um pahars

I quite agree, as those that are against someone for no other reason than because they are posh/hockey loving/a snob/ruddy cheeks (delete or add as applicable) are themselves no more than inverted snobs. I wouldn't be so naive with regards Jan, he's also played the "skint" card along with the "youngsters are tired" card. Now of course one mans bulsh17t is another mans honesty, but .............. We haven’t been lucky in all the games We go with a young team because we have not the money to do it another way. We may have to change a couple of players because some players are tired physically or mentally. We will have to make some changes because I think even the young players are not capable of playing three games in a row It needs a little bit of time But with regards the honesty and effort of the youngsters, I think you would struggle to find one poster on here who has activley criticised the effort and integrity of them (although McGoldrick has polarised opinions!!!), and it is great to see them putting the effort in (and getting a great result on Saturday). However, with the downside being so massive, I see nothing wrong with people having (and expressing) a view on our progress.

Oh no!!!!!!!! That was just terrible all round. Thinking they could court and influence opinion by entering into subtefuge on here. Then claiming it was all a storm in a teacup etc etc etc. One of the most misguided, foolish and quite frankly insulting episodes in recent years. Cowengate me up :smt119:smt119

And of course you have these quotes from Pearson a few months back which hardly make him out to be a dinosaur and backward looking when it comes to youth. "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."

Crouch didn't sit with the fans when he was Chairman of the Club. And Lowe should be sat in the Director's box representing our Club when at matches.

Totally agree, hence my long held grudge against Adrian Heath and Everton (mind you the Everton one started when Bailey signed for them and has never gone away since).

And there are also bigoted posters on here who reckon everything that Lowe does is completely right. Then of course you have the vast majority of posters on here who judge people in a rational and logical manner on the basis of what they see, feel and know (not what people tell them to think!). Other people's view on the situation and the opinion they espouse may not be the same as yours, but that's football for you (and nowadays what goes on in the boardroom has a direct impact on what happens on the pitch, so the two are inextricably linked). Sadly, too many on here try to pigeonhole people and find hidden agendas behind personally held views (e.g. "you only hate Lowe cos he's posh").

What makes it even sweeter for me is the fact that Alan Irvine used to play for the team I hate most. Everton of the early 80's!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Payback (of sorts)

Doesn't matter what their take on the game was, just look in the scorebook. We were probably due a gritty win (and if this wasn't that, then we've still got it up our sleeves)

Oh, it's the fans fault once again:rolleyes: As many others have said, many times before, the support at St Mary's has been really good, all things considered (i.e. one league win). We haven't had much to cheer about, but the Northam and the resettled Itchen haven't been shy in supporting the team. There has been no widespread booing, no widespread attacks on the youngsters, no widespread attacks on Jan and no widespread attacks on Lowe & co. Of course numbers could be better, but then again there are 13,000 more Saints fans at SMS for each home game than there were at Preston yesterday. Do you go to SMS, because if you do you have a totally differnt perception of what happens each week to many on here

He was certainly much more upbeat on the Solent interview after the game than he has been for some recent games. I was actually beginning to feel sorry for him as he sounded so demoralised, so I'm really glad to hear him being much more upbeat and just being happy. Hopefully he slept well last night and the result will rejuvenate his bateries.

I must have blinked and missed Chorley's £10 infommercial. Comparing posts on this site to a General Election is somewhat deviating from the realms of reality. If anyone was seriously swayed or alienated because of what is written on here, then I have to question the make up of that person. This isn't a forum that sublminally or even sperliminally influences people. This is noddy, nerdy iternet message board read by a small percentage of Saints fans and contains a myriad of opinions, information and rubbish. We have the pro Lowes, the anti Lowes, the ambivalent Lowes, the pro Crouch's, the anti Crouch's, the pro McGoldrick, the anti McGoldricks ad nauseum (with a good combiantion of them as well). The one thing I would agree with you is that we do appear to have the extremes of all views on here, but that is more to the nature of internet forums and how people express themselves on them, which is very often so different than real life. But cutting to the chase, chasms have not been created by supporters. Sadly we have been the recipients of some very poor management. Chasms have been created by those who have been in charge over recent years, from Lowe, through, Wilde, Crouch, Hone etc and back to Lowe who have all mismanaged this Club to some degree in recent years. PS I must also have blinked when you posted a similar attack on those creating division by having a pop at Crouch, Pearson and McMenemy earlier this year.

Don't tempt fate!!!!! I'd probably settle for a draw next week after todays result.

Excellent all round. Watford losing, Norwich losing, Charlton losing, out of the bottom three. To come back from 2 goals down is a great effort. Well done fellas.

The only bright side is Charlton getting hammered at home (downside of that is that Barnsley pull away). Another free header for St Ledger, could have been 3-0

1-0 down. saints faill to clear

Free header for Preston but put wide from a corner. Then up the iother end Saints get a chance after keeper loses it

Solent saying not many chances for either side, neither side looking very sure. Smith and James not in the match yet. Surman our best player. Merington nto impressed y preston and thinks we could get something here.

Goal disallowed for Preston. Very lucky by the sound of it as we were sloppy at the back

Team is ---------------Davis----------- James Lancashire Pearce Skacel --------------Cork----------- Thomson--- Scheiderlin-----Smith --------------Surman----------- -------------Mcgoldrick--------- Seem to be holding our own, not many chances for either sie with the ame being played in the middle of the park. Surman outstanding accoridng to merrington

Team is ---------------Davis----------- James Lancashire Pearce Skacel --------------Cork----------- Thomson--- Scheiderlin-----Smith --------------Surman----------- -------------Mcgoldrick---------

Agreed, he played really well midweek.

I think that you: a) Firstly pay too much homage to a few people who mainly post on noddy, nerdy internet message board!!!!!! The opinions of those you have named (including myself) are no more valid or influential than any other on here. and, b) Secondly, you seriously underestimate (if not insult) the intelligence of Saints fans if you think they are swayed by the views of a few loudmouths. People make their own minds up on these things and many have never heard of this site, let alone the losers you're trying to balme it all on. Get in the real world and you'll find that the pro and anti Lowe divide is just as evident out there. He's a marmite figure that's for sure and he builds the chasms himself (so feel free to stop laying the blame at the doors of others).

I said what was damning was the dates and the fact that he was signed well after Gray had left, which would indicate to me that the push for signing Delgado originated with someone other than Gray i.e. If it was Gray's choice, then I would have imagined that the deal would have been put on hold as soon as he was sacked. Why would you continue with signing a player who was the choice of someone who would no longer play any part in the Club's future??? The decision to finally sign Delgado was certainly not Gray's as he had left three weeks earlier, and WGS has always said he was never involved, so just who was pushing this deal through???

There was no £5m kitty:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: There was no £5m warcest:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: Hone revelaed this a couple of weeks in: "Our supporters had been led to believe that there was a war chest with funds set aside to acquire players. We have spoken to George Burley and he didn't know what the budget was - he had no idea. It became clear there was none." Just as Lowe did when he signed Rasiak for a couple of million on a four year deal, the signings were funded on debt with payments structured into the future. We were to be run as a "Quasi Premiership" Club for that second season whoever was in charge. The very fact that you can't even get the starting point right just about renders everything else you have to say on this topic as irrelevant.

No, nothing definitive that I would rely 100% on. I could have a guess (which being honest would be no different to many have already said on here), but I wouldn't say that my guess wouls be any different than others on here. I just don't know exactly what charges have been placed on various assets and who is where in the pecking order. My gut feel (on the many areas of this) would be: 1. There is no way the stadium or other assets could be hived off & saved, or sold, just because the ownership is with one of the subsidiaries. The PLC would go into Administration and that is the overriding parent of all the companies and so they would all be consumed by the event as well. 2. We own the Stadium, but we owe Norwich Union something like £22m on the loan notes we took out with them to finance it. There is a securitisation agreement where they get their money first from season ticket sales. However, the overiding issue relating to the stadium (and other properties totalling over £30m) is that they are subject to charges held by both Norwich Union and Barclays. This means that these assets cannot be sold without the consent of Barclays & Norwich Union (although it can get very contentious). It is similar to a mortage on a house. So I think even the administrator may not be able to sell these assets without the permission of Barclays and Norwich Union.