Frank's cousin

NOt quite true, it was certainly a way for the old board to make money for themselves and for Lowe its was merely his original secure rtd shares being transferred to new SLH shares and he was topgeter with Wilde and CRouch someone who made no money out of them whatsoever...

Fair enough, but some of the love fest stuff is a bit...well you know... brown nosing a bit surely? ;-)

NOt sure that we are not over complicating this 'financial prem structure' - all it means in reality is bottom line - we have costs inexcess of revenue from teh academy and staplewood facilities to SMS and the cost per game running costs etc... and staffing t contracts to cover that set up .....player contracts are just that and as all employment contracts not immoveable on compensation - something that also needs to be worked out within a L1 business plan - the simple fact s that cost still need to be trimmed...

Whilst there is no doubt that he derserves credit for this noble thing and has shown that he really does care about the club, despite probably getting a post kicking there are a couple of points: 1. He has my respect for these doantions/loans 2. Everyone who has donated has my respect and there are those on low incomes who have gifted a high percentage of their limited income that are equally deserving. 3. Does this gift absolve the mistakes made in the past? Because they did contibute to the over spend and our current stuation so seat on the board? 4. OK the most cynical question: If he is involved in one of the consortia, then its in his own interests to keep the club alive in this way whilst they try and find the cash rather than allowing Fry to sell components - again a good thing alround, but perhaps tehre is more to it than a simple gift or loan?

And that would be?

Been over these before and the points you make whilst mostly true ARE simplistic, butits all been done a 1000 times. There are those who are happy to debate tehm and those that are not - Anything I sy will not effect opinion so not going to go over it again...

Anyone who blames fans is barking up teh wrong tree because fans have a CHOICE in what they spend their money on - if the fare is poor less will go - its a fact and a fact at 100% of clubs. but its also a fact that reduced gates mean less revenue so tehre is a direct link - Its simplistic to say well thats Lowe's fault for getting rid of Pearson - certainly it was a major blunder as he misread the feelings of support and goodwill towards Pearson , and when replaced by unknowns that failed to deliver on early promise, it caused the demise in quality and results - yet what happened to the side that beat Reading away and several of teh otehr eresults where we played sides off the park? the ability was there but as is typical of relegated sides the consistency was not - why? The tricky question is when it comes down to pure choice... hypothetically if asked if it was achoice between Lowe and Crouch, same squad same manager, same finance who would you pick? (I would want none of them, but this is a hypothetical quetsion) The obvious answer IS crouch because he has shown on more than one occaison his personal comittment in digging into his own pocket to support teh club. He is without doubt a fan with heart on sleeve - fans can relate to him because he is 'down to earth' and has shown the passion we desire.... but what of his ability to make those difficult decisons? He has mad mistakes and my misgivings are for when he is tempted to avoid making decisons that are unpopular - he wants to be seen as the peoples champion and he seems not to understand its not a popularity contest - its ego , from a different perspective to Lowe. Lowe is ever the pragmatist, mean of spirit publically, mean of purse which we see as lacking ambition. BUt few can argue against the perils of overspending considering our current situation. too cautious in the past? possibly but its a question of risk, the consequences of relegation when in debt are all too clear to see, so why add to it? Naturally we can question his 'footballing' decisons - superficially complete ****** and shows a complete lack of understanding of teh game, and there are certainly deciosns that would back that perception up - and yes you DO have to judge them on tehir results not their logic or rationale, but that does NOT mean there was not logic and a good rationale at their conception. Thats all I have tried to understand and question; youth policy and development, being less relient on single autocratic managers that leave you teh moment someone bigger comes calling and thus its always one step forward and two back and more expense as the new guy moulds his own side, sports science, etc. Timing, implementation and inflexibility are another matter.... Thats where I am coming from in this whole saga - sure its easy to pin a label and say i am this or that nd if it makes someone happy - whatever, but the reality is asking teh rigt questions and finding the right answers leads to better understanding. If there are those who feel they have that wisdom, good for them, but for us mere mortals its what keeps us asking those questions.

NO worries... I think NCs style is part of the problem (bit similar to Lowe? ;-)) There is as steadfastness or even arrogance in his posts and its right to question this as his views can be perceived as very polarised - but that does not mean there is not some truth or merit in some of his thoughts and opinions. Crouch and Lowe have one thing in common . They both have character traits that make it difficult and at times incredibly frustrating to defend or support even if they do individual things taht deserve credit or have merit - myargument really is only with tose that seem to refuse to ever acknowledge that this is even possible when talking about Lowe.

Success would indeed have secured a larger gate - large enough to put right the overspend and stave off admin ? we can not say and we will see what sort of crowds we get now... Would Perason have done better with the same squad restrictions? possible but nothing is certain given the financial situation or how his own choice of loans would have combined with teh squad members we had left - sure chances are better, but no guarrantees.

That really is very simplistic...

Fine if you want to keep it that simple, but there are others who have a (un)natural interest in delving a little deeper and seeing the rational in teh decison making process, understanding where things went wronga nd why what looked like good ideas on paper failed... not for everyone, for sure. BUt if this is not of interest why do some posters simply jump on the threads to dissmiss and poor scorn? if its not your thing just start up other threads surely?

Whether its a tenner or 350K anything he donates he deserves credit for - end of - because all I have ever said is that with all these individuals there are pros and cons and if true (and I am not sying its not, then this is very definitely a pro - as I have said time and time again - but Alpine seems unable to read those statements....

Think you hit the nail on the head with some of the antagonism - I can fully understand that and as I said previously, its sometimes incredibly frustrating and difficult to stand up and defend an idea or concept that LOwe initiated, when it fails because of either **** poor implementation, bad timing or inexperience or just plain wrong for the circumstances - especially when he compounds it with his his appalling PR and arrogance, but that does not make 'prudence' and living within our means, or investment in youth or even a continental system wrong in totality and thats the sort of thing that I do try and defend - not the man initiating them. Lowe's name attached does bring its own set of problems though There will always be times when as fans we support ideas that later turn out to have been wrong and most sensible folk are happy to admit 'I got that one wrong' - but too often teh sense of schardenfreude or simple nasty 'I told you so's' makes it pretty difficult to admit - or more commonly the actual situation is more complex. The classic is teh one you refer to - the Dutch Duo and youth - risky and 'barve' or stupid and ignorant? you take your pick - I thought its was a combination risky and certainly brave, but also Lowe had misread the positive feeling fans had following Perasons survival run in - dropped a clanger, but would have been oK had the Duo delivered and there were early positive signs of encouragement - sure the obvious is it wont work, as has been proven, but should fans feel ashamed of being SUPPORTIVE and POSITIVE about a new season and new approach even if eventually doomed? and does that somehow mean we are suddenly Lowe supporters because we suppoted the team and were excited by teh possibilty? sorry i dont believe that is so. Finally it works all ways- so far I have for example resited 1) taking the **** out of all those who 'got it wriong about Wilde 2) all those who thought admin was a good idea...why? because its easy to see positives in these things and thus feel compelled to believe, its not naiveity but passion ruling head and there is nothing bad about that. As for CRouch I will happily (and have always done) give him the credit for the good he has done and is doing (if he has in deed dipped in again he is a legend for that), but I simply struggle with his big gob and 'showey' attitude that is ego driven... as I struggled with Lowes arrogance and dismissiveness towards fans... cant really see where Alpine gets his vitriol from, but it takes allsorts I guess...

LOL about the Wilde plan... doubt Lowe would ever donate money - but when hell freezes over you never know... just wish we could cut through some of these rumours and not instantly jump on bandwagons based on rumour. It would certainly be a big feather in CRouch's cap if this is true and he would deserve all the respect that goes with it.

Alpine just Shut teh feck up - rejoin the converstaion and debate when you have something worthwhile to say. OK the plain stupid - all I have said is FACT - there is no evidence AT PRESENT to support this claim - merely rumour - same as a lot of other garbage spouted about Lowe, Wilde and CRouch - tell why its wrong to seek evidence on any of this before supporting or dismmissing things?

I am sure you are on a wind up Alpine because once again you show your true colours - keep up your 'ignorance ios bliss pathetic sniping if you like, no skin off my nose, but with each such post you merely confirm your ignorance. As to CRouch 'propping up the club' thats merely a rumour and I am surprized you heard it from deep wityhin his rectum... read the above again and previous posts and there is no back tracking...but you obviously dont have the intelligence to differentiate between posts too blinkered in your outlook.... jeez

Well yesterday it was said we had enough in the coffers to pay wages and but no evidence as to what source - gift or loan or reserves - Fair play if this is true, but sorry, do we really believe everything posted on here or printed in the Echo? Seems to meif pro CRouch its instantly 'TRUE' but this is not applied to everything consistently... afterall the paper printed and support Wildes 'investment' plans....

SO this must mean AVIVA todate have not been willing to discuss a refinance package that would seem them get ALL their loan back + interest - by either extending teh terms but reducing payments? Because it would then be that someone could probably buy teh club for as little as £1 + paying off the 6 mil overdraft and keeping the stadium on new terms. Or it means that those biddding dont even have this sort of cash available....

If Crouch has inded gifted money to the club to pay wages and keep us alfoat in these dark times then he will inded get the respect from me that deserves - but call me cynical, its only a rumour and from what source? Also, a few days back someone mentioned (FF or UP?) that he had been willing to 'LOAN' the club cash to keep in going rather than gift it... so if true great hes the man, but would like to see some evidence rather than rumour on a fan site

Is there an element of 'the ladies do protest to much' in some of the angry responses to NC because of his 'pro-lowe' stance? Its the biggest source of frustration as well as amusement that there are some on here that refuse to even discuss or debate some issues if: a) the poster is perceived as pro Lowe, or b) the idea being supported or endorsed was inititated by Lowe despite not necessarily supporting the man.... All this does is hinders proper debate and discussion about the merits of some good ideas -whoever initiated them... and its like an infection - I suspect there are some of you out there that simply refuse to say anything positive about anything associated with Lowe because despite deep down recognising some positives, you are simply too frightened to admit to it publically because of this rather childish response and labels and tags bandied around by the ignorant? Lowe was simply like most people - some good, some bad, talks sense, talks crap - just so happens that a lot of what he did and talked about as chairman did not work... and he had teh arrogance never to admit his errors which winds us up, but that does not mean EVERYTHING was not worth discussing and it certainly does not mean that anyone with an alternative approach to Lowe must therefor be RIGHT which is the impression quite a few folk give? Come on FFS, this is a forum for debate and discussion which takes all opinion and all sorts - also if we want to find a solution that we all agree on, that we feel is the very best way forward for saints, you have to be open minded and acknowledge that ideas (and good ideas) can come from most unlikely sources. Narrow minded dismissiveness merely limits the options. I know UP and other have sometimes accused me of having some sort agenda against Crouch - and its fair to say that part of this attitude has been a bit mischievous on my part as a direct response to those so dissmissive of everything lowe, (even simply discussing the logic or rationale behind ideas that ultimately failed) and were so up Crouches backside. Crouch had his own merits and good ideas too and I would be happy to discuss those, but only with those who have open minds towards all. To much deeply polarised opinion in many cases on a refusal to get over the simplistic and superficial result and not enough willingness to ask the right questions before drawing conclusions. If that sounds patronizing Alpine - well tough, because thats the perception that is given by those so instantantly dismissive of any opinion that is not theirs (or the popular one) - and usually from those that respond with agressive one line dismissive ****** rather than taking the time to engage in proper debate and actually give an opinion and what they base it on...

I think what needs to be remembered is if this happened it would be because a new club was formed AFTER the loss of both Saints and Pompey as we know them - so less of 'union' more a new club - I could possibly give it a go under those circumstances as long as Westwood was banned or had to have the bell stuffed up his rectum for teh entire match duration.

Gentleman, is this helping? Lets step back for a moment - there were some advocating admin as a way to deliver us from evil and hopefully see a new dawn - and as a sentiment who could disagree? Its only because perhaps in these cases the consequences were not fully appreciated, or as many of us would have to admit it was not considered that we would not find a buyer - I have mellowed on this because its no different from me not seeing teh consequences of the dutch failure at season start being generally positive and up beat about the potential style we saw in pres season and the first few games... Surely we should just all agree that we are in teh mire and need help...soon!

Dont worry Ponty - we'll all be supporting Solent United - you heard it here first - we have teh stadium, Pompey the league position and solvency (well at least for the time being) - its obvious is it not, all we need is those clever Photoshoppers to show the new Blue and red striped kit ;-)

Why does the Echo simply keep posting stories they have heard on teh radio/TSW/from johnny the cab driver?

TBH for me its been less about the personalities and what they actually do or how they act in fulfilment of their plans - Lawrie for all his achiements for which he is rightly held in asteem did make a call to align himself very much much with Crouch and so will split opinion as a result, but would gain more support should he be part of plans that are obviously an improvement on what is happening right now. Personally, I struggle with his slight arrogance and willingness to join in the frenzy rather than at the time providing practical and constructive support/critique. Our herpoes need to rise above teh petty politics of blame and public slagging if they dont want to lose their halos