Alain Perrin

Yours is a well constructed argument, but I fear you are are either new here or naive. Um Pahars delights in a bit of Lowe bashing and anything tainted by his hands. Watch in awe as he digs out the Poortvliet's CV issue for the nth time! He has strong opinions, as many of us do, but if you expect him to accept that giving youth a chance is the only viable option, I fear you are wasting your time (unless of course it was Crouch's idea). Whilst I don't like to think this of anyone, I suspect that Um and a number of those who rail against Lowe get a degree (albeit a small amount) of satisfaction out of Saint's on pitch difficulties. Just as I suspose I'd gloat if the alternative were true - after all, everyone likes to be proved right. My worry is the debate is an echo of the original Lowe-out one. Want him out, anyone but Lowe/Poortvliet/Telfer/Delap will do. Any counter plan has to be viable and affordable (and when the coffers are bare, that leaves little option but the status quo).

I don't doubt we've a lower attendance than was expected, but I also doubt they planned on an average of 22,000 (afaik we didn't have that last season). That also assumes that all ticket holders pay maximum price. I also doubt we wanted rid of all of the above, 3 out of 5 maybe. So in short, we're in the ****, but I don't agree it is as deep as you say.

Clearly you could, and I am thankful for that. However I am not sure your comment adds a huge amount to the debate either....

The theory sadly only holds if we manage to sell enough of our young playing assets to make a dent on the debt, whilst still having a team that can consolidate and progress. Kind of a "chopping off your leg but leaving enough to still walk on" strategy. Unfortunately (without a sugar daddy) I can't see much alternative.

The same could be said about your reply

We're not going to win the league, we're not going to get to the playoffs, but we might survive. One thing is certain though, without the fans supporting we won't survive and there won't be a Southampton FC in 5 years time. Out of the games I have seen this season (all home, one away) I have seen positive displays (not results) in all but 3 of them (Blackpool and Barnsley: poor; Ipswich mediocre). What though did we expect? Personally I think expectations are too high at the moment (not helped by total football performances against Birmingham and Derby) and need to be re-alligned. We can still survive, then if we sort out our finances, build for the future. But, we need to keep the faith.

I suggest Sunderland the year before. Happy for people to slag off Jan, but only if they have a viable and affordable alternative..... and I thought Lowe was the trigger happy one!!

Precisely my point. A dis-united club, either at board or fan level will struggle to attract investment. All football investment at the moment is 70% profit, 30% ego driven. Any investor (unless it is a true fan and I don't believe they exist with the money required) will want to make (or at very least, not lose) money. Man City are a great bet from this perspective. Loyal fanbase (through think and thin) and Premiership. Saints - dwindling attendance, Championship - less so. Chuck in disunity and there is very little to attract any investor. It's a vicious circle though. Anti-Lowe poster seizes on any miniscule incident and turns it into a holocaust like attrocity, Pro-Lowe poster leaps to an over the top defence perhaps coupeld with a slight on Crouch etc. - with the trolls happily stirring things up in between. The point above about debating the facts, not the personalities is a powerful one. Only when the critcism of Lowe, Crouch or whoever is realistic (blames where there is a viable alternative); appropriate (blames where there is deliberate fault); proportionate (ie. some of Lowe's decisions ultimately contributed to relegation, but it wasn't only his fault); and impersonal (it matters not who Lowe is, it matters what he does), will the circle be broken. Not that this post will make any difference to the vitriol on here, just my thoughts though

Say no to Anti-Lowe.....

I don't doubt Lowe has a big ego, I don't doubt there are better people to do the job. Fact is though he is our only chance. I use the 'only' word deliberately because I can't see an alternative at the moment. Perhaps football attracts a particular breed, but, in my meagre experience, most senior execs are either lucky (in which case they don't last) or devious/politically astute. Couple that with fan vitriol and you've got the ingredients for an egotistical, thick skinned, singleminded chairman (ie. you've got Lowe). Others may pretend to be different, but underneath they are almost all the same. The one exception is Delia (and actually come to think of it she's an evil *****! ).

http://www.sportbox.tv/football/news/story.php?id=270910 Interesting comment from David Sullivan regarding Ashley's attempt to sell Newcastle. Reminds me of how fan vitriol towards Lowe would put off many a chairman. If I had £25m then I'm not sure I'd hand it over for the delight of being called a ******* by a bunch of fan(atic)s everytime the team loses three on a bounce, or critiqued because I may or may not be smiling/smirking whilst watching the team lose.

Incidentally, the original thread that started this was so utterly predictable - I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

It can't be though, can it? I'm sure that Lowe never listens to the fans....

I think people over egg the impact of gate receipts. An extra thousand bums on seats equates to a mere £20K per home game (assuming all adults at £20 each). I'm not claiming that every penny doesn't count, but getting someone significant salaries off the books is more significant (they get paid whether there is a home game or not).

If we can just stop fighting each other and focus on supporting the players on the pitch (rather than the boardroom) then the better we'll all be for it. I'm not asking for happy clappy positivity, just a realisation that, in most cases, people are trying their best - both on the pitch and in the boardroom.

Ps. I suspect when the loan window opens there will be more for people to maon about (I expect Scratchall and Uhaul will be off the books for some period then)

This thread is a joke. Let's us replace Lowe's name with Crouch or Branson or Laurie Mc, and let's see if the same faces post the same crap. If Lowe wasn't directly involved in the signings I am sure the same faces would say 'what are we paying him for'. QED, he (Lowe) cannot win, despite JP saying he's happy with his signings. Saint's sign players by based on requirements and finance - if you think JP has no input into those requirements you are at best naive, at worst a ******.

Poor show Nickh, we need to know his name, rank and serial number so that Alpine_Saint can perform a Cilla-like Surprise Surprise reunion for you both

The fact is we lost, but on the positive side JP does seem willing to change things when the gameplan isn't working. Hoddle was the last manager we had (IMHO) who could change the game with a substitute or tactical switch. Since then we've had people who just made stock changes at 65 minutes. Jimmy Case made an interesting point that we looked at subs on a like for like basis, not a midfielder for a leftback or complete team juggle to accommodate a new player. Given time I believe that JP will deliver the goods. He certainly says the right things and identifies what's wrong in the post-match analysis. I know fixing it is a whole different thing, but it is a start!

Most of the time Pahars had an attitude problem, not an injury problem. I don't doubt he had genuine injuries, but equally he had far to many viruses and toothaches for my liking. In the early years he was the Latvian Micheal Owen and saved us from relegation without a doubt, in the later years he was a work-shy mallingerer. Of course he would take a 66% pay cut, that's still 33% for not playing. The guy had more come backs than a Danish porn star.

Agree we should leave Plan C well alone, it's ****.

deleted

I do feel the obsession by the more vociferous Anti-Lowe posters about 'plants' is verging on paranoia. However, that all lies in the ashes of the TSF server - this new home seems far more refined (perhaps the Anti-Lowe focus of Um Pahars et. al. is fading when we've got good football and results to talk about). Or perhaps he's on holiday! Long may it continue (the positivity, not Um's holiday). I don't dispute that Lowe's PR company got rumbled posting a few messages years ago but to assume that people who disagree with you are stooges is disrespectful and not a little arrogant. The genius of the original Lowe-Out campaign was that Keith Legg et al did Mike Wilde's PR for free! It is also ironic that the leadership you damn is the one that brought the current coaching set up to the club, the one that is delivering the good football we ALL (regardless of persuasion) should appreciate. And that is the bottom line. Who cares? I've seen better football, from more commited players in the last 3 games, than I have in the last 3 years. If Lowe is responsible for that then well done him - perhaps it will go someway to making up for relegation, if not, who cares. I'd go anyway!

Yes, how dare they try and improve the service - the ******s!

Constructive comment as always Alpine. However, if you read what I wrote, rather than just jumping on the negativity express, you'll have seen I'd welcome anyone's cash - I am merely saying, "think twice before replacing the coach". Shearer, in my opinion, would be like Nigel Pearson without the passion.