um pahars

I have to say I think the sancitmonious possee have saddled up again. 2. any evil condition or thing that spreads destructively; blight. 3. like a cancer; an evil that grows and spreads; "remorse was cancerous within him"; "pornography is cancerous to the moral development of our children" 2. A pernicious, spreading evil: A cancer of bigotry spread through the community. 3. an evil influence that spreads dangerously: their country would remain a cancer of instability 3. fast-spreading bad phenomenon: something, usually something negative, that develops or spreads quickly and usually destructively There are enough definitions of "cancer" to show it can be used in this context without it being deemed offensive or indeed insensitive.

I'm afraid I do not share your optimism with regards Liptak. I am of coure no footballing expert and have seen him play for a total of about 15mins, but he looked scary (and I don't mean in an agressive, I'll bite yer legs off way). Not good news if true, so hopefully a minor niggle.

Do you remember that letter from Burley last time around;) Be prepared for another one of those to tug on the heartstrings if Lowe's position comes under threat:D I'm sure there are some on here who wouldn't have minded Burley fcking off with Lowe in 2006!!!!!

Do these events take place in the Itchen South/Chapel corner??;)

I think in that interview he was alluding to his offer of putting money in, coming back in some capcity and replacing Poortvliet. I think Crouch realised that once Wotte was appointed we had probably rolled the dice for this season and the only option was to back the manager. I think he was happy to undermine Poortvliet (and fair fcking play to him, because Wilde and Lowe were dawdling), but he did not undermine Wotte as far as I am aware.

That's one of my problems, not that he doesn't get any scoring chances. more that he fluffs, scuffs and spoons too many of them (particularly the easier ones!!!!). Which in a way is surprising, because at Youth level he was burying them.

I can only presume you couldn't read the part that said: "Of course it's all hypothetical with no firm evidence (this is a message board for opinions after all)," If you're expecting every opinion, piece of conjecture or way of thinking to be supported by firm numbers then I'm afraid you've come to the wrong place. This is a message board where people can discuss potential alterntives without having to go into detailed cashflows LOL. If you're not open minded enough to realise that there were alternatines to the strategy we undertook, then you probably could do with taking a step back and having a reasoned think about it. I have no doubt that we were under incredible financial pressures at the start of the season, and I also accept thay the majority of the decisions undertaken were done for what was believed to be the right reasons, but we could have done things differently. Two simple examples. One would have been not to appoint Poortvliet. We could easily have kept Pearson (or being progressive we could even have appointed Wotte to the hotseat!!!). I don't really see that decision as being particularly financially driven. I'm sure Pearson was on more than Poortvliet, but not so much that it would tip the balance. You really should not be scrimping on arguably the most important person at the Club (we got what we deserved when we wnet that way). The second was the money spent on Schneiderlin and the priorities at the time. What the exact sums involved are indeed unknown, but it probably wouldn't be way off the mark to think we have parted with half of the £1.2m quoted. Throw in £3k a week and we're up to maybe £750,000 for the season (BTW I'm just estimating here if that's OK with you;)). Would that £750,000 for this season cover Saga's wages, bonuses and any fee payable by Aalborg. I have no idea, but I don't think it would be a million miles away. And then of course after that you have to start thinking about including any benefits from having Saga available all season with goals increasing the chances of winning, increasing the chances of bums on seats etc etc etc. Now if you want to come round mine and run some financial modelling, then I would be only too happy to do some of that, but I also think it is safe to say that you can get a general vibe for things without having the full details at your disposal. If you're going to insist that every opinion on here has to be costed and audited, then we will soon be back to Best 5 crisp flavours;)

He indeed does have a very good point, because the recent mini revivial under Wotte just goes to show what might have been possibe had we gone down the more "traditional" route from the first game of the season, as opposed to some Revolutionary Set Up playing Total Football. Rather than being embroiled in a relegation battle, we could have had many more wins under our belt, dare I say many more bums on seats and then arguably much more wonga coming in, with maybe even the possibility of strengthening the team in the January window to push on even further. A Virtuous circle as opposed to the viscous one under Poortvliet. If Wotte keeps us up, then arguably our form will have to be akin to mid table stuff (if not higher).

But this happens a lot in the Youth leagues and then many of these players just can't make the step up to the first team and replicate that form. I watched quite a bit of the youth team back then and IMHO a) he was in a pretty good team and b) he was a sort of bully and his physical presence and power was much greater than his compatriots (I likened it to a good County Batsman who can bully the County bowlers, but then gets found out on the International stage). It's all about opinions, and whilst he has played OK in the last two games that I have seen, I still don't think he is a centre midfielder (attacking or not) and I would single him out as one of our weaker players. Would love to be proved wrong of course.

My understanding is that Wigley brought Wotte to Lowe's attention, but have absolutely no idea where Poortvliet came from. Three years ago Wotte was wanted alongside Lok, so was it definite that Wotte was number one back then, and not Lok as number one, with Wotte in the background, or was it definitely Wotte in charge, with Lok behind him?? Would also be interested to know just how we ended up with Poortlviet, how his name first got mentioned and what research we did on the guy. And given the mysterious nature of the man, would still love to know exactly who Van Der Waals is/was and how much of an influence he has been (considering that in that interview he credits himself with developing the strategy alongside Lowe!!!)??

But what is down to the board is: a) What coach they employ to get the best out of thoise resources, and b) The strategy and constraints within which that coach has to work in.

Absolutley Mike. I have no problem with financial prudence and living within your means, and like you I believe our biggest problem in recent years is how we spent the finite amount of money we had. If you haven't got much cash, then how you spend it becomes so much more important. Too many poor decisions in the top flight led to our relegation and we have compounded those errors during our sojourn down here.

Surely Crouch would have been lobbying to replace Poortvliet, as he met with Lowe earlier in the day that Poortvliet resigned. I think he was up for replacing Poortvliet with someone other than Wotte, but after Wotte had been given the job I have only heard Crouch say Wotte should be supported until the end of the season (happy to be corrected, mind). This bit in the Echo makes it clear he would have liked someone else to replace Poortvliet, and it also says Wotte should be supported once Wilde and Lowe went with that decision. http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/saints/news/4078741.Crouch__Why_I_proposed_changes/ As far as I am aware I have not heard Crouch say he was going to replace Wotte once he was in situ. But you're right about the Lowe threat hovering over Pearson, absolutely terrible considering we were in the midst of a relegation battle.

I think we would have been playing more youngsters this season than last, both out of financial necessity and also because I think some might actually be better (or at least a better long term bet). I have no problem with youngsters playing their part int he team, but very rarely does a whole team of youngsters perform from the off, and certainly not in the way they Lowe would have liked/hoped for and how he described it at numerous times this season. The whole concept of Poortvliet with a team of youngsters has been found severely wanting, yet we blundered on for 28 games before things came to a head. As far back as last March, Pearson was clear that the youngsters would play a part this season, but I think everyone had what is currently happening in mind (supplementing a spine) as opposed to the mass blooding (and resultant failure) witnessed under Poortvliet.

You're clutching at straws somewhat if you're trying to include Gillett as one of the yougsters. He may be an Academy product, but that does not automatically follow he is young:rolleyes:. 23 is no spring chicken in the football world. Lallana has the quality to break through, whether he would have played as many games is something I accept, but then again I'm not overly sure playing so much is right for his development at this stage, but happy to include him as one of the youngsters. DMG is a marmite player & along with James means we're playing 3 youngsters on a regular basis. Nothing wrong with 3 youngsters in the side particularly if they're augmenting a strong spine, but quite a bit of a change from what Poortvliet was doing.

Gillett is 23, so we can dismiss him for a start. We are using three in the current line up; Lallana (who came through last season and was always going to feature), David McGoldrick (who I think is one of our weakest players) and James (who in an experienced back 5 is looking much more protected and stronger as a result). This team can easily handle three youngsters, it was the 6/7/8/9 that was causing us problems!!!!!! And that has been the main change for me.

That's 95 for Crouch now!!!!!!!!!!

It's more than just two players. Wotte deserves alot of credit for turning things around, so to suggest it's just down to two players and being a better man manager is probably doing him a great disservice. He has made many changes and should be commended not only for doing that, but for being able to bring them off. We're a shadow of the side we were under Poortvliet.

So how have they changed then?

Of course it does LOL. Just typed in Lowe and got 275 returns for you, Crouch got 94 returns, 17 for Corbett, Cowen 12, Richards 13, shareholder 21. You've never been shy in the past;)

But surely there's more to it than that, not least you're use of the plural strikers, as opposed to playing one up top. We're alot more 4-4-2 (even if one sits whilst the other goes forward). We've heard about changes in training, fitness regimes, preparation etc etc etc. Then of course there's the change with regards the more experiencesd players and the idea of building a team around them (i.e. the spine so many of us were crying out for). Goals are certainly a must in this game, but we have improved just as much (maybe more) at the back. We're a much tighter unit, not trying anything fancy, simple and people doing their jobs. There has been a massive sea change over the last few weeks.

I think you've misread the thrust of his argument. Surely he is saying, do let the last three results gloss over the reasons why we found ourselves in a pickle in the first place i.e. IMHO we would do well to remember why we ended up staring relegation and administration in the face, so as not to repeat those stupid mistakes. Or have I misread what you're trying to say?

Just go back to the OS archives ref all the stuff about Total Football, then look at the sides he was putting out, the tactics and formation, use of youngsters, one up top, flexible 4-3-2-1 to 4-1-2-1-1-1 to 4-2-2-1-1 teams, believing the youngsters can't play with the old players, technique over physique, the fluid movment, wingers, etc etc etc and you'll get Poortvliet's brand of Total Football and the Dutch experiment Thankfully Wotte has adopted a more "British" approach to the Championship and it is paying dividends. Wotte has gone on the record a number of times about the changes he has implemented and the results are there for all to see. If you can't see this and think we are playing the same style as under Poortvliet, then I'm not really sure what to say. So what do you put the change in fortunes down to then??? Just a mere change at the top???

Have you seen any recent games, have you read any recent interviews, have you not picked up on little snippets on here or in the media, have you noticed the line ups, the tactics etc etc etc. Fortunately, the only thing Dutch about the current set up is the nationality of the Coach (I don't think he's manager). We're back to a much more traditional style, two up front, a good blend of young and old, keeping it simple and people knowing their jobs et al. Are you really saying that Wotte has just taken over and maintained the status quo, in which case how do you account for the mini revival under his leadership?