Long Shot

And there we have it. A man who doesn't bother going criticising those that do.... who then complain.

Nick go find a sunshade quick - we are getting worried here in Blighty. Love Liz

Nick matey no offence - have you been on the lunchtime tequilas or is the Florida sun at work. I really am not sure what you are saying. Rgds Liz

Integrity alert

You know that for sure do you?

So that's why you were unable to "make the game" last week.

Which begs the question why Wilde hasn't been taken to task by the law?

Appreciate how you feel I really do. I think the choice we face as a club is damage or damage limitation. I think with Lowe/Wilde running the club that damage is administration. I think with Crouch/and friends running the club we would be able to fend off administration and also be able to hang onto players we want to come January. Option B is not wonderful but obviously better than Option A. Influenced.com asked when - fair enough, I accept it is a bit like waiting for Godot (especially after Fulthorpe) at present. There is activity in the background but there is a lot of bad feeling out there and the e mail shows just how treacherous some of those involved can be.

Thanks WS - a good and accurate analysis. What is interesting is how Wilde was trying to sell it (Crouch's appointment)to the recipient of the e mail. Blaming Lowe, in fact almost slandering him if it wasn't true.

I represent myself. I seek no particular attention. I merely want my football club to be run by people of rational/worthy character. This e mail proves both Wilde and Lowe not to be rational or worthy. Simple enough for you? Go find another messenger to shoot.

No one has attempted to answer why Lowe thought it OK, upon his leaving, to slip the club a "poisoned pill". Was he prepared to jeopardise the club's future just to get even. Wilde's allegation is incredibly serious.

Nice cut and paste job Nick because these words are not yours!

No mate not at all. In the end I went and ended up supporting what I thought was a good performance from the kids. Absolutely torn in the end. But I maintain the thought that for this club to prosper Lowe must go and I will fight for that to happen. Remember this my friend - although it is always easier to shoot the messenger the bullet you fire may not always hit the target you seek. This club will be happy once Lowe and Wilde are gone. Cheers!

You mean Rupert doesn't like him, surely?

Positive people need a reality check

Old Frank could only score Cup goals

Phil at no stage did I exort others to hope for a defeat. You really have lost the plot here. I have wanted Saints to lose before - at home to Port Vale in the Cup because I knew it would be the end of Branfoot. We drew and it was enough. I then, to make up for wanting to lose the home tie, drove to Port Vale in driving rain to cheer on the Saints feeling unburdened by Branfoot's exit. So in a few days I had gone from wanting us to lose to driving 300 miles in the rain to cheer us on against the same team. If Lowe resigned this morning I would find my ST and be there this afternnon cheering as loud as anyone. When someone becomes bigger than the club as Lowe has drastic action is called for. I do not expect or even want anyone else to do or feel as I do. Indeed all those taking kids etc etc and have travelled far I really hope you get your desired wish - I speak only for myself. We all deal with these feelings different ways - this is my way of addressing our predicament it may be wrong and sit uneasily with most fans but you look at the thread after last weeks match and see how many who were claiming that they were no longer interested in the result to see the malaise that has gripped our club.

Don't forget Wilde has a habit of re-writing history. As one of the SoS team reminded us the other day soon after their meeting with Wilde he was on the phone to Lowe's lot telling them the SoS team had said they wanted Wilde back as Chairman. Question remains however did Lowe dliberately foist on the club a man he knew to be "divisive and destructive" and if so, Why?

it's a fair point and I think Wilde is probably lying or trying to undermine Crouch and Lowe with one bullet. On the other hand Lowe could have asked for this 'poison pill' and been given it because at the time Wilde was getting on with Crouch and had no reason to see it a bad appointment. It's all very murky - either way it does not paint Wilde or Lowe to be men who would put the club irst.

Pretty much spot on I would say. Included in the rest of the e mail Wilde is very damning of Crouch, basically upset I think because Crouch had not invited him back onto the board. He says " LC's argument for getting rid of the 3 executives was so the board could be restructured to represent shareholder interests more closely; bring in more expertise; and return the power to the non executives - it is interesting that during the last 2 months since their removal - a critical time for the club - nothing has been done - meaning that we now have an impotent PLC board with no-one to put a check on LC's excesses - Trant is more concerned with his own business - Wiseman is waiting to retire and secure his Vice-Presidency - Hoos has been appointed beyond his competence and Jones has insufficient strength to be regarded as a Finance Director within the proper meaning of that term"

This is what Wilde said about Lowe in February 2008 in an e mail - I think it sums up how the duo are unfit to be in the position they are. Basically Wilde is accusing Lowe of deliberatly sabotaging the Boardroom with the insistence that a destructive and divisive person be appointed. Thanks Rupert. "Unfortunately Leon Crouch was the 'poison pill' that Rupert Lowe forced upon the new management team at the point of his resignation - I did not want him appointed as a director at that time as I knew how divisive and destructive he could be - Rupert Lowe also knew this and insisted on his appointment as a condition of his stand down".

Spot on - I have an e mail from Wilde that complains (amonsgt other things) about Crouch's failure to bring him back on board or to use his words make it more representative of shareholder interests.

Exactly, some Saints fans prefer life in cloud cuckoo land

I would love to have 5 mins with Askham because he must now see the fruit of so many of his errors and I'd be dead interested in a) how he justifies them and b) what he intends to do to rememdy them. He was after all, once a fan. The key lies with him but is he man enough to unlock the door?

There is sense to your argument but for your last sentence. There is no stability in the boardroom - under Lowe's stewardship the boat is sailing straight into the rocks - to do nothing is suicide - there is no grin and bear it alternative.