Frank's cousin

NOt against a stand renaming at all - would welcome a decent tribute as it would thoroughly deserved... but my only point would be, would it not be best to look at what options of a suitable tribute there are and then let those who knew him personally decide or at leat help in the selction. The point made earlier is that ML was not one for the grand gesture, as that wonderful image of him taking pictures at Wembley shows - teh simple joy of seeing his team win, is something that should be indelibly marked on all Saints fans... simply wonderful and its that spirit we should be trying to capture I think ? Just a thought and would fully support a stand/stadium/stature/garden/training ground/or even rename the charity thing after him lots of options, but the best choice to ensure something would meet his approval is probably best left to those who knew him best?

Uhm... Sure there WILL be time when Adkins get its wrong or struggles with the tactical changes necessary - every manager does even Wenger, and SAFand we have one who is still learning! But thats the beauty of it as far as I am concerned. For too long we have expected the best manager in the world who never gets it wrong and always picks the the same team as we would... what we have now is a talented,smart up and coming who can learn as we progress, witha superb set up and who genuinely seems to 'get' the program that NC is delivering. Why is it that our expectations are often fuelled with the legacy of arrogance of the 27 years? We need to move on and accept we are were we are, but with the potential to progress rapidly - we have a fantastic infrastructure, a chairman who despite what some think, has seriously got it upstairs with the strength of character to avoid populist pandering for short term acceptance, add a manger who is obviously young and inexperienced b but getting better every game and a squad that is currently harmonious and arguably the best in this division... oh and major investment in the academy so that we continue to produce good talent.... er so not exactly sure what else teh club or Adkins needs to do to convince everyone? As to the cup runs interfering with promotion hoopes... well we have seen 8 changes today... something we did not see last season, even in the paint cup... so I dont think Nige will fall into the same trap. ENJOY the good times!

Anyone we played in 76 - last time we beat Blackpool in the cup we won the fecker! ;-)

Great news. Adam is a great example to young players...lets hope Oxo can learn from it - see according to the Times this morning Saints have told Arsenal he will cost 10 mil....

Where exactly does it say socialists must be poor? You response is typical of the often seen political ignorance of the right when it comes to trying to combat the 'red threat' - spread misinformation and bullsh!t. BB is one of the few who still has some integrity, happy to pay higher tax as a high earner as he appreciates the benefits of his circumstances. Campaigns actively against racism and seems to have a decent humanitarian approach to life. I dont agree with all his campaigns and I dont even agree with all of his politics, but I cant fault his honesty or integrity and that should be admired... seems to me that many on the right struggle with the old fashioned concept of respecting those values, even when they dont agree with all the opinions.

Whilst I agree to some extent these two situations are different - the need for students to pay for themselves is simply because of numbers wanting to go... simply impossible for the tax payer to cover it all especially since every college and poly is now a Uni and a squillion kids can become stoodents on 'degree' courses in media studies that have no real worth in the real world simply because the previous government thought it a good idea to get 50% of kids into higher education.... the old notion of an academic elite supported by a well educated and grafting workforce was lost in 70s... but the story of the socio-demographic decline of the Thatcher years is another story.... ... sorry, but the car insurance thing for 17 year olds is simply a result of the trends in the last 20 years beginiing with the joy riders, uninsured tw*ts that dont give a flyin g feck about anyone else - unlike the younger person above, I at 41, have seen 4 fatals of kids I knew the parents of and a story a few years back of a local mother and baby that were killed by a 19 year old doing 85 in a 50 zone ... the 3rd party factor is the thing that is most often overlooked by young kids in their cheap heaps of crap when factoring the insurance costs... the only way they will come down is if collectively these kids change their attitude and start taking the responsibilty seriously... sure this has led to an increase in driving without insurance, but the only way to sort that is heavier and more realistic penalities, not fines of a few £100 quid.... I certainly dont want to pay more to cover the losses incurred by idiots who dont think...who does?

To be honest, dont let this troll wind you up. BHA, you aren't doing your club any favours - and apart from an obvious wind up mission, not really sure what else you are trying to achieve... ALL clubs have a few obsessed arrogant fans who for some inexplicable reason seem to rely on the size of their club to compensate them for what I can only assume to be a small ccok... including ours and its those that seem to get some infantile pleasure from their arrogance... but dont forget some is just decent and typical banter, afterall, we are both going for auto promotion.. I am not actually surprised we are averaging around 22k... which for L1 is pretty good... but I would admit if we were playing poorly, down the bottom, we might struggle to get 15-16k - thats what happens at all clubs - results/performance/success creates higher numbers - simple fact that many chose to ignore - what is puzzeling though is why Brighton are still struggling to fill a small ground when you are having such a great season under Poyet? I will acknowledge that the Withdean, is hardly going to inspire, and I am sure when you move into your new ground you will see attendences go up, whether you get promoted or not... but you have to ask yourself why your club has designed this for 22k if you have long term ambitions to get to the top flight - when we were there, we sold out 32K most games, and could have sold out 40K plus for at least half the matches... make of that what you will. Brighton are a club that got screwed by owners, have someghow survived these years without their own ground, and despite nobends like BHA, and his lack of wit, I actually hope to seem them do well, and get promoted with us and ideally Bournemouth to... so not really sure what all the fuss is about... But we are easily the bigger club ;-)

... for me the most interesting was his take on parachute payments - a veiled dig at our friends down the road? ;-) I can see Cortese rallying a few chairman to the FL to look at this again, because there, this level of parachute encourages clubs to enter into contracts they cannot really afford and gamble, as well as the obvious competitive advantage...

Uhm... thing is the Echo like most local rags need copy that goes beyond ' old lady sues Tesco for potato that looks like her late husbands p***s'' and they knwo that the club stories are big sellers... but like most these days they dont ever seem to think first and play the long game. I am sure the club would love to be able to trust them and provide them with exclusives and the big stories first, but time and again they print stuff either after they have been asked to hold on for a few hours, or pander to the the club bashing by the old guard... seriously, as any press they will print anything irrespective of hether its harmful to the club or not.... instead of clearing the air and developing a strong and robust relationship with the club... I know many on here equate Good Public relations practice with spin... a sad legacy of a classic daily Mailesque campaign to get 'spin' engrained in any PR/press release by the last Government, in which they seem to have succeeded. BUt bad stories sell more papers than good ones, so its no surprise that the Echo is keen to print negative ****e, that although in the grand scheme of things is forgotten tomorrow, nonetheless can damage the club, as typically like all media they chose their moments to coincide with sensitive commercial negotiations... that is their free press right, but if they chose to exceecise that right in the way they do, then it cant be classed as a supporter of the club.

Just a couple of points... try and keep it brief :-) 1. On those that are still 'questioning' - no issue with asking questions and despite my faith in NC, I can see that there are severalm questions that in an ideal world we would have answers to, and we could all be 100% assured. The trouble is in many cases we are talking about private or confindential or even commercially sensitive information. Pwersonnaly I can live with 'not knowing' and support NC. Its not blind faith, because I too have the questions, but I do understand that soem things can not be answered in public. 2. On the 'dark forces' - I think I have a pretty good idea who this is. The thing is it does not surprise me that they would not have 'got on' with NC - no more jobs for the old boys and 90K a year for hosting a few lunches... the club is looking for value and for those that add a real conribution. The issue I have say with some the old guard is that if they really loved the club and had its best interest at heart, ADD something positive for free and prove the value you add and I can bet once NC see the value, Something can be worked out - but the days of freebies have gone. And whilst we are doing well, are making good progress etc, can anyone really tell me that those spreading shiete in the press really love the club? If you love the club, you dont try and undermine the work that is being done just because you are ****ed off with the CEO... because that just shows selfishness in the extreme 3. Good interview - ' Dune , WTF are you on with the looking to the left sheite' its feckin obvious that this was a planned interview and given its over 30 mins in length pre edit, that he was looking at a cue card FFS. He planned what he wanted tpo get acrooss and made sure about it which is as it should be... feck me do you see conspiracy in everything?.... jeez

Just read that - jeez that was hilariously harsh ... did not know whether to LOL or actually feel sorry for the Aussies... decided to laugh out loud.

Why does anyone really care? And sadly why does this sort of thing always result in taking sides, more bolox vitriol and a black and white speculation fest? What we know is very little, and that is how it should be - We know that NC and AP did not get on... for whatever reason ... there could be something tangible or just a personality clash - but it was not something that would go away. Now most fans always side with the manager against the board.... why the need to take any side? A decision was made to make a change and NC will be judged on whether the cahnge is successful or fails - end of. Why is it whenever these things happen, out of the woodwork pop thsoe with agendas of their own and start spouting to anyone who will listen? AP was a good manager for Saints - he put together a squad that by the end of last season was probably the best in the league. NC made a change and now he carries the responsibilty as well as ensuring NA gets the same support - if we can afford it and NA makes good choices, then it will all be well and good. NOt really sure why so many feel obliged to side with one side or another? Pls explain? this is life, these things happen, and so to me its a non strory. Yes I was surprised, yes I rated Pards as he had a done a good job, that does not change. But I also believe NC is doing a good job and is right to act if he feels the management team relationship has broken down - FOR WHATEVER REASON - as it never leads to good things if you just let it fester either because of concerns about fan reaction or media speculation. Whenever there is change in a club, business, there are some that will get it, others that dont, some will have noses put out of joint as the new regime implements plans that theyr either disagree with or simply dont get. The problem in football is when fan favourites, ex players and managers, use thsi as an excuse for a return to the media spotlight and are negative about it - because we tend to fololow the heart and believe way too much that is said and forget that our 'heroes' might have their own agenda... AP - good manager, did well sad to see him go NA - good manager - doing well and glad we have him on board NC - probably a hard taskmaster, driven, and unlikely to be easy to get on with if you dont support the plan - but doing a good job in my opinion. What is the problem?

Funny thing is - how we view thenm should now be put into some sort of context. Given the various nefarious goings on in teh boardrooms down the M27 and the way thier 'stewards' of the club have srious fecked it over (despite having just about got away with it) - it makes all these look a darn site better (relatively speaking of cause) - they at least wanted good things for teh club, just fecked up on how to ensure it happened and in some cases let ego get in the way of making the right decisions - not defending it, but when you compare to Storrie, the faik sheiks (sic), Chanrai, redflaps, Gunrunner + son, makes them look quite good!!

That is actually quite funny, so good to see you have found a sense of humour. OK, on a serious note, what do you believe would have been/would be an appropriate punishment for pompey given what they have done? What do think the prem/FL should be doing in pompey's case to remove the stain this will leave and how can repatre the damage? Please try and put this in context of punishments suffered by other clubs for lesser evils. Its clear that there is absolutely no consistency in dealing with these issues, whetehr linked to financial irregularities by owners or simple expenditure way beyond income - its this lack of a consistent and equally applied punishment that is truely reflective of the level of defaulting on loans and debt on which transsient success has been based that this thread has reached this number of posts - life may not be fair, but surely the rules governing the game and thus ensuring a level and equal playing field should be if a sport is to have any credibility at all? MIstakes on the pitch, dodgy goals and bad refs are part of the game that make being a fan interesting if frsutrating, but this total lack of equality in the way the various governing bodies deal with clubs who in effect 'cheat' financially for short term gain is what is so wrong, and why so much vitriol. Would be interested to hear what you think your punishment should have been?

Well that's me banned for life then... ;-)

That's 'cause Tory's are all ****s ;-)

To be fair... if there was criminal activity, then that needs to be investigated, and quite rightly this should not reflect on the fans... but whatever the source of the 'money' the fact remains that the club gained success on money they did NOT have or could not pay back... will pompey fans demand the Cup is returned and awarded to Millwall or think Millwall did not deserve to win it because they did not during taht January window borrow money they could not afford, but in a load of better players on huge wages, win a trophy, and then sit back whilst they ran out of money, went into admin and did not ahve to pay for it?

Think is HO NO one whinged abolut you 'cheating' when you won the cup, because at that time, possibly like you it was a) no known that you had not been paying Mr Taxman, and in principle if can afford a loan, the the repayments etc than legally nothing wrong and you can spend it on what you wish... unfortunately, itb was in effect cheating which has come to light with the benefit of hindisght in that a) you could not actually afford any repyent, b) the club had no plan in place to repay it (even a Champions league 20 mil + extra revenue, would have left you with a debt mountain - which not being a brief, I cant comment on the legality of ) c) you had not been paying the taxman, and perhaps the most important point, this debt did not even go on decent infrastructure... just ****ed against a wall on the hope of transient success through rapidly depreciating player assets. The 'cheat' tag as you probaly well know refere to the simple fact that prior to that cup win in at the start of that season, it was was reported in the media (and not challenged by the club) that you were close to 40 mil in debt already (unsecured) - what did the club do? Did it shed big earners, recognise it could not go that way, understand the footballing consequences? NO, it kept spending on players that the clubs around them on similar levels of standard revenue, could not afford creating an unfair competitive advantage... You will no doubt say 'so what you did it, you were 30 mil in debt in the prem... etc... to which teh response is obvious - this was the stadium mortgage, and there were plenty of our fans unhappy that as a results of the repaymenst of approx 2 mil a year, we were not spending on this extra on wages etc... and we DID NOT keep spending and borrowing to ramp this up to 100 mil or so in an effiort to stay in the top flight... we may still be their had we done so, as would plenty of other clubs... On relegation,to the CCC we cut our cloth as best we could under the conditions of the contracts... we sold prize assetss and youth and so built up a spare bit of cash... However, new board came in and in a push for popularity spent that rainy day cash on a promotion push...you may or not know, teh fan base was split at the time, with amny advocating this as a risky strategy and having concerns about this spend... it failed... as we know, we had a season of stupidity in the board room. Lowe came back and whatever else we think of him, he at least recognised we were in the shiete... his solution was to bring in some dutch coaches on the cheap, ship out as many older playesr and play kids - diasterous in football terms, but saw our overdraft slowly being reduced - we kept paying the stadium loan and we kept paying the taxman - notice the difference there? but the lower gates also impacted and the speed of teh overdraft reduction during a financial crisis meant it was called in... at that moment we were in fact insolvent and Lowe, did what was legally required and put teh club into administration which resulte din him personally loosing approx £800,000 in share value... so whatever we think of him, your various owners make him look like a true Saint. Sure the club looked at teh legal issue around the -10 points with the football club being in effect a subsidary of the SLH and not in fact in debt itself, given that historically SLH also had several other businesses, SMS Ltd, Saints INsurance Ltd and Saints Radio Ltd... but it did not was we took our punishment... which HAD an impact in starting last season on -10 costing us a playoff place... so what impact has your 'punishment had despite no effort to cut your cloth, pay teh taxman, continue to trade whilst insolvent, ship out kids to plead a depleated squad and make big loan signings during admin? Feck all ... thats what and you still ask why some on here find that this stinks? I am not saying you should have been liquidated, I dont want that for any club, but there needs to justice in terms of both an effective and appropriate punsihment, one that has an impact and one that is effective... Despite whatever pain the fans have gone through, you have in effect 'got away with it' and that only adds to teh cheats tag because what you are left with is an FA Cup triumph 80% of which was paid for by the taxpayer and the businesses that with get 20p in the ppound over the next 5 years... now had pompey fans bowed their heads in shame, apologised and understood this 'luck' - you may have had teh sympathy that normally follows football fans when clubs shaft them, but no we have the whooping of victory and the gloating of that success, built on nothing but other peoples money.

I give up... what should eb obvious is that the main 'gripe' is about the 'attitude' your fans have towards all this... the fact that teh only excuse offered for teh club is that its all right becuase otehrs did the same... which is no defense. Yes there are parallels with other clubs, but surely you must see that the EXTENT of the the debt, teh fact it was calculated on a huge risk of continued success to create a huge competitive advantage is different from our situation? IF you had say had an owner who decided to borrow 70 mil + (typical current estimate)for a new 30,000 seater stadium + 10 mil for decent training facilties - a real investment in the future of your club, but you like many had then been relegated (with fans screaming for first team investment rather than a new stadium) , and at that point shipped out all teh expensive players you could subject to contract, in an effort to cut your cloth, but had been screwed anyway and entered Admin - I would be supportive of your situation - because ultimately that is in effect what we suffered... which IS morally and ethically different to the 100 mil of excess on players, wages, transfers and image rights etc at the expense of the fans - I could even feel sorry for fans given you had no direct control over the situation, had any of them shown any kind of shock, horror and acknoweldgement taht is was just plain stupid, wrong and that itgave you an advantage that led your brief success... but you dont and its that attitude that cause most of the anger/bitterness - especially as teh 'punsihment' has had no impact (you were down anyway), and have been able to carry on with a relatively decent squad, as if nothing has happened... Sure there is resentment that you have in effect gone unpunished, for what is a scandalous level of debt and financial mismangement, totally immoral etc, when other clubs, yes including our selves have had additional relegations etc as they tried to do the right thing, cutting cloth playing kids etc... rather than loaning out kids to plead insufficient squad numbers to get dispensations... that is where this bitterness comes from. ... I dont believe you are thick or stupid, but you are defending your club with a zealot like zeal, which is simply incompatible with the morals and ethics of the situation.

How can you not see the difference between spending money that WE HAD CASH IN THE BANK, and getting 120 mil in debt to fund a squad that others could have had had they also chosen to feck all other creditors to teh tune of 120 mil? Also, our 6 mil or so CASH WE HAD IN THE BANK that we spent recklessly, half our fans were up in arms about this at teh time, seeing it as a jesture to appease fans by a new board - and a dangerous move that could back fire and did - remember also that as a result that board was ousted because of tehir financial incompetence... pompey on the other hand seem to be under the illusion that Chanrai played no part in teh debt accumulation and are happy he has returned and is already talking about 'financing' - I would be worried if I was you - because I am not sure you would get away with it again.... PS and you did not seem to answer any of the other points?

The agreement was as I understand it reached between the Administrators and Aviva - which in effect set the purchase price - Given that the club had paid approximately 20 mil over 8 years in interesta nd repyaments + approximately a guess at 7mil in settlement - teh total repaid on this debt would not have been far off the the full extent of the loan without interest - which is why Aviva would have agreed a settlement at that level. The issue though is entirely different in that Saints 'debt' was not a) relatively small (5 mil overdraft) and b) not as a result of excessive spending on players and wages to try and buy success... an investment in infrastructure for the future. Yes we had a moment of madness under one of many boards in which CASH we had in the bank (approx 7mil from the sale of players) was spent in a push to regain premiership status... wich meant we entered into contracts that would not be sustainable long term if we were not promoted - hense the subsequent sale of players in an effot to get us back to an even keel - it was not possible to terminate all contracts, and this meant teh need for overdraft - which was being reduced when Barclays got cold feet - that is completely different to pompey who when already 35 mil in debt - continued to spend like there was no tomorrow and managed to increase this to 100 mil plus! Even the most biassed fans must be able to see a moral, ethical and obvious difference between the two scenarios if they engage the neurons for a few minutes...

What will be will be... Pompey live to fight another day... and from a true fans perspective, seeing clubs go out of business is never something any of us should want to see... even the Skates... but for me I would ask the question, of the Skates, are they truely happy with the ethics of the solution? Are they already planning the great return, based on further potential funds being raised through Chanrai, that may create the same scenario again, and will they be demanding transparancy of the finances, or simply turning a blind eye to the ethics if it means 'success' as they did last time around? I did not want to see them get liquidated, but acknowledge that the financial maangement decisions that got them into that mess did create an 'unfair' competitive advantage; that given the subsequent inabilty to pay for that success, there was and something seriously wrong with the approach that tarnishes that success... the punsihment needed to be a proper deterent, not a slap on the wrist and have appropriate consequences. The excuse that MU or Liverpool or Citeh are in effect buying an unfair advantage through leveraged debt is simply not acceptable as these clubs also seem to have a suspect moral compass - although to be fair to MU, before the Glaziers leveraged buyout they were debt free and able to max their [purchases simply through a much larger revenue stream... Pompey need to be realistic in their expectations - given their size, revenue and fan base - as all clubs should - the growth needs to be natural based on success, not a do or die financial tightrope that seems to cloud judgement - and that goes for ALL clubs. In our case, the majority of fans now accept that growth needs to be based on incremental success and self sustaining... I dont think most of pompey's fans share this view at present.

As others have said... I think his intentions were always good - whatever your opinion on him getting back with Lowe... Indeed, even Lowe wanted to see us bask in the glories of The Champions league. But in both cases, the methods employed were simply unworkable, misaligned or mistakes made at simply the wrong time - everyone makes them, but timing can have a big impact on the outcome... Its a bit churlish to wish anyone illwill - this is afterall football, and depsite what some may think I dont believe any of our recent owners have wished bad things on the club...

That actually was quite funny!

I think some folk ned to try and differentiate between expressing disaatisfaction (something that every 'customer' of any club/business is fully entitles to do) and those that because their ticket did not cost £3, with a free pie and a BJ at half time think Cortese is Satan... Even when you fully understand the rationale, accept the reason for a decison, does not mean you have to agree with it - but it should mean you at least respect it and move on. This fan base seems to have a tendency to move very quickly from disagreeing with a decision to some sort of infantile 'hatred' - the poster responsible for the 'f off' insult to the 'oweners' is a prime case - idiotic statement, no matter how potentially valid his opinion on the decision. I really struggle at times with the mentality of some of our fans - is Saints really SO important, so overwhelminging significant that they are offended the moment anyone does something different to how they see the club should be run? Are their lives so restricted that they cant put support of a football club into some sort of perspective? FFS..... Our owner and GOOD FRIEND of Nicola just died, and here there are some insulting that legacy because in their own selfish arrogance they believe its their right to insult, if they dont like what is being done... I would not be suprised if some of those who are so obssessed by the lack of a defeered payment sustem are not the same 'fans' who took the **** with it before, or some of those who a few seasons ago tooki the **** by getting loads of mates in for free on the same ST. Now, if we want to take the moral high ground here, then you have to grass those people up... sorry but thats the way it is. If you want the club to offer the most flexible approach, then you have to root out those who take the **** and get rid of them simple as... otherwise the club quite rightly has to take a more rigourous stance. Thats the feckin trouble with fans,... we want it all and we want it all our way... and anybody that dares interfere with our view of how a club should be run gets the abuse... what the feck is wrong with some of our fans - they really should get a feckin life.