WealdSaint Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1205574/Rupert-Lowe.html?ITO=1490 Obviously still reaching for his lawyer at the first opportunity! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scudamore Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 I don't care. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 Who? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 Why? (And even the correction is wrong) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Bates Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 What's a rupert? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRichmond Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1205574/Rupert-Lowe.html?ITO=1490 Obviously still reaching for his lawyer at the first opportunity! After over Twelve years "in charge" at St Mary's, he "allegedly" lost all his money, and left "Penniless" ....... poor soul ........ Makes you wonder exactly where his money is sourced from to afford top lawyers ..... they're not exactly £7 per hour + LV's ........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paris Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 Yawn.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hackedoff Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 Go on Dragon,s Den Rupert, see if anyone wants to buy into your "How to run a football club" manual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintDonkey Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 Bloody hell do some people just have news alert set up to pick up any inconsquential dribble of news about our ex-chairman? He's history guys - get over it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greenridge Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 Go on Dragon,s Den Rupert, see if anyone wants to buy into your "How to run a football club" manual. I lol'd at that...very good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintwarwick Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 Go on Dragon,s Den Rupert, see if anyone wants to buy into your "How to run a football club" manual. I suppose those running the club in between his two visits could go on the same programme. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WealdSaint Posted 11 August, 2009 Author Share Posted 11 August, 2009 Interesting Responce...............yes he's history. BUT recent history and obviously not changing. and along with P**pey he's worth a laugh ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 After over Twelve years "in charge" at St Mary's, he "allegedly" lost all his money, and left "Penniless" ....... poor soul ........ So, he worked for free during those 12 years.........? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INFLUENCED.COM Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 After over Twelve years "in charge" at St Mary's, he "allegedly" lost all his money, and left "Penniless" ....... poor soul...... As much as you may wish for it, I doubt if that is the case SR. I think it is only right and proper that 'people' subject to untruths in the media should tackle them head on, whether it Rupert Lowe or SaintRichmond Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjk Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 Couldn't give a sh ite about him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 why should he let a slur stand against him if it was untrue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Wayman Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 WHO????????????????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victor Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 why should he let a slur stand against him if it was untrue? So who WAS chairman when we went into admin? I suppose he resigned at 4.00pm and we went into admin at 4.01pm. To be fair, it has been a little difficult to keep up with who did what and when over the last few years. Hopefully the revolving doors have been removed rather than repaired after the use they have had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bartosz Bialkowski Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 Nobody cares, thats why its the top story on newsnow over the last 24 hours..... http://www.newsnow.co.uk/h/Sport/Football/League+One/Southampton?type=ts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRichmond Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 As much as you may wish for it, I doubt if that is the case SR. I think it is only right and proper that 'people' subject to untruths in the media should tackle them head on, whether it Rupert Lowe or SaintRichmond Of course ... my comment was cynical ... He certainly made quite a lot of money out of SFC ..... Far Far more than he should have IMHO ........anf Far Far more than the likes of I could ever hope to prove...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Landrew Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 Tbh, I'm not at all sure this is Saints related. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRichmond Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 why should he let a slur stand against him if it was untrue? .... I always think of the comment ..... "Methinks thou doth protest too much... " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 why should he let a slur stand against him if it was untrue? What untrue, Nick? Lowe WAS in charge of the club when it went into admin, wasn't he? What's actually untrue is that he devised the structure of the club to avoid the points penalty - an impossibility since SLH predated the penalty system by three or four years. That's why the apology is just plain weird. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 why should he let a slur stand against him if it was untrue? Still the 'lovein' nick!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Professor Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 .... I always think of the comment ..... "Methinks thou doth protest too much... " Out of 1,624 posts, how many were not about Lowe? The Mail obviously printed something that was untrue, and have been required to correct it (although the correction looks wrong as well) but its got no relevance to Saints now. Lowe did a lot of good for this club, despite the abuse heaped on him, and had Wilde not sided with the anti-brigade to oust him, history could have been different and we may never have sunk to Div1 or administration. On the other hand we would not now have Marcus or the bright looking future, so it has all worked out for the best. Time to put the past behind us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redondo Saint Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 Out of 1,624 posts, how many were not about Lowe? The Mail obviously printed something that was untrue, and have been required to correct it (although the correction looks wrong as well) but its got no relevance to Saints now. Lowe did a lot of good for this club, despite the abuse heaped on him, and had Wilde not sided with the anti-brigade to oust him, history could have been different and we may never have sunk to Div1 or administration. On the other hand we would not now have Marcus or the bright looking future, so it has all worked out for the best. Time to put the past behind us. Wise comments. Let's move on and show some class by looking forward rather than slagging the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Bates Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 So who WAS chairman when we went into admin? I suppose he resigned at 4.00pm and we went into admin at 4.01pm. To be fair, it has been a little difficult to keep up with who did what and when over the last few years. Hopefully the revolving doors have been removed rather than repaired after the use they have had. i think the wording of the apology is badly worded as the original or else no aplogy would have been offered. I cant recall exactly but the original drafting of the PLC meant that we could avoid getting the -10 but that was just a coincidence that appeared when we came to the position.It was set up intentionally to do so. RL etc technically would have been removed at the moment we went into receivership, but that is splitting hairs. I suggest if it went into the press that you in your profession was slighted you would demand an apology or withdrawal. Even if you had wronged in othet areas, it is a basic right in our society and good luck to him to exercise his right.He lost a lot of money and prestige, I suggest he got his rewards by that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 Still the 'lovein' nick!!!!!!!!!!still the stalking Ginge.xxxx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SW11_Saint Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 About the 3rd of 4th retraction I've seen. Clearly keeping himself busy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 Bloody hell do some people just have news alert set up to pick up any inconsquential dribble of news about our ex-chairman? He's history guys - get over it! Easy enough to do without much effort. http://www.newsnow.co.uk/h/Sport/Football/League+One/Southampton Just an occasional glance at this site gives all the media updates pretty well as they happen. It's also good for keeping an eye on the Skates' latest catastrophes. I saw the Lowe bit yesterday, but frankly couldn't be arsed to feel much for it, except a quiet prayer of thanks that we were delivered from his clutches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 I read it this morning but I failed to see how the Mail had slighted him in any way and I really can't see what the apology was for, but that's Rupert for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 I read it this morning but I failed to see how the Mail had slighted him in any way and I really can't see what the apology was for, but that's Rupert for you. Thing is if someone prints something thatt is inaccurate, it should IMHO be at least retracted apology or not... we see too much of this sort of crap that becomes urban myth. Just because we dont like the bloke, should not mean the principle does not count? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 Thing is if someone prints something thatt is inaccurate' date=' it should IMHO be at least retracted apology or not... we see too much of this sort of crap that becomes urban myth. Just because we dont like the bloke, should not mean the principle does not count?[/quote'] What crap would that be then? Lowe WAS chairman when SLH went into receivership and yet the Mail is apologising ostensibly for saying that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 What crap would that be then? Lowe WAS chairman when SLH went into receivership and yet the Mail is apologising ostensibly for saying that. WRONG! The mail is apologising for suggesting Lowe set up teh PLC to avoid the points deduction, which is the first inaccuracy. They also go on to say sorry for suggesting Lowe was at the club when the penalty was awarded... which is NOT actually factually correct - it was some 3-4 weeks after going into admin that the points deduction was confirmed - when Lowe had indeed left..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 Hardly worth demanding a retraction though, don't you think? I agree that when an apology is required then it should be freely provided, and in a font the same size as the original headline! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 WRONG! The mail is apologising for suggesting Lowe set up teh PLC to avoid the points deduction' date=' which is the first inaccuracy. They also go on to say sorry for suggesting Lowe was at the club when the penalty was awarded... which is NOT actually factually correct - it was some 3-4 weeks after going into admin that the points deduction was confirmed - when Lowe had indeed left.....[/quote'] This is what the apology actually says. An article on April 8 ‘Saints, Sinners…and the Lord Above’ wrongly suggested Southampton chairman Rupert Lowe had exploited Football League rules to avoid a points penalty when the club went into administration. Mr Lowe had left the club by then. We apologise for the error. It says nothing about suggesting that Lowe set up the company specifically to avoid the penalty (which of course is an absurdity, since SLH was set up years before the penalty system was introduced). So where did you get your idea from exactly? In fact not one word of your post bears any relation to the apology. The apology is also clearly badly worded, because it appears to suggest that Lowe wasn't chairman when the club went into admin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 This is what the apology actually says. An article on April 8 ‘Saints, Sinners…and the Lord Above’ wrongly suggested Southampton chairman Rupert Lowe had exploited Football League rules to avoid a points penalty when the club went into administration. Mr Lowe had left the club by then. We apologise for the error. It says nothing about suggesting that Lowe set up the company specifically to avoid the penalty (which of course is an absurdity, since SLH was set up years before the penalty system was introduced). So where did you get your idea from exactly? In fact not one word of your post bears any relation to the apology. The apology is also clearly badly worded, because it appears to suggest that Lowe wasn't chairman when the club went into admin. 'Exploiting the rules' = PLC v Club... work it out second part should have said ''as a result of the club going into administration' because Lowe had indeed left the club when teh penalty was applied, even though he was in charge when teh club went into admin' verbal jousting for sure but based on the original artical teh Mail did indeed get it wrong on both counts.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 'Exploiting the rules' = PLC v Club... work it out second part should have said ''as a result of the club going into administration' because Lowe had indeed left the club when teh penalty was applied, even though he was in charge when teh club went into admin' verbal jousting for sure but based on the original artical teh Mail did indeed get it wrong on both counts.... Work what out? Sometimes, it's a useful idea, Frank, to take things as read, not as you want them to read. Anyway, I'm bored arguing about the angels on this pinhead. By all means have the last word before I starting sounding like ottery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 Work what out? Sometimes, it's a useful idea, Frank, to take things as read, not as you want them to read. Anyway, I'm bored arguing about the angels on this pinhead. By all means have the last word before I starting sounding like ottery. ;-) no worries... its not worth arguing about - its just I had that whole 'manipulation thing on the brain - and the original artical did kind of imply that as well after what another ex Director said in public.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 This is what the apology actually says. An article on April 8 ‘Saints, Sinners…and the Lord Above’ wrongly suggested Southampton chairman Rupert Lowe had exploited Football League rules to avoid a points penalty when the club went into administration. Mr Lowe had left the club by then. We apologise for the error. It says nothing about suggesting that Lowe set up the company specifically to avoid the penalty (which of course is an absurdity, since SLH was set up years before the penalty system was introduced). So where did you get your idea from exactly? In fact not one word of your post bears any relation to the apology. The apology is also clearly badly worded, because it appears to suggest that Lowe wasn't chairman when the club went into admin. The paper also published only the heading to the piece, we don't know the full wording as far as Im aware as it may have been defamation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 Whilst it was obvious that the structure of the Club was not set up to aviod any deductions I still think the whole thing is worthy of debate, as we are -10 this season because of it. Surely Lowe knew we were close to the edge and that cheques he/PLC wrote would take us over our overdraft limit. I would like to know when Lowe realised admin was inevitable and whether he believed our structure would render any points deduction unenforceable.The cut off date is in place because teams will manipulate the timings of admin if it was not. It is therefore possible to enter admin at the best time for a club,and the best time for us would have been a few days earlier. Personally I've no doubt that had Lowe been interested in buying the Club post admin, he'd have gone into admin earlier. My personal belief is that Lowe, whilst knowing the game was 99% up, ploughed on because he thought the league were unable to issue any deductions, and he had no intention of wanting any part of the Club post admin. The decision to plough on and bluff it out is the reason we're sitting here on -9, because without it, we'd have a great chance of promotion this season. I dont suppose we'll ever get the answer, but those few days really cost us dear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 I dont suppose we'll ever get the answer, but those few days really cost us dear. Do you really think that RL would not have sold all and sundry to have saved his money if he had a sniff of losing it? I believe he would have moved hell and high water , and made sales of players to have avoided the possibility. Only RL knows that but there are a lot of odd goings on that have as yet not been explained. Anyway he is gone Enjoy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintDonkey Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 Easy enough to do without much effort. http://www.newsnow.co.uk/h/Sport/Football/League+One/Southampton Just an occasional glance at this site gives all the media updates pretty well as they happen. It's also good for keeping an eye on the Skates' latest catastrophes. I saw the Lowe bit yesterday, but frankly couldn't be arsed to feel much for it, except a quiet prayer of thanks that we were delivered from his clutches. Oh god does that mean that every time he's in the press and it describe him as the ex-chairman of Southampton FC we're going to have another bloody pointless thread about him. It's not so much licking old wounds as jabbing them with hot knitting needles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wightman35 Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 I dont suppose we'll ever get the answer, but those few days really cost us dear. You are quite right, LD; a very costly delay and the real reason will probably remain buried in myths. But, hey! We have a glorious future beginning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wightman35 Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 Oh god does that mean that every time he's in the press and it describe him as the ex-chairman of Southampton FC we're going to have another bloody pointless thread about him. It's not so much licking old wounds as jabbing them with hot knitting needles. Now if he were to buy a club a few miles to the South East of Southampton, where they are short of investment, we could manage even more "pointless threads" about him! :smt070 :D:D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 Now if he were to buy a club a few miles to the South East of Southampton, where they are short of investment, we could manage even more "pointless threads" about him! :smt070 :D:D Oh please let it happen, I dont prey, I'm not relegious, but if this happened I'd go to church every Sunday for the rest of my days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toadhall Saint Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 Who? Not a name I'm familiar with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 Oh god does that mean that every time he's in the press and it describe him as the ex-chairman of Southampton FC we're going to have another bloody pointless thread about him. It's not so much licking old wounds as jabbing them with hot knitting needles. I agree. With luck, now his profile has been considerably reduced as he's no longer Chairman of a football club, he will just disappear back to being the non-entity that he used to be. Unless of course he takes on another football club, that is. But hopefully he has learned his lesson; not to get involved with things he doesn't understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 11 August, 2009 Share Posted 11 August, 2009 Now if he were to buy a club a few miles to the South East of Southampton, where they are short of investment, we could manage even more "pointless threads" about him! :smt070 :D:D I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemies. (I would really) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now