Wes Tender

That's quite a different matter altogether and I agree with you. I've been to all the home matches, rebought STs, merchandise, etc and only wish that I could afford the time to go to some of the away matches. It is sweeter to have witnessed first hand the turnaround from a slow start. Had the events of the past few months not taken place and we were still saddled with that last shower, this season I would have only gone to the away games within an hours drive or so.

Why can't they? They have the satisfaction of knowing that their absence in effect brought about the administration and therefore the removal of all the dross that used to run this club. Perhaps they are actually getting more enjoyment from their return, satisfied that although a division lower, they are watching a team who actually seem to care for the club, which in itself is unified for the first time in years and years.

Thinks...should I respond to Influenced's post and thus further continue posting on this thread? No, I don't think I will.

But will anything further emerge about it all? There have been numerous events during the past decade or so that have remained unanswered, or at least not to the satisfaction of most of us. The reverse takeover, why Gordon Strachan left, why the executive board under Hone and Dulieu got rid of Wilde, why Lowe didn't opt for administration before the points deduction deadline, whether there was collusion between Fry the administrator and Fry the Banker at Barclays who promptly left Barclays to work for the administrators, etc. There will be gagging orders over much of it, or it is not in the interests of some of them to leak anything, as it might put them in a bad light or implicate them. Likewise, I suspect that nothing of the events of the past few months will become any clearer just because we are chewing over it on an internet forum. If any of the protagonists had been still connected to the club, then there would be every reason to keep digging until something is unearthed, but as nobody has any bad feelings about the current incumbents and the bad eggs are all gone, what's the point?

As we're talking about a chapter in our history that is now closed, you're right, there is no end game, or if there was, it has taken place. Also, contrary to Nineteen's comment, I do not see why there should not be any humour in your posts, Frank. It isn't as if the matter is serious any longer, is it. I'm really past caring about the past myself and will only post on this topic if somebody is trying to rewrite history. All of the protagonists who caused the club's demise have gone and the new people really cannot be criticised so far, so what is the point of raking over old ground?

Just stumbled across this and I really do like the idea. Can we perhaps start it up as a new thread a couple of weeks before Xmas so that it is current at the time? I think that it would get a fantastic response from the fans and I'm sure that Markus would be very flattered by the gesture. Cheap Cards? The Card Factory, East Street and most big towns.

You're not an old perv... for that it'd have to be 18 x 12 year olds running around half naked.

What are you wittering on about? Both Alpine and me have made posts in the past saying that things didn't have to be run in the way they were during the past decade and suggesting alternative strategies. And you have absolutely no evidence either for implying that Cortese would have acted no differently than the other lot under the same financial restrictions. That is pure conjecture based on your contention that we were in a financial straitjacket which apparently narrowed down our options to just one strategy. Well, that was not the case at all. We did not have only one option of importing cheap lower league management from abroad and playing the kids for a start. A couple of very basic business principles are always there for the wise to follow both in business and in football. If you pay peanuts, you get monkeys for one. Perceived wisdom in the footballing World is that you never get anywhere by playing kids. Another guideline is to avoid the mindset of "never mind the quality, feel the width", or to understand that sometimes less is more. Both Alpine and me have previously pointed out that expenditure on decent players who could win matches would bring in more bums onto seats that could pay for it. As he says, it really isn't rocket science. Instead, we embarked on a policy of keeping prices high when serving up dross, because we invested in many mediocre players instead of fewer good ones. I'm sure that Nicola Cortese understands these things very well as an astute and professional businessman. Unfortunately it was apparent that the previous regime ignored them at their and our peril, but thank God we are rid of them all.

It wouldn't be the first time that a linesman got it wrong at this level, as they patently even get it wrong often in the Premiership too. The difficulty is that often the linesman might be up in line with the defence / striker, but has to be looking many yards back to the player that plays the ball. How can he simultaneously watch the ball being struck and watch the striker break forward to intercept the ball? Thank God though that if the decision was wrong, it did not cost us the 3 points. One just has to hope that the linesmen get as many wrong in our favour as against us over the course of a season.

Yes, I don't disagree with what you have said here. IMO, although certain people associated with the club have had mixed reviews on whether they improved matters or made them worse, whether they acted with integrity or for motives of ego or personal gain, the plain fact is that most are glad that they are all gone. Although we need to reflect on our past history and the part played in it by the various protagonists, there can't be many, if any, who are not extremely grateful for the way that things have turned out and I have yet to see a bad word spoken about Markus Liebherr and Nicola Cortese. There might eventually come a time when there is some reason or other for some to bellyache about something, but so far they have not put a foot wrong and long may it last. As you rightly conclude, I was looking for a debate that doesn't exist. Things are so good at the club at the moment, that there is common ground between former sparring partners as far as the running of the club is concerned now. There is little to discuss apart from the football. That is how it ought to be, but it's so dull for those like me and you who like to gnaw on other bones.

But is it easy to throw money at a problem? First you have to actually have the money to throw at it, something that we as a club have not had in any serious amounts, so it has hardly been an option for us until recently. And often, money is the answer to solving the problems. Money enables us to afford a decent manager and decent players, to turn down offers for players we do not want to sell, to set ticket prices at an attractive level, etc. The difference with us is that before it was a case of spending wisely the money that we didn't have as against now where the club are spending wisely the money we do have.

Brilliant draw! We can get revenge for the awful way that they unceremoniously dumped us out the last time. And with luck, the player to apply the fatal coup de grace will be Lambert. Although we are now in the same division, I'd argue that this is a better team than then, with a better manager, not difficult when we are talking Dodd and Gorman. Now is the right time to play them again and turn the tables.

I think that it would be interesting to be able to ask his contemporary, his ex-team mate Surman whether a move would be a good thing. I have a sneaking suspicion that Surman might actually be beginning to rue his decision to leave, now that he is just warming the bench at Wolves, whereas his mate Lallana is feeling wanted and enhancing his reputation by adding some skill to an increasingly successful team.

I think that you miss an important point. Certainly Lambert is costing more to buy and more in wages than many other players from this division. But the other side of the equation is what he brings to the finances on the other side of the balance sheet in terms of goals to propel us up the league and in turn the extra bums on seats that follow a successful team. It is the same old connundrum that those of a financial background often fail to recognise, that sometimes money invested in this way can be self-financing. The same sort of parallel exists regarding a company's expenditure on advertising, which again can be self-financing and which equally the accountants cannot get their minds around as it is hard to quantify the exact return. In terms of total outlay, although our expenditure on players and their wages appears to be a lot at this level, the total isn't great in the scheme of things when you look at the big picture, which is the cost of getting us back to the Premiership and the financial return that will bring to us by comparison. The former incumbents coming from such a financial background, never had the imagination to consider this scenario. That is why we eventually fell through the divisions and ended up in administration, they having lost all their money tied up in their shares along the way. And it bloody well serves them right.

I also admire his honesty. It is a much better idea to be honest to themselves, as that is when they can start to address their shortcomings and improve. Karl Robinson must have been watching an entirely different game. It is indeed mighty refreshing to read that part of the problem was that Easter had to face a huge defence, especially the CBs. I really am coming around to believing that this defensive partnership is the best that we have had for many years, perhaps even better than the Killer/ Lundekvam one. It's early days yet, but Harding, Jaidi and Trotman are immense. James has been OK, but is the weak link, whereas Murty would hold his own against those other three as completely up to the best standard if he returns soon. I would also say that some of the other players in the current team would not have looked out of place in teams that we have had in the past decade, even in the Premiership. But whereas it is easy to talk about individuals who are shining, it is important to consider that it is more pertinent to recognise that as a team, as a unit, we are beginning to meld together very nicely.

Looking at the table, we have the fith best goal difference in the division. Today, beating the team in third position (and happily pushing them down a position) was a statement of intent. When we beat Charlton at home too soon, we will know that we can beat anybody in this division and teams will be looking over their shoulders' at us. Credit to Pardew for making the tactical changes that turned around the game. The fight that we put up after those substitutions and the change it made, was palpable and lifted the support. Although the first half was scrappy and it was hard to impose ourselves on the game, however our defence was solid and Kelvin had very little to do all match. In particular, Jermaine Easter did not have much impact and credit to the defence for keeping him quiet. I had expressed the opinion that it might be the difference between the two teams that they only had one one player in scoring form, whereas we had players scoring from all over the park. So it proved. We shut out Easter, but they couldn't handle the threat from all corners of the pitch that we showed. Hammond's confidence must be growing, the same with Connolly. Their Goalkeeper really was one of the worst I have seen. Granted that the blustery wind made conditions difficult, but I lost count of the number of times he kicked the ball out of touch or to one of our players. As for their goal, the referee should never have awarded a free kick that led to it. Our defender shoulder charged their player off the ball, which as far as I am aware is not foul play. They did the same to one of our strikers in the second half and we got nothing from it. It did seem that several of the MK Dons' players were far too ready to crumble whenever one of our players came within breathing distance of them and I don't like that in a team. Ince should attempt to instil some balls into his squad and the referee needs to realise that football is a game for men, not pansies. We certainly aren't the team of small young players anymore that were prone to being bullied by the big players in the lower divisions. We have some huge players in our team now, yet they are players with skill too.

Thanks for reminding me. I thought that the name somehow gave me the impression that this guy was a plank and that his opinions were not worthy of consideration. As you say, quel surprise.

Here at West End, there is a breeze and a little drizzle. Not too much to concern us about the match being postponed IMO. It looks as if it could have stopped and brightened up in the next four hours if anything.

It seems that where we should gain encouragement is Ince saying that MK Dons need to start scoring through other team members and not just Jermaine Easter. It therefore makes it easy for us tactically to attempt to keep him quiet, as we can clearly identify their main scoring threat. I suspect that our current formation with Wotton acting as a sweeper in front of the back four might with luck snuff out that threat. On the other hand, IMO Ince has a bit of a headache with us not having any problem with scorers throughout the team. He might assign somebody to try and tie up Lambert, only for Lallana, Papa or Harding to score from open play, or one of our big defenders to score from a set-piece. And if Connolly is playing too at some stage, it could be that we have too much firepower for them. MK Dons haven't let in many goals recently, but what would they do if they let in a couple early on? It will probably be a dour, tight game with little between us, but it is possible that we could run amok, as MK Dons have not been playing the in-form top teams so far and we are becoming one of those teams ourselves. This being Saints, I don't rule out the possibility of the wheels falling off and them hammering us. But with each passing week, the confidence grows that we are less likely to do that.

Well, our meeting was with Roberto Tambini, who was the officer appointed by the Council to oversee the project. From speaking to him, we were left in no doubt that it was the way that Lowe approached matters and his complete intransigence towards accepting that the shopping complex and the multiplex cinema could never be permitted, that alienated the EBC. Why would the Council have appointed an officer to oversee the project if if didn't have the support of the Councillors? You might be right that at the point that things were falling through because of Lowe's arrogance and crass lack of diplomacy, the Councillors were then against the project, but that could equally be an excuse to save face when the project was all but doomed. Why should there have been mass opposition to the stadium? Most of the electorate of the Borough were not affected by proximity to it and as it was not just a stand alone stadium, but part of a large sporting complex with the possibility of a bowling alley, ice rink, night club, themed restaurants, hotel, etc, there were great benefits that the project would have brought to the town, including extra business to the area, extra jobs and increased prestige for the Borough. The only residential area in close proximity was Stoneham itself, a small village with a small electorate, so not many votes lost from the NIMBYs there. Your statement regarding the suggestion "that the club had "upset" anybody is entirely wrong" is the incorrect one. The Council were upset enough by their treatment from the club that as a result I was told that they would not look favourably on a planning application for housing on Jackson's Farm while Lowe was in charge of the club. Of course it is all history and irrevelant now, but having taken the trouble to find out these things first hand, I'm bound to try and stand my corner if somebody tries to portray events in a different light. In particular, it is totally incorrect to state that Lowe and the board did not upset anybody on EBC.

People comment on things that they haven't seen because this is a forum and that is the purpose of these things. I have never taken hard drugs, but it doesn't preclude me from commenting on the rights (none) or wrongs of that. I haven't yet witnessed a murder, but surely I'm entitled to comment on the circumstances that might have led to it, am I not? In this particular case, we might well have been discussing a murder. It may have been that the victim could have had a heart condition, or that one of those kicks to the head was just millimetres away from causing his death. Would you then say that the only people justified in commenting on it were those who actually witnessed it? In any event, there are disparities between reports of even those who did see it, with some saying that the victim was unconscious and those saying he was not. It is clear to see where you stand on this, as you call those who comment on it but did not see it ***s and you also call those who report it a certain way, idiots, including the Echo. Presumably, they are also ***s because they dared to report it even when they weren't there either. If you witnessed it yourself, perhaps you ought to go and tell the police what you witnessed, Oh no, you couldn't do that, could you, as it would be grassing up the culprits.

Is that the one that says "Danger - stupid person", or the other one?

This is an excellent read about the latest fiasco. Very much along the same lines as that web blog on Fahim. Perhaps it's the same person. http://www.twohundredpercent.net/?p=2609

Zigsdad, thanks very much for taking the trouble to post such a detailed and interesting summary of your visit. I was delighted to note that the cameraderie and spirit in the camp was so relaxed and easy going. I noted that Papa appears to have been the victim of a prank by his mates, them telling him that a suit was compulsory whereas all the others turned up in casual gear. I wonder how much of this sort of practical joking was present before, or whether it has been turned up a notch or two by Wally Downes, credited with being the instigator of the original crazy gang at Wimbledon. In any event, the end result appears to be a very happy bunch of players getting on well together. As many have been captains in other teams and others having played either as top scorers or at a higher level, there would be scope for a big-time Charlie attitude from them, but apparently there is little or no evidence of this. Also good to hear that Murty is such a nice outgoing guy, as a post on another thread surprised me when it claimed that he was an arrogant sod. Frankly I had doubted it and am happy that it appears to be without foundation. It is certainly encouraging to have such spirit and unity in the camp, as it is beginning to translate into results and will be important later when players like Trotman and Papa come to decide whether they would like to stay when their loan spells end.