Alain Perrin

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

I fully respect the right to protest, but what does this protest want to achieve? All the good protests have a defined objective (poll tax, Iraq, suffragettes etc.). I think the protest "against the running of the club" is a bit wooly. What does it mean? - You want the club to stop running! - You want the club to be run differently (regardless of the personalities) - You want Lowe to resign. - You want the whole board to resign. - You want Crouch instead of Lowe. - You want a new board, clean broom. - You want JP out (job done!) Otherwise those that oppose you will divide and conquer. You need to be clear about the objectives, otherwise it's: "What do you want? Ermm?" "When do you want it? Now!

Yes, I agree. If he taught my kids and was protesting in favour of legalising heroin / death penalty for homosexuality / capital punishment for sadomasochism, I wouldn't complain. He has the right to protest about what he likes. I know it is a world away from those issues, but where do you draw the line?

Thanks. Didn't need the help though, it was a deliberate mishpelling, hence the quotes. I can recommend Google Chrome for it's in-built dictionary - it helps with the pendants on here

Arghh it pains me! I have sympathy with Alpine on this one. The thread title was OTT, but that's his choice / style. My sarcastic thread response was an expression of my rapier like wit, rather than a criticism. That said it doesn't really matter and the forum will be better if we all try to avoid falsehoods and 'highperbowl'. Let's all try to get on

Probably worth self-closing this thread because this sounds on the right track... http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=8758

I'm following Alpine_Saints lead of posting a thread title that misrepresents an article massively! In the Mail today, covering JP's departure there is a curious phrase "Southampton have called a press conference for Monday, when further details of Wotte's appointment will be explained." What does this mean? Is it just a turn of phrase, or is there more to this than is first apparent. There seems to be some spin going down from the Crouch camp, so I suspect the later. Anyone heard the inside track?

Why????? What purpose does it serve for someone (presumably Crouch or associate) to get Fitzhugh Fella to post/plant this (seemingly benign) bit of information? I have no idea.

Not wishing to swim against the current but I still want to avoid admin first, whether that's with or without Lowe/JP doesn't matter to me. I like the JP idea, and would have loved it have worked (I'm not sure everyone can say that). However, no-one can dispute we certainly have played some entertaining football this year, with young enthusiastic players - unfortunately a lot of naivity and some total gash results/performances too mind you. FWIW I don't think we're united, the fights in the Stadium seem to prove we're not. I am sure the Anyone But Lowe camp have a few more tents in their field after a miserable defeat against Doncaster, but equally I think a lot of pro-Lowe / ambivilants have just given up trying to argue against what are undoubtedly the majority (and from this boards membership an intransigent majority). That doesn't mean they agree, it just means they've quit arguing with the little boy over whether he can play with matches, just let him burn the house down if he wants too (frankly it's on fire anyway). If that's too many analogies for you then you can.... stick that in yer pipe and smoke it.

To be honest machine gunning a bunch of negative ****ers like you wouldn't necessarily be a bad result I am not against change, but it is difficult to see what benefit it would bring in the time remaining with the resources we have available.

Thought it would be more one sided. I feel this justifies my Lowe In position.

Where I work there is a big sign saying "Display your security badge at all times". When this was first introduced we were encouraged to 'interrogate' (in the nicest possible way) anyone who didn't follow the rules. A colleague of mine did this to a person she didn't recognise. Turned out he was the chairman of the board. I wouldn't recognise David Armstrong from the next man, although I know he was a slaphead! I'd bet good money the steward didn't recognise him either, hence the point the club make about welcoming ex-players but making sure that plans are known so that stewards can be informed. The steward called him 'sir', rather than 'Mr Armstrong' which suggests to me that he didn't know him (tenuous maybe). Granted some stewards are fans, to others it is just a job. (ps. How Lowe can be mentioned in this thread when he wasn't there is beyond me).

Where I work there is a big sign saying "Display your security badge at all times". When this was first introduced we were encouraged to 'interrogate' (in the nicest possible way) anyone who didn't follow the rules. A colleague of mine did this to a person she didn't recognise. Turned out he was the chairman of the board. I wouldn't recognise David Armstrong from the next man, although I know he was a slaphead! I'd bet good money the steward didn't recognise him either, hence the point the club make about welcoming ex-players but making sure that plans are known so that stewards can be informed. The steward called him 'sir', rather than 'Mr Armstrong' which suggests to me that he didn't know him (tenuous maybe). Granted some stewards are fans, to others it is just a job. (ps. How Lowe can be mentioned in this thread when he wasn't there is beyond me).

Doesn't stop most on here

Let me explain how percentages work....

No evidence for this but I suspect that Pulis was signed as a sweetner in the Davis deal. i.e. you'll get more for Davis if you take this crock off our hands. If you do the maths then I suspect we got a good deal, otherwise there would be no point. Of all the things he can be blamed for, when it comes to transfers Lowe is not naive.

To be fair Armstrong didn't call for a boycott. A caller rang up and said she wasn't going to renew her season ticket and instead was going to buy for every game (she was very screechy). He said the thing the board would notice would be empty stadiums and, if you did want to protest, staying away was the best way. So he stopped short of calling for a boycott (although maybe he was being tactful)

Not sure why that was a lol, because that was my point. Isn't Daren W a pseudonym? I'm good at guessing, but there are many 'W' names you could be called! No, it's a poster saying watch out for it happening, not that it is happening. Who is spinning now? Yes. Yes (although 'favourable ride' is a bit like describing Dale Winton as ever so slightly camp). I don't remember the Wilde incident but don't doubt it happened. I think the one thing you can't accuse Lowe of not facing up, there are numerous occasions where he has taken abuse in public/semi-public gatherings. Whatever you think about the man, he's got a brass neck. Personally I see the original debacle as a reaction to what was a master stroke of PR by Wilde. One that backfired on Lowe big time (another reason why I don't think he'd risk it again. I am not asleep. I'd happily replace Lowe with someone better, but at the moment, given our financial plight, I doubt much (other than the name and the dodgy jacket) would change. My opinion is build it and they will come, just don't dynamite the old building before the plans are in place for the new one. Otherwise you're no better than Bush in Eye-raq.