Greenridge

In that case Bloop I wouldn't class you as a luvvie but someone who believes in something and supports it where credit is due. Not that we should be trying to pigeon-hole fans anyway. There are some however, who would support him regardless of what he did and it's these people with a strangely slanted view of their Messiah that seem to get people's backs up. He's done some very good things for the Club and some which are not so good but to blindly believe everything he touches turns to gold is not reality.

I guess you don't read the forum too much if you think Scooby is the only one. Plenty more can be added but that's hardly the point I was making. How about Sunny D for starters. There are others of course....

I'm sorry Prof but I strongly disagree with this comment and submit a prime, if not extreme example, of Scooby. As was mentioned by someone earlier this week it is not that the majority are anti-Lowe but they do object to getting pro-Lowe comments rammed down their throats at every opportunity. It is this aspect which appears to keep the 'divide' ongoing. Nickh offered a definition of 'Lowe-Luvie' on a thread recently. However whilst I agree with some of what he wrote, in my humble opinion, a Lowe-luvie (I hate that description) is not someone who see's the good in what Lowe is doing (I think the majority would agree he is doing some very good things for the Club, albeit by necessity rather than choice) but the bloody-mindedness of some who will support him and would continue to support his ideas if he became an axe-wielding murderer. A surreal example I grant you but you get my drift.

No not at all but feel free to carry on with your patronising.

So you've not seen them play? Not very strong grounds for making this post.

Yes I knew that Nick (h) so no confusion on my part. Just read your post on the 'Lowe vindicated' thread and mybe at last we agree on something. Onwards and upwards.

Dear oh dear Nick. If it makes you feel better and massages your ego then you have been proven to be totally right. Oops, hold on a minute we've won one league game in three. I really, really hope you are right and I'm sure that goes for every single fan of SFC but it's probably a tad early to be saying 'I told you so'.

I'm sure the mod team will be grateful for your enlightenment on how to run the forum. Bit of a waste of one of your three posts but good to see you back. It must be the ray of light of a couple of successes that's brought you out of hiding.

Andy you are wasting your time trying to debate with some members of this forum who have agenda's relating only to the incumbents in the board room and not to do with objective and unbiassed assesment of footballing matters.

You continue to make such ridiculous statements with your hellbent myopic view it is scary. If Le Tiss had been in that team the results wouldn't have changed either as any sane man can tell that one player isn't a team. So from your logic you wouldn't have minded if Le Tiss had moved on. If you can't post objectively to my comments then please refrain from posting at all.

Not sure what you're trying to say with this post Proff as it appears to come under the heading of 'stating the blooming obvious'. As has been proven this week with the sale of Davies, everyone at the club is for sale irrespective of your position within the team i.e. first choice or last choice. They've attempted to dress various sales up in different ways (too old, doesn't fit the new system, wanted a new challenge, stopping the youngsters coming through, unsettled by an offer, blah blah) but you cannot dress the Davies sale up as anything other than financial. I hope this one doesn't come back to bite us right where it hurts especially considering Svensson's longevity concerns.

Not too many replies to your latest twaddle eh Scooby. I guess that just goes to show how many have you on ignore. Great win, great result. 1 out of 3 does not mean vindication whichever way you try and massage the statistics. PS ... there is a thread on exactly the same theme already running so there is no need for this duplication. I'm sure the mod team will take the appropriate action.

Couldn't agree more. Quite easily the most incredulous and short sighted decision this club has yet to make. Cue the financial wizards with the predictable retorts....

Confirmed on the OS.

What is the timeline for this?

It''s all very well talking about the 'team' ethic and how much better it is this year but if the players are not good enough then they're not good enough. I'm not saying they are by the way I'm just pointing out that playing as a team is not the be-all and end-all of things. If we wanted a truly integrated team to fight for one another then look no further than the local youth team leagues. These guys would die for one another but I doubt they'd do too well in the CCC. Despite his cracking start to the pre-season / season I too worry that we will rely on DMG and it would now appear that JP is perhaps sensing the same as he has brought John back into the frame and talked him up somewhat. Let's hope the club can balance the real longer term economies of maintaining CCC status with a marginally higher wage outlay (in keeping John) than having false short term economies.

Now Nicholas I would have thought you would know better than to bite like that. You obviously don't read my posts if you feel that your flippant statement in bold is accurate. As I have said many times and will say it again for you in case you are having a little memory trouble I see it like this.. Firstly, I do not believe Crouch and Co were heading in the right direction however I do believe they were acting as 'fans' in the way they ran the Club. It was clearly not a sustainable policy however. Wilde to me is the biggest gremlin in the whole equation who rode in on his trusty stead announcing how he would save the Club from the evil Lowe. It didn't work out, his board decided he was not up to the job and he left. Five minutes later he's aligning himself with Lowe. It could only happen at SFC. The man can have no credibility and I think Lowe realises this which is why he remains the mouthpiece of the club both on football and more corporate level matters. I'm sure you will point to the occasional press release from Wilde but they are on pretty minor matters. As for Lowe then I believe he is a good businessman and with football becoming a 'business' in recent years then the fit is there. If, however you believe he has returned to SFC for any other reason that to protect his investment (share holding) then I'm 100% sure you are sadly mistaken. Athough he has been trumpeted for his cost cutting skills this is really a very simple task. A more difficult task is to make those needed cost reductions and in parallel maintain a team that is competitive. The Holy Grail is the Premiership and that must be the objective. Only last weekend the TV pundits were discussing the real possibility that League 1 and 2 clubs may need to go part time in the not too distant future. Football is in danger of imploding but that's another thread altogether. I try and consider all the available information when I form an opinion and I have no allegiance to any of the previous or current leaders of our club. I do however want to see the very best outcome for SFC as I'm sure we all do. What I do object to however is that some are so unwavering in their support of certain regimes that they become blinkered and unable to make objective considerations and see the wood from the trees.

It's no surprise that you appear to be the only ally he has now. Unfortunately he appears to be causing more harm to your idol than good but it's good entertainment for the majority. Keep it up Scoobs.

Scooby you really are a classic. Even the most ardent hardline Lowe supporters have started to distance themselves from your ramblings (well, most atleast). You do more harm than good for the poor man.

The OS suggests (from JP) the same team as Saturday with the exception of Svensson. The Daily Echo seems to have been playing 'pin the tail on the donkey' for a couple of years with regards to the teams they come up with in Friday's paper for Saturday's games. It used to be relatively accurate but not any longer.

I have heard this from a variety of different people including two Derby season ticket holders I know very well. What's the view from those who have seen him in pre-season or at Cardiff? He seems pretty low on the radar in terms of references on the OS or match reports from the friendlies and Cardiff.

Based on that I forecast a 10-0 win to Saints.

Think you're giving him too much credit there. His strategy is based on the situation the club finds itself in and nothing else. We didn't have the same strategy when we were in the Premiership did we. Times and circumstances change and you have to cut your cloth accordingly. I'm not a Lowe fan (in football terms) but in business terms he knows his onions. Whether the two can be combined to give the level of on-the-pitch performance remains to be seen. Don't be under any illusion that if any of the youngsters reach the required standard they will remain with us as they won't. They'll be sold to support the future of the club. That is the future until a white knight appears over the hilltop.

Source? If the Spiderman is as good as is being trumpeted then it's a good piece of business (as per Rebel's comments) but don't expect him to be around too long.

Sorry to take this thread off topic a little but I heard a piece of comedy gold on Saturday afternoon whilst listening to the radio coverage (Hampshire Radio?) in the car. The commentator guy is talking about Andrew Surman and how he's going to be a Dad etc and says 'Andrew Surman a Southampton man through and through. Born in South Africa.....' I know what he meant but the way it came across gave me the chuckles