um pahars

Got to this point and gave up. If only it was one poor performance :rolleyes::rolleyes: Can we have a smiley for "head in the sand" please.

Whilst I understand your sentiment, I do think the problem of finding an alternative manager is somewhat easier than establishing a fully fledged democracy in a country ravaged by conflict and ethnic, tribal & religious divisions. Keeping Pearson would have been a good idea, so I don't buy the line that there is no other alternative out there. Nor do I accept that lack of money forces us to persevere with this hair brained scheme. Indeed, not to stop this folly would be a false economy of epic proportions. I don't reckon it would cost much to pay Jan & co off, and I also think that what is needed is a change of direction, not necessarily a wholesale change in personnel. Some shrewd loan signings should be possible in January and if necessary then maybe we should trade in some of our talent to fund some new additions. I just can't accept that we have no alternative than to sit back, accept our fate and either pray this all comes off, or we die a slow, painful death.

Spot on. Just because we're skint, then it doesn't automatically follow that we have to employ someone who is clearly our of their depth.

I would be 2nd behind you in the queue, and looking over my shoulder I reckon there would be plenty more in line. My football club would cease to exist if this happened and I would be only too happy to support an AFC Southampton as an alternative.

Exactly, and if a couple of thickos like you and me can spot it so easily, then it's no wonder what proper CCC managers can suss us out so easily!!!!!!!! Total Football, my fcckucikng ar5543e

No worries. And although an animated manager may not be everyones cup of tea, at one point I was willing to go and nut Poortvliet and tell him to get his hands out of his pockets and start showing some passion on the sidelines. He was as lame as what was out on that pitch. And about as inspring as Captain Mainwaring's briefings!!!!!

I don't think they were particularly good, more that we were particularly shocking!!!!! As for your second point, I think you're spot on, as they had done their homework, pressed us and rendered us totally impotent. Once again, we were totally incapable (or is it unwilling) to change our shape and try something different. Did their keeper make a save???

If I see any of those players out tonight, then I think I'll be chinning the fccukers, let alone booing them. If they take the money, then they should be prepared to take the stick. I've had a fcculking gut full of all this pussy footing around, particularly when he's on the OS telling us how happy he is with his performances and how he's turned the corner. Fccujk off has he. And if by sheer chance Jan Poortvliet is having tapas at Langkawi, then I'll be inserting the chicken satay up his ar553. Stop blaming the long suffering fans and a have a fukkucing closer look at what's making them all get so wound up!!!

Oh fcccukk didn't realise they were playing Donny. I suppose the best result for us would be a Donny win!!!!!

So we're back to blaming the fans again. Bravo, nickh, fcckuing bravo.

I think that is because this time Lowe is intrinsically linked to the Poortvliet appointment and the underlying strategy. An admission that Jan has failed would inevitably be a wider admission of failure on the part of Lowe, something which I very much doubt he would face up to, particularly at this stage of his current tenure.

Hardly a ringing endorsement for Lowe though!!!! I would be up for getting him (and Jan) out and bringing in someone fresh. Anyway, I'll see you later tonight I believe!!!!

We own a part and we lease a part.

Did you see him play today????

False economy me up.

I don't think he would have sacked him because: a) I honestly don't think we would be in this position under Pearson, b) I don't think he would have brought in some of the players Jan has (Gasmi WTF??) c) I don't think we would have seen such dire performances (particularly at home) d) I don't think we would have played such one dimensional and predictable football.

McGoldrick is also not a kid. Forest had a load of youngsters, as have many other teams. We also took a conscious decision to get in youngsters on loan, when we could have got some experience in. Our squad is actually not that bad, certainly not promotion chasers, but then again not one that should roll over and get spanked at home by Forest. Make no mistake, this should have been something like 4-1 to them. A new manager could play a different formation, could motivate the players better, could wheel and deal in January. The notion that there is no alternative to Jan is fccuking head in the sand thinking.

In which case, then Lowe has to go as well.

The bit about resources is boll ox. If you have a look at our squad, then you will find some decent players. Certainly comparable to many in this division. Granted we haven't got a decent striker on our books (but then again some of that is down to Jan), but we do have at least an average squad. Apart from Earnshaw, I couldn't tell you one Forest player, but they pi545ed all over us today. We could have lost 5-1 it was that bad. I think Jan is out of his depth big time.

When anyone says we play attacking and exciting football, I will refer them to this game. When anyone mentions Total Football, I will refer them to this game. When anyone says we are making progress, I will refer them to this game. Make no mistake, this was no fluke result, this was no one off poor performance or a bolt out of the blue, this was plainly total and utter rubbish. Another one dimensional set up which was not delivering. Some of these players aren't that bad, but the way we set up and the way we were playing is just appalling!!!!! Davis - 6 - Three very good saves that kept the score down. James - 3 - Offered nothing. Perry - 5 - Tried his best, but was surrounded by players not performing. Pearce - 2 - Looked nervous and always suspect. Skacel - 5 - Tried his best, but eventually gave up Euell - 5 - He is not a right winger, HE IS NOT A RIGHT WINGER Surman - 4 - Overrun by Forest's midfield Cork - 4 - Overrun by Forest' midfield Holmes - 5 - Tried his best, btu the very fact we were one dimensional and trying to play everything through him meant he was oon snuffed out. Lallana - 5 - So skilful and silky, but Forest had him sussed and kept him from hurting them. McGoldrick - 0 (zero) - A waste of a shirt. Subs : Wright Phillips - 5 - Tried his best, but back to normal Gasmi - -5 (minus 5) - made Ali Dia look good. Didn't have a clue, did not look as though he knew where he was playing or what he was doing.

I think wages would be a big problem for him, but that's not to say there aren't other experienced players out there who we could pick up on a loan (or a free) who we could afford.

You've obviously never heard of proxy votes then (as mentioned in your own little cut and paste). Thanks for another laugh and chuckle at your expense over the last few days watching you thrash around, as once again you're taking about stuff you're really not that sure about. At least caveat things if you're not exactly sure, or say you're open to being persuaded, but please stop showng yourself up (methinks you're confusing (a) buy outs & then companies taking private with (b) shareholders voting to to delist!!!) How about the following notices outlining recent delistings from AIM: The De-Listing In accordance with Rule 41 of the AIM Rules, the Company has today notified the London Stock Exchange of the De-Listing, which is conditional upon the consent of not less than 75 per cent. of votes cast by Shareholders in a general meeting. The Resolution to cancel admission to trading on AIM requires the approval of 75 per cent. of those present and entitled to vote at the meeting or voting by proxy. If approved, it is anticipated that trading in the Ordinary Shares on AIM will cease at close of business on 22 May 2008, with cancellation on AIM taking effect at 8.00 a.m. on 23 May 2008. Delisting from AIM In accordance with AIM Rules, it is a requirement that any delisting from AIM must be approved by not less than 75 per cent. of Shareholders voting in General Meeting. Accordingly, the notice of General Meeting set out on page 7 of this document contains a Special Resolution to approve the application to the London Stock Exchange for cancellation of admission of the Company’s shares on AIM. If the Resolution is approved, it is expected that cancellation of dealings will take effect from 7.00 a.m. on 22 December 2008. HTH

Not me!!!!! I pointed out a while back that my little moles inside SMS were saying how big a part Hockaday plays, and how he has Lowe's ear big time. And just as Lowe demanded a "transfer fee" for Webster in the summer, I reckon that if it is Hockaday they want, then Lowe would be hanging on for a good price. Not just because he always does, but maybe because this time he wants to price Hockaday out of the job as he thinks he is such an integral part (and maybe even our next manager;)). A pi5s5ed off Hockaday may not be a good thing, but maybe the sweetener has been an "I'll see you alright next season" LOL.

Methinks you should try and read what is said, before you go and make yourself look even more of a fool than you did last night. You're now even arguing against yourself and inventing something called a half season rule LMFAO.:rolleyes:

And that is one of my main problems with Jan, in that he continues with a system even when we do not have the players to play it. Without natural wingers, he put square pegs in round holes in an attempt to persevere with the only system he would appear to know.