Wes Tender

Currently 80% of the fan base represented here is in favour of some form of protest or other, with over half in favour of the most drastic but most effective option, the mass boycott.

Crouch also said this at the AGM. Again, I can't be arsed to read the transcript that the Echo reported to see whether it was covered, but he certainly said it.

So all fans are a bit thick when it comes to running a football club? Logically it follows that the best people to run a football club are not fans, by your argument. Many fans of this club are also business people in their own right and know perfectly well how to run their businesses. The difference here, is that the club is a different type of business to most, being as it is in the entertainment sector. The trouble with the current people running the club, is that they might have a decent appreciation of how to run the finances except with one deficiency; they alienate their customer base at their peril. It doesn't matter a jot how good they are at balancing the books if their policies alienate the very people they need on board to keep the business afloat. This is the achievement of the current lot, who are the most divisve board in the history of this club. You might wish that these issues are put to one side, but others consider them the crux of the whole matter and refuse to ignore them, knowing that ultimately they will destroy the club.

Journalists independent? My God, you're naive. They report what their editor wants to convey, with a slant in their favoured direction. Of course the transcript wasn't verbatim. Read it back again and tell me where they mentioned Lowe's crass exercise of attempting to big up his ego by reading that letter singing his praises. I can't be arsed to read it all again, but if memory serves, I don't think that they covered what Anne McMenemy said about the replacement of her husband's picture with the FA Cup either. Verbatim means quoting everything that was said, not a precis of what they thought were the salient points. I heard the words of all speakers verbatim, especially as I was sat close to Crouch, whereas in the melee, unless the reporter was also sat close to him, he might well not have caught what was said through the noise. The thing about the photo illustrates the pettiness of the people running the club. The significance of that obviously escaped you.

Those in power? You mean the cosy little clan of former board members who put themselves in the position to enrich themselves via the reverse takeover with Lowe and Cowan's little retirement home company, in alliance with somebody who is prepared to stab him in the back one minute and cosy up to him the next, just so that he can protect his shareholding, his other monetary assets having plummeted in value recently. "Those in power" back Lowe for purely selfish reasons or hadn't you realised that? It's not anything to do with whether somebody could run the club any better, but everything to do with maintaining that power and influence and keeping others away from the controls of their train set.

I tried to do this, knowing that the normal procedure is to dilute the thrust of an argument by using multiple threads. So I'm not going to exacerbate the problem by posting anything constructive on this one

Pardon me, but I am having difficulty in understanding the concept that the older a player gets, the worse his passing becomes. Or did you mean that with the money we have available we can only afford the useless older players who lack the ability to make a decent pass? I thought that several of our older players like Safri, Idiakez, Belmadi, Liska were quite good passers of the ball when they were fit. Shame also that the training of our youngsters does not include the ability to anticipate and deal with a ball over the top of the midfield. I would have thought that this was fairly basic defending. Perhaps we ought to play 4-4-2; that is simple enough to understand for all those youngsters that are confused by the alternative formations.

I'm encouraged to hear someone like you whose opinion I respect giving this idea some credence. I wonder whether there are others with influence out there who have contacts with people who might progress this scheme?

Great to see you back Duncan and a good post, as usual. The main difference that I perceive between the current board and their potential successors is over the question of unity of the fan base. Lowe's board is the most divisive in the history of the club (unless you can correct me as the club's historian ) A new chairman would have the moral authority that Lowe does not have to issue a passionate rallying call to the fans to support the club in the hour of its greatest need. I agree that Crouch would not have total support, but would be a good stand-in option until a new board and chairman was appointed. Half of the problem with gaining complete support for change is that some reasonably ask what the alternative is to be and they compare the change of board to the changing around of the deck chairs on the Titanic, which is fair enough if the board was simply a change of the usual suspects. After the AGM, a group of us were exchanging ideas and one fellow suggested that perhaps a rival board should be formed as a board in waiting. The more I think about it, the better an option it appears. If the other major shareholders were to make approaches to a potential new chairman such as Salz and make use of the contacts that somebody like him would have and come up with names of other respected and competant people who would also be prepared to serve in the running of the club, they could be put forward to the fans, the media etc as the board in waiting. If they were an impressive alternative to the current board, with more widespread support, they could approach the Bank and loan note holders, who might then call on the Lowe board to resign.

The object of the boycott is to rid the club of Lowe primarily, as he is the most divisive element. JP is a side issue. Half a season is time enough to assess the viability of Lowe's bizarre policy and conclude that it hasn't worked so far and is unlikely to work given even more time which will most likely dig us deeper into the mire. The blame for JP's appointment and the resultant ensuing chaos lies squarely on Lowe's shoulders, but JP is clearly out of his depth and I don't personally see any benefit in retaining his services except as purely a youth coach, similar to George Prost. The campaign must be seen as against the current board, not having its focus split by issues such as the manager, but essentially a new chairman and board would be likely to make changes to the team management IMO.

Now watch them climb the table at our expense.

When it comes to your assessments of the team and the players, you certainly seem to know what you are talking about and I respect your views. However, the comments above give me doubts as to your grasp of the more political aspects of the club. As you say, 10,000 have voted with their feet already and deprived the club of the additional income that they would have brought. As things stand, this situation will only be exacerbated by the continuation of the bizarre experiment, but also Lowe's increasing disdain for the fans as he becomes ever more isolated and contemptuous of those against him, he will further alienate them and even fewer will attend. We are in a vicious downward spiral. Granted that a turnaround would ensue following a string of good wins, but realistically the chances of this happening become less likely, especially as confidence diminishes amongst the players and we have to sell the best ones to keep afloat, thus weakening the squad even further. The crux of the matter is that instead of the slow death of a thousand cuts with attendances decreasing week by week until we reach a figure whereby we can no longer keep afloat, we have the option of a short, sharp action that if supported well, would force Lowe to resign within a matter of days, either through pressure from his cronies who are propping him up, or through the banks. Once he is gone we can start to turn things around with a unified club, better attendances and support, changes to the management and method of playing which would hopefully begin to bear fruit in the results.

I think that the old company adage applies here; Rule number 1 The Company Chairman is always right. Rule number 2 In the event of the Chairman taking any action that is questionable in the eyes of others, see Rule number 1.

I think that the old company adage applies here; Rule number 1 The Company Chairman is always right. Rule number 2 In the event of the Chairman taking any action that is questionable in the eyes of others, see Rule number 1.

HaHaHa! Glad that we can still make fun of ourselves and our dismal situation. Is this a case of gallows humour, or a case of if we didn't laugh we'd cry instead?

HaHaHa! Glad that we can still make fun of ourselves and our dismal situation. Is this a case of gallows humour, or a case of if we didn't laugh we'd cry instead?

The poll aspect of this has only just been posted onto it. So the 25 votes is not connected to the 727 views.

The poll aspect of this has only just been posted onto it. So the 25 votes is not connected to the 727 views.

Glad that following another of our useless performances, that this thread has been resurrected. Having read the contributions, I think that that by CB Fry was one that I agreed with entirely. I concur that if a mass boycott was made, the results would be very quick. I also love the idea of the city venues with attendance of one well known ex-player at each venue. How does everybody else feel? If there is now agreement that the only really effective option to achieve the departure of Lowe and Co quickly is via this option, this plan needs to be put into action now, before too much further decline has been experienced. I will be away from 29th to 18th January, so cannot contribute my own personal efforts, but if the plan is to succeed, we need some volunteers to help arrange it. Anybody willing to step up to the plate?

Glad that following another of our useless performances, that this thread has been resurrected. Having read the contributions, I think that that by CB Fry was one that I agreed with entirely. I concur that if a mass boycott was made, the results would be very quick. I also love the idea of the city venues with attendance of one well known ex-player at each venue. How does everybody else feel? If there is now agreement that the only really effective option to achieve the departure of Lowe and Co quickly is via this option, this plan needs to be put into action now, before too much further decline has been experienced. I will be away from 29th to 18th January, so cannot contribute my own personal efforts, but if the plan is to succeed, we need some volunteers to help arrange it. Anybody willing to step up to the plate?

Thank you for raising what for me is precisely the point. You want balance in the discussion, but have tried to link together two totally diametrically opposite characters and expect them to exhibit similar behavioural patterns? Would you expect the headmaster to act in an unruly manner because one of his rowdiest pupils does? Lowe's background is one of privileged upbringing, private education, jobs at the top echelons of the City financial institutions amongst people who are supposed to act like gentlemen, respectful and respectable. On that basis, one wouldn't expect Lowe to feel so insecure at an AGM of a PLC that he felt the need to inflate his own ego so crassly with an anonymous letter singing his praises. Nobody with an ounce of humility would even consider doing that. It was patently either a deliberate wind-up of his enemies, or he has a mental problem. I know Richard quite well and I know that he is a very passionate individual, who sometimes goes over the top, but his heart is always in the right place. Who knows, the throwing of the 30 pieces of silver might have been a deliberate ploy to raise the profile of the AGM and boost the campaign to rid the club of Lowe in the media. Maybe he anticipated how Lowe would behave and how the OS would further shoot itself in the foot by using it as a propaganda weapon against Lowe's detractors, which is what has happened. Granted that the 30 pieces of silver would more appropriately have been given to the Quisling, who felt the desperate need to be elsewhere so that he didn't have to face the wrath of those who felt that he had betrayed them by allowing Lowe back in control. But I consider that taken altogether, what Richard did was effective both in raising the media profile of the AGM and showing what a dickhead Lowe was in allowing or maybe even instructing the OS to attempt to call this incident a throwing of coins with intent to injure. As UM says, I had not even felt it worthy of mention in my report of the AGM and yet because of either the support or condemnation of Richard's action by either the fans or Lowe, here it is being discussed as a separate aspect of the AGM. Well done Richard, you probably achieved what you set out to achieve.

Thank you for raising what for me is precisely the point. You want balance in the discussion, but have tried to link together two totally diametrically opposite characters and expect them to exhibit similar behavioural patterns? Would you expect the headmaster to act in an unruly manner because one of his rowdiest pupils does? Lowe's background is one of privileged upbringing, private education, jobs at the top echelons of the City financial institutions amongst people who are supposed to act like gentlemen, respectful and respectable. On that basis, one wouldn't expect Lowe to feel so insecure at an AGM of a PLC that he felt the need to inflate his own ego so crassly with an anonymous letter singing his praises. Nobody with an ounce of humility would even consider doing that. It was patently either a deliberate wind-up of his enemies, or he has a mental problem. I know Richard quite well and I know that he is a very passionate individual, who sometimes goes over the top, but his heart is always in the right place. Who knows, the throwing of the 30 pieces of silver might have been a deliberate ploy to raise the profile of the AGM and boost the campaign to rid the club of Lowe in the media. Maybe he anticipated how Lowe would behave and how the OS would further shoot itself in the foot by using it as a propaganda weapon against Lowe's detractors, which is what has happened. Granted that the 30 pieces of silver would more appropriately have been given to the Quisling, who felt the desperate need to be elsewhere so that he didn't have to face the wrath of those who felt that he had betrayed them by allowing Lowe back in control. But I consider that taken altogether, what Richard did was effective both in raising the media profile of the AGM and showing what a dickhead Lowe was in allowing or maybe even instructing the OS to attempt to call this incident a throwing of coins with intent to injure. As UM says, I had not even felt it worthy of mention in my report of the AGM and yet because of either the support or condemnation of Richard's action by either the fans or Lowe, here it is being discussed as a separate aspect of the AGM. Well done Richard, you probably achieved what you set out to achieve.

You and SOG don't get it, do you? Granted that we are talking about petty things, but they are discussed to illustrate how petty our chairman can be. There were two things at that AGM that sum up the small-mindededness of Lowe and some might say that both of them taken together point to a mental defect. Firstly, I was incredulous when he waved his letter in the air and read the contents, fullsome in its praise of Lowe's job at the club. Surely no sane person would have been so crass as to do that. It was the action of a megalomaniac. The second action of removing the picture of the most successful manager at the club commemorating the single biggest success in our history surely also speaks volumes. It is obvious that apart from the pettiniess, Lowe cannot countenance the thought that there is a picture of somebody he detests because Lawrie is everything to this club's history that he is not. Did you actually go to the AGM, Chez? If not, then surely it is not up to you to say whether it was a waste of time. Personally, I think that it was a very useful opportunity to force Lowe and the board to face up to the fact that they are deeply divisive and have no idea of how to run a football club. They might know how to keep a business afloat ordinarily, but they have not the slightest idea of running a business in the entertainment industry that is so reliant on keeping a requisite number of repeat regular attenders. It should also have been clear that the shareholders in this club are not the ordinary investors of most PLCs. They are mostly truly representative of the wider fan base and the message that they gave Lowe was that they want him to go as he has been a failure and is past his sell by date. One word of advice Rupert; listen to what your wife tells you. You don't have to endure this level of hate. You can walk away, the sooner the better.

Just posted much the same thing on another thread. Gross incompetance.

You can snooze all you like whilst the club enters a tailspin into the third division. Most others accept that although stability is a great policy when you are melding a team together, it is useless when you have the number of personnel changes we have had recently in the players used. Look at today for example. Why is it preferable to keep a manager for the sake of stability and not for that manager to keep the same team for more than a handful of matches? I'd like you to explain it to me, as either I'm thick, or you have just contradicted yourself with your stability argument. A bit like Lowe, in fact; he can't see that Portvliet is the weakest manager we have had recently and will no doubt argue for stability with his own choice, when his track record over managerial appointments is one of the worst in British football. He didn't allow us much stability with Pearson, did he, so how can he expect us to allow his appointment more time? And yes, your last line is exactly what we should be doing. Replacing the nice but incompetant Dutch guy for somebody who knows what he is doing, keep at least one of those strikers who knew where the goal is and rid us of the scourge that is Lowe who is doing his level best to reduce attendances at St Marys to the level that every match puts our debt levels higher and higher. Great strategy.