trousers

Ok, been thinking.... So what do we know about the actual human beings at Barclays who have Saints future in their hands? I've seen a "Reading branch" connection posted on here on several occasions. Even a name of a chap has been posted once or twice (even I can't be arsed to trawl back to find it...) But does anyone know how much the person/people who are ultimately determining our fate at the bank know about the nuances of running a football club compared to businesses in other industries? The reason for asking is that I suspect if they aren't "football fans" themselves then they will be treating the club just like any other business and demanding relatively arbitrary cost cutting measures. (Not surprising given that is their job but bear with me....) Whereas, if he/they have some sort of footballing/sporting background (be it as a fan or some sort of sport management qualification) then one would expect/hope that they would take into account the 'false economy' effect that off-loading all our highest-paid (aka "best") players has on the viability of 'the business' in the longer term. The circumstantial evidence is that the string pullers at Barclays are not appreciating the false economy scenario of offloading all our 'star' players over the last 12 months or so. It just appears to the man-in-the-street to be a short term (blinkered?) numbers game at the moment. So, a long-winded way of asking to anyone 'ITK'....what 'running a football club' experience do the club's bankers have (the people running our account, not the bank as a whole)? Thanks.

My pleasure

Damnation....you found me out....here was me pretending to be intelligent for 3 years and it's all been blown apart in one careless post. It's back to selling photocopiers for me....

Indeed. Although at least the OS has now come full circle in that it is so blatantly obvious to see when it is 'covering up the truth' on occasions that it makes it easy for us to see through it. It was clear the second that the "international clearance" article was published that it fell into this category due to the number of holes in its logic.

Simple maths really... If Saga is deemed good enough to help save us from relegation (and one would have thought that a player who appeared at the world cup last year might just meet such criteria) then a £150,000 outlay is a "non-brainer". Interestingly, if Lowe doesn't deem him good enough to help Saints survive then he creates a paradox for himself in that he would effectively be reducing Saga's value and offload potential by declaring "he's not good enough to help us stave off relegation". What sort of message is that to send to potential new clubs? So, logic would suggest one sensible answer to the question...Yes, he should stay.

Stumbled across this thread from August 08 whilst tracing back through some posting history via the Man Utd post-match thread..... One question: What went wrong?

Two?

This club does not lie. FACT.

Dubious play-on-words aside, I believe the original poster was highlighting his foresight rather than hindsight..... He makes a good point if one scratches the surface. There was no apparent tactical changes from the manager, sorry - coach, in selection of the team to play Man Utd. It was very much "this is what we do, so we'll carry on doing it regardless". The quality of the opposition is neither here nor there. It's the principle under discussion here. One word: Worrying.

p.s. I trust you've switched off your mobile phone again until Feb?

The OS 'mysteriously' omits this Poortvliet quote: "Arsene Wenger has said United always get the 50-50 decisions and I agree. Alex stood up once to have a word and after that everything went their way"

Is it not possible for a bad board to affect the team? And if so, isn't any short term pain that helps remove said board a longer term benefit to th team? So, it could be said that whilst hurting the board may initially also hurt the team in the short term, it will actually help the team in the longer term? So, by renewing your season ticket (and thus, by association, endorsing an arguably 'bad' board) you could actually be damaging the team. An interesting paradox either way...

Alex Ferguson's post match comments are more telling IMHO.... "They're a very young side so you'd expect us to win. You don't want to humilate them because they have a tough programme ahead to survive in the championship". To me that reads that he actually instructed his players (overtly or otherwise) to take it easy on us. Puts a slighty different angle on 'only' losing 3 nil....

Good point. It's fine for people to say "It was Man Utd...we were hardly going to win were we?" when there was none of that 'lower league club - put the willies up them' spirit in evidence. It suggests an underlying lack of team spirit at the club.

...

Smugger than a smug man in smugshire

The scoreline v Man utd is arguably the worst result for speeding up any regime change. It hasn't been a complete white wash and we held out with 10 men for a fair while. Lowe will herald it as a plucky performance and a demonstration that we are "heading in the right direction". A more humilating defeat would have been better for the club in terms of regime change. More of the same beckons after this.... IMHO of course

Pehaps someone heard a shot outside the ground....we've had none inside....

This is going to be the worst result for speeding up any regime change. It hasn't been a complete white wash and we held out with 10 men for a fair while. Lowe will herald it as a plucky performance and a demonstration that we are "heading in the right direction". A more humilating defeat would have been better for the club in terms of regime change. More of the same beckons after this.... IMHO of course

Maybe so....but still desn;t expain why he went for it with his hand in the first place. The fact that he missed it with his hand doesn't explain what was going through his head....if anything...

No, its not you....

Who's to say that Lowe hasn't paid Riley to get the crowd on the referee's back and not his. Not something I'd suggest or accuse but might have crossed someone's mind...