Alain Perrin

Which is precisely why I agree with Nickh. Support the team through the match, boo Lowe at the end. Anything else is, in my opinion, self defeating. To throw a punch at a fellow Saints fan is despicable. Ever since Hoddle-gate this club has been turning in on itself, blame, counter-blame, anger, vitriol and now violence. Like the Roman Empire, the mob will destroy SFC, and I'm not sure how you solve it.

We keep hearing rumours about Leon Crouch offering £2m to the club but only if the others chip in too. Personally I think this is an empty offer, but let's assume it isn't. If LC is serious about it, he should go the Daily Echo and state it loud and proud. Better than just chucking £2m into the abyss, why not sponsor the wages for Lupoli or another signing? He would then force Rupert to put up or shut up, until then it is like me offering £2m (nice idea, but I'm struggling with the mortgage as it is!)

Keep up the positive comments on Radio Hampshire Tim, they're a breath of fresh air in a (often ill informed) gale force of negativity. I was thinking about the differences between fans who attend games regularly vs. occasional / radio vs. read the report fans. The fix that they require to keep them happy is very different. All get ****ed off when the team lose and perform badly. Attendees (like myself) are pacified if the football is good and exciting, but we lose. If you're a radio/report fan then the result is far more important than the experience. For example I would vehemently resist appointing a hoof and run manager, even if it meant winning a few more games, because my match day experience would be reduced. Even a great radio presenter will struggle to convey the difference between a hoof and run goal and a crafted goal. The issue this year has been that for EVERY televised game our team has failed to turn up. This means that the remote fan hasn't seen that there are positives to take away in the sea of negativity. I'm not trying to make out that all is great if you sit in the stadium, it isn't. Just that it is probably easier to be despondent if you are sat in your armchair/car listening or reading about the game. All in moderation though, we need to win more and that begins with today.

Sorry that is ********. Whilst I agree that you have to look backwards to inform what you do going forwards, the 'picture in the boardroom' debacle is a complete irrelevance. If the picture scored goals on the pitch or cleared off the line then it would be worth worrying about. Other than that it is a pointless illustration of how irrelevant some of the arguments between those that run the club and those that want to run the club (and their supporters on here) are. You can add it to the colour of the boardroom chairs, carpet or type of biscuits served at for elevensies (who cares if they're made in Portsmouth). The sooner people realise there are bigger things to worry about (y'know, things that make a difference to whether we win or lose) the better. Most fans haven't ever been, and won't ever go, into the boardroom anyway, so they can have naked pictures of Rupert Lowe for all I care.

Poor Rupert. He is being slated for now is having the temerity to demand more shops etc. which would have - **** me - earned the club more money? The bastard. So the Stoneham project, sorry the non-viable Stoneham project, fell through. Shouldn't we be celebrating that? SMS is our home, Rupert helped deliver that at a fairly decent price (when you look at how much Wembley cost / Pompey's fairytale will cost) - deal with it. It is not easy to deliver a stadium, regardless of what some on here think (just ask Everton, Liverpool or Athens 2004). For all its faults, the reverse takeover enabled the rights issue that helped get the ball rolling on the stadium. It might not be right for us now, but SMS wouldn't exist without it.

See threads on Crouch, Kenwyne and many others to see how 'we' can be proved wrong. No doubt McGoldrick has potential, he's still young and has a lot to learn. For our sake and his I hope he does well.

Because I'm sure the fans would have harboured no malice towards Hoddle if RL hadn't stoked the fire...... how naive are you?

To be honest I think, bar the AGM (at which neither side covered themselves in glory), that RL has made the best of a bad job on his return. He was never going to be popular, and nothing was going to change the 'lunatic fringe' into card carrying 'lowe luvvies'. That said he's taken, in press terms a pretty anonymous back seat and that has reduced the amount of sticks he can be beaten with. If the accounts are to be believed, cuts needed to be made and RL has made them. If he cut too much, time will tell and we'll be relegated. If he has cut just enough and JP stays up then it will be job done. It's a ****ty job but someone had to do it, and whoever did it will be vilified for it. To be honest I think Wilde and even Crouch / Fulthorpe et. al are happily sitting back letting RL take the flak (afterall if you are already considered as Satan, how much worse can it get).

When you look at the crop we've turned out in the last few years that boast isn't too far from the truth though is it? Whatever the reasons (investment, our turn etc. etc.), any academy that can turn out Bridge, Bale and Walcott in quick succession has got to be respected.

Would prefer the thread to be about things you yourself have posted. Otherwise it'll turn into a "he said, she said" fight between people with small penises.

Seeing as we've posts using the benefit of hindsight to critique what Wilde and Lowe have said, I thought it would be useful to turn the mirror of history on us, the fans, the supporters, the lunatic fringe. What have you posted on this board that has later proven plain stupid? For example: "We will walk this league" "Dodd and Gorman should be given a chance" "We got our club back" etc. Mine would have to be (I paraphrase) "our squad is much stronger than last year" (before the relegation season )

No doubt he didn't work out, but it is not irrelevant. Out of the candidates available at the time (those asked or interested in to managing a recently relegated club which needed a major restructure), I am questioning whether George was, on paper, the best man for the job - or rather who were the alternatives you would rather have had at the time? Clearly no chairman appoints a manager expecting them to fail, why would they. That said, all you can do is look at is their CV and how they come over in the interview. On the CV alone (all we can go on) George was the winner by a country mile I'd have said.

Sorry to be a Lowe apologist but isn't that a fact. Burley may have turned out ****e, but I can't remember people complaining when he was appointed. It was almost viewed as a bit of a coup.

What do you expect? His first name is Um

I would be very surprised if there are PR plants on here, you won't change the minds of those on this board and it's not the opinion shaper it once was. I think it is, more often than not, a cheap jibe by someone who can't understand that someone could possibly disagree with them. To be honest there are some opinions on here that are so vile, bitter and one-sided that they do more for raising positive posts for Lowe than any PR would. I don't agree with everything RL does/is doing, and will say as much. However, there are times when I feel compelled to defend him from people who blame him for everything post WWII.

I think it'll be a great idea. We could get rid of all the miserable *****, plus it would be hilarious hearing the Solent FC fans argue about team selections. ("He's no better than a Sunday league player! Oh, hang on, we ARE Sunday league!")

Stupid statement. I assume you had similar comments on Crouch (before he came good), Bennett (before he came good), Williams (before he came good) etc. etc. Lancashire is not Sunday League standard and to suggest so says more about you than it does about him. There might be an argument that he is not yet ready for the Championship, week in week out, he's certainly no match for Man Utd's strikers, but I think he stands a chance of becoming a good footballer. Will he play for Arsenal or Chelsea, probably not - but are we Arsenal or Chelsea?

Thank you for giving me Forecast - I knew I was missing one. I can't disagree with much of what you say. I remember thinking before the relegation season what a good squad we had in comparison to the previous one where, at one point we were struggling to find a fit 15. However, as became clear, it is not the squad, but the team that is important and our team didn't cut it. Lowe has to take the lions share of the blame for this because he was behind the managerial appointments that recruited too many 'squad' players. There are other factors, not Lowe's fault, and these are well documented (see any of Dalek's posts ). When he was ousted the first time I supported him, but accepted that the new guys would bring benefits (best of all in my mind was the end of the poisonous fans atmosphere at SMS which I don't think benefited the team). That said, Wilde, Hone and Crouch let us down, promising much and delivering nothing except a memorable night at Pride Park and a bag load of debt. If RL can sort that out so that we still have a solvent club in 12 months time and hopefully stay in the CCC, then good luck to him. I haven't seen any of the alternatives Leon, Laurie et al. offer any evidence that they could do a better job (and their behaviour at the AGM solidified that for me). If RL was ousted again and crowds went up by 3,000 then I'd support whoever came in. It didn't happen last time (despite the claims of Football first). Our attendance owes more to our league position, results, recession than it does to Rupert Lowe. I think that the best way to improve the league position is to be financially secure first. Clearly we don't want to be relegated to achieve this but this is a massive balancing act. Imagine if we kept John or Rasiak, stayed up by 6 points and then were relegated because we went into Administration??? Personally I think RL can steady the ship. I don't think Cowen can (he turned down the role on the grounds of experience) and I think that switching to Leon without a takeover will leave us with the same problems, if not worse (because Leon is a fan first, a business man second - RL is, in my opinion, the otherway round).

None taken, but I would like to know what the truth is. My problem with anti-Lowe bluster is it just that. All anger, no (affordable) solutions. If someone had a plan that got Lowe out, didn't put us into admin and kept us in the CCC, then I'd support them absolutely. To date, all I've seen is some grumpy old men complaining about photos in the boardroom.

Not Mr Angry and I don't know who Perry is (other than the SISA bloke but I'm not him)? I'm just a fan, like you, just with different opinions. If you think that anyone who disagrees with you must be on the inside / a PR plant or whatever, then it says more about you than me. I know what I've heard - that John was on £17K per week and Rasiak not far behind him. The rest is speculation on my part. What I know for certain (because I can read the published accounts) is that we have a problem. We have wages too high and income too low. The only way, the ONLY way to solve that is to increase income (takeover, attendance, exceptionals like Man Utd, player sales) or reduce costs (Wages (biggest %), staff, closing corners, free buses). I don't know any other way of doing it and therefore I can't slate Lowe for the inevitable.

"Rudi, thanks for coming" "Není problém Rupert" "Rudi we have problem, we can't afford your wages and we'd like you to look for another club. If you don't we won't be able to play you because of the win/goal/appearance bonus in your contract. This is is not a reflection your ability, you know we think you're a top player, it's just that we in financial difficulties. Anyway Ipswich want to speak to you, it's only £6K per week, half of what you are on now, but please speak to them" "Polib si Rupert, chci všechny vaše peníze vám kachna myslivost kurevníku" "Hmmm, well it looks like we have a problem then......." Anyone speak Czech?

Pray tell, what's it like ****ing Debbie McGee? If you can only pay peanuts, you get monkeys. Unless you've got a magic idea how we can magic money from somewhere I don't see we have much alternative. You might be able to shuffle the pack a bit, or get a couple of players in on sub-£3Kpw, but that's it. I hear that the club is still losing £10K per week. That's 60% of a John, or Rudi plus a Schiederlin. ps. add Holmes to the list, I forgot him. One more to hit the eight mentioned, who am I missing.

We are. That's why Rudi has played 17 games this season. When we realised we could sell him / loan him we played him. We have a number of 'high' earners, all of which when it comes to the books would be sold/loaned to get their weekly wage off the books. Saints wanted to sell Rudi to Ipswich but they couldn't meet his wage demands. What does that tell you about his wages???? No surprise that Lowe used the "we're not going to play you line". Most professionals care about playing as much as they do about the money but there is probably a point though when the cut in money to play just ain't worth it (again what does that tell you about Rudi's wages?) Not begrudging him it. He negotiated the contract and we need to honour it. It doesn't make the club evil for trying to get that contract off our backs though.

Yes, it must be a right ****er being on £15K a week. The poor little things. Just as a question. How much do you think we are paying the following players per week: Schiederlin Smith Pulis Gasmi Wotton Molyneaux Help me out, who are the other two? Given age and experience personally I doubt they are being paid more than £2-3K per week each. Wotton perhaps the exception (but he's out on loan). Given that Saga is seen as too expensive on £7K per week then it gives you a clue how little (and I use the word advisedly) some of players are on.

Because if he's on less than £32K a week (John and Rasiak's combined wage) then we'll be better off....