www.saintsweb.co.uk

[TopGun]

Looks like a clean and fresh design. Editorial looks professional too. Hope it all adds to our Saints Experience.

Edited 28 September, 2008 by TopGun

[saint lard]

Looks like a clean and fresh design. Hope it all adds to our Saints Experience. Editorial all looks professional too.

 

Agreed,welcome addition to "favourites".

[Weston Saint]

Good to see Chap in the Chapel giving his opinions again

[Micky]

Just had a quick scan - looks pretty good.

[Sundance Beast]

Looks like a clean and fresh design. Hope it all adds to our Saints Experience. Editorial all looks professional too.

 

Editiorial may look professional but it pedals the usual unbalanced fare as this extract from the Chav in the Chapel proves:

 

Rupert Lowe’s tactic of treating the club like a train set has evidently had a high cost in terms of fanbase confidence, and if the Doncaster result proves to be an exception rather than the rule then the nigh-on certain arrival of administrators will be something that he will have hastened

 

Its not Lowe that will be responsible for taking the club into administration it will be the supporter's self-eroded fanbase and no doubt when we go into administration and start to slip out of the football league another 16,000 fans will crawl out of their holes and cry woe is me as we slip out of the football league in front of 32k crowd on teh last day of the season and still hoping for an investor.

 

Truly laughable, as if anyone would want to invest a £100m+ into this club safe in the knowledge that 50% of its fickle fanbase will walk away at the first sign of a bad run. Unfortunately, this club is being destroyed by a fanbase that largely looks for reasons to knock the club and not attend the match than the hardcore who get behind the club through thick and thin. The doom mongers pencils were blunted following yesterday's victory and clearly the majority on here at leats want the club to lose and fail miserably so that they can cry 'I told you so'.

 

Thankfully, IMO it just makes Lowe and his team more resolute and determined to continue with this potentially workable game plan but unfortunately it does rely on fan's support but clearly some so called supporterd would prefer administration and very serious failure. We are not Lehman Brothers who had a wealthy and reliable customer base and some talented and experienced staff on their books - so even in administration we are not going to be worth the $2 Barclays paid for Lehman.

 

Nice to see this new website has set its stall out so early on choosing to blame Lowe for the dwindling attendances than the so called supporters who would probably walk away if a new investor turned upto a game inadvertently wearing a blue tie. This is not a website for the true Saints supporter its just a vehicle to provide a voice for damaging prejudice, embarrassing.

[TopGun]

Lol at predictable Sundance

[Weston Saint]

Editiorial may look professional but it pedals the usual unbalanced fare as this extract from the Chav in the Chapel proves:

 

Rupert Lowe’s tactic of treating the club like a train set has evidently had a high cost in terms of fanbase confidence, and if the Doncaster result proves to be an exception rather than the rule then the nigh-on certain arrival of administrators will be something that he will have hastened

 

Its not Lowe that will be responsible for taking the club into administration it will be the supporter's self-eroded fanbase and no doubt when we go into administration and start to slip out of the football league another 16,000 fans will crawl out of their holes and cry woe is me as we slip out of the football league in front of 32k crowd on teh last day of the season and still hoping for an investor.

 

Truly laughable, as if anyone would want to invest a £100m+ into this club safe in the knowledge that 50% of its fickle fanbase will walk away at the first sign of a bad run. Unfortunately, this club is being destroyed by a fanbase that largely looks for reasons to knock the club and not attend the match than the hardcore who get behind the club through thick and thin. The doom mongers pencils were blunted following yesterday's victory and clearly the majority on here at leats want the club to lose and fail miserably so that they can cry 'I told you so'.

 

Thankfully, IMO it just makes Lowe and his team more resolute and determined to continue with this potentially workable game plan but unfortunately it does rely on fan's support but clearly some so called supporterd would prefer administration and very serious failure. We are not Lehman Brothers who had a wealthy and reliable customer base and some talented and experienced staff on their books - so even in administration we are not going to be worth the $2 Barclays paid for Lehman.

 

Nice to see this new website has set its stall out so early on choosing to blame Lowe for the dwindling attendances than the so called supporters who would probably walk away if a new investor turned upto a game inadvertently wearing a blue tie. This is not a website for the true Saints supporter its just a vehicle to provide a voice for damaging prejudice, embarrassing.

 

You are steadily going down in my estimation.

[Guest Hacienda]

Editiorial may look professional but it pedals the usual unbalanced fare as this extract from the Chav in the Chapel proves:

 

Rupert Lowe’s tactic of treating the club like a train set has evidently had a high cost in terms of fanbase confidence, and if the Doncaster result proves to be an exception rather than the rule then the nigh-on certain arrival of administrators will be something that he will have hastened

 

Its not Lowe that will be responsible for taking the club into administration it will be the supporter's self-eroded fanbase and no doubt when we go into administration and start to slip out of the football league another 16,000 fans will crawl out of their holes and cry woe is me as we slip out of the football league in front of 32k crowd on teh last day of the season and still hoping for an investor.

 

Truly laughable, as if anyone would want to invest a £100m+ into this club safe in the knowledge that 50% of its fickle fanbase will walk away at the first sign of a bad run. Unfortunately, this club is being destroyed by a fanbase that largely looks for reasons to knock the club and not attend the match than the hardcore who get behind the club through thick and thin. The doom mongers pencils were blunted following yesterday's victory and clearly the majority on here at leats want the club to lose and fail miserably so that they can cry 'I told you so'.

 

Thankfully, IMO it just makes Lowe and his team more resolute and determined to continue with this potentially workable game plan but unfortunately it does rely on fan's support but clearly some so called supporterd would prefer administration and very serious failure. We are not Lehman Brothers who had a wealthy and reliable customer base and some talented and experienced staff on their books - so even in administration we are not going to be worth the $2 Barclays paid for Lehman.

 

Nice to see this new website has set its stall out so early on choosing to blame Lowe for the dwindling attendances than the so called supporters who would probably walk away if a new investor turned upto a game inadvertently wearing a blue tie. This is not a website for the true Saints supporter its just a vehicle to provide a voice for damaging prejudice, embarrassing.

 

If it p i s s es you off then that'll do me.

[hypochondriac]

I think you should offer Sundance a column.

[Colinjb]

Editiorial may look professional but it pedals the usual unbalanced fare as this extract from the Chav in the Chapel proves:

 

Rupert Lowe’s tactic of treating the club like a train set has evidently had a high cost in terms of fanbase confidence, and if the Doncaster result proves to be an exception rather than the rule then the nigh-on certain arrival of administrators will be something that he will have hastened

 

Its not Lowe that will be responsible for taking the club into administration it will be the supporter's self-eroded fanbase and no doubt when we go into administration and start to slip out of the football league another 16,000 fans will crawl out of their holes and cry woe is me as we slip out of the football league in front of 32k crowd on teh last day of the season and still hoping for an investor.

 

Truly laughable, as if anyone would want to invest a £100m+ into this club safe in the knowledge that 50% of its fickle fanbase will walk away at the first sign of a bad run. Unfortunately, this club is being destroyed by a fanbase that largely looks for reasons to knock the club and not attend the match than the hardcore who get behind the club through thick and thin. The doom mongers pencils were blunted following yesterday's victory and clearly the majority on here at leats want the club to lose and fail miserably so that they can cry 'I told you so'.

 

Thankfully, IMO it just makes Lowe and his team more resolute and determined to continue with this potentially workable game plan but unfortunately it does rely on fan's support but clearly some so called supporterd would prefer administration and very serious failure. We are not Lehman Brothers who had a wealthy and reliable customer base and some talented and experienced staff on their books - so even in administration we are not going to be worth the $2 Barclays paid for Lehman.

 

Nice to see this new website has set its stall out so early on choosing to blame Lowe for the dwindling attendances than the so called supporters who would probably walk away if a new investor turned upto a game inadvertently wearing a blue tie. This is not a website for the true Saints supporter its just a vehicle to provide a voice for damaging prejudice, embarrassing.

 

Oh noes! If they are not with me they are against me.

 

You are pathetic. F*ck this pro lowe, anit Lowe bullsh*t, the board room scum are all as bad as each other. Get a grip. It's a fans perogative to take a detached view of things. After all, without our money, they would be screwed. And who can blame a few of the more dissilussioned souls who saw their team die back in 04/05 be less likely to buy tickets now the same bloke is back steadying the ship.

Edited 28 September, 2008 by Colinjb

[benjii]

You are steadily going down in my estimation.

 

I'm surprised that's possible.

[Baj]

Sundance, without wanting to point out the obvious, that's CITC's column, a seperate piece from the main saintsweb editorial... you do understand that right?

 

We have columns to let others express their views, we are open to applications from other people for columns and as long as their articles are legible then we are happy display them.

 

Once again, CITC's column is NOT the view of saintsweb, its his column

[dubai_phil]

I think you should offer Sundance a column.

 

Joking aside, nail on the head.

 

To be really successful, the guys need balance in viewpoints - doesn't need a luvvie but there's 3 sides to every coin sort of thing.

 

And by offering SB or Scooby the chance to write a column to clarify their viewpoints, identify the facts they use to vindicate their positions would, in all probability be priceless.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

and very short lived

 

Oh and I'm sure Hiley still has a soft spot for the club, maybe he'd like to send us a view from on high once in a while

[Colinjb]

I think you should offer Sundance a column.

 

Completely agree.

 

And Scooby as well.

[Baj]

Well I completely agree that we should have a set of columnists who have the full spectrum of opinions, myself and granty have already discussed this... who we choose tho is up for argument... at the moment no one has applied.

[TopGun]

Sundance, without wanting to point out the obvious, that's CITC's column, a seperate piece from the main saintsweb editorial... you do understand that right?

 

We have columns to let others express their views, we are open to applications from other people for columns and as long as their articles are legible then we are happy display them.

 

Once again, CITC's column is NOT the view of saintsweb, its his column

 

I get the feeling that Sundance is concerned that his PR campaign (it is his field truly) on behalf of Lowe might suffer.

 

I think a new media outlet is good for all concerned and, as Baj intimates, can only be healthy. Surely Sundance isn't in favour of repressing free speech? Blimey!

[Colinjb]

Well I completely agree that we should have a set of columnists who have the full spectrum of opinions, myself and granty have already discussed this... who we choose tho is up for argument... at the moment no one has applied.

 

Who needs to apply. There are many voiciferous individuals here, let them state their opinons regularly and openly. I'm sure many would love it.

 

Invite them in!

Edited 28 September, 2008 by Colinjb

[hamster]

Forguve my ignorance, but what are RSS feeds please?

[Sundance Beast]

Sundance, without wanting to point out the obvious, that's CITC's column, a seperate piece from the main saintsweb editorial... you do understand that right?

 

We have columns to let others express their views, we are open to applications from other people for columns and as long as their articles are legible then we are happy display them.

 

Once again, CITC's column is NOT the view of saintsweb, its his column

 

Baj, you make the rules to suit yourself. Its his column but as I assume you have some say over the content of the website you are condoning his post as a balanced article? I'm not sure Lowe would appreciate his efforts of trying to get the club back on track as 'playing with his trainset'.

 

A few months ago you banned me from the previous forum because I was deluded according to your goodself if I deemed it as a democratic site for an exchange of views and as you owned the forum ultimately you had final say on who had access to post and who didn't. Hence my not exactly difficult decision to hand you a fiver.

 

A newspaper regardless of it's political stance publishes every letter regardless of legibility and a degree of editorial licence is used to avoid defamatory comments or a view that is unhelpful to both sides of the argument. You understand that right?

[benjii]

Can we have a "Glenn's Glen" or a "Hoddle's Huddle" section please?

 

I can think of someone who will be happy to write it.

[dubai_phil]

Who needs to apply. There are many voiciferous individuals here, let them state their opinons regularly and openly. I'm sure many would love it.

 

Simple then. New weeklycolumn called the rant.

 

Full Members send in their article to an email box and the admin post based on

Funniest

Controversialness (is that a word)

Informative

Topical

 

Being a (marginally) commercial venture now, they need to pick the articles that would get the most readers and pull in new subscriptions

 

(oh and only Full Members can submit so pay up SB)

 

 

I would give an example for October's Issue

 

Selling the Football Club

by LLS

Places to ski while listening to Saintstv

by Sue Whistle

How not to win an internet argument

by many on here

Minimising your International Phone Bill while being a Radio Star

by Tijuana Tim

Creating the perfect match day weather report

by ericofarabia

 

and finally

giving smartarsed ideas to web sites for nothing that you could have made money out of

by yours truly

 

etc

[benjii]

Baj, you make the rules to suit yourself. Its his column but as I assume you have some say over the content of the website you are condoning his post as a balanced article? I'm not sure Lowe would appreciate his efforts of trying to get the club back on track as 'playing with his trainset'.

 

A few months ago you banned me from the previous forum because I was deluded according to your goodself if I deemed it as a democratic site for an exchange of views and as you owned the forum ultimately you had final say on who had access to post and who didn't. Hence my not exactly difficult decision to hand you a fiver.

 

A newspaper regardless of it's political stance publishes every letter regardless of legibility and a degree of editorial licence is used to avoid defamatory comments or a view that is unhelpful to both sides of the argument. You understand that right?

 

Eh?

 

I bet I can write a letter to a paper that doesn't get published.

 

It will be blustery and billious with scant regard for sense or veracity. Would you like to help me?

[benjii]

Simple then. New weeklycolumn called the rant.

 

Full Members send in their article to an email box and the admin post based on

Funniest

Controversialness (is that a word)

Informative

Topical

 

Being a (marginally) commercial venture now, they need to pick the articles that would get the most readers and pull in new subscriptions

 

(oh and only Full Members can submit so pay up SB)

 

 

I would give an example for October's Issue

 

Selling the Football Club

by LLS

Places to ski while listening to Saintstv

by Sue Whistle

How not to win an internet argument

by many on here

Minimising your International Phone Bill while being a Radio Star

by Tijuana Tim

Creating the perfect match day weather report

by ericofarabia

 

and finally

giving smartarsed ideas to web sites for nothing that you could have made money out of

by yours truly

 

etc

 

That's a good idea.

[Chap in the Chapel]

Off to a good start then! I'm quite intrigued, though, as to how someone whom, to the best of my knowledge, I have never met, can describe me as a chav!

 

Further to what Baj has said though, I am not part of the Saintsweb editorial decision-making process. They give me a platform to write and, unless methodical debate and superior deductive reasoning from another party convinces me otherwise, I stand behind everything that appears in the CITC column. I call it as I see it, no more, no less. I welcome refutation and argument, as that is how mature conclusions are reached, even if situations are constantly developing. Finally, I try and be scrupulously fair, giving credit where credit is due. I have no personal axes to grind and look forward very much to reading a broad range of fans' opinions on a wide variety of subjects relating to our club.

[dubai_phil]

That's a good idea.

 

Yep = see what happens when you have a dose of the sh*ts and can't go down the pub at the weekend.

My apologies, won't happen again

[JB]

Can I recommend a column maybe written by a family with three generations of Southampton supporters who go to a lot of matches and have seen the highs and the Lowes of supporting Saints.

 

Comparisions of how today's match day experience compares with what it was like in the old days. And what it's like being a kid and choosing Saints over a more successful side because your Dad and Grandad make you Stuff like that.

 

Also I think Kaiser Soze should do a travelling away guide.

[Baj]

Baj, you make the rules to suit yourself. Its his column but as I assume you have some say over the content of the website you are condoning his post as a balanced article? I'm not sure Lowe would appreciate his efforts of trying to get the club back on track as 'playing with his trainset'.

 

Since CITC has a reputation as a coherent poster, I didn't even read his article, and that's the truth. I had no idea of the content, other than trusting not to write something that was illegal or personally offensive to me.

 

 

A few months ago you banned me from the previous forum because I was deluded according to your goodself if I deemed it as a democratic site for an exchange of views and as you owned the forum ultimately you had final say on who had access to post and who didn't. Hence my not exactly difficult decision to hand you a fiver.

No, I suspect you were banned because you breached the forum rules. Since I dont hold personal grudges I cannot remember exactly why you were banned, tho im sure the other admins would. Contrary to what you believe, users are only ever banned for breaching the rules, and there's a continuous theme of banned users blaming their bans on "properganda" because they cannot simply accept that they broke the forum rules. In fact if you looked at the history of who we have banned, who will it has been from both sides of all key arguments, we don't ban views, only those who break rules.

 

A newspaper regardless of it's political stance publishes every letter regardless of legibility and a degree of editorial licence is used to avoid defamatory comments or a view that is unhelpful to both sides of the argument. You understand that right?

As I've said above, I didn't even read his column, therefore there was no editorial process.

[TopGun]

Baj, you make the rules to suit yourself. Its his column but as I assume you have some say over the content of the website you are condoning his post as a balanced article? I'm not sure Lowe would appreciate his efforts of trying to get the club back on track as 'playing with his trainset'.

 

A few months ago you banned me from the previous forum because I was deluded according to your goodself if I deemed it as a democratic site for an exchange of views and as you owned the forum ultimately you had final say on who had access to post and who didn't. Hence my not exactly difficult decision to hand you a fiver.

 

A newspaper regardless of it's political stance publishes every letter regardless of legibility and a degree of editorial licence is used to avoid defamatory comments or a view that is unhelpful to both sides of the argument. You understand that right?

 

Hilarious from Sundance.

 

Can I suggest that you yourself then stop posting with infantile names for people such as Chav in the Chapel, Sundance. As it stands you have all the credibility of Comical Ali!

[puff the magic dragon]

Editiorial may look professional but it pedals the usual unbalanced fare as this extract from the Chav in the Chapel proves:

 

Rupert Lowe’s tactic of treating the club like a train set has evidently had a high cost in terms of fanbase confidence, and if the Doncaster result proves to be an exception rather than the rule then the nigh-on certain arrival of administrators will be something that he will have hastened

 

Its not Lowe that will be responsible for taking the club into administration it will be the supporter's self-eroded fanbase and no doubt when we go into administration and start to slip out of the football league another 16,000 fans will crawl out of their holes and cry woe is me as we slip out of the football league in front of 32k crowd on teh last day of the season and still hoping for an investor.

 

Truly laughable, as if anyone would want to invest a £100m+ into this club safe in the knowledge that 50% of its fickle fanbase will walk away at the first sign of a bad run. Unfortunately, this club is being destroyed by a fanbase that largely looks for reasons to knock the club and not attend the match than the hardcore who get behind the club through thick and thin. The doom mongers pencils were blunted following yesterday's victory and clearly the majority on here at leats want the club to lose and fail miserably so that they can cry 'I told you so'.

 

Thankfully, IMO it just makes Lowe and his team more resolute and determined to continue with this potentially workable game plan but unfortunately it does rely on fan's support but clearly some so called supporterd would prefer administration and very serious failure. We are not Lehman Brothers who had a wealthy and reliable customer base and some talented and experienced staff on their books - so even in administration we are not going to be worth the $2 Barclays paid for Lehman.

 

Nice to see this new website has set its stall out so early on choosing to blame Lowe for the dwindling attendances than the so called supporters who would probably walk away if a new investor turned upto a game inadvertently wearing a blue tie. This is not a website for the true Saints supporter its just a vehicle to provide a voice for damaging prejudice, embarrassing.

 

It was noticeable how many fans we took up to Donny. Even in our Premier League days we never took this many to far flung Northern outposts. I guess that like me many are boycotting SMS and doing more aways.

 

As for your sarky comment calling "the chap in the chapel" "the chav in the chapel" i must admit i was shocked that you could be so rude towards someone who has got off his arse and done something for their fellow fans. What have you ever done for other fans?

[Baj]

First impressions are that the site looks very good. Who is running it? Is any help with writing/editing required now or at any time in the future? I'd love to get involved anyway.

 

Steve is the main editor providing 99% of the content. I will provide non-saints related articles/news, as well as tech support for the site. As for future help, we're playing it by ear for now but are always open to suggestions.

[Roman]

A newspaper regardless of it's political stance publishes every letter regardless of legibility and a degree of editorial licence is used to avoid defamatory comments or a view that is unhelpful to both sides of the argument. You understand that right?

 

You ARE joking, right? Tell me you're joking.

 

And nice work, Baj. If it's not good enough for Sundance, it's good enough for me.

[saintwarwick]

Oh noes! If they are not with me they are against me.

 

You are pathetic. F*ck this pro lowe, anit Lowe bullsh*t, the board room scum are all as bad as each other. Get a grip. It's a fans perogative to take a detached view of things. After all, without our money, they would be screwed. And who can blame a few of the more dissilussioned souls who saw their team die back in 04/05 be less likely to buy tickets now the same bloke is back steadying the ship.

 

Calm down Colin we didn't die, we just got relegated, something that has happened in the past. Fans will be less likely to buy tickets in a lower league for a team of our size. We lost 10,000 season ticket holders when we got relegated but when the Wilde bunch took over there was no reversal in those figures contrary to popular belief to the Lowe out brigade.

[Mole1]

Why don't you have a bit on the web page called "Luvvies Corner" where scooby and sundance can give us all a laugh with their wacky views.

[benjii]

Baj, I reccomend you do read articles before publishing them.

 

You wouldn't want to get in any legal hot-water or other sort of bother with any parties (and I'm not being tongue in cheek there; seriously, someone should proof-read the material.)

[Baj]

Baj, I reccomend you do read articles before publishing them.

 

You wouldn't want to get in any legal hot-water or other sort of bother with any parties (and I'm not being tongue in cheek there; seriously, someone should proof-read the material.)

 

For anyone else I would.

[Colinjb]

Calm down Colin we didn't die, we just got relegated, something that has happened in the past. Fans will be less likely to buy tickets in a lower league for a team of our size. We lost 10,000 season ticket holders when we got relegated but when the Wilde bunch took over there was no reversal in those figures contrary to popular belief to the Lowe out brigade.

 

The team in spirit died that season.

 

If we ever get close to how we where in 03/04 I'll die a happy man.

[Tamesaint]

I think you should offer Sundance a column.

 

 

Readers of the Asturius thread are expecting an apology from sundance before he writes much more on here.

[scott_saints]

Baj, if you would like a column by "Nob in the Northam" then I can confirm I'm available.

[Frank's cousin]

Whatever we think of Scoobies 'wind up 'sycophantic ramblings' or Sundance Beast's attempts to defend what is in so many eyes indefensible, are they not merely reflecting the opposite of the staunchly held 'blame' culture that many display which it can not be argued continues to provide a nice negative cloud over anything the club does or tries - in many cases simply because of WHO is trying it with the Question of WHY and the ALTERNATIVEs not really being given the appropriate adult debate?

 

Alternative views should be encouraged and applauded if made with intelligent and rational opinion surely? Too often on here the FACTS are lost amongst the almost schardenfreude like glee that we feck up - as its another stick with which to beat the Lowemonster/meister* (* delete as appropriate to your stauchly held opinion).

 

I like many will agree that the decisions taken by those at the top, and the effect it has on the field are THEIR responsibilty and they must take that responsibilty, good or bad. There are times such as now where the facts suggest that teh wrong decsions have been made, afterall we not setting the league alight with our kids playing total football.... but there are certainly merits to the the idea and the necessity of it financially is difficult to argue against, but how does this lead to the conclusions that some on here believe is beyond me.

 

I seriously do not believe there is anyone at the club who wants failure - yet some of the opinions often expressed suggests that some do actually believe this - I do believe that for whatever reasons and motivations, success is wanted by all. As was the case under Crouch. Whether they have the knowledge, experience and approach necessary to achieve that is what is open to debate and rightly so - but if we are really honest with ourselves it all really comes down to money.

[Iowsaintsfan]

or is their any K**ts in the Kingsland?

[TopGun]

Whatever we think of Scoobies 'wind up 'sycophantic ramblings' or Sundance Beast's attempts to defend what is in so many eyes indefensible, are they not merely reflecting the opposite of the staunchly held 'blame' culture that many display which it can not be argued continues to provide a nice negative cloud over anything the club does or tries - in many cases simply because of WHO is trying it with the Question of WHY and the ALTERNATIVEs not really being given the appropriate adult debate?

 

Alternative views should be encouraged and applauded if made with intelligent and rational opinion surely?

 

I and many others have no problems with the views held by Sundance. The objections exist because of the offensive and juvenile manner in which he posts.

[Long Shot]

I and many others have no problems with the views held by Sundance. The objections exist because of the offensive and juvenile manner in which he posts.

 

 

Hear hear!

[Weston Saint]

I and many others have no problems with the views held by Sundance. The objections exist because of the offensive and juvenile manner in which he posts.

 

I agree with your comment TopGun

 

I consider Sundance has an unhealthy obsession for Leon Crouch and Rupert Lowe on opposite ends of the scale.

 

I agree with some of his views, I disagree with others. I know enough to realise neither are Saints nor Sinners. However it is this unhealthy obsession and the offensive manner of the postings that are the main issue for me.

 

Each to his own but if you bite or bait (as some have done on here) you are only feeding that obsession in my view.

[Roman]

Each to his own but if you bite or bait (as some have done on here) you are only feeding that obsession in my view.

 

I don't know about that, Weston. The forum loses is edge when it gets too 'polite'. I'm not defending outright abuse, but engaging with the (to me, at least) strident, thundering strangeness of Sundance is essential.

 

Scooby is another matter and, frankly, his stuck-record impression of Little Lord Fauntleroy is more than a bit dull.

 

Give Sundance his 'column' by all means, but don't expect many of us to respond with 'interesting, however...'

 

Actually, I doubt he'll want to do it, because as far as I can tell, he ONLY writes in order to abuse something someone has had the temerity to say that might be vaguely perceived as anti-Lowe. That in itself would be fine, except that now his abuse has extended to making snearing comments about posters' wives.

 

I don't see why we should give this particular charmer, in his self-appointed, Mitty-ish role as Lowe's internet champion, a free or easy ride.

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

Editiorial may look professional but it pedals the usual unbalanced fare as this extract from the Chav in the Chapel proves:

 

Rupert Lowe’s tactic of treating the club like a train set has evidently had a high cost in terms of fanbase confidence, and if the Doncaster result proves to be an exception rather than the rule then the nigh-on certain arrival of administrators will be something that he will have hastened

 

Its not Lowe that will be responsible for taking the club into administration it will be the supporter's self-eroded fanbase and no doubt when we go into administration and start to slip out of the football league another 16,000 fans will crawl out of their holes and cry woe is me as we slip out of the football league in front of 32k crowd on teh last day of the season and still hoping for an investor.

 

Truly laughable, as if anyone would want to invest a £100m+ into this club safe in the knowledge that 50% of its fickle fanbase will walk away at the first sign of a bad run. Unfortunately, this club is being destroyed by a fanbase that largely looks for reasons to knock the club and not attend the match than the hardcore who get behind the club through thick and thin. The doom mongers pencils were blunted following yesterday's victory and clearly the majority on here at leats want the club to lose and fail miserably so that they can cry 'I told you so'.

 

Thankfully, IMO it just makes Lowe and his team more resolute and determined to continue with this potentially workable game plan but unfortunately it does rely on fan's support but clearly some so called supporterd would prefer administration and very serious failure. We are not Lehman Brothers who had a wealthy and reliable customer base and some talented and experienced staff on their books - so even in administration we are not going to be worth the $2 Barclays paid for Lehman.

 

Nice to see this new website has set its stall out so early on choosing to blame Lowe for the dwindling attendances than the so called supporters who would probably walk away if a new investor turned upto a game inadvertently wearing a blue tie. This is not a website for the true Saints supporter its just a vehicle to provide a voice for damaging prejudice, embarrassing.

 

I've got to say I don't usually agree with Sundance and I don't agree with his assessment of the new website, but I do agree with what he says about the fans...

[Arcadian]

It was noticeable how many fans we took up to Donny. Even in our Premier League days we never took this many to far flung Northern outposts. I guess that like me many are boycotting SMS and doing more aways.

 

As for your sarky comment calling "the chap in the chapel" "the chav in the chapel" i must admit i was shocked that you could be so rude towards someone who has got off his arse and done something for their fellow fans. What have you ever done for other fans?

 

Totally agree. Resorting to cheap name calling and insults kind of shows his/her true character.

[Frank's cousin]

Think the biggest part of the problem with these boards is how seriously some folk take everything.... including the football. We all know scooby is a wind up, laughing himself silly at the way some on here get so strung out by him, and Sundance? Can those so critical really say their opinion of him is solely down to the way he presents his views rather than the views themselves? There does seem to be a higher level of acceptance of abuse and slagging when aimed at the 'luvvies' than vice versa - a virtual bullying from the virtual mob at times or so it seems.

 

We all need to lighten up and have a laugh yet it seems strange that we have a go at some for getting wound up by insults and 'hitting back' yet are happy to let some juveniles use quite frankly pathetic or sick avatars?

 

I think most appreciate that this is an open forum, open to all siants fans and that our fanvase reflects all types, but perhaps we should be concentrating more on those things that are just wrong and less on slagging each others opinion?

 

Chap in the Chapel's views often differ with mine, but he writes a decent line, has got off his arse to do something for fans and has always been open and honest about his opinion so he should be applauded whatever you think of his views.

[Sundance Beast]

Readers of the Asturius thread are expecting an apology from sundance before he writes much more on here.

 

Really? Tame you're like the little kid at school sitting down the front with his hand up in the air. Please miss, please miss, Sundance Beast was rude and hasn't apologised miss. I got my Yellow card ( so did Wes btw) so stop your bleating.

[Greenridge]

Really? Tame you're like the little kid at school sitting down the front with his hand up in the air. Please miss, please miss, Sundance Beast was rude and hasn't apologised miss. I got my Yellow card ( so did Wes btw) so stop your bleating.

 

Wes started it Miss, honestly it was Wes.

[Tamesaint]

Really? Tame you're like the little kid at school sitting down the front with his hand up in the air. Please miss, please miss, Sundance Beast was rude and hasn't apologised miss. I got my Yellow card ( so did Wes btw) so stop your bleating.

 

Come on then. Apologise in front of the whole class.

 

Stop mumbling. Speak up. We cannot hear you.