Wes Tender

I really can't be bothered to go through the whole post and debate every point, as I am shortly going out. But having read the statement above, perhaps it illustrates your shakey grasp of the situation last season compared to this:- Pearson's record excluding the Plymouth game when he was not nominally in charge, was won three, drew 6, lost three. If thta equates in your mind to losing far more games than we won, then continue to delude yourself.

You get some perspective too. Otherwise you might as well stupidly ask why most spend so much time watching the television when they could be doing something positive about the World's ills. The perspective comment came against the background of LGTC linking pride in the young players against the background of heartache and despair in the World. A bit like saying that despite global warming, the starving hordes in Africa, the numerous people suffering financial hardships because of the credit slump, thank God that the young saints team make us proud the way they play. Sounds stupid put that way, doesn't it?

You just don't have the imagination to realise that there are other alternatives to the situation that was brought about by Lowe, do you? Everything doesn't have to be black or white; there are shades of grey too. There are experienced managers out there no more costly than JP, just as there are players out there more experienced than the youngsters and who wouldn't cost a fortune either. The shade of grey that might well have produced better results is having a blend of experience and youth. Kindly give it some consideration before you try and rationalise incorrectly what I was saying.

Just because WG's opinion doesn't coincide with yours doesn't mean that he is taking the p*ss. I think that you're also being disingenous selecting the second half of the season too. In the corresponding beginning of the season up to the 8th December, we had won 5 times as many home games as we have this season, beating the likes of Stoke, Hull and West Brom in the process. In case it escaped your attention, all three of those teams are now in the Premiership. We also beat Cardiff and Blackpool. If you believe that you have made any valid point by mentioning the cup match against Bristol Rovers under the stewardship of Gormless and Dudd, then you might as well tell us all how wonderfully we played against Rotherham in the same competition under JP. We wait for your assessment with bated breath. As for the period after Dodd and Gorman's departure, most acknowledge that we were playing an improving game with a squad that looked better under Pearson. Many posters on here have indicated that they would prefer Pearson to be here now instead of Poortvliet. Are you going to tell them that they're taking the p*ss too? Like Whitey Grandad, I would swap the beginning of last season with the beginning of this one in a shot.

The usual contradiction. You ask why there were the constant threads about Lowe then urge us all to get behind the team and the manager as if the policies of Lowe had no bearing on the criticism of the results obtained by this rookie manager and the young team. If you can't see that the appointment of the manager who is out of his depth and the replacement of experienced players with naive youngsters is the root of our problems and then make the connection with the person responsible for that, then I can understand why you are surprised that there are so many threads about Lowe. What is frustrating is attending all of the home games for nearly half a season and constantly coming away from matches feeling good about just one win. Whose fault is that? Lowe's? The manager's? The players'? Ours'? Or is it nobody's fault? Just that we were unlucky?

You can see it, I can see it, Case and Merrington can see it along with most fans that attend matches; everybody but our lower league Dutch manager apparently. As I've said many times, as entertaining as it is to watch the pretty passing and movement, I would rather see more of the play out wide, pacey wingplay stretching the midfield, taking the ball to the byeline and crossing in for the strikers to attack. Holmes and sometimes Dyer were excellent at this and it would have been bread and butter for John, Rasiak or Saganowski. Unfortunately with Holmes injured, Dyer, John, Rasiak and Saga out on loan, the manager hasn't the mental capacity to instruct others to take up their roles; either that or the players haven't the discipline to play to a strategy. Whichever it is, I tire of the pretty stuff if there is little or no end product. When push comes to shove, I'm afraid that currently I'd rather see us win dirty than lose or draw prettily.

Frank, you don't appear to have noticed that this is LGTC, not LGSC. Now, this could be the same bloke, or maybe not. If it were, I missed the explanation as to why the change was necessary. But do you still believe it's a top post saying as it does that amongst all the heartache and despair in the world right now, finally we have something and some people to be proud of and believe in? Usually your posts have a bit more gravitas than to agree with a sentiment as shallow as that.

I think that this is a shame as I have always respected your opinion on the youth, as you have made it your business to go and watch them play and your assessments on them seem fair and balanced. I suppose that I'm a bit disappointed that a Navy man would just surrender so easily without putting forward his counter views to a forum, secure in his knowledge that he knew what he was talking about and confident that for that reason he could change opinions from the more sensible posters and just ignore those others who he deemed to be idiots. I try not to be too critical of the youngsters who mostly give it their best shot. I just bemoan the fact that due to the lack of finances caused by the mismanagement of the club these past few years, we are blooding most of the youngsters before they are ready and that we have attempted to throw too many of them into the first team at the expense of balance.

We ought to play him up front then, as most of our strikers are lousy shots and couldn't hit the proverbial barn door.

I just thought of the pithy little epithet that answers the thread title to a tee. A change of attitude is only deserved when the players demonstrate a change of aptitude.

Thanks

Try and get some perspective on things. If you're going to hold up our football team as an example of something that makes you proud against a background of the heartache and despair in the World, then IMO that makes you a very shallow individual. It's only a game for crissakes and personally I'd feel much prouder of the things that British people do to try and alleviate some of that suffering in the World. Often that is unsung heroes who contribute something just for the reward of knowing that they have tried to make a difference rather than overpaid footballers.

Sorry. Your views mean a lot to me, I messed up on this occasion. I had clearly intended the post to be taken as non-drivel, and mature. Thanks for pointing out the error of my ways.

Before you deign to respond to Upton's thread, perhaps it would be a good idea to read it thoroughly and then digest it before responding. Did you not see the reference he made to being a current ST holder? Unless you have a screw loose, you couldn't put forward a convincing argument that any ST holder that still pays his hard-earned dosh in this division to watch a squad full of youngsters managed by a lower division Dutch Manager could conceivably be a plastic fan. And I also think that having paid for that ST, he is perfectly entitled to go and watch the team play Man Utd without being insulted either.

It is about time that legislation was passed to regulate clampers. This legislation needs to ensure that anybody authorised to clamp vehicles should be licensed before they can do it. There should be a regulating body authorised to withdraw these licenses if the clampers act badly; some are guilty of demanding money with menaces for example and that should never be tolerated. There should also be legislation pegging the fine at the level of the average parking ticket. A fee of £450 is simply monstrous and personally I would not be at all surprised if an individual wished to exact some sort of revenge against the clamper or their bosses as a result. Regulation against the companies in this industry which comprises more than its fair share of thugs and criminals to enforce it is long overdue.

Drivel, infantile, puerile. A better effort and more imaginative.

Groundhog Day again at St. Mary's. Another match where we were good one half and unable to sustain it for 90 minutes. The same old questions raise themselves every home match; are we good and the opposition bad, or is it a case that when we are good in the first 45 minutes, the rival manager susses us out and makes adjustments to negate our strategies? The first half, we played as good football as I have seen this season with fluid passing and movement, good possession that had SW chasing shadows and a hungry will to win the midfield battles and maintain possession. But what exactly is the point of it all when we do not have a cutting edge to kill off the game with a two or three goal advantage from those efforts? Back to the connundrum of whether SW were just plain bad that first half and had Law's boot up their behinds during the interval, or whether he had sussed out how to negate our formation, but as usual we were nowhere near as effective after the break and indeed could have lost the game if SW had taken their chances; but luckily they were as crap as us at finishing. And so it continues. Still one win only at home. It simply is not good enough. Not good enough in terms of value for money, not good enough if it continues to secure our survival in this division. Along with many others who still attend out of a deep felt sense of loyalty, my patience is wearing very, very thin. Thank God I hadn't bought a ST, so if I decide that I've finally had enough, I won't have wasted any more money. I think that depending on sales of decent players in January, that could be the catalyst for my attendance or not, until Lowe goes, when I will return regardless of results.

Well, somebody can have the seat that I would have bought had I not arranged to be enjoying three weeks of Tropical sunshine in the Far East, leaving just before the New Year and returning around the 18th January. I'll just have to watch it live, late at night in some bar. If we win by some fluke, I'll be able to wear my Saints shirt and laugh at all the plastic ManUre fans with their fake replica shirts over there. If we lose, then I'll bemoan the fact that when we usually lose at home it is against teams whose players are generally unknowns or has beens rather than the World stars of ManUre. The point there is that it would not have cost much different to watch them than it would our youngsters playing the fizzy pop opposition.

No. If you have a different opinion, post it yourself, don't try and alter the opinions of others.

Not helpful. I go to all home matches and therefore have some idea of how we play. Presumably if you were at the game, conversely you are not able to comment on whether the Radio Solent commentary was accurate or not either. Anybody not able to attend away games has to rely on that. LeGod Third Coming: A helpful post. I think Perry is good in defence and I have kittens when we tried to play 4 inexperienced youngsters across the back previously before we put Perry in for experience and stability. As it is, most of Charlton's chances seemed to come through Jay McEveley who had a stonking game by all accounts. Was he their left back? If so, I guess that Lallana and James didn't have the measure of him. As you say, our finishing is just not up to the standard needed to gain us points.

Totally agree. When Big Bad Bob asked whether Lawrie wouldn't have done the same, one has to think what Lowe has done as an historic achievement that would measure up to the heights that Lawrie achieved with us. But I can quite see on the other hand why a group picture Lowe, Askham and all those other charlatans ought to be hung on the boardroom wall after we have rid the club of them, to serve as a reminder of our darkest hour and that we should never allow their like to get their grip on us ever again.

If you just stopped a second and analysed what you have just said, you would realise that you have put your foot in your mouth. Did it not occur to you that by saying there were more negative posters, that itself was proof that there was less to be positive about? Besides, as has been debated before, arguable as to whether you are more sensible than the negatives, but the positives are less sensible than the realists.

Although I wasn't at the game and only listening to it on the radio, I find it hard to believe that some are saying that we shaded it and even some say we should have come away with the three points. According to the commentary, we didn't have one shot on goal until Perry's header at the half hour mark, whereas Davies had made the most incredible string of saves and was playing out of his skin. If I heard it right that he had made about 7/8 truly magnificent saves, obviously with a goalkeeper not quite as on top of his game, we could easily have conceded three or four without him. And how many chances did we have that ended as shots on target? Not many at all seemingly. JP had stated in a pre match interview that we feared nobody as we had dominated most teams so far this season. The results show the stupidity of that remark if domination is not turned into points, but today we were dominated by Charlton until the second half where it appeared that Charlton's players were not as fit as ours and began to tire. Things also changed when the completely innefectual Robertson was taken off and Pearce came on, as not only is he a decent defender, but he also has the strength and presence to add threat to the attack from set pieces and also Cork is a better player in the centre of the park. But when we had made those substitutions, we had tightened up the midfield playing 4-5-1 which is what we should be doing more often away anyway. As often has happened to us in the past, teams playing that formation at St. Mary's often hit us with a sucker punch on the break and take all three points, especially as we are so crap at home and we could have done the same to Charlton. But Charlton had enough opportunities to have hit several past us today and unlike us, it wasn't the paucity of striker quality that prevented it; it was the incredible performance of Davies that saved our bacon yet again. For all the revolutionary total football played by our brilliant youngsters once in a blue moon, it was one of the oldest players in our squad that shone the brightest yet again. Ironic, isn't it?

What next? The statue of Ted Bates will be handed back to his family because Crouch paid for it and replaced by a statue of a Klingon.

Ah, I see. I thought that as a forum, all shades of opinion were welcome. Perhaps the people who run the forum should allow that some topics can be classified in such a way that only positive supportive posts are allowed on those threads and in the interest of balance, of course there should be some threads classified as only for negative posts. But sensibly, they accept that the best solution is that there are threads started by people of all shades of opinion and that posters of all shades of opinion respond them them. And is the thread dead? No. There still seems to be life in it, as far as I can see. It hasn't been closed yet.