um pahars

Just being totally honest, I have never rated him and after last night I am still of the same opinion. That's not being fickle just being honest of how I see him as a player. Would love to be made to eat humble pie (as I have had to on other occasions, notably saying Shearer misses too many one on ones), but just don't think I will be doing so. I was worried when people were saying he was our best player pre season against lower league opposition, because for me that was an indication of how poor the others must have been.

Exactly what the group who I went with were saying. The atmosphere and exprience was similar and the calibre of football was similar. By that I mean whenever I saw reserve games I always noticed there was alot of skill on show, alot of good passing, but ultimately everyone was a bit raw, it never ever came to much, players just tried to do that little bit too much (probably trying to impress), there were alot of basic errors and it was a sort of pinball football.

We all wondered whether it was down to stamina and the youngsters not having fully developed yet???? Or was it a mental thing and they were just drained??? Or was it that Ipswich stepped up a gear???? Don't now what caused it, but it was really obvious to everyone around us.

I think he's a great player and he would be in my team every week. It's just I wouldn't play him at left back!!!!!!!! There was a period in the second half where he was constantly beaten, gave the ball away and was like a rabbit in the headlights. I actually felt for him tonight as he is being played out of position and it's doing him no favours at all.

We were very lucky to get a point tonight. Very lucky indeed. With the exception of Lallana who looked quality every time he touched the ball, I have to say the rest of the team looked very poor. Outmuscled, outfought and outthought for long periods of the game. I am very worried about our defensive frailties and at times Ipswich were just walking straight through us. We looked good in patches, but sadly these were few and far between and never really led to anything. For the majority of the game I saw nothing that looked like total football and there were long periods in the second half that were dire. With not much to cheer me up on the pitch, I have to say off the pitch was worse. For long periods the atmosphere was dead and with about 13,500 Saints fans there it was fairly obvious why!!!!!! Tonight was a very sad night for me. As for the team: Davis - 7 - Some very good saves that kept us in the game (and was ulucky with the first goal). James - 4 - Looked uncomfortable (did he get outmuscled for their second goal) Cork - 5 - Looked good, but still very raw Perry - 5 - Didn't really do much that I can remember Surman - 3 - And that's only because he scored. the poor fela is not a left back and was given a torrid time. Dyer - 4 - Dire Wotton - 6 - Tried to put himelf about it and tried to lead the team Gillett - 4 - No surprise when he was substituted Lallana - 8 - A class above. Very skilful and capable player. The only one who looks as though he can play total football. McGoldrick - 5 - Won alot of headers, but just did nothing else John - 6 - Held the ball up as much as possible, but everyone else was playing a different game. Scheiderlin - 5 - Game passed him by Pekhart - 6 - Looked hungry and sharp when he came on Wright- Phillips - 5 - Never got in the game Sorry if that's pessimistic, just how I saw it. The lads certainly gave their all, of that I have no doubt, but too many of them are just not able to cut the mustard for me.

That's an interesting comment, particularly considering I have yet to see anyone mention that player morale isn't good at the moment. On the contrary, even though many are unsure about the merits of the current set up, I think we can all see that the team are playing with gusto and actually look as though they're busting a gut. I'm sure they're not overly happy with losing 4 out of 5 games (as would any professional), but they all certainly seem to be enjoying the experience and giving 100%. But anyway don't let that get in the way of just making stuff up.:toimonster:

The Hey Ho was actually used to infer that this was an entirely seperate area. Something we could debate elsewhere, but here I was focussing on why Crouch was the architect of our financial downfall (not) as opposed to the merits (or not) of Hone carrying on spending as normal. And if you're comparing a throwaway comment on a noddy internet message board with the formal quotes of a PLC Chairman and lead person of our football Club, then I have to say you must have a very faint grasp of reality!!!!! From day one Leon Crouch acquired his shareholdings to remove Rupert Lowe. If you ever spoke to Crouch from the period he bought his wedge of shares until the aborted EGM then you would realise he was never going to back Lowe. He certainly had issues with some of Wilde's team, but he was never going to back Lowe. Of course "hating" is OTT but it is there just to get the point across.

We do have a home game in hand though. Wrist slitting really should commence about this time tomorrow if we lose.

On a day to day and even a month to month basis (and even longer in reality) the PLC Board runs the show. You isolate and ignore your shareholders at your peril (as Hone ultimately found out), but the day to day business transactions and short to medium term strategy is set by the PLC Board. Wilde, Crouch and Lowe had no power as long as they all sat in seperate camps and Hone knew that. Having spoken to him at length over this time, he was running the show with no recourse to any of them (although he was also aware it would eventually come to an end). But as I said, none of the large three would call an EGM because (a) they were not working together and were never sure they would be supported, and (b) they couldn't agree what would replace it. Even at the Runnymede meeting in November every permutation for a new PLC Board put forward by each of the three shareholding groups could not be agreed on. Every time one of them put forward an alternative Chairman or CEO, one or both of the others rejected it. It was this stalemate that kept Hone in a job for so long. Up until last summer, I would have to say that the Executives ran the Club fairly well. The financial results they delivered for that first year were relatively good (if you're able to understand that in context as you seem to struggle with it). However, their decision not to implement Plan B when the paachute payments ended was, IMHO, a crass decision. Then was the time to retrench, but instead they carried on as before in the forlorn hope that SISU (or someone else) would prefer to buy a Club that looked the part. Ultimately that decision probably put a few extra million on the debt, so unsure how you condone such a strategy. Additionally, I'm still perplexed as to how you think Crouch was the main architect for all our financial woes. It just shows a serious lack of understanding of where the power has been over recent years. Crouch was an accomplice in the early Wilde days and he was one of three shareholders who fought amongst themselves and in doing so let Hone loose in the post parachute days, but his failings pail into comparison when compared to the main protagonists of recent years.

I don't like puppies;)

Theirs are on the shortlist to replace Jan;)

Hone and co maintained their position due to the power vacuum at the Club, caused by the continual infighting amongst the shareholders. As for why they never implemented Plan B immediately after the parachute payments ran out, then I have to agree that it has never been fully explained. The only answer I got from someone very senior at the Club was that the idea was to run the Club as a quasi Premership club until the January transfer window as this would make it more attractive to prospective buyers (SISU???), but if no buyer came forward by then, then the drastic cutbacks would then be made at that point (the January window as noted by Hone in his doomsday speech). I' not overly comfortable with that response for a number of reasons, but hey ho. Hone, Dulieu and co effectively had control the minute they forced Wilde to resign back in February 2007. If he hadn't have jumped then he would have been forced out as the entire PLC board (inc Crouch) were against him regarding his constant failure to secure the funding which he kept inferring was just around the corner. The upshot of this was that it meant the roud robin of shareholders was complete with: Lowe hating Wilde for instigating the EGM and removing him. Lowe hating Crouch for supporting Wilde and removing him. Wilde hating Lowe for "not running the Club correctly" Wilde hating Crouch for being party to forcing him to resign. Crouch hating Lowe for getting us relegated (and all the other stuff). Crouch hating Wilde for being a charlatan. It was this three way split and continual fighting that allowed Hone and co to remain in situ and carry on regardless. No two groupings of shareholders were prepared to align themselves together as they weren't even on speaking terms. Furthermore, any change in the boardroom might mean that one of their enemies might get their seat back, something all three of them couldn't handle, so instead they all sat back and let Hone defer Plan B. PLC boards run companies, shareholders don't. And that is exactly what our PLC board did. They ran the company as they saw fit. Hone and co knew it was only short term until the major shareholders finally sorted themselves out, but whilst the three groupings weren't prepared to work together they were left alone to do as they saw fit. They obviously had some contact with the major groupings, e.g. Hone and Crouch argued at every opportunity (regradless of whether it was in the Club's best interests), Wilde and Lowe were consulted over removing Crouch from the football board (but neither Lowe nor Wilde asked about Plan B at that time, they were more interested in sticking the knife into Crouch!!!). It was only in the Autumn of 2007 that the shareholders got together after the SISU approach focussed their minds. However, even then the animosity amongest the shareholders still shone through as noted in the Runnymede minutes with the action points including : Wilde to decide if he is prepared serve on a board with Lowe, and Lowe to decide if he is prepared to serve on a board with Wilde!!!!!!

6 points from the next two games is certainly not impossible and would mean 9 points from 7 games which is OK. We need to stiffen up the defence and be more clinical up front, which are both doable. Much depends on the many youngsters confidence and I don't think that is too much of a problem now, but we do need to stay off their backs if it's not working. Come Saturday evening, we could be OK(ish). Howeve, there is also the potential for losing both or just picking up the odd draw, in which case we will definitley be in the mire. But 6 points is doable and I'l be giving the youngsters (although I hope there will be somd old heads playing as well) my support.

Some very salient and relevant comments on why Crouch is the architect of the financal problems that are now manifesting themselves. Excellent, you've surpassed yourself with that response. Did I really pay a fiver to be associated with such people :confused:

Which is why just before Wilde and co took over Lowe committed us to a 4 year deal with Rasiak making him our highest paid player by far (and promised to bankroll Burley further). When Wilde and co came in, they carried on with this and apart from sanctioning a further £2m, they ran the Club in ostensibly the same way as it was before. The only difference was that rather than a flirtation with relegation, and promotion nowhere in sight, the first season without Lowe saw us get to the play offs. The reason for running the Club this way was that they all knew that the only place this Club can survive in its current form is in the top flight and the best chance of getting back there was during the parachute period. So for two years we ran as a quasi premiership club (beyond out meas for sure, but for a limited period using every advantage available). The tie to retrench was last summer, but instead the Executives had their eye on a takeover, whilst the shareholders were too busy fighting each other to ake them to task over not imlementing Plan B.

Feel free to reconcile such a "straight down the line approach" with their reckless failure to cut back last summer when the parachute payment ended and we became another £7m worse off overnight. Hone cemented his position with the appointment of Oldknow (and the stepping down of Hunt) and was calling all the shots up until his removal in December (but of course, feel free to blame Crouch:rolleyes::rolleyes:).

So are you seriously saying that the players we got in and the way we have decided to set out our stall is the only route that a club like ours can follow? If so, then I have to wonder why football is supposed to be that hard if there is really only one way of doing something and there are no alternatives whatsoever.:smt102 Wotton is an example of someone who may not be a bad buy. Someone who has been around a while, happy to leave his foot in. Rather than relying on the youth, maybe we should have hunted around for other seasoned veterans of this division (or even from the lower reaches) who could provide some steel, nous and calmness to our youngsters. Just as our financial position may well have limited our choices on the managerial front (and there were choices there), so will our predicament limit our player dealings. However, it will limit them, not rule out every potential alternative out there. IMHO the youth have their part to play, but they need to be augmented by seasoned pros. Now these may be the disillusioned ones on our books who the manager needs to motivate or these need to be others brought in o frees and loans.

Air Florida me up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

First we have your noddy financial analysis and now this. This was all "started off" by relegation and the tens of millions wiped off of the top line as a result, so sadly Lowe has to ake the blame on that one. As for what happened after, then you need to engage your brain, see where Crouch was in the balance of power, and then relate that to the two year time frame. Crouch was certainly an accomplice in the initial period when Wilde and co first took over, but I bring you back to the results delivered for that first season when we go to the play off spot. Your financial analysis was shown up to be pathetically out of touch with reality, with costs reduced, losses and cash outflow reduced and net debt at its lowest for years. So for the period when Crouch had any real say, the financial position wasn't that bad (particularly when compared with what went before and after). When Wilde jumped (before he was pushed) Crouch was immediatelyy marginalised, as at that point the Executives, under Hone, had control of the decision making and control of the PLC board. This was further enhanced that summer, with the resignation of Hunt & the appointment of Oldknow, and Hone had full power (hence Crouch being kicked off the Football Club Board). Crouch only got in the top seat half way through last season, so slightly unsure how you can accuse him as being architect of all the financial problems we now face. Sadly, once again your understanding and appreciation of the situation has been found wanting.

Which is why I said eek out a one nil win or win a scrappy game. Last season's non gutsy losers will not be easily forgotten, but sadly this season is turning into a losing one, albeit that the players are gutsy. Being gutsy is admirable, but the last time I checked the league rules I couldn't see how many points you were awarded for that characteristic. I would prefer neither losing with or without a gutsy performance, and instead get back to watching a winning team and moving up the league.

A bit raw at times, but have to say he looked exceptional in parts today. No idea whether he'll make it or not, but he's got to be our brightest prospect. Obviously has a lot to learn (and needs to bulk up a bit) but I think he has got what it takes. Just need to try and keep hold of him.

We knew Thomas has an injury history, we knew Killer would be touch and go, we knew Skacel was ****ed off and we must have known Perry was getting on a bit. So having known all that then maybe we should have thought about bringing in some other wise old heads who can help the youngsters in these tough matches. We may be skint, but there are players out there who would fit the bill and who would not have broken the bank (free transfers and an average wage). We didn't because the "revolutionary new coaching set up" believed the youngsters could hack it.

A very good summary and something I really have an issue is the piece I have put in bold. IMHO the decision to go with two rookies at centre half away from home was wrong. If we are going to blood players, then at least try and pair them up with an experienced player. Additionally, try and do it home where the youngster might fel a bit more comfortable and also where the opposition might only play with one up front. JP was very naive today and IMHO it cost us.

I was in agreement with Case after the game when he said we need to be tougher and we need some experience in there to help the youngsters (something Dublin was also saying). I don't mind us having a number of youngsters who have come through the ranks, but I was always worried that they would be outfought and outthought by seasoned pros in this division. I don't mind a majority of youngsters and inexperienced players, but the 9-2 majority today was a few too many. It's still early days, but I do think the "revolutionary new coaching set up" need to take a long hard think about just how many youngsters they play at any one time. If they haven't got the squad to enable them to do this, then someone needs to hold their hand up and say so, and then we need to get some loans in PDQ.

I'm sorry Yorkie, but I would rather be eeking out 1-0 wins and winning scrappy games as opposed to being the whipping boys who have spirit and play some neat football in the middle of the park. Football is ultimately about winning and the gutsy losers will soon be forgotten.