Wes Tender

What makes you so sure we won't? We could be back there the season after next. Now that might be what you consider a long time. Of course it could take several years, but there is no reason to believe that it will take longer to get back than it took us to get down here, especially considering the resources we have now which we never had when we were in the Premiership.

Manchester City and Leeds have both been down where we are now in recent history, as have other former Premiership clubs like Sheffield Wednesday, Norwich, Charlton, Notts Forest, etc. Forest were European Champions within the memory of a good many on here. Only within the past year or so, some were saying that it was almost impossible to dislodge the top four, not contemplating that Liverpool could possibly fall so far, so I'm not about to slash my wrists just because we have fallen down there due to the actions of past incompetents running the club. When we return to the top flight, it will be all the enjoyable and satisfying because we sank so low. I could see your point had Bournemouth beaten us, but we have already beaten them twice this season.

You're embarrassed by our current demise, but Vectis asked a perfectly valid question which you haven't answered. In our long history, we have been a lower league club for much longer than we have a top flight club. Were you therefore embarrassed to follow Saints when you first became a supporter before we reached the top flight? As for the EPL thing, what is mildly irritating about it is the totally unecessary and superfluous "English". It's a bit like Adkins adding the word "football" in front of everything related. i.e. we needed to make use of the width of the football pitch, we need to play an attacking game of football, etc. Everybody knows that football is what is being played, that it is played on a football pitch.

Not via a reverse takeover it wasn't. That was purely a device to enrich those old directors who held shares at a cost of a nominal £1 each, the value of which rocketed when we became a PLC. Happily some of those directors who held onto their shareholdings lost it all when we went into administration, but that had not prevented them from taking large sums out of the club in the form of salaries or consultancy fees and expenses. Originally Posted by CHAPEL END CHARLIE What we had to endure the last five years is directly related to the mess caused by us being a PLC under Lowe and the resultant in-fighting between factions of egotistical shareholders because the board had only about 30% of the shares. But apart from that, I disagree that our lowly position is an embarassment. I take a great deal of unexpected pride in still supporting my club as fervently as when we were in the Premiership, feeling that I have been tested as a fan and have gained credit for remaining loyal regardless of where we now find ourselves. So the Skates are in the division above and the Cherries at the same level. So what? The entire footballing World knows that the Skates are there through cheating and living way beyond their means and that we will end the season well ahead of the Cherries. As to feeling embarrassment in the company of other fans of Premiership clubs, that depends on whether they have any valid reason for supporting that team beyond the reflected glory. If not, then I feel pity for them, or despise them for their shallowness, a position that is even more justified because we are two divisions below and therefore more credence for supporting your local club.

Entitled to your opinion as I am to mine. Nefarious eh?

If I remember correctly, Thorpie is a teacher. One has to raise one's eyebrows at the apparent loss of calmness and reason from him, as well as the language used. It's not the first time either. I certainly wouldn't want him teaching my children.

Most of the immigrant community in this country comprises law-abiding and respectable citizens who add positive things. But when extremist elements like these surfce, it is as acceptable that their actions are condemned both by their own ethnic group and also the indigenous population, without others throwing about accusations of racism.

You suggested that this was a scare story perpetrated by the tabloids and probably untrue. I provided up to date evidence from a broadsheet that substantiated my point, so I'm glad that I've swayed you. But where you cast doubt on this survey is by the inference that it is the schools who are making these decisions, where it also states that the majority of parents would be quite happy with a Nativity play. Of course, the reality is that the decisions taken by the schools is heavily influenced by the local authorities, particularly the left-leaning ones. What would be most refreshing would be a situation where the parents are able to vote on whether there should be a Nativity play or not and then they could raise two fingers vertical to the leftie bureacrats who are paid by their taxes to act as public servants, not Gauleiters

What, tabloids like The Telegraph for example? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1571187/School-nativity-plays-under-threat.html Perhaps you had better write to them and tell them they have got it all wrong.

They might have the same rights as us, but the difference is that if the same actions were taken by the indigenous British population against some Muslim or other ethnic group's celebration/holy day, then the authorities would come down hard on it with charges of racial hatred, incitement to riot or other public order offences. We might have the same rights, but some local authorities don't allow us to have nativity plays in our schools, lest we offend those pupils of different ethnic groups. The entire system is geared towards not upsetting their ethnic or religious sensibilities and the British public are getting fed up with it when our hospitality towards immigrants like these is abused. But their protest was pointless really, as there is no heaven or hell. When they are dead, they will either be cremated or rot in the ground like everybody else. There is no spirit afterlife.

No head bobbing up and down or Brandy in hand? She must be feeling a bit deflated, your "girl". No puncture kit to hand?

And you hate him. It's obviously not enough for you that he was instrumental in bringing in ML to save us from oblivion. I get the impression that you would have preferred us to be playing in the Blue Square league. BBB is right. You're simply not objective enough to look at the bigger picture and place far too much store on these other matters. Frankly I couldn't give a damn about whether he has offended the delicate egos of freeloaders, self-important journos, underperforming managers or players or staff who don't pull their weight. As for the interfering Chairmen of other clubs trying to be macho to impress rival supporters or leaders of support groups representing nobody but themselves, who cares? I'll certainly judge a man by his actions, but that will the actions that get us back to the Premiership, not those that ruffle a few feathers along the way.

So you know for a fact that he had no experience in managing people or handling relations with the media, do you? Kindly give us chapter and verse of the evidence that will convince us that you know what you are talking about. He appears to be a very private individual, so I would be surprised if anybody on here knew much about his former life before he came here. He has had interviews with some of the more serious newspapers who find him charming, but that rather contradicts your assumptions. I suspect that in his former roles working for the Sports sections of the various Banking Institutions with which he has been involved, he probably had several staff under him. Latterly, when he had been in charge of the financial affairs of Billionaires, you reckon that he didn't have the personal relationship skills to deal with those customers adequately do you? Regarding the Saints V Echo issue, my information was that the thing started because the Echo had breached an agreement to hold fire on an article about the new training facilities and therefore Ian Murray made himself and his rag persona non grata at the Club. Instead of apologising and trying to mend fences, Murray has pursued a petty vendetta against Cortese, who doesn't suffer fools gladly and good for him. But it has already seemingly been established that the basis for this thread is not correct anyway, so those who revel in slagging off our CEO will have to wait until they can clutch at some other straws to satisfy their craving for a good bleat.

I'm surprised you didn't have the forethought to start another thread on it, Smears. Missed a great opportunity to establish your credentials as whinger-in-chief when it comes to criticising our CEO. But you do win the Irony Prize for being petty enough to accuse Cortese of being petty over this non-event. So you're promoted to Chief Petty Officer Smears.

Quote: So Charlton's holding Company were a PLC like ours, but able to transfer all of their largest assets like the Stadium and the training ground to Murray's new company along with the players who were owned by Charlton Athletic Football Club and effectively wipe out £30 million of debt? Is this just badly worded, or were they able to do that as a PLC?

And soon we can expect an apology from various posters can we, expressing regret at jumping to wrong conclusions that it must have been all Cortese's fault? And sorry to be pedantic, but if the information on which those comments were based was incorrect, they cannot be facts.

Sorry, I fail to see the difference between our position and theirs. The PLC was wound up as was ours. We thought that we had exploited a loophole but weren't allowed to get away with it. What's the difference with Charlton's position? So what if their debt was loans from directors. So was some of Pompey's. Debt is debt and paying it off reduces the amount of cash that could be spent on improving the team, therefore writing it off in Administration gives a team an advantage, so I thought the whole idea of the points deduction was to negate that advantage. So it happened in the Summer and therefore there cannot be any points penalty for this season. Is that how it works?

Agree wholeheartedly. Charlton's position could well have an impact on the promotion prospects of another club which has had to cut their cloth according to their means and often debt spiralling out of control is due to a club buying or paying players money it cannot afford, but giving them an advantage in terms of the strength of their team. We had to take the nasty medicine and without the penalty might have been promoted to the Championship. At the very least, Saints should make representations to the FL that a penalty should be levied on Charlton, or an explanation should be made as to what the difference was between our situation and theirs. If they do not impose the penalty, there should be a campaign from supporters of other clubs in the division to apply pressure on the FL to change their minds.

Who is denying the Echo the right to print whatever they like provided it isn't libellous? It's up to them to gain the story and print it and if they have jeopardised their relationship with the organisation which probably has more column inches in their publication devoted to news connected to it, then that is their fault. Let their journalists find their own stories about the club if they can and if they can't because doors are closed against them, then they can always publish stories in the public domain. But nobody is obstructing the freedom of the press.

You're naive if you believe for one moment that if you treat the media nicely they'll treat you nicely back. All they're interested in is selling their rag and if a sensational story comes up about Saints, it isn't going to be held back or treated with kid gloves just because the club and the Echo are cosy together. And I see that you are like some others on here who are only too ready to apportion the blame onto the shoulders of our Chief Executive and none onto Ian Murray's. As the saying goes, it takes two to tango, but as far as you're concerned, everything must be the fault of our CEO. You say that Cortese has experience as an advisor to where the rich should invest and then you say that he has no experience of running anything. Which is it? Isn't his experience of financial matters of any benefit to the club? Equally one can state that Murray has no experience outside of Journalism and would be no more qualified to run a football club than Cortese, although Cortese would be more qualified at least to advise on the financial aspects of running that rag the Echo. Murray ought to be good at the PR aspects, although one wouldn't think it if he is capable of p*ssing off those who can aid the sales of his rag.

I agree with you entirely. But Docker P seems to think that Mind you, he's wrong and might have more of a case if he raised the age figure to 70+ and even then the number of silver surfers is growing fast as grandparents seek to keep in touch with their families.

Spot on. Who cares a damn about it when one can access the actual highlights of the match on a computer or watch them on the local regional TV reports? If no accord has been reached between Cortese or that prat Murray, then I will lose no sleep and have no qualms about siding with Cortese. It is Murray that is losing out if he refuses to offer an olive branch. His rag's circulation will suffer and the buck will stop on his desk if his lords and masters call him to account.

"Bearing in mind the opposition and the number of other significant home matches during November, the Club had wished to push through discounted rates for this match, in order to reward our most loyal fans." So Shrewsbury couldn't be bothered to bring more than a paltry 727, despite our best efforts to get their fans a really attractive price and our own fans couldn't really be that bothered to go and watch us play a fourth division team either. Rather tends to justify the statement made on the OS, doesn't it?

"Bearing in mind the opposition and the number of other significant home matches during November, the Club had wished to push through discounted rates for this match, in order to reward our most loyal fans." So Shrewsbury couldn't be bothered to bring more than a paltry 727, despite our best efforts to get their fans a really attractive price and our own fans couldn't really be that bothered to go and watch us play a fourth division team either. Rather tends to justify the statement made on the OS, doesn't it?

Toss a coin. Whilst it's still spinning in the air, you will decide which way you want it to land. Stick with what that decision was.