Professor

lets just remember that poor sad Alpine predicted relegation and administration at the start of the season. This thread seemed to be almost a regret that neither have yet happened.

If the reports on Scowcroft are accurate, Saints were IN the market and the decision not to move was made by the player. Also, he did not just turn down Saints but had already decided not to move other Championship clubs. How that story can be interpreted as a negative towards the club is quite incredible.

Can't see why anyone would see Leon as a saviour of the Saints. His spell in the chair took us as close to relegation as its possible to be and the reason why there was a need for major cost cutting measures this season. If we do go down, its still Leon who has to bear his share of the blame.

Oh dear, Oh dear. Someone's not taking their tablets......

Simple really, they just log on to the forum and let us all have it........

As always, selective memory to justify the obsessive anti-board attitude. The summer of 2003, after the 1-0 defeat in the cup final ended on 31st Aug with Saints beating Man U 1-0. The side had Beattie and Phillips as the strike force, Claus and Killer as the centre backs and was a perfectly capable premiership team. The only lunacy is with those who try to re-write the facts to make unjustified accusations. True Le Saux was playing in place of Bridge but WB has made his decision to move to the new chelski set up, regardless of what Saints could have done, but his replacement was as good as you could get.

Its a shame! Another perfectly valid discussion is hi-jacked by the anti-Lowe faction who then introduce the usual comments, unsupported by evidence, on which their predudices are based and which have become just a little bit boring. This thread is about the fact that there has been an improvement in team performance since Wotte became head coach but that we are still in much the same position in the table as when JP left in January. People have rightly pointed out that although we are getting more points, there are less games left to climb the two places needed and other teams in the bottom six or seven are also posting improved performances. My own view is that the team still need to do better to survive. At current performance under Mark Wotte we would get another 8 or 9 points, which I think would not be enough to stay up, although others disagree. My estimate for survival is that we need another 14 points. I admit that is a pessimistic position to take and I hope I am wrong as my position makes relegation the more likely outcome. My other point about Mark Wotte though, is that if we do go down, I think he has shown that he deserves to stay in the job to try to get us back next year. The anti-Lowe faction, who include in their complaints that Lowe has had too many managers over the years should, logically, agree but then logic struggles to hold its place in some of the discussions here. (Please take that remark as intended to be light-hearted).

Seems odd to write a manager off because of his nationality in these days of non-English managers throughout the higher levels of football. Chelsea's "Dutch Experiment" seems to be going OK! As for the 'reality' of the situation, the current board have done no worse than last year's board so far, and although none of us outside of the club actually know the financial situation, what we have seen in terms of cost cutting suggests better financial management then previously. Certainly money is still a major issue, as indicated in Wotte's comments about no late season loans, but the point about team performance is that although performance has improved so has the performance of our competitors, as other teams also get their end of season upward curve. We are still in much the postion JP left us in, but had he stayed we could be already down.

Weston has misunderstood. I am talking about a promotion bid back to the CCC from Div 1. ! My conclusion is that, although it is not yet a certainty, relegation is more likely than not, despite Wotte's improvement over JP. If relegated, however, I would say Wotte has done enough to be kept on to lead a promotion bid from Div 1 next season. However, it would be with a different squad.

Performance under Jan P up to the Doncaster game was Played 28, Won 6, drawn 8, lost 14 (GF-14; GA-42) 26 points. Points average per game - 0.92 After the Blackpool match, the record since Mark Wotte took over at the Norwich game on 27 Jan, is Played 11, Won 3, Drawn 5, Lost 3 (GF-14; GA-12) 14 points. Points average per game - 1.27 Conclusion:- Performance has improved. Wotte's performance, if maintained for a whole season would give 58 points and be about 14th in the table. However, lower table teams tend to have an upward curve of results in the last quarter of the season thereforec Saints still have to do better. If the team continue at 1.27 points a game, they will finish with 49 points and be relegated. Ergo - we are still in the same position Jan left us in, but there has been an improvement and if the end of season upward curve of results is achieved, it is possible to avoid the drop. You cannot be precisie on the number of popints needed as the results of other teams influence that, but 14 more points are probably needed. But there are only 7 games to get them from, so 4 wins, 2 draws and only 1 defeat needed. Even if Wotte fails in that, he will still have improved performance very substantially over Jan P's record which ought to earn him the right to go for promotion next year.

Interesting that on Radio Hampshire, David Armstrong made the same point that taking off DMG was a mistake, and he said so when the substitution was made - virtually predicting the outcome. Pushing up the defence at the end though was right IMO. There was nothing to lose and the possibility of gaining a point.

We stayed up with 54 points last year. To get 54 this year, with 10 games remaining, requires 5 wins and 2 draws with only 3 more defeats. This is tough, but do-able, and even if we don't make 54, its always possible that one of our rivals in the bottom 6 could have a bad run and slip below us anyway. But if that 4th defeat comes along, at that point fans might want to start planning for the promotion campaign next year!

Since 1st Jan, Birmingham's league record is W3 D4 L3. Not promotion form. The club is ecstatic over winning against Bristol City on Wed night, but it was only a 1-0 win at home with a very late goal 3 mins from time. Today's match is an extremely winnable game for Saints, even if DMG is not playing. A win might not change the league position much this weekend but it would be a major step putting us in contention with a whole range of teams in the second half of the table.

And did you knock off the 10 points deducted for going into administration.....

I thought the club were relegation candidates last season as well, before Lowe took over? Wouldn't any finish above 20th be an improvement?

Seriously, chatting to a Saints fan in Woolston this week, he said he wanted Lowe out of SFC. When I asked him "what's your reason?" (emphasis on the 'your'), he didn't know but said, everyone else wants that as well. The logic of the mob. So guys, have a reality check, and then protest when you know why you are doing it. 'Lowe out' at any price, even if the team are doing well is also the logic of the madhouse, and is the approach that Wilde adopted last time, that got us nowhere. Lowe will go in good time, but we need that to be when there is someone better to come in, not when his going would simply leave a vacuum.

The youth experiment is not over - academy players are still well represented in the team. The difference is that there is better balance with more of the experienced players playing, some of whom were not available earlier in the season. But Wotte is also using a different formation and he seems to be a better motivator than Poortvliet. True the board are responsible for the make-up of the squad, and as most of last night's team were on the books at the start of the season, they seem to have assembled an acceptable squad from the outset. How the players were used is not a matter for the board, that is down to the coach.

Sorry Hypo, but this is the dilemma of the anti-Lowe position. By all means criticise Lowe for things he does that you don't agree with, but it is simply illogical to say that Lowe can be blamed for what goes wrong but have no credit at all for what goes right. The anti-Lowe stance will be to say its Lowe's fault if we go down, but if we stay up it will be nothing to do with Lowe and will be despite Lowe's attempts to destroy the club! Sorry to those who think that way, but it just does not make sense. If we stay up, Wotte will have achieved just what Pearson did last year, and with Pearson it could not have been closer to the wire as it needed other teams to lose on the last day to save us. Its too soon to say that Wotte is a great manager, but he is definitely doing OK and if he keeps us up, that will be a great achievement. Lowe will be entitled to claim the credit for appointing him, and for agreeing to the squad changes that have provided more experience once the experiment with youth proved not to be adequate, but it is the coach who takes most of the credit, just as Poortvleit must take most of the blame for the first half of the season, and did, by resigning. Lowe must take responsibility for appointing JP in the first place when it looks as if he should have given the job to Wotte at the outset, but to his credit he changed the decision by letting JP go, when the plan failed. Not sure what more could be asked of any chairman, especially when financial survival is the other priority. If we stay up, I don't care who takes the credit - everyone connected with the club, as far as I'm concerned, made even sweeter by the predictions of relegation and administration by some of the regular posters on here. But it hasn't happened yet, so Come on you Saints, Come on Wotte, Come on Rupert, keep it going!!!!

Whats changed? Quite a bit. In defence, JP Size has definitely added stability and Skacel is settled with his transfer plans over for the season. More emphasis on attack has taken some of the pressure off. Euell has never really succeeded in midfield, failed at Middlesborough when he switched from striker, but is still effective up front. Saga is as good as a new signing. Overall, the younger players do now have the experience that playing regularly was always going to give them, but more importantly, there is now a better balance between youth and experience. Today's staring line-up had 6 players aged 29 or older. That is quite a change from September.

Same old Mike - If its going wrong its Lowe's fault. If its going well its despite Lowe's attempts to make it go wrong. Lowe does not take training, dictate the tactics or pick the team - that is what the head coach does. JP had a reputation for handling young players well, but it didn't work. No two managers are the same, and Wotte does it his way. He has done the obvious which is to change a system that wasn't working. Lowe doesn't come into it, but the problem for some people is that although they want Saints to win, when the team does, its hard to find some other way of criticising Lowe. Wotte has done really well with two tough games at home and now he's got some tough games to come away. But the lads have done well away from home and Wotte is proving to be a good motivator. Its asking a lot for Wotte to deliver two more straight wins, but one would be nice and one plus a draw would be great! As for Lowe, I expect he's very pleased that his appointment of Wotte is looking good so far. The rest of us should feel the same.

I don't normally bother to respond to posts by Alpine, who I'm sure is a lovely man, but who is so opinionated and so incredibly certain that his opinions are always right, that any debate would be pointless. But this post of Alpine's seemed a good example of stating opinion as fact, and of spreading cheap abuse about people who, whether they have succeeded or not, have given time and effort to the club, and did certainly not start this season with relegation as the target, any more than did the directors at Charlton, WBA, Brighton, or any of the other clubs that will ultimately be relegated this season. As so often, the simplistic supporter looks for someone to blame, despite the compexity and uncertainties of football. Would Alpine also blame Lowe for the club getting to the cup final, or reaching 8th in the Prem, or getting a state of the art stadium? No, he'd say that was luck or down to other people. Scapegoats are only responsible for what goes wrong, never for what goes right

Problem is that Saint Robbie, Offix, etc..... you know who you are - have allowed your anti-Lowe attitude to blind you to reality. Some of you give the impression you don't care what happens to the club as long as Lowe goes, whereas surely what matters is the club, not who is chairman. Despite the fantasy by some that Lowe picks the team, takes training, and gives the half-time pep talk, the team is actually run by professional coaches, who also advise on transfers. But you have to claim Lowe does all these things or you can't blame him for everything that goes wrong. I do have to admit that I have no idea why Lowe was prepared to come back to manage the club as he was bound to face abuse and insults. But if he had not, and no action had been taken by Crouch and the other former board members to stabalise the finances, would the club actually be any better off, or might it already be in administration or even out of the League altogether. By all means, if someone better than Lowe and Wilde comes along, lets welcome them, but for now there is no one else, so asking them to go now is like turkeys voting for Christmas.

I have long believed that demonstrations are a simplistic reaction by disapointed fans who need someone to blame if their team is not top of the table, and who believe football success is easily obtained by changing the faces running the club. There is a long record in football as a whole that this is just not true. What can change a club is MONEY. Not faces. But if yesterday's demonstration was a revolution by fans, the revolting 500 really need to explain what they would have instead. If Rupert Lowe and Michael Wilde were to resign, and the other board members with them, just who do people think would run the club? Last year's board, without the current members were in exactly the same position at the end of last season, and arguably left an even bigger financial mess that this board has cleared up. The club has DEBTS and limited income, so whoever runs it has to do the best with what they have got. So don't just chant "Lowe Out" - it means nothing - you have to chant for "X or Y" IN! Only there is no X or Y. So the revolting 500 don't even know what they are revolting against, except, like all of us, they want the team to get better results. Yesterday's result against PNE was better. So what next?

Some fans have been part of the trouble for along time, by creating a negative atmosphere in which the team have to play. In the relegation season, the team did not play better with anti-Lowe demonstrations, and in the following year they were not motivated by anti-Redknapp chants and anti-SCW moans, but neither were they to blame. In fact, blame is pointless, despite people here who want to blame Lowe, or Wilde, or the Managers. The fact is that if all 24 clubs in this league had brilliant managers, 3 of them would still be relegated,k because the greatest factor of all is LUCK. Not just luck in matches, but luck in whether signings turn out to be good, luck if young players improve, luck if key players avoid injury. So top of my list is Luck.

I can only assume you have never played football yourself at level where you get local support at home games. The motivation of playing in front of supportive fans is one of the reasons why clubs have better results at home. Its not just 'knowing the pitch' or travelling. For a long vtime now, Saints teams have played in front of quieter crowds, sometines even drowned out by a few away supporters. The days of constant singing and chanting of COYR, COYS have gone and verbal support is now intermittent. All that is linked to occasional abuse of the manager or the chairman, from within the crowd. No one 'blames' the fans, but its a factor, and the only factor that the fans themselves can do something about. As for blame, most of it is directed at the chairman or the manager. But the chairman can only bring players in that are available and that the club can afford. The manager has to do the best he can with the squad. SFC has very limited rsources and to pretend that a different chairman or a different manager would make everything alright is total fantasy. Too many saints fans have been acting on that fantasy for far too long.