um pahars

I have no problem with "him" whatsoever. It's not in the slightest bit personal, I've just judged him by his results. When he did well, I praised him (cut to GM who can put hat post up from a few years back) and when he did poorly I criticised him. I don't doubt for one minute he thought he was doing the right thing, and in a way that is one of hs problems, in that he is also so arrogant that he probably often thinks he knows best, only to be found wanting. I'm only looking at this with reference to his performance at the Club I support. I'm sure that if i met him in a different setting he would be a fairly interesting character, but perhpas not someone I would want to go on holiday with. I don't doubt that one or two class warriors have had it in for him from the off, but then there is no reason to trade off of this and try and tar us all with the same brush. With every interview, he just makes it even clearer that he really has lost it.

Crouch was never on his own long enough to get anything done. The minute he froze Wilde out of the boardroom after kicking out Hone & Co, the 42% were out there making their move (when did you meet with Wilde????) and trying to get Lowe the Saviour back on the throne.

Came to nothing though!

As has been shown on the rather parochial and insular Island of Portsea, if people deliver success than any manner of backgrounds and personality traits are soon forgotten. No one had a problem when Lowe was doing well, and fair play to him, but when he went past his sell by date people began to realise he was a lost cause and a weight around the Club's neck. He was called Rupert back around 2002/3 when we were successful and no one (except a rabid mnority) had a problem with his name or class back then, and the only reason he is not wanted now is for the complete opposite reasons i.e. he's not been successful. The tag of Toff, Duck Off etc etc etc only then really came about when people had to start coming up with comic style insults for him. I have heard nothing that would indicate we would have gone under last summer had Rupert not come back. Nothing whatsoever, and you can be assured that had Lowe heard the same snippet, then he would have been using it to his full advantagelast summer. We had just been given the support of the Bank, maintained our Championship status and ended the season with a sell out crowd. In relative terms, there was a small ray of light peeking through the dark clouds. Wasn't to be???? So booting out Pearson and the appointment of the Revolutionary Coaching Set Up was giving it a go and it just wasn't to be. That decision cost us points on the pitch and ££££££'s off it as attendances fell. Just wasn't to be:rolleyes:

Exactumundo!!!!! And I'm not sure which ine is worse (probably the latter for me if I had to choose).

Who is to say that some weren't knocking around but getting nowhere witht the then current board;) How many of us (and therefore others) saw Administration coming so quickly after coming through the transfer window with no sales, positive comments regarding the Creditor's ongoing support etc etc etc. And why didn't Lowe and Co try to sort out a Pre Pack when they finally saw the writing on the wall by trying to search out these interested parties. IMHO These last few months have not been very clever on or off the pitch.

Someone should ask The Farmer to superimpose Lawrie and his picture on to the backgrund of that Lowe and his train picture he mocked up!!!!

100% agree, but my concern is that the League will see right through this ruse (with the support of the other 71 clubs), and implement some other punitive measure and basically say to the Football Club, this is the deal, if you want to play in our League you have to accept this ruling.

But it is my understanding that due to this "League" rule whereby all footballing debts have priority status and have to be settled, it effectively puts these creditors at the head of the queue, which is what HMRC object to (as they recently lost their equivalent priority status) and hence why they always currently vote against CVA's. So my point is that the League can make up their own rules, and enforce what they like, how they want and when they want (within reason of course) and if you want to play ball you have to accept them.

I'm split between thinking what a complete twt he is if he really thinks that is the primary reason for people disliking him, wondering if he really is delusional and how lucky we are to be rid of him, wondering whether he is on a deliberate Sundance style wind up or thinking if that's really how he believes many supporters think, then how the hell did we survive so long with that type of attitude. How did he ever manage to conivnce people that he should come back????

The reason I mentioned it was due to seeing the following two notes in recent accounts: Note 11 Properties of the Group with a net book value of £34m are subject to charges held by Barclays Bank PLC and the loan note holders. It's obvious regarding the loan note holders (Aviva), but was unsure what the Barclays bit referred to???? Was it the overdraft (we've often used one in the past)???? or were Barclays who we borrowed the £1million loan from in 2003 and so that's why they're mentioned here? Note 18 The bank overdraft, loans and loan notes are secured on freehold land and buildings (see note 11). So here it specifically states that the overdraft is secured against assets, hence my earlier post.

And of course we must also remember his and others support during some very dark days in the 1950's when John Corbett very often paid the players wages out of his own pocket. I'm sure it was said by Brian Hunt this was an act that he reckoned saved the Club from turning semi professional (with the associated downward slide it would have brought). Going slightly off on a tangent, but then again we do find ourselves in a very similar position 50 years on, so let's hope there are still some generous benefactors around this time.

Read the second paragraph and sht yourself when it comes to administrator's fees!!!!!!!! http://www.bournemouth.vitalfootball.co.uk/article.asp?a=111029 "Firstly for any prospective purchaser there are the fees for the administrator, at present in excess of £500k, though certain monies will have been used from the sale of Sam Vokes to reduce that, but clearly a substantial amount remains"

And what exactly does that mean? What limitations are there on transferring funds? What firewalls (if any) are in place? What is the end game? I'm not having a got you Derry, as you just seem to be in the firing line from us old whingers, but i just think these and other questions need to be answered by someone before money is blindly chucked around, and I wasn't convinced by Crouch's answers on the radio the other night. Believe you me, if someone comes out, explains the timeline and the strategy and how the Club would benefit from any of these schemes, then I would be up for helping out on any other them like a flash (I'd even do a sponsored spell if GM would sponsor me). But at the moment all I'm seeing is snippets of information and some mad running around. If anything, I actually think your idea of trying to establish an emergancy purchase fund if none of these other consortiums come through is the best thing I have heard in this area so far. Of course, it might be that the Administrator can't be saying much in case he reveals how insolvent the Football Club Ltd is, but I'm just not overly confident of people pouring money into a black hole for wat????

One can only presume you missed the joke and the reference to Barry's briefcase. I wasn't picking you up on your spelling dear chap, as you should know I really don't go in for spelling mistakes (viscous, vicious, visciousetc etc etc) because as someone else said on another thread being a pendant (sic) will come back and bite you on the ar5e on these message boards.

But on a serious note, I'm also sitting back as I want to understand just exactly what the situation is and what the due process is. I'm assuming by asking for all donations to go to SFC ltd they are attempting to establish a firewall as they are claiming that compnay is still trading OK. But can someone be clear about how this works, whether monies can or will be switched about, what this means in the next few weeks and then going forward etc etc etc??? I share some of your concerns, but I also understand the need to ensure the Club survives in some shape or form as I don't particularly think an AFC Southampton in the Jewson Wessex League is the best way forward. I also wonder whether the delaying of the points deduction decision and the sniffing aorund of the Leagues advisors are preventing some home truths from being spoken, as being honest I would have thought things would and should have been made quite a bit clearer by now (e.g. I had no idea where Crouch's we need £500,000 now came from and what it really means).

I presuming that's just a bigger case than is normal briefcase;)

Absolutely!!! The minute he started trotting out the "I'm hated because I'm called Rupert" line he lost all credibility. In fact it's actually a rather insulting claim, insinuating that those who judge him are doing it solely on the basis of his class. It's a lazy, sloppy, cheap and somewhat insulting claim that just because of someone's background, people will automatically judge them. I would say to Rupert, please don't judge us by your own very low standards.

My only concern Derry is that the PLC that might be ready to sue them and fight them all the way, may not be around for much longer!!!!!! I totally accept and agree that technically we remain within the rules and therefore should not get a points deduction, but having spoken to a few in the game (and sorry I'm not prepared to breach their confidence) they are also of a view that the League is very much like a Gentlemen's Club who can and will do whatever they want, and you will have to agree with it if you want to play in "their" League. They mentioned that the payment of all footballing debts when in administration goes against the grain (which is why HMRC always vote against the latest CVA's), but the League still manage to enforce it if you want to play in "their" League then you have to accept "their" decisions. I just don't see it as an open and shut case.

And ultimately it was a gamble that failed. I certainly don't buy the argument that there was no hope, or else why did he come back?? Of course it was a precarious position, and of course it would be tough, but it certainly was doable and that is why Lowe came back. Sadly Lowe failed in his attempt to stave off administration (and we're very close to failing on the pitch as well). We should have avoided administration at all costs, and even when the overdraft was cut back in Sept/Oct, we should have done everything and anything to adhere to these new lending limits. That could have included an "anything goes policy" with no sacred cows, be it the sale of players, sale of other assets, sale and lease backs, begging for money from people, forcing Crouch's hand just to raise some one off cash. OR even if the worst came to the worst arranging a pre pack sale achieved by other clubs, and I presume Derby did this in 2003 (effectively accepting administration as a last resort, but having already lined up a buyer so we go in to and then come out of administration almost immediately). I just don't think these last months have been handled very well at all off the pitch. It would almost appear that there has been an element of head in the sand and Barclay's won't pull the plug about it. And exactly the same can be said for on the pitch where terrible decisions from the off have impatced directly on attendances which have lost us ££££'s which could have ensured we stayed within our overdraft limits. I can't buy into the premise that we should have taken administration last May as everyone (inc Lowe and Wilde) were of the view that it would be possible to play and trade our way out. Administration should have been avoided at all costs.

That's what I was pinning any faints hopes on. Aviva have a track record of supporting clubs and appear to have a good relationship with the Club, and maybe we could even play a part by leaning on them if some carpetbaggers showed up. Additionally, Barclay's, despite their recent showings have an interest in football so fingers crossed there as well. Very, very faint hope though and until we start to see who emerges then maybe we should all just start praying!!!!!

Have you got an equivalent of this easy guide to administration that you could put up here???? A mate sent this to me last week and it helped outline a few details (but also left a few questions unanaswered!!!). http://www.linklaters.com/pdfs/publications/banking/Guidetoadministration.pdf

Crouch definitely denied that it on the Radio Hampshire phone in the other night. Why would he deny it?????

Who cares?????? But on a serious note, do we still play the Attacking Dutch Style 4-3-3 Totale Voetbal style???? Who was it who said players who play 4-3-3 are worth more LOL???

We lost many, many, many more people through poor football and results (particularly at home) than we ever did through boycotts. If we're going to blame an inidividual for boycotting, then I think it's only fair to first look further up the chain of command and see who has cost us thousands of bums on seats.