But wasn't he brought in by Lowe PRECISELY because of his 'specialty' of being able to work with youngsters in difficult financial circumstances?
The fact that he "failed" in such handcuffed circumstances actually defeats the reason Lowe appointed him for in the first place.
The "Dutch Duo" Poortvliet and Wotte were brought in for the very reason that our hands were tied financially - that was their 'unique selling point'.
To now use that in his/their defense is somewhat missing the point.
This airbrushing of recent history is becoming a tad tiresome.
IMHO of course