Alain Perrin

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....

lol, so why weren't they at Preston? Nothing to do with the fact that it was our closest away day?????

Without wishing to be rude but how the **** do you know that? If you're staying away then you've no right and no evidence to judge the quality of the football played. Pretty much the only games we've been below par in have been on Sky. Pity really because that would have been a great advert for quality football. You could have judged from the 30seconds on the Championship or listened to the radio. Entertaining or no that might be, that's about as much use as letting a blind man choose my wallpaper.... Our away form has been good but I suspect you are one of those 'stay aways' that was going to go to every away game (until that was the missus asked you to go shopping, your budgie died or the car needs fixing). These youngsters aren't failing but what do you care?

I was waiting for this b****** argument to be trotted out. Whilst I have no doubt that some were the "never set foot" types I suspect that many of the "never set foot types" had mysterious other engagements or other reasons for not going. The actual number? Who knows? At best a few hundred. If I could be arsed I'd look at the fervent stay away posters and see how many made the effort? (Was Alpine there? Yorkie?) More influential was that Reading is our closest league derby and, in part due to Saint's coastal location, for many fans (those that travel in from Basingstoke, Swindon, even London etc.) it was actually an easier journey. Personally I was back home by 6.10pm compared to my usual 7.15pm. "Can we play you every week?"

A very fair argument, until the pub gets bulldozed and a Tesco gets built in its place. Administration will make RL look like Mother Teresa.

You should buy yourself a bottle of this.... http://www.amazon.co.uk/CK-Obsession-100ml-EDP-Perfume/dp/B000IOSHTY I've read a lot of your posts but this one is keeerrrazzzzy. Do you seriously believe there are people paid to disagree with your opinions on here? Not only is that lunacy, it is disrespectful. Effectively what you are saying is if I disagrees with your opinion I must be a plant/PR man etc. No, I just think you are talking ****! For what purpose? As your post proves this forum exists for a few hardcore Saints obsessives, they aren't going to change their minds (although they'll probably shut up if we start winning again). I've pretty consistently supported Lowe as I consider him the best option for Saints. If a better one comes along then I'll support them (but unlike you I want a viable alternative, not just cutting my legs off and then thinking about where I want to walk). Unlike a lot of the the anti Lowe chip on the shoulder gang, I supported Saints under Wilde MK1, Crouch et al. I don't care who the suit is, provided the football is good. Not that you'd know that by not going, but hey, your loss

You are entitled to your opinion and actions John Smith, and you are right that football has changed. But that is football, not just Saints. For that you should blame Rupert Murdoch, not Rupert Lowe (he is merely a bit player). I do think there are certain fans who'd raison d'etre seems to be to hate Lowe, rather than support Saints and those are fans I (as a loon that still goes) think are becoming irrelevant. We'll either sink or swim without them, so they might as well not be there. I've watched every home game and a few away games this season. I've enjoyed good (even great) football in almost every match. Sometimes, even many times, I've walked away disheartened because we lost through youth and inexperience. Yes I find it frustrating, but more because I think we are close to the real deal - a team made up of enthusiasm, not mercenaries. A team that can play football, real football, in a hoof and run league. .... And that is why I find stay away's who protest they won't return until Lowe goes annoying. Partly because (I believe) they're pushing us closer to administration over politics (politics that are irrelevant to the 11 players in red and white), and partly because it feels like they're killing that dream. I also think Lowe is a convenient excuse for a lot of fans. Fans where the real reason for non-attendance is poor results, money, kids, work or distance. For them a 'Lowe Boycott' is convenient and has a lot more street cred and that's just, well a bit sad. Not saying that's you, because regardless (until we're forced into administration anyway) it is their and your loss, not mine. And if you don't feel that loss, well you cease to be a fan of Southampton FC. ps. not wishing to be pedantic, but it's absolved, not absorbed

Excellent so you agree that it doesn't have to be a football man then? Hang on though, how will he know how to treat the "customers". Running a PLC where I have to answer to a bunch of reactionary tosspots (and I don't mean the share holders) takes someone who is single minded and arrogant. Ermmm, like the bloke we've got. Unless you want Leon Crouch who is single minded but hardly covered himself in glory in his recent stint did he (Dodd + Gorman, untruths about contract renegotiations etc.) Anyone who doesn't deliver instant success will soon become enemy number one. Try putting that in the advert and see any applications you get (oh and don't forget the salary is f'all)

I agree, the Tyro league is where real football is played. Eastleigh won't get a penny of my money until that scum of a chairman is gone. I will support them away from home though because I bleed erm, Eastleigh, I do.