Frank's cousin

I missed myself so much I came back... also someone needed to bate Alpine a bit more as he was becomming so tame now that we have decent owners and the only way is up... thing is after all the heated exchange over spring, when we finally got decent owners and we only had footie to talk about it kinda went flat a bit and teh summer hols and the kids dont always help... but hey we can now all post jolly things in the knowledge that we are winners again... ;-)

Just goes to show what winning does... we had the same set up 6 games ago so much can change if the points start racking up... the vast majority simply want wins to get positive about Saints and dont give a flying feck who is in teh boardroom if we are winning...

Where would I be without you mate? Its all fun and games and no one looses an eye ;-) Feeling the love right now as quite chilled on minibar contents ... shame the only footie I can get is Man U v Burnley...

If only the same could be said about my posts on the main board :-)

Problem is simply one of education: 1. BBC giving that ***t Griffin a platform shows all that is good about Britain - democracy in action and a society that does not supress freedo of speech no matter how ignorant and idiotic the view 2. Problem is those that vote for him do not appreciate that (too stupid) he is using the very democratic platform that he would in his warped little mind deny several minorities. 3. Imigration is a big issue, especially during times of recession, as it plays on the fears of ordinary folk and yet the main parties are too worried about perceptions amongst the vote swingers (who hold all the political power) to have an adult debate - its so NOT about race but about economics 4. Race - what Griffin is so ignorant of is geological time. Some make an issue out of race and nationality because they simply see things in a few generations worth of time. Homo Sapians have been around for about 2,000,000 years and all stemed from the same branch - eg we were all once teh same colour and MIGRATION into different environments led to subtle genotypic and phenotypic variation but we are still the SAME species - then add fights over land/borders be it village, region,country, politics and we crete artificial boundaries and you have the advent of nations.... whhich thankfuly many have now grown into mature civilised and educated societies.... add in teh mix of international travel and we now have this wonderful re mixing of the gene pool...give it 10,000 years or which is tiny in geological time and we will all be the same colour again as we have learned to adapt our environment to suit us as opposed to needing to adapt to the environment... so 5. Nick Griffin is a racist ****

My crystal ball predicts Alps: Lowe's a %&^$^$& NIneteen: I want manlove with Rupert ;-)

The formation should not matter, its whether the players can adapt to it so that we have several plans A,B and C ot outwit the oppostion which although early days seems to be working...

Classic!

I predicted sweet FA (cup) - so being stuck right now in a hotel room in Bonn, having consumed the meagre minibar supplies (now just the Underberg left) I feel my Crystal ball is telling me the following: We will make the playoff final this year and the 5th round of the FA Cup without getting into debt. Alps will pop up at various points along the way to remind us that he wished for Admin as it was the only way we could survive, get rid of Lowe and have new owners prepared to take a sensible route to progress (I wish I had had his crystall ball), but forget to acknowledge that the sensible route of living within ones means, is not tooo dissimilar to what we tried whilst in the prem... See I blame the other 19 clubs for getting in to debt to save their arses - my crystal ball (the other is of the normal kind) predicts there are several other clubs that will end up like we did and may not be so LUCKY...

Box has gone, not sure if CRouch still comes, would probably have to pay.... but hey who cares now as we have ML! (I can do fickle too ;-))

I fully appreciate the need to show ambition and look for a way in which a club can progress and inspire its staff and fans - I would also agree that buying 3 x 4mil players would be the way to go IF the wage demands were manageable within whatever budget has been set. But its no good just wishing for it, we need to question and find a way this going to happen. I believe (rightly or wrongly) that Lowe really did believe he had a strategy to progress with the way he went about two things: the academy investment was obviously one - the belief that the very best would be sold to raise funds hopefully after a few productive years in the first team + developing those 4-5 mil players ourselves rather than pay someone else for them... I appreciate this has big flaws given the time it takes to go all Ajax, and also teh experience issue etc, but its not completely without its merits... The second was ways og getting the most out of these players - Strachan got more out of the team by getting them fitter than they had ever been or been since, but Lowe I think felt teh whole SCW experiment would help on that front too... give us an advantage through the best possible preparation etc... now it failed, not leasste because of media ridicule and football being so old school in its attitudes, and the timing etc, but again not without merit. My gripe is not with those who believe its necessary to show ambition, I agree, but there are often not many who propose a REAL plan of how we could have done this without serious borrowings or a sugar Daddy... I think that was teh main thing really... all around us we saw clubs spending 10mil on players but these were funded by Sugar Daddies or borrowings. Maybe part of the issues we had was that Lowe was not a sugar daddy - had it been his money he wasted on some the cra p, he might have had a better time of it.. ;-)

My Boring posts seem to attract the most responses from you Alps... which is odd as I usually simply ignore boring stuff ;-) You simply have no answer apart from those 'high class' put downs (irony there) for anyone who is simply not as embittered by hate towards any of the protagonists... Let me state again for the record, i neither dislike nor like any of the 3 amigos, they dont impact on my life enough to register in that way... but my opinions are formed on the finance strategies they employed...simple as that and because I dont fall into the 'spend and support the manager whatever the demands' pot, I have always tried to put that across which you have always interepreted as supporting LOwe - fair enough think what you want, but it would not be the first time you have been wrong...

For threads that are so 'boring, you dont half spend alot of energy getting all worked up with your ingrained beliefs... these are meant to be 'discussions' or debates alps, not tit for tat bitterness exchanges. You also have a selective memory. There was nothing cheap about Hoddle or Strachan, and when these guys went yes there were mistakes made in selecting a cheaper alternative..no argument from me there, but what we are talking aout is not being held to ransome by wage demands and transfer and agent fees we simply could not afford - what nearly killed this club was spending 7mil in the CCC which we had in the bank for the rainy day on contracts we could not sustatin if we did not get promoted - simple facts Alps that you seem to miss. Clubs get relegated every year - it happens for a verity of reasons. IN our case we got relegated from the Prem, because Lowe employed the wrong man, and then compounded it by bringing Redknapp who did not ahve a clue how to manage on a budget or motivate when we still ahd a very good chance of avoiding the drop... the mistake was then not cutting our cloth when Wilde ousted Lowe... the fact he could not back up his spending with the legendary manifesto investors that suckered so many in, forced him to resign and hand over to Crouch...well intensioned, well liked, but unable to do anything practical because he had neither the knowledge or experience... and naive in thinking him ousting Wilde would not come back to haunt him.... Lowe's spending policy is not much different to the one we have now - the best players will still go if bigger clubs come in and match our valuation - it will happen next season with lallana if we dont somehow go up... you know it, I know it. BUt at last more fans understand and appreciate that its the wise and right way to mange things, even if it does not bring instant success... If you dont enjoy the debate Alps dont take part, but if you do, FFS stop the petty bickering and feeble attempts at point scoring, because you add nothing of any value...

OK I bite... Alps the whole Lowe thing is quite simple. Throughout the whole Lowe v Wilde saga and then Lowe v Wilde and Crouch and then Lowe and Wilde v Crouch (all we were missing was Lowe and Crouch v Wilde and we would have had tehe full set :-)) The basis of my opinion has always been about what IMHO is financially risky versus approaches to maintain stabilty. I disagreed with many back in 2003 because when so many were calling for Lowe to spend serious money I was asking 'what money?' because I dont believe in borrowing to service player purchase and wages - simple as that. I did not 'support' Lowe, but supported that principle and still do, which is why I am so supportive of ML and Cortese. I knew well the ego, the personality issues and the foot in mouth poor communication, but i was and still am of the belief that if a club has no money to invest it should NOT borrow just to avoid a relegation, but look to build slowly and live within its means. Both Wilde and then Crouch were also egotistical, fans yes, but also not adverse to the glamour and prestige of owning a football club and unlike Lowe before them were basically determined not to to become the hate figure he was - so they did teh whole football first thing, spent money we really did not have which opened the door for Lowe to shmooye up to wilde, and oust Crouch who had isolated both of them. Lowe is not someone anyone can reallz support - his personality is too wierd to be able to empathise with, but I could agree with the prudent spending approach he followed. Crouch and Wilde were much more likeable, down to earth, understood the passions of fans so its easy to like them, especially when Crouch personnally funded things like teh statue, which was great, but dont be so naive as to think he did not appreciate the positive PR this would bring. BUt I could not support Wildes 'manifesto' as it was like a house of cards ´biuild on nothing... and CRouch never had a policy he shared with anyone... apart from saying no sales necessary in direct conflict with what the board were saying... so hey just get rid of the board.... I dont expect you alps to read let alone appreciate any of this as you are too set in your opinion that its all black and white - it never was and its the last bastian of the ignorant that simply dont want to go beyond the superficial emoptional arguments....

There are a few ;-) TBH, I would not really have a problem with anyone getting a freebie, be it Crouch or Even Wilde LM or ...dare I say it LOwe... because it depends on the reasons why... Some would be in Honor of service, others to try and entice some cash out of as a corporate level eg potential sponsors or advertisers, so it depends on the reasons...

I have no doubt that Crouch wanted to help, but the questions that remains for some is that in his position, could he have looked at the overview of all groups and maybe identified that The Swiss bid was better and thus encouraged it? Surely it would have been obvious that teh Swiss bid had more credibilty than Pinnacle? Or would he not have been aware of teh Swiss bid and its backers? I am not sure. BUt it fuels the suspicion that he went with Pinnacle because of the position he would hold if they took the club over, even if thats bull, its easy to speculate that given the vast difference we have seen between teh two bids... NO I have NO PROBLEM with Crouch wanting to be involved at board level after a takeover - afterall he lost nearly 2mil when his shares went to zero, and he helped the club with cash on numerous occasions to keep us afloat, but we should not fall into the trap that because of this, he is some kind of untouchable legend surely...

Thing is (Daren, and I totally agree with the above), if you want everyone to accept that principle it should be equally aplied to ALL the protagonists - none of whom did anything out of spite - ego, stupity and infighting for sure, but not out of spite for the club....

Problem with some of you is you want it both ways - with Crouch who undoubtedly helped the club, we must somehow ignore the duff stuff he did and thus he is beyond riticism, others in the whole mess, we must igmnore any good stuff they might have done because of the bad... its selective, its ignorant and way over simplistic. Crouch rightly deserves thanks for the GOOD he did for the good he did for the club, but that does not make him immune for any criticism when the discussion goes that way. Should he get fee tickets? NO should he get invites now and again as a guest? No problem with that, but the new regime have been on record that EVERYONE pays including the ML... which is about demonstrating to fans that those in the compfy setas are fans first and not freeloaders, its a simple but effective principle. As for LM, same applies, and like many love him as a Manager for all he achieved, but as a 'politician' - he was kinda lame IMHO... but welcome nonetheless.

Its the compassion and active support for those legends from fans at this club that makes me proud to be a supporter of our great club - its what makes us who we are as a club and to represents the true spirit of Saints. Tim, Duncs and all those involved in GITR deserve our support. To Ron, I think it goes without saying that our hearts go aout to you during this sad time.

:-) True, but as it was brought up....it would have been negligent of me to remain quiet ;-)

A lot to do with morale as well. just the lifting of the burden of the dire financial situation will have had an impact, together with teh optimism that MLs purchase will have had. There was still the psychologcal barrier of the -10 points combined with a lack of a proper pre-seaseon that for me meant stuttering results at teh start of teh season - 10 games in and things got better and we have teh makings of a good L1 side. The big test will come Saturday when we will see how we can kep our heads and shape againts a well drilled MK Dons.

Stu would this loyalty about grassing apply equally to other crimes? Robbery, GBH, Stabbings, Man slaughter, r ape? where does your stupidity and ignorance end and any moral duty kick in? I can only assume you are on a wind up. Jeez.

The 'seeking' or not seeking' investment during 2003 is an interesting debate. All hinges on whether the majority of shareholders at the time would have been willing to dilute their equity for the 'good of the club' by making a sizable chunk available to an outsider in exchange for investment - the issue really was the share price and therefore the 'value' of the club at the club at the time. The Price was actually quite low at around 27p, a reflection of the lack of fluidity in trading the shares and because despite have our greatest turnover that year, the dividends were low (only 800k amongst some 27,000,000 shares) - it woudl have meant that realistically we would have only been able to raise about 10 mil for giving away over 50% of the club... and that woudl not even have covered the Saha and Malbranque transfer fees let alone teh impact on wages their their demands would have brought. This is not about defending Lowe (Alps again wont let thsi go, but until he brings something to the discussion, he is best ignored ;-)) but about the realism that goes with trying to raise capital. The best way would have been to try and sell the club to a wealthy type, but on the open market any takeover would pushed our price up to about 80p a share and so someone would have been looking at about 50 mil to by teh club and clear the loans before investing in playing staff. Were we worth that much and would anyone have been interested we will never know, but remember it was not quite as busy a market as it is today. Also if anyone was serious they could have bought shares and made a bid irrespective of Lowe and his cronies desire to hold on to a 'powerbas' or not. I wont deny that I also think lowe enjoyed his position, the ego massaged by the glamour of the game and the FA position, but to think this is what stopped any inward investment is churlih and naive IMHO. I dont recall fans clamouring for teh club to be sold at the time, just desperate to see WGS be given more cash - yet no one was offering where that would come from. Opinions on this really depend less on your dislike for Lowe or his clan, but more on what you believe a club should be doing with respect to financial management - should a clud or all clubs be forced to live within their means or should debt be accaptable? Personally, I felt and still do that all clubs should be living within their revenue streams. BOrrowing on infrastructure such as new Stadia and training facilties should be done on the understanding that the loans are sustainable if relegation occured. In our case they were, had we adjusted the player costs more quickly and not heightened the problem with new contracts under Wilde. I totally appreciate the perception it gave especially when you consider that around us clubs were happily upping the transfer stakes, but either fuelled by borrowings or sugar Daddies... How you rate Lowe on that will depend on your attitude to debt. Given the state of the country now and teh debt we have as individuals its not surprizing that teh majority view him as tight fecker who should have taken more 'risk' to progress...

Now there's a surprize....

Agreed.. This is part of the problem we were in. We had a successful season, a good manger who recognised we would not progress (or even maintain that level) without serious investment. I Think most would acknowledge that. Fans and Mangers sometimes think its just a simple case of teh board releasing funds for transfers and wages to attract the next level of player.... and if the money is there it is! Our problem is that we were running the club within its means so it was not without an almost equivilent level of player sales. Never going to go down well with managers or fans who see this simplistically as a lack of support for the man in charge of the team... which is wrongly endoresed when managers leave stating anger at not being able to take the team forward without said investment. NO one has told me to date where that investment was going to come form in 2003... despite the repeated calls at the time to spend spend spend... Wilde did just that... in a blatent attempt to win the propoganda battle - Lowe and his cronies had nolfolk 'n' chance - who was ging to listen to anyone who said teh best way to progress is developing our our talent as we cant afford to buy big names vs someone who says I have loads of guys waiting to pump money in as soon as I ma in charge and we will spend it on the first team...which he did, just did not bring in the 7 mil his manifesto promised... Crouch for me was almost too much of a fan, but also his ego would not have let him make tose decsions that would make him unpopular - sales and loans and cut backs - that was his contribution. A sorry tale, ofmishaps, mistakes and and ego driven decision making. None of them evil, none of them without some degree of passion in what they were doing, but all ultimately contributing to the mess...