um pahars

The Revolutionary Coaching Set Up demonstrate "Total Bowling" to the English

You have changed your tune somewhat as you started off with: when in fact he was the assistant first team manager (or assistant first team coach as Poortvliet never got the manager moniker). And: Being the Assistant First Team Manager/Coach is hardly having a "minor involvement". Of course he was not the main driver of the team, I don#t think anyone has suggested that, but I would suggest that his involvement was far from minor and his role as Assistant First team Coach has him heavily involved in first team affairs.

So he was only involved in the bits that went well then??? And there are numerous quotes and examples of his involvement in the first team, it's just you choose to ignore them for some reason. And to finish it off, alongside his Academy Director role, he was also Assistant First Team Coach, which I imagine would be assisting the first team coach with the running/coaching of the first team.

If we get relegated, then personally I would have to say get rid, not least because of his involvement in the first 28 games where the damage was done. On the other side of the coin, if he keeps us up then I think he deserves another crack of the whip having redeemed himself. I'm sure there's some middle ground (i.e. what if we go down fighting, or, what if we stay up but play really badly), but going back to the OP I think I would get rid if we get relegated.

The introduction to the Q & A's following the AGM on the Official Site is as follows: Following today's AGM for Southampton Leisure Holdings PLC, shareholders were joined by Saints head coach Jan Poortlviet (JP) and Assistant First Team Coach/Academy Director Mark Wotte (MW), who spent an hour answering any footballing questions......... The full transcript is in here and Wotte is all over it answering questions involving first team affairs. http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/articles/article.php?page_id=11129 All who I have spoken to at the Club are clear that Wotte was very much involved in the first team under Poortvliet's stewardship. To suggest otherwise is rewriting history.

If you're trying to pin down Wotte to specific mistakes, then once again I think you are trying to polarise the discussion. Wotte was an integral part of the Seamless Revolutionary Coaching Set Up. I do believe that Poortvliet had the last say on "most" things, but Wotte was central to the original philosophy along with a few others. A day or so in Wotte was already giving interviews on how the first team would be playing, he said, "We like a passing, attacking game and we like to play with wingers". Go to this link when Wotton signed and you will see that Wotte is all over it: http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/news/?page_id=10234 In particular, the line by Wotton that says, "I met mark Wotte and he spoke very well. I was impressed by him and the way he wants to play football and how he sees me fitting in". Wotte was very much involved at the business end of things from May until when Poortvliet got the elbow and neither he, nor the Club, were shy in telling us that.

Would I be right in saying all of these quotes were after he had got the job??? In which case, in the interests of fairness, perhaps you should go back and put up some quotes when he was a part of the Revolutionary Coaching Set Up (when they would go out to pubs to meet the fans together, when they would give press interviews/conferences together, when he spoke about his involvement in signing players and when they answered questions after the AGM together). Wotte was an integral part of the Revolutionary Coaching Set Up, of that there can be no doubt (after all we were told this enough), to what extent is up for debate, but I do find the air brushing of his involvement in the first 28 games somewhat disconcerting. I think he has done well since he was appointed and I hope he does well going forward, it's just I find hanging Poortvliet out to dry to be somewhat excusing others who contributed quite a bit to that disastrous period.

And have to agree with that as well. I was never one for spending money we never had, I was just up for spending it more intelligently.

Have to agree Chez. I have no problem accepting that money is tight, but I would then say that if you haven't got much then you should be even more careful how you spend it!!!! There's always a risk when you dabble in the transfer & loan markets (i.e. some come off and some don't), but we have had an extremely poor return this season.

Thanks for highlighting that Wigley cracker;) I gave up reading it after the first line when he couldn't even get right who Souness joined after he left us!!!!!!! nickh has never been hot when it comes to facts;)

But it's not just solely about who is on the board, it's more about developing a sense of togetherness and engendering empathy with supporters. Developing a belief that those on charge do care, are doing their best, they do have a plan and being able to create a rallying call that the supporters believe in and are willing to support. In the absence of major success on the pitch, Norwich have certainly managed to get their supporters to respond to their rallying call (I just don't see Lowe/Wilde being able to pull off the same).

Norwich have had some relative success since the 70's and I reckon they must have had something like 20 years in the top flight since we got relegated in 1974. It is impossible to say one way or the other, but I think that post Chase they have had a Board with whom the supporters have some empathy with and they have engendered a spirit of togetherness.

The cheapest normal early bird renewal for Norwich of £366 is on a par with what we paid last season.

And that is your problem, i.e. your constant use of the term many (e.g I doubt that will please many fans that want Lowe to fail so he can be kicked out again), when in fact nothing could be further fromt the truth. It is your use of the term many that is actaully rather arrogant (and ignorant), as I doubt that there are many who want us to lose just so Lowe can be kicked out, and I also doubt there are many who think that just because you support one thing by a particular individual, they then assume you support everything about that individual. Personally, I think the problem is more to do with how you perceive these posts, than the posts & posters themselves. You would do better to show some respect to the integrity & intelligence of your fellow supporters.

Chesterton could have been writing about us on so many occasions!!!!! e.g. Given the line that Lowe is in the charge as he has the backing of his cabal and can do as he pleases, then: "To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it!!!" Then perhaps persisting with Poortvliet and then reading out the "Everything is OK" letter at the AGM: "It isn't that they can't see the solution. It is that they can't see the problem"

Of course;) I was thinking about writing a long piece on how spending money on Schneiderlin rather than on Saga or A N Other was a classic Loweism (youth and potential vs experienced and potentially no return), but then got bored:smt017:smt017

We had no option.

In your former guise of Sundance Beast you were continually vitriolic and unsupportive of Crouch throughout his tenure, so another case of rewriting history or just fabricating stuff. I agree 100% with TameSaint above who so eloquently highlighted your ignorance of what being a football fan is all about. And I also agree with Daren's assertion that amidst all the bluster, pontificating and bullsht, there is very little substance, and never any menaingful answers. But do carry on, as your protestations, rewriting of history and passing of blame just so reminds of why we so desperately need change at this Club (you're akin to an upmarket version of Scooby;)).

LOL, we spend most of our time on here correcting your fantasies, fabrications and rewriting of history:---):---) Last thing I heard was Justin Fashanu knocking out spreadsheets analysing the attendances going up under Crouch;)

Goold ole Sundance/Nineteen didn't believe it at all;)

I can only go on what I have seen of him, and sadly he is really poor. Although there are always undiscovered gems out there, or players who have lost their way, I fear Smith is not one of them!!! Being plucked from Millwall reserves is always going to make you rather sceptical, but he has backed that up with some very nothing displays. As for the OP, I think injuries will be critical to (a) whether we survive or not, and (b) whether we should go for any loanees.

And scored a vital goal and groomed by the illustrious Pearson to be the player he is today. In fact Pearson managed to get a goal out of him in 15 minutes, the Revolutionary Coaching Set Up have taken over 30 games to get the same return out of him;)

Except spending money on Schneirderlin. Except spending money on Gasmi, Pulis, Pekhart, Robertson, Smith, Forecast etc etc etc Except spending money getting Poortvliet in and out. No other options, we just had to go Dutch, it's in the Football Chairmanship For Dummies 4th Edition, where it says: "If you're tight for money, you only have one option, appoint an absolute no hoper from the lower leagues of European Football, bring in loads of players who won't contribute and spend what little money you have on some speculative buys". As for Pearson not fitting in with the cost cutting exercise, then here's his really expensively assembled starting line up from the weekend: Stockdale, 23 Gilbert, 21 (loanee) Morrison, 20 Hobbs, 20 (loanee) Mattock 18 Cleverley, 19 (loanee) Oakley 31 King 20 Gradel, 21 Fryatt, 22 Howard 32 He would never play the youngsters would he?:---)