!!!!

Played 17 Won 4 Drawn 7 Lost 6 Points 19 Points per Game 1.1 which if repeated over a season would have us on 51 points.

We must have forgiven him as he was asked to get hold of Redknapp for us when they decided to give Wigley the boot. Met him and have to say he was the stereotypical football agent.

If it is an NDA, then maybe the Council really are seious;) As that's the Mayor Councillor Parnell is the Mayor of Southampton and the Chair of the Council http://www.southampton.gov.uk/thecouncil/thecouncil/organisation/city-councillors/parnellbrian.asp?PKID=34

I saw fck all evidence of that over the last 12 months!!!!!!!!!

Been there too. Thought the endless boards of photographs all with the same expression was the most harrowing (plus the bloodstains from 20 years previous).

Judging by the idiots/crooks/shysters who have passed that test, I reckon even Pol Pot would pass with flying colours!!!!!!!!!!!!

I think that has some bearing on why I'm not overly miffed as I sit here this afternoon. For me it was always going to be a big ask and the Revolutionary Coaching Set Up had we worried from the off. I suppose I was resigned to it from about last June!!!!!! I'm also fairly ambivalent because I go to watch Saints at St mary's for no other reason than they are my team. I'm not overly worried what division we ply our trade in and I got watch my team, not the opposition. I just want us to equip ourselves to the best of our ability, do as many things right as we can and play with some honest pride and passion. Of course I'm a bit gutted, but there's always next season (I hope!!!!)

An enjoyable game, some passion, some good things and a few normal bad things. Off to a flyer and looked the better team, should have probably extended our lead, but also have Davis to thank for two very good saves (one looked outstanding). Probably deserved to win, but not being able to close a game out has cost us again. Player ratings Davis - 8 - Some outstanding saves and generally a pretty good all round performance James - 7 - Played really well and looked good going forwards, but then prone to some very poor errors (one should have cost us a goal) Perry - 8 - A very inspriing performance and read the game superbly. Saeijs - 6 - Got stuck in, but gave away another needless penalty and sometimes guilty of jumping in Surman - 7 - A decent perfromance (best for a while). Pushed on quite a bit which helped us. Lallana - 6 - A bit of an enigma, in that he looks as though he has it, but just struggles to get a hold of the game Wotton - 6- Tries his best, gives his all but always half a second too late. Gillett - 8 - For someone I don't rate he really won me over today. Got involved, added some bite and knocked the ball around well. DMG - 5 - I know he scored, but he also missed a penalty, gave away possession, didn't react fast enough and just not doing it for me. BWP - 6 - He just isn't up to it. He's a George Lawrence type player who confuses himself as much as he confuses the opposition. Euell - 8.5 - Ran tirelessly, got stuck in, out himself aboutm never gave up and showed his experience and guile throughout. Subs: Saga - 6 - Didn't really do anything Smith - 5 - Saw alot of the ball, did the hard stuff but couldn't do the simple stuff. Schneiderlin - 6 - Only on for a couple of mins

Only be too happy. We ouldn't need any thers for the cast as Nineteen's various guises will mean we have more than enough to cover all the roles. Actually, given his schizophrenic nature, maybe a version of Hitch****'s Psycho would be more apt;)