Alain Perrin

I agree. I have my suspicion that Stanley is in fact either the same person as Scooby, just playing a different role, or in fact a PR Plant paid for by Rupert Lowe to boost his support through reverse psychology.

Don't worry, someone from the "let's all hang ourselves everything is ****e" brigade will be along to spoil the fun shortly. We've had tons of players who have been rejected by other clubs and turned out to be blinding for us (Paul Williams is a good example), tons we've written off who have then turned the corner (Crouch, Alan Bennett) and some who were ****e when they came and ****e when they left (insert name here). Fact is the posters that slagged off Crouch and Bennett, crawl under a rock when they suddenly 'come good'. Let him play, if he's good then great, if he's gash then we haven't lost a lot. Say we're paying him £1K a week, we've probably committed £25K as a gamble. That's two weeks of Stern John's wages.

Ah my name dates back before my ill-fated engagement with the Skates, indeed when he was touted as an option for us. Back in the S4E days I thought it would be amusing to change my name and write a witty question as to why I (Alain) should join Southampton. It coincided with the mods stopping the ability to change names - the wind changed, as it were, and I was stuck with it. Regarding Rupert as bad for the club, I think it depends how you ask the question. I know plenty (more) people that think Lowe is bad for the club, but I do know a healthy minority who are fearful of an 'Anyone but Lowe' knee jerk reaction. And I'm in that camp. In my opinion it has reached a state where any nuance (on either side) is twisted to fit an agenda. Take Wotte's comment. No one here knows what question he was asked, yet there are pages on here deriding him. He could have been asked "What do you think of the banners and placards wanting you out after just one game", in which case his answer would have been appropriate. I think if people could try and be objective and not see evil in everything then that would be a start.

My attitude is exactly the same to those that belittle the march, it's purile and it is self perpetuating. From the 'ye ha we've got out club back' triumphalism, through to this thread. Take this march, for every poster deriding the numbers there's another one over egging them. Look at this thread to see how the estimate has gone up. Starting at 'over 500' through to claims of 'over 2000' - purely in reaction to baiting. The actual number, who knows, significant. No doubt some of them were on the way to the ground, and may or may not have agreed / been ambivilent. The fact is many made the effort to protest. Do I agree with their aims? It depends on what they are, and this is where my problem is. I fear a post-war Iraq scenario where the evil dictator has been toppled, with no real clue of what comes after. I seem to remember we've been there before....

Gordon, your rant says more about you than the people you call tossers. I can find fault in much that Lowe has done/is doing, but in the land of the blind etc. I think he is the best option we have of avoiding admin (note: my opinion). Your attitude though, drives me to want to defend Lowe more than he has a right for. I can handle your "I'm right so everyone else must be wrong" attitude, we can call it self-belief. However, it is the blinkered "I'm right so everyone that disagrees must be a PR Plant/Pompey fan/Troll etc." attitude that devalues anything else meaningful you might have to say. We are all Saints fans. We all want Saints to do well. We disagree on the how and the who. Deal with it.

I'd like to think I'd have some understanding as to why we are where we are. I'd like to think I'd applaud trying to recover financially by playing youth. But yes I would be critical of them over Jan because it didn't get the results. Personally I'd like to reserve judgement on Wotte.

I found an excerpt from the 'Anyone But Lowe Handbook' fluttering around in the breeze behind the protest yesterday, one of the marchers must have dropped it. It reads: In the event of someone disagreeing with you, on no account should you give a sensible response. We recommend employing one of the following tactics: a) Accuse them of being a PR plant. b) Accuse them of being Rupert Lowe or an associate. c) Act like a complete c*ck Congratulations on deploying (b) and © with devastating effect.

Ahhhemmm

History is littered with examples of Saint's fans 'easy judgement' (Peter Crouch, Fuller, Pearson, Alan Bennett) - not that it is just a Saint's disease. Judge the man on results, not association or history. Far more fight in the team than I've seen in many a game and that can only be a good thing.

FFS you lot. Are you completely brainless? What did you expect him to say? "I think Rupert should go" Whoever is manager has to work within the structure he finds himself. Even your beloved Pearson would be kissing [whoever] the Chairmans arse on camera. I think you've got the balance between being Rupert haters and Southampton supporters wrong. Two games unbeaten (not great, but better than nowt) and you're on his back because of a vox-pop. You need to get a reality check and realise that, at this stage of the season, it is what happens on the pitch that will determine whether or not we survive in this league, not who is in the boardroom.

Hush woman! or you'll feel the back of my hand....

Or I've got something that you seem to lack (a sense of humour). There was no Pro-Lowe march, it was a joke, honest No doubt the ABL gang are the majority, how big, how small cannot be judged. Personally I suspect it varies massively depending on the last few results. I have no great affinity for Lowe, I just want Saint's to do well whoever is at the helm. I do think he gets some unnecessary stick for what is a ultimately a difficult job (especially at the moment given our finances). I would support an alternative if they would (could) do different / better things. Does that make me a Luvvie? I don't think so, but you can think what you like. My only problem with today's march was the non-specificity of its objectives. Sure 'Duck off Lowe' but then what? It reminds me of George Bush and Iraq. Clear he wanted to topple Saddam but without a plan for peace. I don't buy Crouch as a viable alternative. Forget his short tenure before - where the Dodd / Gorman callamity and the duplicity over the Walcott cash in stand out (both of which incidentally would be hung round his neck like a millstone by you and your crew if they were Lowe's decisions), His behaviour at the AGM, ably assisted by Mr & Mrs McMenemy, sealed it for me. He's a fan, no doubt, but we need someone who is a business man first, Saints fan second and I don't think that is Crouch.

Let's see. The Anti-Lowe demo got 1500 supporters (excepting some incidentals and Swansea fans). Attendance today 17,623. Therefore the Pro-Lowe demo was 16,123. We came a different route to you but it was very well supported.

The photoshop comment was ironic, mainly for the benefit of those that jump on anyone who disagrees with them as a PR plant.... Clearly a good turnout, representing a lot of discontent with Lowe/performance of the team. The true test would be a protest on a non-matchday though, as the phrase "numbers swelled as we approached the stadium" is a bit nonsensical, of course they would.

I don't believe that many people turned up. It's quite obvious that those pictures have been photoshop'd

Except for the exceptionals (a la Walcott), I can't see the first team manager being involved in signing academy youngsters other than maybe a handshake at the end.

Great minds etc.

One word.... Watford For that I will always be thankful (and I bet he wouldn't do the skiddy knee celebration on the local park as opposed to Villa park!)

Also FWIW I think we should keep fans as far away from the running of the board of Saints as possible. Passion clouds the clear logical thinking that is needed to run a multi-million pound business (like it or not, it is one). I think we should have fan representation (I think Leon would have the credentials for that), but fan control is a different matter all together. Remember what happened the last time "we got our club back"....

FWIW, I have an envelope on my desk with a cheque that I have just written for £2m. I will deposit it with the club when LC deposits his money. Of course if you cash it, it will bounce - but I'd like everyone to know that I offered. An "offer" of money is like the offer of a ****job from Angelina Jolie, until it happens she is just being a tease.

I don't think I do. I always thought we'd offered him a contract to sign in order to keep him on this books, with the hope of a resale at some point or, as you point out, compensation if he didn't accept. As it is he hasn't cost us much because he's been on loan with his wages paid by someone else and we can still sell him. Win win in my opinion.

What criteria? I assume it was an offer we wanted him to accept, hence matching probably wouldn't have worked.

To be fair, I'd struggle to tell you the name of three agents (beyond those that that have been in the press for taking bungs). Your last paragraph doesn't make sense. Are you saying the club should provide detailed role descriptions for everyone they have dealings with, just so fans know what is going on. Beryl Symmons - Beryl is in charge of cleaning the toilets. She has over 10years experience in sanitaryware cleansing. etc. etc.

Thanks Gordon for yor insightful feedback. I do try and be objective, do you? A couple of points which may have slipped your mind. 1) We are broke - we can't afford any of our higher waged stars (Rasiak, John, Saga etc.). It serves no-ones purpose for them to be out on loan unless we don't have an option. 2) It is in NO-ONEs interest for Saints to get relegated or go to the wall. Do you not think Lowe would jump at the chance to be promoted? 3) When you started work were you on the same wage as now? Likely not. Experienced, quality staff cost more, office juniors are cheap as chips. I reckon you'd almost halve the wage bill of our normal team by not having 2 players (Rasiak and John) on the books (Skacel may skew that though). 4) You are naive if you think Nigel Pearson was a one man band, he'd have had support staff too. Pound for pound was JP cheaper, probably, but inconsequentially. Despite what Lowe says on this, I think it is obvious that price wasn't the main reason for getting rid of Pearson. Lowe's belief (right or wrong) that Pearson wasn't the man to operate on a shoestring was probably more the reason. 5) Despite youth, Dyer is probably on reasonable wages. He was on his second contract and he's an asset that would have walked out of the club with minimal compensation. At the moment he isn't costing us anything and is (probably) increasing in value. That's good business in my book, do you not agree? 6) Quality, ah quality. A word forgotten by people like yourself when talking of Delgado et. al. For every Delgado there was a Crouch, for every Nilson there was a Niemi, for every Van Damme there was a Svenson. "Look at the rubbish we're signing at the moment" you say as you scrabble around for your magic beans that makes the money grow. If you can give me three, no two - ah go on, one realistic reason why it suits Lowe to get relegated, I will bow to your superior knowledge. If you can't, then you cannot explain why he'd not want to make the best quality team (including our two top scorers) available for the manager (whoever he may be) to select from. Losing for the fun of it suits no one.

Transfer fees / loan arrangements are small beer compared to the (obscene) wages some of our 'stars' have been on. I bet you can pay the wages of most of those 15 with a John + a Rasiak. Youth = pocket money. Your 'who signs who stick' is irrelevant. SFC have had the same policy on signings for the last 10yrs. Chairman, scouts, managers, agents, coaches provide the options and a commitee of people decide based on need, quality and finances. Personally I am happier with that than having a manager running around with a brown envelope. If we have a brute of a striker, great, we need one. Climb down off your anti-Lowe horse and try to be happy about it