um pahars

So, do I take it that we should all just ignore everything off the field, not post or say anything about those in charge and just get down to SMS and support the team???? If so, I'm sure there used to be a poster on here called Guided Missile who would always have a pop at McMenemy, Wilde, Crouch, even Lowe about the interest rates recently etc etc etc. I'm sure recently he even started a thread about who to blame for non promotion. Always an antagonistic source of lowering morale LOL. Maybe this post should be forwarded to him to read:rolleyes::rolleyes:

What witty little ditty can you two come up with that I can call Lowe????? Anything to humour me when I remember the fact he has personally drawn a fair few million from the Club (and that's personally drawn, as opposed to the tens of millions his poor decisions cost the Club)????? Maybe something to honour his share of the 600 grand pay off in 2006 (a pay off that was effectively because he got the elbow). Lovely jubbly. Come on, with the wit of you two combined it shouldn't be that difficult.

The return of Lowe, the introduction of a revolutionary coaching set up and the failure to win at home has brought with it a wave of apathy that has swamped the Club. People can't even be ar55ed to go anymore, so the thought that they would then come and protest instead is not that logical. It has just got to a stage where many thousands have clearly giving up and I worry that even a modicum of success will not mean they will all come back. Get out of the habit, lose the passion and it might be hard to reignite. We can argue all we like about whether it is 100's or 1000's who are staying away from Lowe, but the cold, hard facts of the matter is that attendances are massively down and with every match we edge closer to administration. How I wish there were more uber fans out there like you or I [sic] who would go week in, week out whatever the results, but I also wish for other fantasies that aren't going to happen. We need to get real, accept our hard core is somehwere around 12,000 -13,000, and look at ways at seeing if there is any way of getting those missing punters back through the door. We can slag the stayways all we like, but for many they come for reasons other than blind loyalty. For them the Club has to deliver something and to date it has been wanting. 13,000 of us deliver our side of the bargain regularly, perhaps the Club should start to deliver something. The failings at the Club have very little to do with the grass roots supporters (stayaways or not) and so much to do with those who have the power to change things, be they players, manager or directors.

I think people are very tolerant with this young lad, and very tolerant in general to all the youngsters whoare trying their best. If there is any criticism regards Gobern, it's aimed more at Jan for throowing him at the deep end. That's not the young lads fault.

Did the Stock Exchange boys give you a bell when you were peddling your bullshiy7t propaganda that the Change of Control clause would be invoked and we would have to replay the 20million+ outstanding on the loan notes, in the run up to the EGM??? I'll await their call:rolleyes::rolleyes: If the FSA logged on to this board, then judging by your little whinge our crowds would go below 10,000 as most on here would be banged up. Get over yourself.

Come on, don't be so naive. Whoever came in would have had to work within our financial constraints, but there is a massive degree of latitude to what another manager could have done. We've brought in something like 11 or 12 players, so there must have been some latitude in there somewhere. After that a different manager could employ different tactics, different formations and have different priorities. To suggest we were forced down this path and there were no alternatives, no other ways of building a team and no other way of getting the team to play is ridiulous. In fact, the path we have gone down was one that was specifically chosen as a way of getting us out of the mess we find ourselves in. The fact that, to date, it hasn't paid off is a seperate argument, but it was a conscious decision to follow this strategy. Pearson was a dead man walking as soon as Lowe and Wilde got through the door. Those in the SOS group were aware of this months before Lowe and Wilde even called an EGM. Pearson was happy to work under the new regime and when he went off on holiday to Malta he actually thought he had the job. Lowe and Wilde didn't want him, so they activated a release clause, which, however you dress it up, is getting the elbow. JP (and othose who appointed him) must take a large share of responsibility for our poor perfromances. And you highlight perhaps one of the fundamental problems with those running our Club at the moment i.e. the problem of looking beyond the action of purely cutting costs. It is totally impossible to prove, but John's wages must be something like 1,000 on the gate, and you have to wonder what our gates would be like had he still been here, scoring and winning us some games???? Of course releasing him saved us money, but is it a false economy if the team suffers as a result of his departure and attendances suffer as well???? Methinks that some in SMS (wink, wink) thought that David McGoldrick was a ready made replacement. And that could have been all that was needed. They may well have had to make similar decisions about cost cutting, but who was to go, who was to come in and perhaps more importantly, how we were going to play,were all up for grabs (of course there are no guarantees it would hav panned out better, but there is/was an alternative). The problem is that as honourable as it is is to have a long term plan, you also have to balance it with the short term, because failure this season will render any long term plan obsolete. I think you seriously underestimate the consequences of relegation to Division 3. I think it would almost definitely result in us going into Adminsitration and the Club being turned over even more savagely than when we were relegated from the top flight. We also heard a similar line last time around in that we were told at least we would win more games in this division!!!! Hasn't really gone to plan (wth the exception of the play off season). I'm not sure about another excuse to batter Lowe, because even if some people think relegation last time was nothing to do with him, having it happen to you twice in the space of a few years might be slightly harder to brush aside. I'm not sure I agree. I'm not advocating it (just yet), but sometimes a change of manager can bring about a change in direction. Some other things would need to change as well, but I maintain our cards haven't been fully dealt yet and there is still much within our own power that we can do to dictate how the remainder of the season pans out.

How can you comment on the negativity at the games if you haven't been going to the games????? That's as bad as Sad Old Git complaining about fans staying away when he's posting at 3:05pm every Saturday. FYI, I think you'll find the atmosphere and support has been really good this season from those who have attended the matches and despite only one win, I can't remember too much negativity. I'm sure many are unsure/wary/ or against the current experiment, but that hasn't transformed itself into negativity at the matches, which is a tribute to those who are still going. (LMFAO at the thought that we're more negative than oter sets of fans!!! There's nothing between us all, football fans are the same up and down the country:rolleyes::rolleyes:).

I do fear that for many his return and the sacking of Pearson was probably the final straw (when added to all the other reasons). Totally unable to prove either way, but the plain fact is that we are missing quite a few thousand fans. I'm sure the home form and lack of success is by far the biggest factor for the fallen gate, but there is nothing at the Club to galvanise and get the fans to rally around. I like the way Jan conducts himself sometimes, but I don't really find him inspirational nor someone the fans can rally around. There's no real afinity with any player (except Killer who isn't featuring), and then of course both Wilde and Lowe have absolutely no chance of convincing the fans to follow them. Therefore we desperately need some good wins on the pitch if gates are to rise, but I struggle to see us doing this on a regular basis with the current team and tactics. And if 17,000 is no longer the break even figure, I fear we will be going down the pan quicker than many fear. I'm sure there will be a firesale in January and the stayaway fans will get the blame, conveniently forgetting that there are two sides to this relationship and those in charge have seriously underperformed on their part!!!

Indeed he probably would have as he openly pleaded for Pearson to be kept on. Considering what we've ended up with that would have been a very good decision. Would he??? Would he??? Really???? Oh OK????? Apart from your first bit about keeping Pearson, the rest if this is just mumbo jumbo and supposition. Is someone feeding you these stories in an attempt to justify their failed position? Keeping high earners, buying new players, shutting down the Academy, Pearson wouldn't work within the new structure, Pearson wouldn't play youngsters etc etc etc. All stories perpetuated by Lowe & Cowen in an attempt to try and convince us that they had no option but to go dwon this route. Rewind back a few months and try and fit that bullshi78t in with what pearson was saying about the future. "A lot of my background is working with youngsters. I worked with the England youth teams for three years and I see the Academy as a massive part of the club. I have worked at clubs where the academy and first-team are separate entities and not integrated at all and those clubs are the poorer for it. If you put the right effort into recruiting and developing the right players then it can save the club a lot of money on transfer fees." And as for whether he knew of and/or could deal with the financial situation we find ourselves in, I think the answer to the following question also makes it clear that he was aware of our predicament (and willing to work within some tough parameters). "Is it hopeless or are there ways we can improve the team to get back in the Premier League? Can we do it through wheeling and dealing or the youth team or is it hopeless?" "It will be a combination. The reality is there will be comings and goings, there is no doubt about that. Economics will play a part and there will be some natural wastage as players come to the end of their contracts. Then it will be a case of finding players who fit the bill. We need a side capable of getting success but which fits in with the financial situation. But we are not going to be splashing fortunes on players. Even in the short time I have been here, I have been looking to see if we can get players on loan. Short-term is the immediate priority but I am looking long-term too."

Shilton by a country mile. Niemi (and Fowers) were also good, but here is a guy who got 125 caps for his country with 49 of them made whilst playing for us. (Those 125 caps were also despite sharing the position with Clemence for most of the 70's, with Clemence also winning 61 caps). Shilton's international career spanned 20 years!!!!

But that is a totally different (and reasonable) response to our current predicament. Just saying, "Look at Watford, Charlton and Norwich, they're shiy7 as well, and they aint got Lowe" is just ridiculous, irrelevant and lame. The one solution that might be there short term is to relieve the manager of his position. A new guy may have to work within the same constraints and with the same playing squad, but may be able to squeeze better results (he might start with two up front at home for starters!!!!!!!).

Nah, nah, nah, nah, nah.:-({|= You sound like a whingeing five year old, it's not fair, it's not fair LMFAO. (It's a shame you didn't have the balls to call Crouch & McMenemy those names to their faces, but of course you had that last minute meeting up north:rolleyes:)

ZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz On the thread about how many points from the next five games I put down 5 points. http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?p=87639&highlight=points#post87639 We've managed 4 points from four games to date, so rather than being negative, a member of the doom and gloom faction or a pessimist, I reckon you should really call me a realist. I think we'll get a draw on Saturday (you of course can predict a 5-0 stuffing of the Royals if you want to).

But just because others are struggling dosn't mean we have to just accept it when we are in the same position. Not only is that pretty defeatist, negative and pessimistic, but it also conveniently ignores the reasons why we find ourselves in such a predicament. The reason why we are struggling is down to our "revolutionary coaching set up" underperforming and nothing to with the position Watford, Norwich or Charlton find themselves in. We will be the masters of our own success or failure. I am fully aware that football is a great leveller and that over a season you get what you deserve. I could just as easily retort that we should be doing a Wolves, Birmingham or Reading, but that would be just as pathetic as their status, form and position is just as irrelevant to our own situation.

The attendance cost is twofold, direct and indirect. Firstly, there is the direct effect of those that won't go whilst he is in charge. I have no idea how large that figure is, but I fear your estimates are on the low side. Secondly, there are those who aren't going as an indirect result of his major decisions, i.e. his choice of manager and the "revolutionary coaching set up" which has underperformed. I'm not sure that I agree that we can again use the financial constraints as an excuse for why we can't initiate change on the managerial front. The manager should be the most important person at any football club and we should endeavour to move heaven and earth to make sure we have the best person that we can at the Club (of course within the obvious constraints of money, reputation and status). Altough there may well be a cost involved in changing the manager, my increasing fear is that the cost of not changing the manager will be horrendous!!!! As others pointed out on another thread, one of the characteristics of a good manager is his ability to get the best from the playing assets he has. I am an advocate of stability, but as was the situation with Wigley, not stability for stablity's sake. There may well be a time shortly when we may have to act on the managerial front to arrest our decline.

Why do you persist with such a poor line of argument??? Just because other teams may or may not have the same problems with Chairman, managers, players or luck doesn't mean it is acceptable for us as well. I take no solace from the fact that Watford or Norwich or Charlton are suffering. Of course we have no divine right to grace the top flght, so to suggest that people think that and to suggest that we should be happy because there are other teams who are also in the mire is such a tired and pathetic line.

He certainly has potential, and like the fact that he is a tall fella. Got rave reviews against Preston, andd has showed flashes of his ability since. However, IMHO he isn't ready to be in the starting line up. Some players might be ready at 17, but for me Oscar should not be starting matches and it was a mistake by Jan to rush him in too early. We need to be careful with these young lads that we don't ruin them before they even start their careers.

Have to agree. It appears that Jan is learning on the job and if it's one thing we can't afford it's carrying novices on and off the pitch. Perry should surely have started and you're right, there is no way Gobern should be starting. On top of that I still despair at the formation of only having one up top at home. It's still not working. We may ge more possession as a result of having 5 in the midle of the park, but we just don't look like threatening the opposition. As far as I'm aware, the Legue don't award points for pretty football in front of the opposition's defence.

Even if you ignore some of the contentious decisions, it never ever seemed as though he was in full control of the game. It was as though he was too slow and the game was passing him by and he was struggling to keep up. He was fckuing quick to flash the red card though!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hear he has already got them!!!!!!! He would have gone in the summer had Lowe not got greedy and demanded a compensation fee from Ipswich.

Let's make our minds up!!! When people were on about this before they said it shouldn't be done as it might distrct on the pitch matters, and when it is done, people moan about how long it lasted. I held back today as wanted to give the lads my wholehearted support, but don't confuse that with tacit support for the current regime. PS Think the ref took the heat off Lowe today!!!!!!!!!

Have to say that once again this division suffers from having appalling referees. But let's not this get in the way that we lost again at home. We started like ameteurs and were like rabbits frozen in the headlights as we leth them take a 2-0 lead. Our defending was rank and they should have been four up before we pulled one back. The defence was appalling with Iwelumo running riot. Would like to know why Perry didn't start, as the middle of defence was crying out for some experience. At 2-0 down, Euell was the only player on the pitch really geeing up the lads as the rest looked dead and buried. But after we went two down, and then down to ten men we played with loads of passion and spirit. However, real chances were few and far between and although we had loads of the play I don't really think we looked like causing too much trouble. Fair play to the youngsters who battled to the end and never gave up. Not sure if we desreved a point as honestly thought they had more goalscoring opportunities than us (and looked more likely to score). Davis - 6 - A few good saves Cork - 6 - Think he was skinned for the second goal, but was OK after that Pearce - 6 - Cracking goal, but part of a defence that looked shaky Lancashire - 5 - As above, but without the goal Skacel - 6 - Got involved and mixed it, but at times looked petulant. Surman - 7 - Some good touches and centee of some good play, but did not get stuck in enough Schneiderlin - 5/6 - A bit anonymous for me Lallana - 7 - As skilful as ever and involved in all the good things. Euell - 7 - Some fighting spirit about him and tried to drive the youngsters on. Gobern - 4 - The game passed him by McGoldrick - 6 - Did some good stuff, missed a sitter, and still nt convinced Perry - 7 - Provided some xperience and battling qualities at the back Wright-Phillips - 6 - Ok, but nothing special Robertson - 5 - Not on long enough. Have to say that Wolves started brightly and looked a very good side, but when we took control of possession, they didn't really look that special. Then again with Iwelumo up front, and another forward off of him they've got the tactics right to do well in this league. Didn't think it was a sending off as the Wolves player launched himself into it just as much as Euell, but also don't think we should have had a penalty at the end (will be changing my mind when the TV replays show a two footed lunge by Euell and an obvious trip on McGoldrick). Good vocal support again from both the Northam and Itchen (with some anti Lowe/Board chants ringing around for a bit).

I doubt he will (he certainly wouldn't do it when challenged about it in 2006, nor two years later!!!). But this is a non issue. Any "personal guarantees"/"strings attached" would have to declared in the accounts.

My little source says something has definitely gone from Crouch to Lowe. Maybe you should ask why their was no response from Lowe. Is it because it doesn't suit him & Wilde as aopposed to not suiting the Club??? As for anyone else hiding up the trees??? Are they (a) just as mythical as the ones Crouch was holding out for, or (b) are they waiting for administration to befall us before picking us up for a song????? (a) Is never a solution as we can all wait for that promised white knight to come riding in (as many, inc myself, told Crouch). (b) Would be a disaster for a number of reasons, not least that we would start from Div 3, but also because it would consolidate Lowe & others as unpopular owners of our Club (which really would be the end of this Club as we know it!!!!!).

Well he wasn't clued up about this one!!!!!! It was blatant scaremongering, and as for his reasons, well of course you can ask him direct if you know him. Lowe has no personal strings attached to the loan notes (other than what he would have a normal capacity as a CEO, i.e. the loan note holders might/might not have confidence in his management).