um pahars

If you're only in transit then you won't even see customs. Or are you spending some time in Bangkok?????

What is crazy is that we could draw or even lose and be no worse off!!!!!! Forest are away (albeit at Barnsley), Plymouth are also away (Blackpool) and Norwich have Sheff Weds at home. I could easily see them all only picking up a point, which would mean we would still be in with a shout (particularly with our game in hand). Of course, if we're going to overhaul teams then we have to close the gap, and Charlton is obviously our best chance of doing that, but still think we will be in with a chance of staying up even up tp the 90th minute of the last game.

No, I saw it and it made about as much sense as the drivel from you that I outlined. HTH

I personally think that if football started to live within it's means, then it would still be possible to sustain four professional divisions. The biggest problem is players wages, but IMHO there is enough money in the game so long as the wages paid out are sensible (after speaking to a few of those involved with relatively smaller clubs e.g. Exeter, Stockport & Crewe).

Granty, do some of your digging and find out exactly what happens in the lower tiers as I'm sure a salary cap is already in existence in League 2 (think League 1 also tried it for a season or two but then gave up). I'm sure I remember Malwhinney and others mentioning it a while back. I think it may be voluntary, but the main drive is for teams to run on a more sensible financial basis.

It's a footballing debt and so would not be written off (not unless we want to start over in the Jewson Wessex).

I don't think anyone is under the illusion that we would (or could) compete with the "big" clubs for the "top" players. We will never be in the market for the superstars who will of course follow the big money, but at the same time the strategy we followed meant we were never in the market for the next tier of players who may have helped us to maintain our top flight status. A too rigid wage structure (on an individual basis), coupled with a speculative and sometimes scattergun approach to transfers, along with a revolving managerial door meant we never gave ourselves the best chance possible. At one time our income was something like 9th in the Premiership, it's a pity we didn't have a strategy or a CEO/Chairman who could have capitalised on that instead of risking it all through a number of very poor decisions. And as an addendum, this type of over the top sensationalising, mentioning Kaka and suggesting we need to get real as we have no chance of competng with the top clubs is just the kind of response that Lowe would come out with challenged. He would also miss the point, in that most fans don't expect to be signing the mega stars and competing with the top clubs for the best talent, but they did want us to be as competitive as was possible given our resources. Although he would always say "We don't want to do a Leeds", it was an out of touch sentiment, as there weren't many supporters out there suggesting that we did go out and live massively beyond our means and spend extortionate amounts of money that we didn't have. But then again how ironic that under his leadership we are very close to "doing a Leeds" after going down his route.

They went down to Div 3 the same year we got relegated (May 2005), so I think 3 years.

And you could have used exactly the same line of argument in November 2004 or January 2009!!!!! Sometimes the mistake is not in getting rid of an underperforming/dire/out of his depth manager, it's the appointment in the first place. And as for your initial assertion, well sadly the role of Lowe plays big part in the performance of the two managers, with each of them having to work within a strategy overseen by Lowe. For example, many on here argue that Wotte's task has been made somewhat easier due to a lifting of the restrictions within which he can operate (e.g. much greater freedom to use older players). It is a rather naive view to believe that the manager performs in isolation to the overall strategy of the CEO and Board.

We went through all this a couple of weeks back on here. NickG's view is that Wotte was only involved in the academy;) despite Wotte also being billed as Assistant First Team Coach and the OS continually telling us about his involvement as a part of the Dutch Duo / Revolutionary Coaching Set Up etc etc etc

For me, so much depends on other teams results. I can see us getting something like 8 points (W2 D2 L3) or maybe an optimistic 11 (W3 D2 L2), but I've got this sneaking feeling that either would be enough as I think Forest and Plymouth will really struggle in the run in. I think a draw on the last day will be needed and we'll get it, relegating Forest in the process!!!!!

I think mistakes can be, and are made at every club and will often contribute to relegation. And of course they may not be the same mistakes from one season to the next. Additionally, I think some relegations just come down to the fact that many clubs can't make the jump to the big time and stay their due to lack of quality in their playing squad and/or lack of resources to support that. But I do think there has been a certain degree of similarity between our demise in 2005 and the current situation e.g. poor managerial appointment, poor transfer policy and acquisitions, sticking with that poor manager too long etc etc etc. We're certainly not unique and we are following in the footsteps of many others and I'm sure there will be many more.

I like that analogy and it is exactly where I was coming from with my post on this thread, in that whilst we always ran the risk of being relegated, we certainly increased that risk through the mistakes, poor strategies and poor leadership in those final seasons in the top flight.

I have gotten behind Wotte since he has been here and I will support him and the team at every match I go to between now and the end of the season. I have also said that i think he has done a pretty good job since taking over the reins, and if he does keep us up then he has done a very good job. Maybe it's the way in which you read posts, because the intent was not to undermine or bash Wotte, instead I was merely pointing out that Wotte has found himself in very, very similar circumstances in recent times. What happened at Den Bosch has minimal (if any) influence on what will happen to us, just highlighting how he had already come in halfway through a disastrous season and managed to improve things. Whether ours has a happy or sad ending is an entirely seperate thing 9and personally I think we will stay up). (although I was happy to bash the OS and it's authors for their airbrusing of history).

And if it is, then they had better convert those gas holders in to cells as they will have to arrest 1000's each week at St Mary's. Sounds to me as though there was an over reaction by the Old Bill up at Blackpool and a similar one on this message board. Scratching my head that some people find it offensive to get frustrated, animated and passionate at a football ground, and that's before you get on to the perceived naughtiness of swearing!!!!!

Cribbing the title from another thread I have to say that there are also similarities between our potential relegation and the fate that Den Bosch suffered when Wotte took over halfway through a season!!! Den Bosch sacked their manager in March 2000 when they were struggling in the top flight. They brought in Wotte who had the task of turning their season around and keeping them up. "By the time Den Bosch discovered there is still a big difference between first and second division football, fired coach Martin Koopman and started to strengthen its squad, it was too late. Although their results and their football under new coach Mark Wotte improved strongly in the last two months, fellow strugglers SC Cambuur always stayed one step in front." Wotte ultimately failed and they finished bottom, were relegated and subsequently went into the equivalent of administration!!!!!!! But there is an upside, despite going down, Den Bosch won their last game 7-0!!!! Wotte resigned in the summer, to be replaced by someone called Jan Poortvliet. He steered them to promotion and this was the club the OS bigged up his success at (involving youngsters and being in financial difficulties with no money), it's just that they forgot to add the bit about Wotte's involvement in getting them to that position!!!!

Add up all the money wasted by a succession of managers all buying their own players to suit their own style of player (e.g. 4 in 2004 calendar year) and the fact that the strategy appeared to be similar to this pre season (i.e. a scattergun of quantity over quality) and you come to a nice tidy figure. We actually spent quite a bit around that time, the problem was that IMHO it was on mediocrity and too often it didn't enhance the existing team.

Spending money is no guarantee of success and similarly you can achieve success without spending loads. However, there is enough evidence to show that there is a direct correlation between money spent on wages and relative success (the Deloittes Annual Report regularly shows this to be the case). There will always be anomalies and exceptions, but overall the correlation is statistically strong enough to prove there is a direct link. Once you accept that, then you have to to everything possible to get as much bang for your buck, particularly if your funds are somewhat limited. I have never had a problem living within our means, but for me our problem has been how we went about spending the finite amount of money we had. When you're relatively financially challenged you have to make sure you get most of the big decisions right. Sadly, I believe we got too many of those wrong in recent years, with the most damaging being our failure in the recruitment and retention of managers. It's hard enough competing in such a competitive league without being hamstrung by poor leadership, poor decision making and an overall strategy that impedes your development as opposed to enhancing it. It's a tough business, but handicapping yourself with poor decisions e.g. three managers in a season (4 in a calendar year - 5 if you include Wigley's caretaker stint) is just asking for trouble.

Not sure what type of a statistic this is, but below is the average position of the relegation team's opponents: 19. BARNSLEY..........11.25 20. NORWICH...........12.17 21. PLYMOUTH.........13.17 ------------------------------------------------ 22. NOTT'M FOR.......14.7 23. SAINTS.............13.14 24. CHARLTON......... Dead and buried e.g. the avergae position of our 7 upcoming opponents is 13th, but obviously this doesn't take into account of home advantage and other factors (such as weighting). Sort of shows everyones run in is fairly even(ish).

A point is OKish, particularly when you consider two of our relgation rivals lost at home. Failing to close the gap on Norwich is a bit of a bummer, but fair play to them for earning a draw at St Andrew's. A break next weekend then it is crunch time with a raft of relegation 6 pointers: Saints v Charlton Barnsley v Forest Blackpool v Plymouth Norwich v Sheff Weds We could certainly do with beating Charlton as our rivals have a chance of getting points from those matches. And then of course the Monday after we have our game in hand at Watford!!!!!!!!! it will go to the wire!!!!!!!!!1:smt017:smt017

And conversely, I can remember big crowds where we have performed poorly in return for some good support e.g. Forest this year, QPR a while back etc etc etc.

I think we overplay the effect supporters can play in keeping us up. Whilst I accept a baying 60,000 crowd might get on the back of the referee or the opposition, I don't really think even a full house at SMS is that intimidating. The size of the crowd is very much driven by performances on the pitch, which is common throughout the divisions, and of course, I would have to argue that whilst there haven't been sell outs at SMS this season, there certainly hasn't been a booing, baying crowd either.

OK Frank, it might have been necessary because of the payout required for Sturrock, of course it might have, yep sure thing, OK, righty-O, roger, fair do's, etc etc etc, but it could also have been because aliens had landed and taken over Lowe's thought processes, or maybe the Queen Mother blackmailed Lowe into the appointment or maybe even that Wigley is really Lowe's love child. I'm sure we could come up with a million and one excuses for why Lowe appointed Wigley, before we get to, perhaps he thought Wigley would make the step up, but sadly he was misguided in his judgement. But you keep coming up with excuses for why it wasn't Lowe's mistake for appointing Wigley without full approval of his PLC Board.

Hear what you're saying, but I felt Wigley was just so much worse, not least because of how Gray panned out. Even though Lowe stumbled around all summer (but still signed Anders without a manager!!), I couls almost forgive him for going down the continuity route just this once. However, IMHO the appointment of Wigley was a total cck up from day one, with even the OS running round trying to find out exactly whether he was permanent or not, PLC Board Members not knowing about it, briefings about the management structure not being finalised etc etc etc. It just beggared belief that we would jeopardise our Premiership future with such an appointment (but of course it might have been done because we were skint after paying off Sturrock;)).

Lowe replies, "But....but....but.... I've got two really exciting letters that might change your mind. Firstly, I've got this letter from the highly respected and regarded Chris Iwelumo saying we're brilliant and secondly I've got this anonymous letter that I received on the morning of our last AGM saying everything was going great guns. Come on guys, you've got to respect those references!"