Nineteen Canteen

Ludricrous? How do you know this wasn't his fall back option? Sensible succession planning that any business implements isn't it? Appoint JP without a back up now that would have been ludricrous. How else shall we spin it?

No but he probably missed out the FA Cup ties v. Bury and Leicester. Pity because the Bury game I think attracted a big crowd. Interesting though that under Crouch's watch the average attendance levelled off to around 20k from a 25k attendance (from memory) for the first game last season. Lowe is averaging around 17k dropped off from a first attendance of 18,925. Taking Crouch's average of 20k to the first game of this season we could argue Lowe has cost us 1,000 supporters and then a combination of results and economic environment we have lost another 1,800. What is Crouch's excuses for a drop off double that of Lowe?

Trousers, I am beginning to see you in a different light. Alternatively, Wotte knew the financial situation with far more senior players having to be loaned out and didn't want the job until that improved to your 50/50 scenario. Hypothetically, Wotte with more to lose on his CV, may have welcomed the opportunity to assess life in the CCC from the relative comfort of the Reserves/Academy. That forced Lowe to go seriously cheap and the comments attributed to JP about Wotte post his resignation may also suggest there is something in your theory that we could prove Lowe is a tactician of almost Churchillian proportions. Keep your friends close but keep your enemies closer. Keep those matches away from that blue touch paper.

Firstly, it's interesting your own scrutiny didn't pick up the error that crowds were around the 14,000 mark under Lowe when the average is significantly higher this season. Also when I did some analysis on this a few weeks ago so as not to big up the numbers under Lowe I took out the two obvious spikes of the Forest and Man U games to reflect a more typical crowd. Did you remove the Sheff Utd game to reflect a more typical number? A few posts ago I asked could we assess Lowe's performance in today's world you must have overlooked that. In a recession as bad as many of us have ever seen, with rising unemployment and the number of house repossessions on the up and those numbers barely scratching the surface at the momenet of the real underlying problems of people who have 'cashed in' on equity release deals it is likely crowd numbers would fall even if MLT was chairman. Clearly we also have the stay aways who have the spending power but out of pure prejudice against Lowe or those plastics who simply refuse to watch anything but premier league as the Man U fans so painfully and insightfully sang in our honour. 'You're only here to see Utd' which was so sweet and painful at the sametime to those of us who regularly attend home games. Anyway. I digress and to play by your rules I won't attempt to balance out the spikes in attendances and the average attendance this season for the 20 games under Lowe has been 17,156 and that includes the ever popular early season Carling Cup fixture that draws lower attendances across the board than some pre-season friendlies. Doubt Crouchie had too many of those in his 12 games. Interestingly, crowd numbers have increased since our first home win of the season against Norwich proving once again people choose to paint their own picture of negativity. Using the popular art of rounding attendances have only fallen below 14,500 on 4 occassions this season and 2 of those can be written off against the 'Lets can the Carling Cup' and the closure of the south's transport network due to some snow flurries. All in all not bad in an environment not conducive to rising attendances and with the vocal minority trying to whip up a storm of anti-lowe rhetoric that can only help to satisfy their self fulfilling negative agendas. In other words you get what you wish for and there is a pandemic on here at the moment that reads like a desperate bunch of extremists who are on the cusp of losing sight of their dream. What is their dream? A pancea for all that ails this club and the panic is setting in over any suggested reversal in fortune as they know relegation and administration will only see the ultimate demise of Lowe and further destroy his diminishing wealth and the club's ultimate remedy. Once again though they fail to see the big picture that only by keeping the enemy close and growing stronger along with them can you have any prospect of making yourself something worth fighting for (investing in). Or put it another way if you were a commodity would you prefer to be on the shelf in Poundland or Harrods? If money wasn't an issue Lowe would haven't gone the Dutch youth route but he realised on a limited budget he had to try something different to find an angle to compete and it didn't pay off. Sometimes you need to fail to experience success and make sure you have a fall back option and that is what is happening now but the financial spectre looms large regardless of on the field success due to falling revenue streams and credit squeezing. Lowe deserves credit for getting us this far and getting in league with his enemy, well that was inspired. In turn I suggest those who remain prejudiced against Lowe if you want a club to support today and one that can be worthy of significant investment in the future then back Lowe and support the club. The best way to rid this club of Lowe is to help him achieve a good price for his shares and he won't do that if you refuse to support the club and continue with your moaning and whinging. Its false optimism to think an anti-Lowe agenda can bring rewards it will only bring heartache and disappointment.

Factually incorrect points and the rest taken out of context of today's environment. BTW where is Salz now? May as well compare how successful Lowe was in 2002-03 with Crouch's tenure.

I think you'll find attendances dropped more under Crouch's watch and that the average attendance this season is just shy of 17k not far short of the break even point but i agree we could do with some fans who don't attend matches simply because of who is wearing the suit in the boardroom. Interesting you say Salz and LC had the backing of banks but the first half of 2008 was a very different beast to the second half post Bear Stearns and Lehman's bank collapses and then the evident contagion into our own banking industry. At the start of 2008 it was still possible to buy a flat with a mortgage for a £100k on a salary of £20k so I'm fairly sure Crouch and Salz would have got the support of the bank but once the cat was out of the bag and it became apparent we were in an even less good position than the home buyer wanting a mortgage 5x salary not to mention a LTV of 95% and we wanted unsecured funding to boot, well you do the maths. Your facts are wrong about attendances and the one thing you have failed to grasp is the big picture football clubs now operate in. Lowe has made the necessary sea change but unfortunately our attendances still remain below the ideal as they did under Crouch and the reason for this is that the fans expectations are still stuck in 2003 and have taken no account that people for whatever reason do not want to invest in the club at a fair price. Why, I have no idea? (in tribute to the greatest exponent of the rolling eyes) There are some interesting parallels between us and Charlton and lot of the problems were instigated by unnecessary fan unrest that upset the stability of both clubs. Charlton fans unhappy with Curbishley's lack of ambition ! Saints fans with their unrealistic expectations with regard to permanency in the Premier League and refusal to support Lowe's financially prudent medium term plan to return to the Premiership without impersonating a YO-YO. We went for the promise as always and then latched on to Crouch's promises and laughable, currying favour with the fans and without foundation rhetoric. Given the circumstances IMO Lowe is doing a great job and one where the rules of engagement change on a daily basis I should imagine. Regrettably, Crouch has already proven elsewhere that he is not impervious to recession and credit crunches. Anyone can sell water in the desert but when the taps run dry then you have a problem. Perhaps its time we drop the prejudice towards Lowe and assess his performance in todays world and not at the dawning of the Blair years. Trousers asks a very pertinent question and one that in a considered final analysis you can only conclude Lowe does deserve credit for his role this season, whether he was right will be in the long term survival of this club but things are beginning to improve although the off field risks are the real threat.

Just a touch reactionary and none of the points raised addressed just simply written off because it doesn't agree with your prejudiced agenda. Even Um Pahars who makes you look a liberal takes the time to debate the points made. As you point out I have a brain like the rest of us and entitled to my dumb views. Btw we won yesterday, good wasn't it.

Euellsuebio is a lot older than I thought

Well one of the Saints fans I know (and highly respected one on this forum if we are point scoring) is aware that I am not a plant and simply choose to support Lowe in the absence of any investment or Crouch or Wilde independently. Bottom line I support Saints through thick and thin and the club is my religion and not the chairman. With regard to the chairman I am just a fickle fan and support what I consider to be the best available until such time as someone comes along with better credentials. Simple as that really and plant if you prefer, in the fact I have very deep roots and they are entwined around the club. I can recognise Lowe has made some bad decisions but I don't bother living in the past as long as I can see and believe in the future and understand the reasoning behind the decisions with the limited knowledge of the facts at my disposal. I've always believed that to experience success you must at first experience failure and that helps you to role with the punches. Slagging Lowe off is just a waste of energy and given the situation its about time a few posters started looking at the circumstances and see the glass as half full instead of half empty afterall the mind games are working for Wotte and the team.

I think for backers read 'creditors' and 'to date' + no season ticket renewals + stewards not sure if they are being paid one week to the next alledgedly = the same conclusion as you. If revenues are not increased 9 wins from our last 12 might not save us.

Seriously hopeful we can stay up especially as I thought the best we could do was 2 pts from our last 2 games and we got 6 and even allowing for 2 pts I thought we would make our target of 48 -50pts. The fact we won today and so did Plymouth and Forest is a good thing. We still have a game in hand and perhaps we can push away and make it a fight for the last relegation place like last season. Our goal differece is the biggest worry but after 3 tough games with both Ipswich and Derby in the top 6 of the form league we have some very tasty fixtures if Wotte can keep them playing as they are. after the next 3 games our last 9 games are: QPR, Blackpool, Charlton, Watford, Wolves (Choking big time), Palace, Sheff Wed, Burnley (Choking big time) Forest Get past Ipswich, Birmingham and Deby and accept some hiccups and if we play as we have done recently he have a very friendly looking run in. 5 wins from those last 9 games and 4 draws from the next 3 and remaining 4 above and we have 53pts and no team has been relegated from this league on that total since the Premier League started. IMO I think we'll be safe before the last game of the season. Progress!

Unbalanced extremist

Or Wotte, simply didn't want the first team job as he has stated many times and prefers to work in the background. Perhaps Lowe deserves credit for bringing him in the first place and knowing he had a ready made fall back plan. Then credit for persuading Wotte to step into the limelight and take the manager's job in a no lose situation as a result the JP gamble not coming off. Clever or lucky? It could be the smartest thing he has ever done if he managed to get him at this club to do the job that Wotte didn't know he wanted! Having Wotte on board was simply shrewd succession planning IMO but that does not make good copy and sell local rags to the moaners.

Have you had your season ticket renewal yet? Did you read Wilde's comments in the programme about constructive meetings with the bank and backers in recent weeks? I think maybe we need to give Lowe some credit for having a plan b to revert to unlike the kneejerk reaction when Pearson was appointed. In addition credit maybe due that Lowe may just be working quite hard at keeping this club from administration and not inviting fans to pay for discounted Season Tickets when they maybe the prospect of them becoming creditors at the bottom of a pile of a failed football club. Perhaps Lowe is concerned that as soon as those funds for renewals hit the bank account the bank will pull the plug on their backing and we go into administration because of a lack of cashflow. Far be it from me to suggest that Lowe has been quiet because he has been diligently trying to reverse two spectacularly failed years of gross mismanagement. This is all my own assessment and conclusion and I have no inside knowledge but the clues are there and IMO Lowe has in the last 9 months acted in the best interests of the club and supporter alike and the main priority has been to survive and avoid administration. Given the enormity of that task some decisions he got wrong and many he has got right but all I believe have been done in good faith. The fact that he has turned it around and all the balls are still in the air I think we need to recognise that although the job is far from done positive progress is now being made and at the right time and the impact on the interests of club's supporters are being very closely considered. Hopefully, the barrell is well and truly scraped but I'll leave the negative extremists to put a hole in it.

Hardly a 'massive u turn' promoting from within. In fact its probably that Lowe has orchestrated a reversal of fortune from within existing resources that grates with you the most. We could still be heading for administration but that was the case before a competitive ball was kicked this season and the negativity that seeps form every pore of people like yourself have really helped the cause and now you seem disappointed your prophecies of relegation may not come true. At least you acknowledge we were heading to Division 3 and I'm sure admitting that must cause you a lot of pain. I wouldn't write off administration just yet, that depends if some of the fans can change their attitude in line with the squad's.

Is it not mad to suggest that it is not a continuation of the same policy as Wotte was brought in at the same time as JP and has been working with the players in the reserves and the academy so was acutely aware of the club's resources when he was asked to do the first team job. Whose to say that bringing Wotte with JP was not an insurance policy if the gamble didn't pay off. People keep saying don't judge Wotte off the back of 2 wins and that is correct, judge him off the back of 6 games in charge where the team has shown far greater battling qualities and not allowing the opposition any time on the ball in addition to our own more direct style of play. Broadly the policy is the same, maximum return for minimum cost the only difference is the changes in coaching style and the positive impact it has had on the the youth, James, McGoldrick, Gillet especially plus we can presumably pay Saga his wages having farmed him out of the first half of the season and the stewards alledgedly continue to be paid on what essentially amounts to a weekly contract. Well done by Trousers for trying to invite some balance but as a result I'm afraid a pointless thread as we are still in the bottom 3 and 4 points from safety and many will remind us of that fact because negativity is what gets us through our day.

.......and Nigel Pearson. Laughable he was being compared to Martin O'Neill on another thread. Don't think the latter enjoyed the backing of a wealthy chairman and inferior opposition. Alpine and Stanley could probably manage Leicester and get them promoted this season. Still, we will be able to find out next season because we are staying up!

You honestly couldn't make it up! The £50 you were willing to spend + what you will spend in the pub seems to me to equal the £70 required to give your wife a special day out at the game. Perhaps the club did not overprice their offer afterall. Sorry to hear about your son is this a new development? Not much fun for a 14 year old in a pub, so perhaps understandable.

Mike, in line with Norm's comments you strike me as one of the old school reactionary posters. The type who writes to complain to the BBC about a programme they never even watch or listened to but to support those who did complain against the disgusting filth shown on TV etc. It shows how ridiculous your logic is when you state that you would be willing to pay £50 and not £70. To many ST holders even £50 may be beyond their limits so are the club to target their promotions solely for your ideals. I think it is you who shows the lack of understanding about the club undertaking a simple marketing opportunity that may increase their revenue in difficult times. Meanwhile, you obviously welcome any opportunity to jump on your negative bandwagon. God forbid you find out the executive loos use triple ply toliet tissue when they should be using pages from the Sun. I have just read an article in a money magazine that if you smile and act friendly you can pretty much haggle a discount on most things so perhaps your £50 offer will be well received or you you could steam in and demand to see the management about this disgustingly offensive email that gives an offer that is overpriced by a score in your estimation. The effing b'stards - who do they think they are, what scum, no wonder you can't support the club and no doubt why your son has become so disillusioned because of the negativity that must pervade his home. I'm surprised you haven't told us how your young son is to disillusioned to go to the game today as usual, do you have a new record?

No. 5 would certainly reduce the queues in the Gents after the game including the cubicles.

My personal opinion of Crouch hasn't changed but having the more relevant arguments for and against it seemed to me the most logical and readily achiveable solution to shore the club up in the short term and promote some unity. Isn't life all about compromise? I wasn't prepared to let my personal opinions about an individual get in the way of my passionate desire to see this club turn its fortunes around. If the 3 major shareholders cannot work together then surely a fully independent board will be the only way forward but not before i expect a lot of blood letting and unless you're a shareholder all you will be able to do is protest or boycott. If all 3 given the opportunity cannot work together for the club and its fans and put aside their personal agendas then I would willingly boycott or protest and belive me that really hurts me to say that as I believe a fan should support good and bad but this would drop off the scale of selfish incompetence. IMO I don't think that will happen as all 3 of them have something to prove to us all and I want them to deliver. I would give Crouch the Football Chairman role as that is what he has indicated he would want to concentrate on. Jones is a chameleon based on past form and iMo would cast a vote to suit himself not out of loyalty and Cowen IMO is an important cog. If Crouch can bring someone of the calibre of Cowen then ok but Corbett, Trant and McMenemy don't meet the standard. It's more a case of what do we do with Wilde. As he is a non-resident perhaps he should have a non-exec role and make sure teh other two act in the best interests of the club, I don't know and prepared to listen to ideas. However, we don't want to go back to the days of more directors than players. Everyone must have a key and fully accountable role and personally I don't think its necessary as its paranoid to suggest Lowe will have more support and it will simply be in his interests to find and agree on the common ground. For example, with the 3 in situ we could have ended up with the Dutch experiment but without a manager of limited experience as JP. It seems Wotte didn't want the job initially but that maybe just good diplomacy on his part and Lowe preferred JP, Crouch may have pushed for Wotte. At least Crouch will be there to challenge Lowe and vice versa and hopefully we shall get some more rounded decisions as a result. So no sea-change over Crouch and if it came down to a straight choice between the 2 then I'd side with Lowe as the lesser of two evils but hopefully two evils in this case will make a right. I think we have to accept that those with more extreme views will not be happy until Lowe if removed but no amount of protest and moaning is going to make that happen legally, this at least is a positive action and not so readily dismissed.

Sorry Gordon but it was only 7 relatively short paragraphs. Have you tried reading the Gruffalo? Let me know if you would like me to add some pictures to the text to help you digest what is being said or ignore my posts altogether as many do with your dumb diatribe. Your sanctimonious, critical and hysterical posts, that are always delivered without an alternative workable solution smacks of a Daily Mail reader, but you can't read more than 500 words in one go so it must be the Star.

Wes, not sure what you are apologising about and personally I respect those with different views if they take the time to explain why those views are held. Unfortunately, many at the extremes in both camps rarely argue against or support a point or even acknowledge the reasoning put forward. Despite at times disagreeing with you passionately I didn't and still don't put you in the camp of the serial and extreme abuse merchants. Your post summarises my position. Lowe and Wilde to invite Crouch onto the board and failure to do so would indicate to me at least that their agenda is not club focussed and the presure on them to step down would intensify and it would be difficult to criticise any future actions or protest against L&W. If Crouch joined and they could work together and start to reverse the slide then that would be my preferable solution simply because it's logical and although the path of least resistance should still have a significant pay off in uniting everyone and increasing attendances whilst hopefully Crouch could balance out some of Lowe's not so great decisions. If this happened the pressure on the boycotting fans to come back would increase and their actions difficult to justify if they stayed away because Lowe was still in situ. If the 3 can't work together then I think we will slide into administration as what hope is there if the major shareholders can't work together to protect their investments. God forbid the independent control turns out to be an administrator but so be it otherwise they can recruit an independent CEO to sort out their churlish squabbles but to be honest I can't see how that will play out at the moment. Lets see how it goes with inviting Crouch to the party and go from there. I'm not sure your decision to remain in boycott mode is setting the right example with regard to letting go of some firmly held beliefs. We are expecting Lowe to drop his beliefs and invite Crouch and expecting the latter to forgive and forget to move forward. Shouldn't all protesters/boycotters be doing the same otherwise we are just supporting an impasse? If there is a protest for the Cardiff game can I suggest they link up with the Saints Trust and march to request that Lowe and Wilde invite Crouch to join the board. This will deliver a far more positive message and something the board can act on rather than simply falling on their swords.