um pahars

Just as a quick reply as I'm late for my pre match beer. This one line seems to encapsulate so much about the current problems facing the Club: And the majority of the missing support have stayed away directly or indirectly as a result of the catastrophe that has occurred under Lowe's. The missing thousands who have voted with their feet have done so as a result of Lowe's incredulous decisions this season. Rather than blame them, you should be looking at the incompetence that has made them undertake this decision. I can argue for a change in CEO, Chairman and/or manager, others can call for protests and boycotts, whilst you can dream of full houses until the end of the season, but the bare facts are that Lowe has led this Club to the precipice and in the next few weeks he may well take us over the edge. Those are the salient facts and history will be the judge of Lowe.

Fair enough, and going about recruiting his replacement in a professional manner should not constitute change at any cost. To be honest the way these two bumbled in last Spring/Summer is they it shouldn't have been done!!!!

That is not the main reason why we are in the mess we find ourselves. It certainly is one of the reasons, but it is also not the main reason (done to death elsewhere but millions off the top line, and then this seasons charade are higher up the pecking order). And because we never managed it last time shouldn't preclude us from doing it again. After all when we replaced Wigley we never got it right. Are you suggesting we should never have got rid of Poortvliet just because we didn't do it right before? Of course not. It's a pretty backward and negative argument and instead of worrying about emulating the mistakes of the past we should be trying twice as hard to get it right this time. Apart from that, I agree with quite a bit of your post above;)

I have suggested a number of compromises in reconstituting the board that included keeping Cowen and Wilde on as Non Execs, maybe even putting Richards on to the Board as a part of a wider shake up. Your argument of maintaining the status quo is hardly a compromise. Throughout your post, there is no real indication of compromise or a search for an alternative. Instead it is just a number of porr excuses as to why we shoul maintain the status quo. Now if people could start to justify why we should stick with Lowe and the benefits he brings to the Club, then they might just have the basis of a proper argument. Instead the basis of their argument is the negatives of what change might bring, which is a very backward looking and parochial way of running a business, let alone a Football Club. To cut to the chase, as I said above I would be most interested to know when you were converted to seeking to remove Lowe from this Club, because everything in the past from yourself (under your various guises) has been overly supportive of him. What has made you change your tune? Or is it a change in tack because you know at the current time supporting Lowe is untenable, and so instead the tactic is to lay down as many barriers as possible as to why he shouldn't be removed? Being honest, I think it's the latter, which is really negative and speaks volumes in itself.

Well I would counter that the next move to get them to listen would be a boycott either of matches or of season ticket renewals. If they're not going to listen to plain marches, then as you say maybe we have to entertain a different angle. I have to say your idea of all marching together and increasing attendances would arguably play into Lowe's hands who would probably just publicise the attendance figures as a show of the success of the Club under his stewardship. That said, you are never going to get the missing thousands back with a call to arms and it is ridiculous to suggest otherwise. Thousands of supporters have already demonstrated with their feet (be it directly or indirectly attributable to Lowe & the state of the Club). We have lost more supporters through the indirect actions of those running this Club in recent seasons, than we have through those who are genuinely boycotting. Once again, to try and blame the minority of supporters who are staying away on principle is massivley missing the point. Instead you should be looking at the reasons why the many thousands of supporters have turned their backs on the Club, and when you do you will see that the blame for this lies firmly in the boardroom. You seem to be attacking the sympton of the general malaise and spectacularly missing the root cause of the problem. Sorry, but your logic is twisted and you need to readdress what the root cause of the problem is before you even try to solve it. Once again you advocating maintaining the staus quo does not sound like a compromise in any shape or form. You seem to what compromise on your terms. I almost admire your sincerity, but I also know that deep down the underlying thrust of your position is to maintain the status quo and so I'm sorry but I can't take your attempts at trying to remove Lowe through increasing attendances as a serious one!!! And that's before we even get on to discuss the futility and impossibility of the task. Now of course if your desire to remove Lowe is now so profound, may I enquire as to what has changed recently for you to perform such an about turn? No sign of a compromise there then. Of course risk is inherent with change, but to the same degree we all know and realise the risk of maintaining the status quo. When we replaced Wigley, we never appointed the right man. Getting rid of Wigley was the right decision, but maybe appointing Redknapp wasn't. Would you have advocated sticking with Poortvliet just because the last time we sacked someone like Wigley we got it wrong? Of course you wouldn't, so to suggest any change would automatically mimic the mistakes of previous years is once again being extremely disenegenuoius and negative. We would endeavour to bring about change for the good. Not easy I'm sure, probably troublesome, messy and painful, but a darn sight more forward thinking that maintaining the statuis quo which is hardly a compromise. They are imaginary in that you tried to insiuate that removing Lowe would automatically result in adminsitration. You now suggest that there is no suitable altertnative (see my responses on other threads where it is rather disengenuous to suggest that no one in the entire human population couldn't undertake the job of a CEO at a middle ranking football club). And I don't doubt for one minute, much in the same way that you have throughout your posts, that those in charge will attempt to blame the supporters and conveniently forgetting the major part they (and others) have played in the downfall of this Club. Cheap, lazy and out of touch, but not at all a surprise. Once again, blame the fans. Boring and spectacularly missing the point. Whilst we moan, on here, on marches, in our armchairs or on the terraces, the real damage has been, and continues to be, done up in the boardroom. Sainst will exist in some form or another long after the current shambles have upped and left. We existed in various guises before them and we have the strength to rise again. It may take time, it may be painful but blackmailing the supporters is no way to take this Club forward. The problem is that we are going down the pan under your plan of maintaining the status quo. Given the choice no one wants administration, but that is where we are heading under the current shambles. I can see the logic, I just don't buy into your selling of it;) Attendances and support speak for themself here. No one at the Club has the ability to rally the supporters around to create a spirit of unity. You can wish it all you want, but under the current regime and your strategy of maintaining the staus quo it will never happen. Simply, it's hot air and wishful thinking. But Lowe is a busted flush. It is under his sterwardship that we have failed again. That's not being negative, it's just an honest assessment of where we are today. I happen to think that the solution is not maintaining the staus quo, but instead to try and pull together a board of unity. Include some figures who the supproters may respect, dismiss the negative and divisive forces and try and rebuild with a new boarr. If you think your idea of rallying fans in the short term is more achievable then hats off to you and I await your grand march to St Mary's behind your banner.

I have a couple of ins into the current squad & ensemble, and whilst I have heard that things are more "regimented" and "structured" than compared to under Poortvliet (but then again the Academy lad who coaches my nephew appears to know more than Jan), I don't think it is a valid comparison with regards the disciplinary side. Pearson was way, way above commanding the respect and all the things that go with it IMHO. And with regards having experience in the Championship, then I think: (a) Pearson had a much wider, broader and deeper experience of English Football, and (b) Wotte's previous experince was as a culpable part of a 28 game regime that was a complete disaster, a disaster in which he was complicit. The only comparison between the two is because of the position they both find themselves in today. Almost everything else is different (about as worthy a comparison with that of us and Charlton yesterday).

Where has anyone remotely suggested that. You need to stop twisting people's words to suit your own position. It is not difficult to consider we go out into the big wide world and recruit a salaried CEO. Thousands of companies do it on a regular basis and probably every other Football Club has done it in recent years (Off the top of my head I can think of recent(ish) changes at Derby, Everton, Liverpool, Arsenal, Chelsea, Man Utd, Charlton, etc etc etc). No one is suggesting any old then at all, and it is a rather flippant reply to try and say they were IMHO. I'm sure people could come up with a panel that could include some from the existing board, major shareholders and even influential and respected outsiders. How about Cowen, Wilde, Crouch and Bransgrove. If we can't manage to pull together an interview panel, then we really havent got a chance to keep alive. If you really believe that out in the big wide world that there is not one person who could fill the position of a CEO for a mid size football club, then I have to say you must have rather parochial view of life down here. Lowe is a busted flush and if the only reason we are sticking with him is because we don't know what the alternative is, then we might as well chuck it all in now. It's a defeatist and rather tired and flawed argument that it would not be possible to find a CEO out there to replace Lowe. It os quite frankly a rather stupid notion. Just think about this. When Lowe eventually goes, be it in two weeks or two years, how would we go about replacing him? The world will survive without Lowe and just like many other clubs, we will just have to go out and recruit someone else. The way you are reacting is as though we will have to fold and shut up shop as it will be impossible to recruit a new CEO.

Absolutely. Nothing wrong with issuing a rallying cry, a call to arms etc, but he has been poorly advised or alternatively "he doesn't get it" with the other comments. He's beginning to make a habit of it, which IMHo is somewhat worrying. With regards the march, I would have to say there was a very broad cross section of supporters, across all ages and types (e.g. scarfers, old biddy's, lads, families etc). No one group had a real monopoly, atlhough the younger element were definitely more boisterous with regards leading the march and singing the songs!!! But as for your second question, it really isn't worth bothering with. He shouldn't have said what he said, I can see no justification for it whatsoever and trying to disect it in order to give it any credibility is the wrong way to go about it IMHO.

Exactly, some, some and one or two. Hardly something to get all worked up about, as you will always a handful of people that you can point out with regards any opinion. And hardly something the manager of our Club should be using to create division and rancour. His comments were uncalled for, unnecessary and unwise.

But that is exactly the problem. None of the current cabal of shareholders have the balls nor ability to get out there and grasp the situation and run with it. So in the absence of any proactive drive from them, then maybe they need a kick up the backside to focus their minds. If the first stage of a protest march doesn't get them thinking, then I think the next step will ultimately be some sort of a boycott, be it matches this season or a season ticket boycott for next year. That might start to focus their attention and soon get them to realise that maintaining the staus quo is no forward thinking strategy. Just sitting here saying there is no alternative is a cop out, there are plenty of alternatives out there if only you have the balls and initiative to do something about it. It would be relatively simple to reconstitue our board, install an independent CEO and a Chairman who would carry soem gravitas and respect. Other companies (and Clubs) have managed it, why are we so different? To continue with a lame Board and CEO just because we don't know what is around the corner is parochial and defeatist in the extreme and is probably the worst excuse ever for standing by a failing board. I'm not really sure you do agree we need a change, because like many others, instead of really going for it, you start to put imaginary obstacles in the way, e.g. it will result in administration, what is the alternative etc etc etc. In the absence of anything to support and praise Lowe for, the easiest option is to big up the worry of disposing with him. He is a mere paid CEO who are as numerous as football managers in the industry. A slow lingering death or calling for the crash trolley both end up with the same result and arguably it might be better just to get it over and done with. This season has been a disgrace in so many ways and I'm surprised people have put up with it for so long. Rather than drag it out and start inflicting more misery on people, I can see the argument for getting it over and done with. However, my first choice would be change with faint hope that we can manage to get us out of this predicament. Carrying on as normal will only lead to the inevitable IMHO. You can believe all you want, but it will never, never happen under the current regime (which is another argument for change). I would love nothing more than full houses from here until the end of the season with the support and the money flooding in to prop up the team and the Club. But I would also love the numbers to next weeks lottery. There is nothing at the Club that could even come remotely close to engendering such support and such a spirit that would draw people back in. Lowe is a busted flush and the missing thousands will not flock back because neither Lowe, Wilde, Cowen or Wotte have the presence to make it happen.

The problem is that even the staunchest of Lowe's supporters know that there really is no way you can defend his performance since his return, hence the change in direction, the attempt to shift blame on to the supporters and the various attempts at changing the subject. Even by the poor standards Lowe set for himself when he left in 2006, he has surpassed them in this current season. He's a busted flush and everyone knows it.

I do think some people are staying away out of principle because of Lowe's return. I certainly know of a few and they are staying away out of principle. They're not overly enjoying it, but they are sticking to their principles. How many are this then extrapolates into is the unanswerable question. And then of course as you point out, there are many who are staying away as an indirect consequence of Lowe's decisions being played out on the pitch.

But that's just classic blame shifting. People shouldn't have to modify their own behaviour to take account of the pathetic behaviour of others. Instead people should focus on those causing the problems in the first instance. Address the problem.

I concur. In fact at times during the last protest those same snidey little comments were being made when McMillan was in a few photos.

Yeah, fcking bingo, because whilst I was typing my post, you came up with the classic defence of "he's opening himself up for stick". I've got you down for being better than this Delldays, please don't go on fighting those windmills, as you're certainly not Jonahesque IMHO.

I'm sure people would say, "well he's put himself in the shop window by doing this", but men twice, probably three times his age having a pop on here is a pretty wnak thing to do IMHO. In particular those who made the nasty, spiteful comments about his appearance should be fcking ashamed of themselves.

If people say that protesting and working to remove Lowe is wishful thinking, then I have to say the idea that fans will flock to support the Club in it's hour of need is even more fanciful. No one in any position of power at the Club be they Lowe, Cowen, Wilde or Wotte carry the respect nor the ability to engender a spirit of unity and togetherness. In the absence of success on the pitch, which has been found to be so wanting under Lowe's Revolutionary Coaching Structure, there is nothing left at the Club to pull the supporters together as one. Therefore unless there is a change, on or off the pitch, then this Club is going nowhere but down. Despite this Club having been through some pretty low times in recent years, nothing could have prepared us for the abject failings we have been subjected since the return of Lowe and the implementation of his Revolutionary Coaching Set Up. Without change I fear that we will just die a slow, lingering death.

I can only presume for some reason you have managed to post on the end of this thread without reading the copious insults etc in the previous pages:rolleyes::rolleyes: On top of that, there is a history of having a pop at anyone who dares raise their head above the parapet. Please don't turn into a Jonah and just go looking for a fight trying to defend the indefensible!!!!!

But I think the point is that no one is really running this. This is no clique of revolutionaries, instead he has cleverly latched on to the power of the internet and managed to kickstart it. This is now just a widespread cross section of Saints fans who are just coming together fairly spontaneously and not at all orchestrated and arranged in the sense of how many other protests are arranged. I don't think this lad has says he knows what all the problems are and I'm sure he doesn't have all the answers, but what he has done is managed to give us all a platform to get our feelings known. For the last march no one had any idea who was running it, I certainly didn't, I just knew it was a chance to get my protest noted that I was not happy with the way the Club was being run. Was I in tune with what Connor wanted, with what the old bloke we walked with wanted, who knows?? But I do know we shared a common live for our CLub and a belief that it is being run appallingly at the present moment. People aren't blindly following a 16 year old. This 16 year old has shown some balls and perseverence and he has managed to give us all a chance for us to air our grievances. If one or two wakners want to run him down then it says far more about them than it does about him, and I can honestly say I personally felt a real sense of spirit, unity and love for our Club on that last march, so i would like to thank him for at least engendering that spirit in me, something that everyone else connected to the Club has spectacularly failed to do so this season.

You don't post Jordan Orsini on that Saints List do you?? He was predicting a bloodbath, drunks fighting down the street, mini riots, swear words!!!!! and civil unrest LOL. Both of you couldn't have been further from the truth with a march attended by 1,000+ Saints fans of all ages and persuasion. It was probably the only time in a couple of years that I've felt a sense of pride, togetherness and spirit. It was also good to see that that spirit was transferred to the stands for the Swansea match. That's what makes Wotte's and many others posts ont he subject so ridiculous, in that it was feasible to protest with fervour and then support the team on the pitch with just as much passion.

I don't think much really needs to be said on this one. A few people have embarrassed themselves on this board today with their personal attacks on a 16 year old and as you quite rightly say it renders their own beliefs invalid and does indeed make them look rather foolish. Any average person with an ounce of common decency would be able to judge what is right and what is out of order on this thread. They've hung themselves today.

And if that is your opinion, then I have to say it doesn't stand up to much scrutiny!!! Whilst there is no doubt that Lowe (and whoever is in charge) is beholden to the bank, there is nothing to suggest that Barclays would not work with another CEO/Chairman without significant investment. Indeed, we have had two changes of CEO's/Chairman in the past year, both without significant investment, and Barclays have been more than happy to work with both Crouch and Lowe. Therefore your last claim that Lowe going would automatically result in administration had no basis in fact and it is a rather ludicrous opinion as well. But you have missed out a much larger number of fans who have deserted the Club through nothing more than either being disaffected, disenfranchised, fed up, felling that they're not getting value for money etc etc etc, who won't be returning unless there is a marked change in what they see on the pitch. No amount of procrastinating on here, in the Echo or on the OS will bring them back, and they are a much bigger force with regards numbers and their effect on the club's finances. Those who are protesting are a part the rump that is left. The overwhelming majority of them will still go to matches (I know I will), but the fact that even their presence may not be enough to keep our head above water brings us back to all those who no longer go. And rather than moan at the rump who still go (even if they have a good moan and protest), your time would be wiser spent working out why those who no longer come along have taken that decision, and how they can be won back. And as I and many others have said before, rather than trying to win round and change the minds of thousands of disaffected and disenfranchised fans, wouldn't it be easier for just for one or two individuals to stop behaving in a selfish manner? You can continue to blame the supporters (whether they still go or not) for the demise of this Club, but that would be missing the point. The real fact is that supporters attendance patterns, their perceptions and their reactions, are purely the direct result of the appalling way this Club has been run in recent years. This appalling leadership by a number of individuals and groups has crystallised to where we are now with into one of the most wanting regimes we have ever witnessed, both in terms of failure on the pitch and failure in the boardroom. Rather than continually blaming supporters and suggest they need to change their logical and resultant reactions, you would be much better off seeking to change the habits, actions and results of those in charge.

And nor does it show that there is any overwhelming desire from the vast majority of supporters to go into administration just so we can be rid of Lowe & co. But sadly that won't stop Frank and other misguided posters pretend that it is the case and then continue to shout about it at every opportunity in an attempt to cloud the issue and create an entirely false argument. It's exactly the same lazy and cheap shot trotted out by some who say people are only against Lowe because of his background, snobbery, fondness for hockey etc. It conveniently misses the point. A post similar to this was doen before in which posters were asked if they would accept relegation if it meant getting rid of Lowe, and the vast majority once again sadi no. It didn't stop the falsehood being trotted out again a few weeks later, so I wouldn't expect a NO vote on here to have any different effect.

And I have to say the way he hung Poortvliet out to dry is one of the reasons I haven't warmed to him (along with not delivering, but being quick to shoot from the lips as well). It appears he would sell his granny down the line!!!! And judging by Poortvliet's comments after his dismissal, it would appear that he feels the same. It's obvious that the line from the Club is that Wotte is his own man, a fresh start and he shouldn't be blamed for what happened in the past, but this attitude and the way Wotte was quick to rubbish Poortvliet's tactics etc, when he himself was in it up to his neck is rather shoddy. As has been pointed out, the Revolutionary Coaching Set Up was interchangeable, seamless, all helping each other and no fixed boundaries. Wotte and Poortvliet appeared as a double act down the pub, at the AGM, after match press conferences and debriefs and he was involved in transfers in and out (e.g. he recommended offering Dyer a new contract). So to try and distance himself from his involvement with the Revolutionary Coaching Set Up is somewhat tacky and gives me concerns about his integrity.

Their directors recently put in something like £14,000,000+ which I imagine brings with it a certain degree of respect and gratitude. Now if Lowe, Wilde and/or Crouch were to put that sort of money into the Club, then I'd imagine we would look on them in a slightly more positive light.