um pahars

That's not what you said in your PM to quite a few of us all a little while back. Not really the best idea to be sending that PM and then popping back up is it:D:rolleyes::smt119 Keep trolling boy, keep trolling.

Talking about myopics, it would appear that you can't distinguish between Block 4 and Block 10 LMFAO Keep 'em coming troll boy;) In That Number me up or is thatt ITN News:smt119:rolleyes::smt119

Quite simply because he is a troll. Every forum like this has one, they come and they go. Occupational hazard I guess you could call it.

But you also have to remember that we were still in with a chance before tha Charlton game. Had we won and Forest had managed an extra goal, then we would be out of the bottom 3 today!!!!! Going into Administration whilst we still had a decent chance ostaying up wpuld have been a very difficult decision.

Players with no real affinity to the Club. The only ones who have are young lads who aren't mentally or physically up for the battle. Players who know they can get a pay day elsewhere and for whom football is a way of earning ££££££££££'s as opposed to something they love to do. A management team that in the earlier part of the season alienated the senior players, pssed off others and delivered results that put a very dark cloud over the whole place. No one at the Club (on or off the pitch) who is able to raise a fighting spirit, a sense of unity and spirit.

I'm sorry but I really do think you're reading this all backwards. Back in September Barclay's told Lowe that their exposure/risk/willingness to lend was to be curtailed at £4m. That was one of the rules of the game. Everyone who needed to know, knew it, and we had to live within those rules (however unjust, unfair or hard they seemed). We breached the £4m limit, not Barclay's, and they quite rightly (within the parameters they set) refused to honour cheques that would increased their exposure. They were happy to continue with a £4m overdraft, we just failed to live within it.

I can indeed confirm that you are a troll. HTH

No would be my simple answer. Sorry, but I just don't buy it. My opinion would be that he misjudged just how serious barclays were about the £4m cap on the overdraft and he didn't believe that would not honour cheques if we slightly north of that. IMHO a misjudgement by Lowe and not done out of spite.

:smt119 Apart from those that get deleted;);) Troll Boy;)

Is that Godwin from Block 10??? Don't want to be too rude, but if you're still trolling on here after today's results then I have to say I feel very sorry for your wife and kids. Surely you have some friends who can pull you aside and have a quiet word??? Just what does your life consist of?????

They did have an 80's games consoley thingy though. I think that place is going to get messy tonight. Had to leave when the missus fell over for a second time and someone tried to start playing the keyboards for a rather good mod/rolling stonesish band. Huzzahhhhhhhhhhhh

It's a funny old game (although I always thougt Greavesie was a cnt). Anyway off to the Wagon tonight for a 40th birthday party, so loads of reminiscing!!!!!!!!!!!!! Wonder if they've still got the same jukebox????

enjoy

Don't go by Bitterne

Get a grip you fcking big girls blouse. You'll be asking for a cuddle next and from what I've heard you're not that pretty;). But in all seriousness there is so much more that unites us than divides us, and we only get all grouchy and p1ssy up on here because we're all so passionate about our Club. Whatever happens we'll always be Saints. No hard feelings John and as I have said on many occasions I would be only too happy to stand you a pint when our paths eventually cross. Onwards and upwards. (PS Please accept my apologies for any personal insults or unnecessary comments over these last few very difficult years).

I may go corporate in the faint hope that Lowe does turn up;) or maybe try and find out from Askham and Richards just how we really did end up with Poortvliet.

I've been drinking all afternoon and on the BBQ so please exucse any faux pas.

I'm actually ambivalent about relegation and fully accept football is built on meritocracy. I enjoy watching Saints play any team and started out when we were in the old Division Two so a sojourn in Division Three doesn't hold any fear for me. Some of my mates were/are even up for a stint in the lower leagues if it all really goes tts up, with some fun away days to Bemerton, Hamworthy et al. Onwards and upwards, it all goes in circles at the end of the day.

There can be no doubt that Pearson's success only makes our pain even worse:mad: Just what the fck was Lowe (and those who brought him back) thinking last April/May?????? I may have to go and have a read of the OS and Adam Leitch's insightful reports on the appointment of the Revolutionary Coaching Set Up for a giggle to try and cheer me up!!!!!

Well hopefully we'll be able to emulate this next season!!!!!

Of course, just like Poortvliet!!!!!! At last Lowe didn't have to pay off Pearson so we saved some money there:smt119:smt119:rolleyes::smt119:mad:

And you'l get the same reply you got when you popped up last time This is what I found out when I looked at the team Pearson put out a couple of months ago: Here's his side today: 4 loanees 11 of the squad are 23 or under (7 are 20 or under) Martin - 23 (on loan) Gilbert - 21 (on loan) Morrison - 20 (new in) Hobbs - 20 (on loan) Berner - 31 (new in) Oakley - 31 Andy King - 20 Cleverley - 19 (on loan) Dyer - 26 (new in) Fryatt - 22 Howard - 32 Subs: Pentney - No age or data (but young) Chambers - 18 Gradel - 21 Mattock - 18 Dickov - 134 Pearson has shown by his deeds that he is not averse to playing youngsters, nor wheeling and dealing on a small budget. It was pretty obvious that he would be up for such a strategy, particularly when you look back to see he said the following not long after taking over: On youth: "A lot of my background is working with youngsters. I worked with the England youth teams for three years and I see the Academy as a massive part of the club. On working with limited funds "It will be a combination. The reality is there will be comings and goings, there is no doubt about that. Economics will play a part and there will be some natural wastage as players come to the end of their contracts. Then it will be a case of finding players who fit the bill. We need a side capable of getting success but which fits in with the financial situation. But we are not going to be splashing fortunes on players. Even in the short time I have been here, I have been looking to see if we can get players on loan. Short-term is the immediate priority but I am looking long-term too." On youth again, but how the relegation fight must be a priority It cannot be my priority at the moment but it will get my total support in terms of fitting in with the philosophy of the club. I have worked at clubs where the academy and first-team are separate entities and not integrated at all and those clubs are the poorer for it. If you put the right effort into recruiting and developing the right players then it can save the club a lot of money on transfer fees." Those that claim Pearson was only interested in big name players earning big name wages couldn't be more wrong, particularly when you look at his words and deeds in this area. To suggest that Pearson would not have wanted to work here, despite all the evidence showing otherwise and also ignoring the fact that Poortvliet and Wotte were already lined up, is actually a daming indictment of Lowe. Rather than support his footballing decisions you're actually making excuses for him because you know his first major decision was an absolute fck up. The very fact that even his most ardent supporters make excuses and are embarassed by that decision speaks volumes.

I agree it is an assumption, and one that can never be proved one way or the other, but I don't think it's that big to assume we woud not be in the position we find ourselves in if Pearson would have stayed on. In fact I think it's only Franks Cousin who thinks Pearson would have done just as bad.

Go on the link below, type in Rupert Lowe and listen to the interview he gave to SKY news which was almost identical to the others he was running with, and you'll get a very clear idea of where he believes the blame lies and certainly no evidence of him taking any share. http://news.sky.com/skynews/video In fact, I'll transcribe the key part here: "So my primary blame is twofold, first of all, the bank, in my opinion overlent to the club and overlent to the board, and secondly the board that presided over that period (2006-2008 ) did not act wisely, it acted with folly" The only time in the recent media circus was a small line (I think the one you mention) on one news report, but the main thrust of all his recent interviews was that the blame lies with the period between 2006-2008 and the bank and the board of that period were responsible. That interview was probably the most high profile one he conducted and that certainly sets out his position very clearly.

Kept Oakley, Fryatt & Howard and played them regularly, but rebuilt the rest of his team with judiscious loans and alot of home grown players. He's done very well this season and have to say well done. Hope we can emulate it next season.