Alain Perrin

Personally I'd: - Drop Lallana, because he typifies our too pretty, no product style. - Tell whoever plays on the right to stay on the right (that Ryan Smith, if he's fit, would be a viable choice, even James who I don't rate at RB). - Play a defense of Skacel, Perry, Pearce, Cork - Play a midfield of Holmes, Surman, Euell, James/Smith - Play McGoldrick in behind BWP. This would be played 4-5-1, as now. I think the 4-4-2 argument is ********. I'd also have them practice shooting for 3 days solid, not 35 yard shooting as we see in the warm up (woeful by the way 19 shots today, 5 on target, 3 goals), but 15 / 20 yd shooting. Make them realise that every shot counts. After that I don't know.

Not in a million years. Le Tiss was an unmotivated player blessed with more talent in his left toe than most FIFA Players of the Season. That lack of drive would make him an awful manager.

Please if you feel the urge to turn this into a Lowe Out / JP to go thread then go elsewhere... You're Jan P, you've just been embarrassed at home 0-2 by (former European Champions ) Nottingham Forest. The next game looms, what do you change and how? You can't resign, bring in new players, magically fix injured ones or get rid of Rupert. You are where JP is now. I ask because, having watched today's debacle, there was so much wrong I'm not sure what can be done to fix it (and having seen him interviewed post match I'm not sure he knows either).

MTV generation solution to debt, declare bankruptcy / administration. We've spent the money, built up the debt and now need to suck it up and take the pain. Administration is an immoral step.

I can't support the dross seen today, no-one could, but I don't agree with your post. We played some (equally) shocking football under Pearson (Hull away, Burnley at home). That said if we had an option to change JP then we should consider it. I don't think Lowe will because a) we've got no money (for payoffs, new manager or associated players) b) it is Lowe's strategy and he'll stick by it. Ironic though that being 'trigger happy' is a stick often used to beat Lowe and when you want him to.....

To be honest calling someone a "PR Plant" because they hold a different opinion is just a playground taunt. People, regardless of their opinions, should be welcomed to this board if it is not to become a redundant backwater. Lowe's attempt to manipulate the SaintsForever forum backfired big time, but if you honestly believe that Wilde / Crouch et al. didn't use internet forums either through making best buddies with Keith Legg or getting Roger the office boy to do it, you're deluding yourself. I don't know, but I doubt Lowe is doing the same now. Several reasons: 1) This board isn't the opinion shaper it once was. 2) There's no immediate threat to his leadership 3) Once bitten, twice shy etc. And, for what it is worth, I agree with most of what Village Saint was saying. This year has been a struggle under difficult financial circumstances, but there have been flashes of brilliance amongst the mediocrity. Personally I still believe that the experiment can work.

It was a bull**** poll, not worthy of any analysis. A poll that was posted (and I can't remember which) at either 2-0 down or after we'd lost. Either way it would be skewed. If you'd been asked the same question immediately following the Reading result would it have been different? Anyway, enough of the poll analysis I quoted Corky above because I don't get one thing. Lowe has (as the Lowe out gang constantly remind) an insignificant share holding (circa 6%), so in what way does that make him the chief beneficiary of dividends and buybacks? I do agree with Corky's point about 12 months though. The guy has had one transfer window with not a lot of cash (the Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away). My opinion is that this season, given the resources, has shown promise without the results. Hopefully it can come together in 2009 and we can better last seasons finish. Maybe then, with the finances a bit more under control, we could try to move up the league next year.

Calderwood is from Swindon and an ex-player, paper talk 2+2=5

So garbage he got them promoted last year

Sorry for editing your post to get my message across, but if you ain't part of the solution, you're part of the problem.... Regardless of who is at the helm, this club needs money to survive and if you're expecting administration to result in a takeover I think you are sadly mistaken. Times have changed and there is not the money floating around that there was. I fear administration will be a deathnell for Southampton FC (anyway, enough of this, I'm off to Woolworths).

Job specification 1) Mustn't attend games (he's a PLC chairman for FFS) 2) Must attend games 3) When attending games must stand in prescribed area, not facing the pitch lest his facial expression be seen to be influencing the manager in some way. 4) Before games must not speak to players or manager (regardless of topic or timing - Rupert - "Jan, glad I caught you - I've agreed the contract, Dean Gorre can join us" Jan "La La La La - not listening!") 5) After games must not speak to players or manager. 6) Mustn't require paying. 7) Must be willing to take abuse from 'lunatics'. Yep... no problem, drop that into the Times and watch the applications roll in.

25 x £100 a night x 2 equals how much? (then compare to what Stern John's on and you'll realise it is insignificant). Better to get a full day to relax and train away from kids, xmas shopping etc. in my opinion.

Shooting is the problem. Watch the boys warming up ahead of a home game. The number of shots that go wide, over or straight at the keeper is appalling. No pressure, no product, means trouble when the pressure is on.

Pro-Lowe or No-Lowe, this myth must be killed. Anyone who was at Hull or the Burnley capitulation would not agree. I am thankful NP kept us up, his passion was refreshing, and bringing on Lallana at QPR was either inspired or a last throw of the dice. Sheff Utd was a highly charged and emotional day, but to use that to judge Nigel Pearson is like telling a one night stand you love them whilst 'doing the bad thing' - it seemed right at the time but so, so wrong the morning after. To paint him as some kind of demi god is wrong in my opinion.

Agreed but the aim is to get a balance of profit and progression. The higher up the league(s) the club gets, the longer the players will stay for, the more money we can charge, the more profit we make, the better players we can buy.

Both sides on this increasingly tiresome debate are prone to hyperbole. Both your post and the John B post are in my opinion good examples of this. I consider myself to be a reasonable person, but I have opinions too, whether or not you consider them to be biased or blinkered is your decision. In my opinion.... Lowe was PARTIALLY responsible for relegation but there were other factors too (managerial disruption, bad luck, unmotivated players plus a host of others - some of which are resulting from Lowe, others not.). You can argue than if you are "hanging on in there" (as we did for so many years) then eventually your time will come, but that is a result of the other factors, rather than time itself. I agree that good ideas can help save a business (free buses and corners), but you also need to make hard, unpopular decisions. Saints are feeling the brunt of these decisions now (player sales etc.). It is like when Gordon Ramsey cuts a menu back to basics, some customers are going to be disappointed that Patagonian Lamb Fricasse is no longer on the menu - others will see it as a response to allow a menu to exist at all. In my opinion, the fact that we seek out one person to blame for our woes says more about society than it does about Lowe's ability as a businessman. The problem with this and so many threads is that the anti-Lowe and pro-Lowe factions are so wounded they react by defending or attacking his decisions to the extreme. That doesn't help the debate, it just stokes the fires of resentment. The article itself is harmless enough, he's saying we're still in do-do, the Man Utd time won't help enough. All true and nothing we didn't know (although some post did seem to suggest that we now wouldn't have to sell which I think is over egging it). Eitherway it is really not worth getting so upset about.

I thought Saint_Marc was that photocopier salesman bloke?

LOL http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/forum/search.php?searchid=115842

Lol. It just goes to prove that no matter what Lowe does he is damned. He speaks, he shouldn't, he doesn't speak he should. He goes to games, he shouldn't, he doesn't go to games "where's the board representation". He's positive, don't patronise us, he's negative, don't be a doom monger. The best PR advice RL had before he came back was to stay out of the spotlight. In the most part he has done that and, by doing so, he has starved the anti-Lowe movement of much of their oxygen. Occassional utterances like this, plus regulatory requirements like accounts bring them back though, spluttering to the surface like guppy's on a feeding frenzy.

Much as I hate to agree with Alpine, he doesn't need a reason not to attend, he lives in Austria FFS. People who stay away "because of Lowe" who live in St Mary's Road, fine, but people who have families and a fair way to travel don't deserve abuse in my opinion.

A source close to the board (don't ask, I can't tell you who) tells me they will begin with an M, one of... Macclesfied Mansfield Middlesborough Man City or Man Utd I trust this person, they given me good info before....

To suggest that single Saints fan doesn't appreciate that results are important is stupid. Everyone wants to win, and win every game - hell even Lowe wants to win every game. The fact is though, and I think this is the point you miss, is we have depleted team from last season and are financially screwed. We can't expect to win every game but, providing we can survive this year (on the pitch and on balance sheet), we have a chance of building something special. A great analogy because we are all stuck on that plane. However I struggle to work out who you are in it? As I see it you have three options: 1) You can be the person that just sits at the back crying "we're doomed" as the plane crashes to the earth. At least you can die smug, but you still die. 2) You can be a person that sits behind the amateur pilot (who is incidentally the only one with any flying experience on a plane) and whisper's "you're **** mate, you don't know what your doing, you're going to kill us all" in his ear. 3) You can support your only realistic hope with words of encouragement and hope that the Cesna pilot can be talked down by control. The way I see it our financial situation is such that we are already on that plane and that the doors sealed and pressurised. All other pilots (managers) are left in the Airport - including N. Pearson who almost ran out of runway on the last landing (and all the Duty Free that Burley bought has been re-sold). JP is the only person who has flown before and apparently has experience of flying with near empty fuel tanks. Unless a mid air refuelling (takeover) happens, it is unlikely we will find another pilot in the toilet, and get the plane down in time. So who are you? Personally I'd always be (3) but in my opinion you are the worse kind, a combination of (1) and (2) - the guy who tries to open the emergency exit at 30,000ft. (ps. did I push the analogy too far?)

I don't know what irks me more, cheating... or agreeing with Stanley Two things that annoy me: 1) TV Commentators saying "oh the ref bought that one" or similar. Blaming the ref for falling for the deceipt, rather than the player that made the dive. 2) The delay in punishment - the FA takes too long to take action over players misdemeanors (both on and off the pitch). When you hear about a fine for a game that happened months ago it is like punishing a puppy for weeing on your floor yesterday (they don't learn). I'd do the following I'd have a panel that sat on Monday morning and reviewed the weekends fixtures for contencious decisions (whether or not they'd made it in to the referees report). I'd include in that any diving / chat back / failing to go to the ref and punish accordingly. If something was a game changer I wouldn't change the result, but I would double the punishment on the offending player. I'd also not fine on sums, but on a weekly salary multiplier. Sky could then televise John Terry cry as he has to pay a £500K fine for backchatting the ref. It would soon stop it. ps. if you wanted to really get it to work, everyone in the team should be fined, in a kind of whole class detention principle!

Jesus, now it is a semantic argument. Everyone has an interest in Saints, and there are people who are (in whatever way they can) stepping up the plate to 'support' the club financially. What is the one thing the club needs to stop it going in to administration? Financial support. So I am a "financial" supporter, I attend home matches, and those that concienciously object are "armchair" supporters. Some are listening to the radio, some (like John Smith) are ****ging his missus. What I object to is "armchair" supporters (those who could go, there are plenty who can't for various valid reason) complaining that we have to sell players and suggesting this is because of Lowe. In part it is because of YOU. Surely you cannot deny this? I also object to people dressing up their perfectly valid reasons as some martyrdom operation against Lowe. Not liking the football on show is a valid reason, and as phrases like "tempted back" suggest are more likely than a professed Lowe hatred. I would suggest that if you are citing the reason for you not going as "Lowe is a shadow over the club" then you are not supporting to the best of your ability. That is your choice but I think it damages your credibility to complain about issues which are made worse by your lack of support.

Ah Um Pahars in masturbatory glee over accounts shock....