OldNick

i dont understand where you are coming from on that one

You are wrong , the Leeds support was superb throughout that game and it was thier fans belief that roared them on.the players didnt give up as the fans hadn't.I have never liked Leeds fans but from that day i have the utmost respect for their support.

You wont change your mind and will be egging the fans on to sing anti Lowe songs.You will believe you are doing it for the right reasons but take it from me you are only cutting off your nose to spite your face.if the atmosphere is not focussed on supporting the team then we will most definatley lose.it may be best is the Saints go marching out do not come back to the stadium for the game.

I dont many weren't sceptical about the scheme but were understanding enough to realiser that the clubs finances were out of control and so drastic measures had to be taken.It wasnt a case of not realising that it was risky but we had a party and the hangover had to be got over.

Then why do clubs kick to their fans second half. Speak to the pro footballers and they will tell you the fans do help.I was talking to a couple of the Luton players when they went and played at Bournemouth and said to them about their good away support on the night and they said how much it meant to them and did give them a boost. I know the team havent performed at home but surely it will turn soon.I f not you are right and we are doomed.

Stu Im amazed how defeatist you are. i understand why you are like it but there are 14 games to go still.The side that was put out saturday was full of the experienced players the fans have been begging for and also a 4-4-2. We still can do it, haing the fans in turmoil during the game wil not help the club we adore, why help the opposition?

The potential of the club is no more than a dozen or so more clubs in the country.If we go into admiistration and are L1 the time to get us back into position to get to the PL will be another thing to put off an investor. Sheffield United last game last season under LC 32000 Manchester United FA cup under RL 32000. Whoever is in charge and the games are glamourous or important fans will turn up. I defy any fan who tells me if we were in the top 2 that the crowds at SMS would be under 25k now.

Yes they do do replays but I was more interested in watching how the 2 players were trying to deal with the very fast attacker. I was not looking to see why a player who was in the penalty area trying to score when the ball was thrown to an attacker 20 yards further forward, had not got back.it was a rubbish point originally. The players gave what they could which waqs not enough and why knock us when they were trying to throw everything forward to get a goal. I recall Alonso scoring from a similar attack last season I odubt many would criticise the players of his opponents because they didnt get back.

I think you have to go back to the time that the choice was made.I agree that Moyes would have been superb as he works well with little finance. When Moyes was interviewed GH had left and taken a lot of the backroom staff, Stuart Gray was the only one who turned down GH's invitation to leave.RL repaid his loyalty by keeping him in his job. Moyes of course wished to bring in Irvine in Grays place and so RL was caught between a rock and a hard place. Whilst in hindsight it was a mistake I find it difficult to criticise that particular decision if you put yourself back to that time. Wigley and Jan too long would be worse IMO

It is a non starter. How can a council justify purchasing afootball ground?

Well both, if you take away the powers of the Bank of England to stop the transgressions you are left open for peoples greed to take over.The Government did so and the also enjoyed spending the spoils the City brought in on taxes.If speeding regulations were dropped by the Goverenment and only run by people who were likely to speed it would not be long until cars were going along at 150mph,when there was a massive pileup who would you blame then? Imagine you had the chance to make enough money in 2-3 years to allow your family to live in luxury for generations, but in the back of your mind it might mean messing up the system. It would be legally OK but morally wrong what would you do? I myself truely am not sure but probably would veer to the security for life.By taking the regulations away the Government effectivily gave the higher echelon of bankers that opportunity.Forget not many of them were not British and so not too worried about us and the ones that were can now sit back on their deckchaors. Iam a capitalist but do not condone the excesses those bankers have had. As for being revolutionary , give me a break.Under any socialist system the ones at the top only live like royalty but with more excess.

the post was just too complex for you to work out

Yet another who didnt read the posts. I have seen the goal once and the cameras were concentrating on the attacker, when the ball was in the net i couldnt care who was following up and so you are being a right Plum, Plumstead and even went and counted my posts.What a saddo

OK I give in......

Well I cant comment as I wasnt looking.Frankly it wouldnt matter if we had Linford Christie he would not have made up the ground. As for the players giving up so have the majority of fans. 2 players were there and were skinned by superior pace

Good examples DD

Oh come on the ref is outside the box when a corner is taken. The cameras did not show anything else apart from the BC player and our back 2 , we dont know how many were 10yards behind by the time he scored

That is just how the government wish you to believe. When they came to power they took away the powers of the Bank of England to regulate and left the power to the bankers boys club FSA. they of course couldnt give a toss, and the bankers at the top took a once in a lifetime opportunity to make more money than you can dream of and so their famillies are financially secure for ever. During this time the government went on a spending spree on health and education and wars.the money the city was 'earning' was bringing in taxation that the chancellor loved spending.it then got to a stage where he couldnt reign it in as he was embroiled in the spend spend phiosophy.Blair saw the writing on the wall and has walked away smelling of roses when he was overseeing it as well. I and others were questioning how houses could go u 15-20% a year when wages were only going up 2-3%. So much so I sold my house 4 years ago and downsized and put the difference away to protect the gain. Any school kid would think it odd that people could lend 125% to somebody.i f they cant pay a deposit of 1% how will they ever pay 125%. It was madness and the government should have done something eve n as late as the day Northern Rock fell.

Now that's better I thought you were going soft in your old age.

thick as s### may also be reason

I suppose a grudging acknowledgement is as much as I could expect

I have said /thought the same all along.Although I did read the letter by Richards that was posted up on here from the time of the Wilde bunch nad he seemed sensible.Askham and co dont have any credit in my book.There are others that have been around the directors box for decades who should hold their heads in shame as well.

well smarty pants the original post was in reply to the statement that the ref and 2 of our players were the only ones close to play and no others were to be seen.It was not about James and Surman.So I will accept your apology

I think it is past him doing so.The only way a change of manager will happen surely will be if money comes in.