Was the return of Rupert the final nail in our coffin?

[Gordon Mockles]

Was the return of Rupert the final nail in our coffin?

 

Ok – I am trying to be objective and I am asking for serious, considered answers (I realise I am not always the best candidate for this, being an impulsive chap)

 

Last season we survived by the skin of our teeth. Like him or not, Pearson did a good job (when you consider the proverbial ball was rolling out of control, on a crash course, thanks to the huge ineptitude and negligence of George Burley). Nigel salvaged, imho, the almost unsalvageable. Opinions vary.

 

Subsequently, for reasons we can only assume and speculate (but never fully realise), Lowe decided (after a long time in exile) to implement his divisive regain to power (the EGM), co-joined by the equally notoriously quisling & unpopular figure of Michael Wilde (a man who had recently tallied up an equally baffling array of failed appointments, mandates, decisions and broken promises to the ill-fated fans of SFC).

 

My first question is – What was the main motive or Michael Wilde and Rupert Lowe returning to power at St Mary’s? Was it to protect their investment? Was it an egotistical two fingers to the incumbent board of Leon Crouch, Corbett, Mc Menemy and co and yet another power struggle to the detriment of our beloved club? I just don’t know. We’ve had lots of speculating but I sincerely am baffled. You wouldn’t run a business so badly on purpose, would you?!

 

My confusion lies in a few major questions. Pearson made a good impact upon his arrival. He quickly became popular with the fan base and proved to be a well reasoned, straight forward guy. A manager with a hard working, fitness based ethic in training and as a no-nonsense disciplinarian. He was tough, but fair – a decent guy who you had to respect. Ideal (many would agree) for the gritty, arduous Coca-Cola Championship League. Some disagreed but this thread isn’t about Pearson.

 

My second main question - Why did Lowe replace Pearson when he could have gained some sense of appeasement from the fans for retaining his services? Pearson was popular, while Lowe and Wilde were so clearly NOT. Surely retaining the services of Pearson would have built bridges, offering a hand to the fans as a symbol of apology for past mistakes. Any fool could work that out. Fans may moan and criticise (me included), but I think Rupert and Michael would be surprised how forgiving and good natured some people can be. Not all, but some. Sometimes it only takes a small gesture (especially when people do not expect it). Instead, we got a firm two fingers from Wilde and Lowe and have been left in the dark ever since. (Cambsaint summed it up nicely in the thread below)

 

http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=3957

 

Was releasing Pearson down to arrogance by Lowe and Wilde, the fact that Leon Crouch appointed Pearson? Or, was it because Lowe was back to finish what he started before he was ousted and Pearson didn’t fit into that ideal? (many believe an over-riding factor was because Nigel was his own man, not a “yes man” to Rupert. That’s something that will probably never come to the light of day. One thing seems apparent, Rupert doesn’t seem to enjoy seeking advice from anyone outside his ‘circle’, or heeding warnings, as the appointment of Poortvliet was treated with questionable disdain first time around. Ok, what do fans or sadly departed football idols know?! Personally, I like Jan but he seems out of his depth in our league and seems to have his hands tied behind his back.

 

My main concern, which may be ridiculed (I am not trying to score points), is the motives of these unpopular men seizing control and, evidently, destroying our club. Money is an ever problem but decisions still have to be made. We have had nothing but bad decisions from two proven failures and it seems many have had enough, me included.

 

Why are such bad decisions continually made and why does Lowe never seem to learn? Please – do NOT use the worn out money line (we all realise, we have none!) The club still exists, and tough decisions still need to be made. Does everyone believe that the previous board would have renewed all the contracts from the now departed seniors? Don’t be daft. Do people honestly believe that Rupert is the only person tight fisted enough to realise the cost cutting measures like closing the corners or reducing wage bills? Nope! In fact, many of the wage problems emanated from Wilde’s appointments – Jim Hone and Ken Dulieu (Saganowski, Euell, etc.)

 

I can’t help but remember warnings from myself and many others on here (Duncan Holley, Um Pahars, Weston something or other…etc.) as the spectre of Lowe smugly peered over the horizon. The EGM approached. Many warnings seem to have proved astute concerns, Scarily accurate in many cases. Lowe knows how unpopular he is, Mike Wilde can’t be so stupid to realise his basement popularity levels too.

 

Why did Lowe not operate in the background if he was to come back, not take such a forefront role? (i.e. Chairman who never speaks to the fans!) He must realise his mere presence keeps thousands of fans away and why does he treat the fans with such disregard?!

 

As mentioned, Cambsaint brought this up and it’s a doubt that will not leave my head. Because of this lack of engagement from the board to fans, because of the release of Nigel Pearson, because of the parting shots (words) fired at Crouch and colleagues, because of the shifting of ALL the performing seniors, because of the total media blackout and sycophantic Echo rubbish, because of persisting with poor players like Mc Goldrick (while leaving out proven scorers at this level, like Stern John, etc. and subsequently shipping them out to rival clubs), because of almost entirely wasting the loan system by bringing in injured youngsters, not the experienced balance we so desperately crave, because we have a deliberately vague and cloudy transfer policy and (finally) because Lowe appointed a totally risky, unproven Dutch duo who did NOT know our league…because of ALL these reasons (and many more)…I cannot help but think there is some sort of revenge mission going on in response to Lowe being ousted first time around. I do believe he is that petty. I may be wrong. I hope I am. Ok, wildly speculative and sensationalist but would you put it past Lowe? I certainly wouldn’t. I am not here to drive a nail in the coffin or to jump on the bandwagon. We’re all p*ssed off with the management. I just want to see us gain some form and score some goals and win some games. Sadly, I think we need a change to do that.

 

My final question is, WHY? Why such bad decisions?! I believe most fans would have conducted a more sensible approach to transfer policy, the loan system and general football management. Why do the Saints board persist with this avenue of disaster (when results are spelling everything out to the fans?!) WHY – because Rupert is in charge and because he can (and he quite clearly does not give a flying f*ck about the fans and is probably smugly grinning to himself)

 

Lowe and Wilde have had their time and this opening of the season has cemented the fact that most fans knew – they know nothing about football, they are totally out of their depth and both need to go crawl back under their rocks. They are deluded and haven’t the first clue on how to run a football club.

 

Someone please save us, before we drop to the lower leagues and these imbeciles stroll off into the sunset to find some more businesses to tamper with and ruin.

 

[Apologies for the excessively long epilogue – please have a say, I’d love to know what you all thought. Maybe this disaster can unite people and help us regain some strength and power…and maybe get our club back, before it’s too late.]

 

Good luck tonight boys, we’re going to need it!

[Teddy Nutkins]

FFS, G.M, i had to take a nap after reading that.

[trousers]

[Gordon Mockles]

FFS, G.M, i had to take a nap after reading that.

 

LOL – I did apologise. I’m like the energiser bunny, once I start, often hard to stop! (that’s leaving p*ss takes wide open but ho-hum)

 

Unlike militant, rowdy posters (i.e. Guided Missile), this is not meant to be an overtly offensive or provocative. It’s just an opinion and questions that have been bugging me. No agenda. No bandwagon. Just my meandering (rather stretched out) opinion!

 

:butthead:

[Delmary]

FFS, G.M, i had to take a nap after reading that.

You should read adriansfc's post. It's coma potential:D

[Weston Saint]

Bloody hell, I have lost the will to live having read this thread!

[Teddy Nutkins]

You should read adriansfc's post. It's coma potential:D

 

:biggrin: that made me snigger.Sorry Adrian

[offix]

My first question is – What was the main motive or Michael Wilde and Rupert Lowe returning to power at St Mary’s? Was it to protect their investment? Was it an egotistical two fingers to the incumbent board of Leon Crouch, Corbett, Mc Menemy and co and yet another power struggle to the detriment of our beloved club?

I seems to me to be a retaliation/ego thing. Crouch had seized control away from both of them. By combining their share blocks Ru**rt and the Quisling got to stick their fingers up at Crouch. Nothing but petty ego trips.

 

My second main question - Why did Lowe replace Pearson when he could have gained some sense of appeasement from the fans for retaining his services?

Pearson would have never stood for the interference from Ru**rt. Better to get a under qualified yes-man so RL could live out his DoF fantasy.

 

Why are such bad decisions continually made and why does Lowe never seem to learn?

He couldn't be more wrong of course, but he probably believes that his decisions are the right ones. He probably genuinly believes that he is a business genius and that his football knowledge is unrivaled.

 

Why did Lowe not operate in the background if he was to come back, not take such a forefront role?

This sentence males no sense to me, but I think Lowe has learned, from his previous spell as Chairman, that any public statement that he makes is usually met with vitriol. Not surprising when one makes statements about superior catering, Klingons, fastest growing radio stations, lunatic fringe, etc. So he has learned from that, and now he writes the script and then sends out the Quisling or JP to make the statements. They can then take the hit on his behalf.

 

My final question is, WHY? Why such bad decisions?!

As I said before, he probably genuinly believes that he makes the right decisions.

[St_Guido]

You guys clearly don't have enough going on at work.....

[trousers]

You guys clearly don't have enough going on at work.....

 

They are pre-match seat warmers at SMS

[Capel Saint]

My first question is – What was the main motive or Michael Wilde and Rupert Lowe returning to power at St Mary’s? I think the main reason for them returning to power was the realisation that between them they would have effective voting control (by proxy) of approximately 45-50% of the share vote and therefore if a serious bid for the shares and control of the club came in, being on the Board, a deal would not take too long. Secondly, both men had fallen out with Leon Crouch so neither could team up with him and thirdly they are hoping to avoid a bid from the likes of SISU who's motives for buying the club were questionable. (Haven't seen them let Coleman spend the £20m alledgidly available for transfers during the summer).

 

My second main question - Why did Lowe replace Pearson when he could have gained some sense of appeasement from the fans for retaining his services? Unfortunately being on the outside, no-one really knows but I assume that Pearson wanted too much money to stay on as manager. Lowe knew he had to cut costs and therefore Pearson was too expensive.

 

Was releasing Pearson down to arrogance by Lowe and Wilde, the fact that Leon Crouch appointed Pearson? Or, was it because Lowe was back to finish what he started before he was ousted and Pearson didn’t fit into that ideal? I would hope it was done for a financial reason rather than a personal one, but again, we simply are not on the inside and therefore we do not know what the real reason is.

 

Why are such bad decisions continually made and why does Lowe never seem to learn? Please – do NOT use the worn out money line (we all realise, we have none!) Unfortunately our problems started right back to when SFC became owned by a plc. Lowe wrongly thought that being a plc, it would actually generate money for the club. Unfortunately it proved the opposite as money coming into the club as an investment can only be done so if it is a loan. Therefore the club can only buy new players out of the income of the club. Eg Sky money, sponsorship, player sales etc. All fine when you are in the Prem but as soon drop out of it, available money for players virtually dries up overnight.

 

Also, constantly changing your manager does not help. It means that there is no continuity and a balanced side is never achieved. Admittedly Souness and Hoddle walked away from the club but there was no excuse in experimenting with Wigley and Gray. This is one area Lowe didn't ever seem to learn.

 

Wilde must also shoulder some of the blame as it was under his stewardship that Burley was given £7m to spend on new players which to be frank, the club could not afford. Wilde in turn was let down by investors who said they were going to give funds to the club, suddenly walk away and disappear. Wilde was also responsible for brining in Hone, Dulieu etc who proved to completely help in mis-managing the club.

 

Why did Lowe not operate in the background if he was to come back, not take such a forefront role? (i.e. Chairman who never speaks to the fans!) Maybe he feels he is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. I must admit that it would be better if he came clean with the fans and explained the reason for so many of our better players being farmed out and cheap, inexperienced replacements coming in. Unfortunately he seems to have gone overboard as most of team now seem to be under the age of 23 (including the loans). Fans are not stupid and will understand the decisions made if they are explained ie the bank are calling the shots. To say nothing just angers the fans, especially when the quality of the side reduces , which snowballs more defeats etc.

 

My final question is, WHY? Why such bad decisions?! See above. There has been a string of incompetent chairmen and Board members. Unfortunately no-one will save us until we are in administration which will happen if we are relegated to Div 1. (The taxman usually causes comapnies to go into administartion rather than the bank).

 

In the cold, hard world of business, investors will not come knocking whilst a plc is in charge of a football club. Far less expensive to wait for it to go into administration so that they can get the club much more cheaply and don't have to shell out millions in buying shares from the shareholders who may also decide not to sell their shares anyway. Administrators will sell the club as a going concern and the shares become worthless as the plc would be dissolved. As fans, our hope is that we get an investor who generally cares for the club and wants to rebulid Southampton back towards being a Prem team. (Which could take many years)

 

It would be great if the club could survive in

[ottery st mary]

EGO, EGO and more EGO.

To be Director of Football.

Revenge against the fans including Crouch and Corbett and of course McMac.

Mightier than thou attitude. Same as EGO I suppose.

Financial training as he still can't get it right in any business.

Maybe he has some sort of illness and believes he is something he is not.

But to be fair its not all his fault. The Lavendar Hill Mob have a lot to answer to as they seem to be in awe of him.

 

Wildey...Well I give up..But I would ask him to come to his senses and oust Lowey now.

 

To answer the ? YES..each and every time he has become involved.

[ottery st mary]

Sorry I am just very frustrated.

 

A simple Yes would have sufficed.

 

I still hope by some miracle we win tonight. I will be chanting for Lowey and Wildey out from afar but still hoping for a win.

[SaintRichmond]

Why would it be the final nail in the coffin? People talk as if the club is about to end, others talk as if they want it to. I disagreed with sacking Pearson, but like others, I don't know the full story on that. Maybe they just wanted their own man, maybe they were saving money, maybe Pearson didn't want to sell players or play a very young team. Whatever the reason, it happened, and we have no idea if we'd be doing any better with Pearson. I liked him, but then, I like JP and think he has a ridiculously tough job on his hands, as Pearson would have had too.

 

Besides that I really don't know what else the board have done wrong. I end up looking like some massive Lowe supporter simply because I can't stand the ridiculous hatred and pantomine rubbish on here. He's not evil, he's not trying to destroy the club, he's just a chairman and a man who has more money than most of us, and is a lot more posh, which makes him more of a target from the start. He always wound me up and I could cite many faults with his previous tenure (and quite a few positives) but based purely on this tenure, and surely that's all that matters, what on earth have they done wrong? It's strange on here now. We get a lot of sensible people who realise the financial situation and know what has to be done. No-one is enjoying it, but that's the way it is and there's really nothing to do but get on with it. More sales will likely follow, maybe we will go down, but I'd rather than League 1 football than administration. Moaning and booing really helps no-one, although I understand the frustration and lack of joy supporting saints right now, the all too easy Lowe scapegoating just looks ridiculous. We're poor, is that what we're booing about? We're booing because Lowe isn't rich enough to make us brilliant. Well, if you have enough money and care enough, invest it in saints.

 

Many others claim to appreciate the constraints on the club, yet everytime someone is loaned out or sold they're up in arms again blaming everyone in sight. It's as if they think the financial troubles magically go away if no-one mentions them for a while and they need something like Stern leaving to remind them. Many of the same people, suggesting they knew it would be a hard season stated they would be happy just staying up. Very easy to say, but the reality is very different. If survival is the aim and expectation, surely getting behind the team to achieve it is fair? We're in poor form and in the drop zone, yet we still have every chance of staying up, especially with a bit of support. Did those saying they would be satisfied with surviving mean they expected us to not be in the relegation zone all season and not lose regularly? If you're finishing in the bottom half, you're losing regularly! That's something we have to deal with. I doubt we'll go on a winning run all season, but survival is about finding enough in the squad to have a go at every game and scrape a few wins here and there. Maybe tonight will be one, maybe it won't. We certainly have the potential to win, but likewise, the potential to get stuffed in each game.

 

So, all I'd ask is that we don't have the usual overreaction after every game. We haven't turned a huge corner if we win and we're not doomed forever if we lose. We're just a poor team trying to improve in difficult circumstances and in need of support. Obsession with the board, management change and criticising players quality won't help at all, assuming people want to help of course. Lowe returning will only be the final nail in the coffin if the fans want it to be, and while some seem determined this will be the case, I fully believe there is a larger group that won't let that happen.

 

 

 

What a load of Drivel from a Lowe Luvvie ............ In short, can't you see that Lowe's arrogance in thinking HE is right in EVERYTHING .... his DISMISSAL of Pearson because he knew he would not be a Yes Man to (Lowe), .... his Bloody Mindedness in pursuing a Academy Youth Policy for the First Team ( against advice from MANY Qualified Football people ) ........ His Fire Sale of ALL players that WOULD have stabilised us in the CCC ........ his Appointment of Edam & Gouder for his "Total Football" concept ........ etc etc etc .........and yet YOU bleat on about Lowe And the Board not doing any wrong ... !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! .......

 

THAT BEGGARS BELIEF .........

 

Saints are THIRD FROM BOTTOM of the CCC, and, many think, will be in an even worse position after this evening. .......... Lowe is BLEEDING US DRY, much like someone trying to bail out the Titanic with a bucket full of holes ...... Yet YOU can see no wrong

 

Crawl back under the stone my friend ...... we'll wake you up in a few years time ........... when we are in the Blue Square North

[Oz]

was 4 me!

[Long Shot]

I'm such a **** for bothering to reply. When on earth have I been a Lowe luvvie? I'm very careful to make it clear quite often that my only defence of Lowe is in response to what I see as ridiculously over the top criticism. If no-one went in for all the abuse, I wouldn't be sat here praising him, not that I have anyway. In fact, is there a word of praise for Lowe in that long drivel post? Maybe that I think his previous tenure had both positives AND negatives, I suppose that's as glowing as it gets. But I'm a Lowe luvvie, because I don't hate the man, I don't obsess about him.

 

It won't get through this time, it never will. People see I haven't slagged off everything he's said and done so I obviously love the man. Well, for the record, for the millionth time:

 

In his previous tenure I got as frustrated with him as anyone and flat out hated him at one point.

 

I hated the Burley appointment and thought that decision, along with the Wigley one was appalling decision making.

 

I hated the sacking of Sturrock and was more anti-Lowe than anyone at that point.

 

I hated the way he came into the club in the first place.

 

I dislike his demeanor to a lot of fans and think he really doesn't help himself a lot of the time.

 

I was against the sacking of Pearson.

 

I do not believe a lot of what Lowe says.

 

 

BUT, because I do not believe there are many alternatives in this tenure, because I have no real hatred for the man and because I don't believe he's picking the team or funding Al Qaida, I am a Lowe luvvie.

 

To conclude, as people will only read the last line, I love Rupert Lowe.

 

 

Football is a sport where only black or white opinions count - so having said that I think Lowe is an absolute fruitcake.

5 minutes in his company would have you reaching for the phone to call the men in white coats, I assure you.

I wouldn't leave him in charge of a shopping trolly let alone a football club.

[OldNick]

What a load of Drivel from a Lowe Luvvie ............ In short, can't you see that Lowe's arrogance in thinking HE is right in EVERYTHING .... his DISMISSAL of Pearson because he knew he would not be a Yes Man to (Lowe), .... his Bloody Mindedness in pursuing a Academy Youth Policy for the First Team ( against advice from MANY Qualified Football people ) ........ His Fire Sale of ALL players that WOULD have stabilised us in the CCC ........ his Appointment of Edam & Gouder for his "Total Football" concept ........ etc etc etc .........and yet YOU bleat on about Lowe And the Board not doing any wrong ... !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! .......

 

THAT BEGGARS BELIEF .........

 

Saints are THIRD FROM BOTTOM of the CCC, and, many think, will be in an even worse position after this evening. .......... Lowe is BLEEDING US DRY, much like someone trying to bail out the Titanic with a bucket full of holes ...... Yet YOU can see no wrong

 

Crawl back under the stone my friend ...... we'll wake you up in a few years time ........... when we are in the Blue Square North

Amazing Blue Square League now, and that's from someone who thinks it would be good to go into administration which is more likely to propell us that way.

[Gordon Mockles]

Folks, opinions vary so let's not descend into another slanging match with each other. Adrian has his opinion. That's fine. Thank you for sharing your thoughts. Cape Saint - You came out with some interesting points and thanks for taking the time to read my lenghty synopsis (or conjecture, however you see it!)

 

The responses suggested one thing to me, despite my strong dislike of Lowe, he can't win either way. My badly worded question about him being in the background/foreground (confusingly worded, I concur) was meant to infer - he is controlling the club in the background, whilst at the forefront of the club - being the leader - THE CHAIRMAN.

 

Whilst I accept, Rupert is in a tricky position coming back to a club where he is widely disliked, he is thick skinned enough to return (for whatever reason), he should be thick skinned and brave enough to face the brunt. He may even win some respect. He certainly won't gain respect with the culmination of his track record and current conduct. In fairness, that ill feeling is possibly now beyond repair. Having a chairman willing to take charge of a club yet totally refusing to acknowledge the fans is unacceptable in my books (and the occasional wheeling out of Mike Wilde to spout meaningless pish, whilst stood in front of his large home, is pointless and pathetic to say the least!)

 

[MY ANSWERS to Capel Saints are in red]

 

My second main question - Why did Lowe replace Pearson when he could have gained some sense of appeasement from the fans for retaining his services? Unfortunately being on the outside, no-one really knows but I assume that Pearson wanted too much money to stay on as manager. Lowe knew he had to cut costs and therefore Pearson was too expensive.

 

That is a sensible way of looking at it but do you truly believe that?! I don't. I don't think money comes into the equation. It's relative but cheapness doesn't transend directly into finance. I'd hoped Lowe had learnt this from his Premiership/lack of ambition days and not building on relative success post FA cup. It seems arrogance and stubborness can cloud common sense, if evident.

 

I think Pearson never stood a chance because of a few reasons:

1.) He was appointed by Chris Mc Menemy/Lawrie/Leon

2.) Any success he may have achieved would NOT reflect on Rupert Lowe (Conjecture I accept, egotistical by Lowe, but not beyond possibility).

3.) He was not a "yes man" and had his own ideas and would possibly not respond well to any (alleged) interferring by Lowe (which I cannot prove but I truly do believe goes on. To what extent, I haven't a clue and don't believe it is as much as some on this forum make out but it's a tucked away secret we may never truly know.

4.) He did not fit this new, revolutionary idea that Rupert had been sold/invisaged in his mind. I don't know how much is attributed to Lowe/Woodward/Hockaday/Poortvliet/Wotte, esq. (and I am not against new techniques, when plausible) but this was so clearly a disaster waiting to happen (i.e. having a small percentage of capable youth team capable of stepping up to 1st team, ignoring all advice and throwing in the boys against men and putting way too much pressure on young minds/shoulders - just look at Mc Goldrick as an example or James, Gillet, etc.!)

 

Why are such bad decisions continually made and why does Lowe never seem to learn? Please – do NOT use the worn out money line (we all realise, we have none!) Unfortunately our problems started right back to when SFC became owned by a plc. Lowe wrongly thought that being a plc, it would actually generate money for the club. Unfortunately it proved the opposite as money coming into the club as an investment can only be done so if it is a loan. Therefore the club can only buy new players out of the income of the club. Eg Sky money, sponsorship, player sales etc. All fine when you are in the Prem but as soon drop out of it, available money for players virtually dries up overnight.

 

Interesting point. I'm not so clued up on the loan issue and PLC status as the business side bores me slightly but it's an issue I was only partly aware of and another point to show how self-serving Askham and co were (i.e. share profit before club achievement/prosperity) but those type of people have nibbled away at our club ever since, and we are still not rid of the parasites. The reverse takeover will always bug me, more in the fact the consortium (Davies/Frost) that could have been should have offered us more, and a group of money hungry a*seholes leeched shares and it made these very greedy, unethical men (who clearly had no scruples) rich overnight but little money made it's way back into the club (but that's another, well worn story *grunt*)

 

This is one area Lowe didn't ever seem to learn.

 

Wilde must also shoulder some of the blame as it was under his stewardship that Burley was given £7m to spend on new players which to be frank, the club could not afford. Wilde in turn was let down by investors who said they were going to give funds to the club, suddenly walk away and disappear. Wilde was also responsible for brining in Hone, Dulieu etc who proved to completely help in mis-managing the club.

 

Indeed. I've moaned about that episode enough. We all know about Hone (and his conduct towards shareholders wanting good for the club! *cough* Mary Corbett), Dulieu, Oldknow and those bunch of idiots and the contracts they dished out, whilst no-one kept Burley reigned in, and look at the damager he did. We've still not recovered! Wilde has a lot to answer for. This is my main point. Wilde AND Lowe coming back with a proxy to attain power, it's a nightmare you couldn't imagine and I fathom to understand WHY?! They must have realised the welcome they would get, especially with such crushing decisions and massively risky strategy. If they did not realise, they are truly idiots of the most lowest common denominator!

 

Why did Lowe not operate in the background if he was to come back, not take such a forefront role? (i.e. Chairman who never speaks to the fans!)

 

Maybe he feels he is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. I must admit that it would be better if he came clean with the fans and explained the reason for so many of our better players being farmed out and cheap, inexperienced replacements coming in. Unfortunately he seems to have gone overboard as most of team now seem to be under the age of 23 (including the loans). Fans are not stupid and will understand the decisions made if they are explained ie the bank are calling the shots. To say nothing just angers the fans, especially when the quality of the side reduces , which snowballs more defeats etc.

 

Badly worded question by me. I concur - He can't win. I have some sympathy there but not for his total lack of engagement, and darn right scorn, for the fans. Before, he interferred and came out with ridiculous statements and decisions, even took press conferences. This time, it appears he has interferred with the football management (DOF rumours which fit his profile and look at recent events), taken on more control than he should but without any form of contact to the fans and media. Rude, ignorant and arrogant. Not the way to run a community-based football club. Yes, many fans are ignorant and fickle but you treat your customers well, inform them, help them where necessary, and encourage them (not patronise them with inane player statements, rallying calls and cries/demands for support when you are so clearly desperate and driving fans away with YOUR bad decisions). Important and obvious rules of business. Clearly, Lowe is not the astute businessman, glowing with respect, that many of his cronies purport him to be. Far from it, judging by his recent history.

[Gordon Mockles]

Bloody hell, I have lost the will to live having read this thread!

 

Don't do it - it's not worth it! It's only a poorly run football club!

 

 

You guys clearly don't have enough going on at work.....

 

Hey! We've got to amuse ourselves on boring lunch breaks when you can't ber bothered to go out and aren't working through (for a change!)

[Capel Saint]

Interesting points GM, not that I agree with you on all of them but I think everyone interprets what has gone on differently.

 

That is a sensible way of looking at it but do you truly believe that?! I don't. I don't think money comes into the equation. It's relative but cheapness doesn't transend directly into finance. I'd hoped Lowe had learnt this from his Premiership/lack of ambition days and not building on relative success post FA cup. It seems arrogance and stubborness can cloud common sense, if evident. No, I am not convinved this is true as, like most fans, we were not in the room when Lowe and Pearson sat down to discuss if he was going to continue at the club. But any of the reasons you state below could be true or could not be. However, one thing that Lowe does do is look at the cash the club has incoming and what is outgoing. He knew when he came in that the club's finances were a mess and the bank was calling for some serious action. Maybe the bank wrote to the major shareholders to tell them that drastic cost cutting had to be done?

 

I think Pearson never stood a chance because of a few reasons:

1.) He was appointed by Chris Mc Menemy/Lawrie/Leon (possibly)

2.) Any success he may have achieved would NOT reflect on Rupert Lowe (Conjecture I accept, egotistical by Lowe, but not beyond possibility). No, can't think that that would be a factor in his decision.

3.) He was not a "yes man" and had his own ideas and would possibly not respond well to any (alleged) interferring by Lowe (which I cannot prove but I truly do believe goes on. I do think he has direct involvement in which players are brought in, salary negiotiations etc, but not telling Jan who picks the team, as some posters feel he does. He is a chairman, not a manager and not even a yes man would not allow a chairman to pick the team. That would be ridiculous!

4.) He did not fit this new, revolutionary idea that Rupert had been sold/invisaged in his mind. I don't know how much is attributed to Lowe/Woodward/Hockaday/Poortvliet/Wotte, esq. (and I am not against new techniques, when plausible) but this was so clearly a disaster waiting to happen (i.e. having a small percentage of capable youth team capable of stepping up to 1st team, ignoring all advice and throwing in the boys against men and putting way too much pressure on young minds/shoulders - just look at Mc Goldrick as an example or James, Gillet, etc.!)

Quite agree. Lowe is making a last gamble on hoping that Jan, with his Dutch training techniques, could get the young (cheaper) players to mould into good players. The major problem is that Jan has less than a season to get these players up to be able to cope with the rigours of a CCC season and improve them enough to win enough games to avoid relegation. An extremely tall order as players need time to improve and develop and I just can't see how Jan is supposed to do this in such a short time frame.

 

 

Interesting point. I'm not so clued up on the loan issue and PLC status as the business side bores me slightly but it's an issue I was only partly aware of and another point to show how self-serving Askham and co were (i.e. share profit before club achievement/prosperity) but those type of people have nibbled away at our club ever since, and we are still not rid of the parasites. The reverse takeover will always bug me, more in the fact the consortium (Davies/Frost) that could have been should have offered us more, and a group of money hungry a*seholes leeched shares and it made these very greedy, unethical men (who clearly had no scruples) rich overnight but little money made it's way back into the club (but that's another, well worn story *grunt*) - Yep, would have been much better if the Davies/Frost consortium had taken over rather than a plc. I heard a whisper that before Saints were relegated from the Prem, Lowe had realised that a plc owning a football club was clearly not working and was hoping that the plc could start to buy back the shares. Unfortunately, we were relegated and the idea went out the window.

 

Indeed. I've moaned about that episode enough. We all know about Hone (and his conduct towards shareholders wanting good for the club! *cough* Mary Corbett), Dulieu, Oldknow and those bunch of idiots and the contracts they dished out, whilst no-one kept Burley reigned in, and look at the damager he did. We've still not recovered! Wilde has a lot to answer for. This is my main point. Wilde AND Lowe coming back with a proxy to attain power, it's a nightmare you couldn't imagine and I fathom to understand WHY?! They must have realised the welcome they would get, especially with such crushing decisions and massively risky strategy. If they did not realise, they are truly idiots of the most lowest common denominator! - Yes, Burley should have been reigned in when dishing out the contracts but unfortunately Wilde and Crouch are fans (as opposed to emotionally detatched businessmen looking at the sustainable business element), had no experience of running a football club and it wasn't until the gamble of being promoted back to the Prem when we reached the play-off failed, that the financial wheels came off and we have ended up being broke. I think Wilde saw what he and the Board of idiots had done, the lack of any serious bid on the table and he jumped ship before the fans learnt of what had gone on and started singing for Wilde to be hung from the Itchen Bridge.

 

With regards to their return, I genuinely think Wilde and Lowe knew that as the biggest shareholding of the plc, they had to unite in the vain hope that an investor would be attracted to buy the shares and gain control of the club. I also think they were alarmed by the SISU proposal and realised Hone, Dulieu and Oldknow were trying to bale and get a takeover done at any price. They also saw that Crouch had no idea how to run a football club and the financial mire was increasing and their shares dramatically becoming worthless. Alas, no investor has come forward and now, I don't think one will until the club goes into administration and they will lose their investment anyway.

 

I'm not a Lowe luvvie but he is good at managing the financial side (eg reducing costs) but is a very poor communicator (eg to the fans). He has also made the biggest gamble of his tenure by hoping that the young players can learn very quickly in 6 months rather than what would probably take 2-3 years. Unfortunately, the stats show that winning one home game so far, is relegation form and this gamble will end up costing the club relegation and administration. For Lowe, it is a no brainer, he knows that administration will end his association with the club and will walk away having ultimately failed. (Not that his arrogance will see it that way). I also think, despite what other posters have said, he hasn't got the financial muscle to buy the club back from the administrators, as he won't have enough to service the debt and buy the assets of the club.

 

All in my humble opinion of course!

[Charlie Wayman]

Lowe is a bean counter not a risk taker. How many beans make five? Answer, 4. The other one is Lowe's Dividend. He's not in there for nothing after all.

 

As a result of his excellent stewardship of our finances we will probably end up as the ONLY solvent FC in the Blue Square Premiership and with the biggest ground.

[OldNick]

Lowe is a bean counter not a risk taker. How many beans make five? Answer, 4. The other one is Lowe's Dividend. He's not in there for nothing after all.

 

As a result of his excellent stewardship of our finances we will probably end up as the ONLY solvent FC in the Blue Square Premiership and with the biggest ground.

If you think the way RL is doing things is not a risk I wouldnt want to go into business with you.

[Gordon Mockles]

Interesting points GM, not that I agree with you on all of them but I think everyone interprets what has gone on differently.

 

That is a sensible way of looking at it but do you truly believe that?! I don't. I don't think money comes into the equation. It's relative but cheapness doesn't transend directly into finance. I'd hoped Lowe had learnt this from his Premiership/lack of ambition days and not building on relative success post FA cup. It seems arrogance and stubborness can cloud common sense, if evident. No, I am not convinved this is true as, like most fans, we were not in the room when Lowe and Pearson sat down to discuss if he was going to continue at the club. But any of the reasons you state below could be true or could not be. However, one thing that Lowe does do is look at the cash the club has incoming and what is outgoing. He knew when he came in that the club's finances were a mess and the bank was calling for some serious action. Maybe the bank wrote to the major shareholders to tell them that drastic cost cutting had to be done?

 

I think Pearson never stood a chance because of a few reasons:

1.) He was appointed by Chris Mc Menemy/Lawrie/Leon (possibly)

2.) Any success he may have achieved would NOT reflect on Rupert Lowe (Conjecture I accept, egotistical by Lowe, but not beyond possibility). No, can't think that that would be a factor in his decision.

3.) He was not a "yes man" and had his own ideas and would possibly not respond well to any (alleged) interferring by Lowe (which I cannot prove but I truly do believe goes on. I do think he has direct involvement in which players are brought in, salary negiotiations etc, but not telling Jan who picks the team, as some posters feel he does. He is a chairman, not a manager and not even a yes man would not allow a chairman to pick the team. That would be ridiculous!

4.) He did not fit this new, revolutionary idea that Rupert had been sold/invisaged in his mind. I don't know how much is attributed to Lowe/Woodward/Hockaday/Poortvliet/Wotte, esq. (and I am not against new techniques, when plausible) but this was so clearly a disaster waiting to happen (i.e. having a small percentage of capable youth team capable of stepping up to 1st team, ignoring all advice and throwing in the boys against men and putting way too much pressure on young minds/shoulders - just look at Mc Goldrick as an example or James, Gillet, etc.!)

Quite agree. Lowe is making a last gamble on hoping that Jan, with his Dutch training techniques, could get the young (cheaper) players to mould into good players. The major problem is that Jan has less than a season to get these players up to be able to cope with the rigours of a CCC season and improve them enough to win enough games to avoid relegation. An extremely tall order as players need time to improve and develop and I just can't see how Jan is supposed to do this in such a short time frame.

 

 

Interesting point. I'm not so clued up on the loan issue and PLC status as the business side bores me slightly but it's an issue I was only partly aware of and another point to show how self-serving Askham and co were (i.e. share profit before club achievement/prosperity) but those type of people have nibbled away at our club ever since, and we are still not rid of the parasites. The reverse takeover will always bug me, more in the fact the consortium (Davies/Frost) that could have been should have offered us more, and a group of money hungry a*seholes leeched shares and it made these very greedy, unethical men (who clearly had no scruples) rich overnight but little money made it's way back into the club (but that's another, well worn story *grunt*) - Yep, would have been much better if the Davies/Frost consortium had taken over rather than a plc. I heard a whisper that before Saints were relegated from the Prem, Lowe had realised that a plc owning a football club was clearly not working and was hoping that the plc could start to buy back the shares. Unfortunately, we were relegated and the idea went out the window.

 

Indeed. I've moaned about that episode enough. We all know about Hone (and his conduct towards shareholders wanting good for the club! *cough* Mary Corbett), Dulieu, Oldknow and those bunch of idiots and the contracts they dished out, whilst no-one kept Burley reigned in, and look at the damager he did. We've still not recovered! Wilde has a lot to answer for. This is my main point. Wilde AND Lowe coming back with a proxy to attain power, it's a nightmare you couldn't imagine and I fathom to understand WHY?! They must have realised the welcome they would get, especially with such crushing decisions and massively risky strategy. If they did not realise, they are truly idiots of the most lowest common denominator! - Yes, Burley should have been reigned in when dishing out the contracts but unfortunately Wilde and Crouch are fans (as opposed to emotionally detatched businessmen looking at the sustainable business element), had no experience of running a football club and it wasn't until the gamble of being promoted back to the Prem when we reached the play-off failed, that the financial wheels came off and we have ended up being broke. I think Wilde saw what he and the Board of idiots had done, the lack of any serious bid on the table and he jumped ship before the fans learnt of what had gone on and started singing for Wilde to be hung from the Itchen Bridge.

 

With regards to their return, I genuinely think Wilde and Lowe knew that as the biggest shareholding of the plc, they had to unite in the vain hope that an investor would be attracted to buy the shares and gain control of the club. I also think they were alarmed by the SISU proposal and realised Hone, Dulieu and Oldknow were trying to bale and get a takeover done at any price. They also saw that Crouch had no idea how to run a football club and the financial mire was increasing and their shares dramatically becoming worthless. Alas, no investor has come forward and now, I don't think one will until the club goes into administration and they will lose their investment anyway.

 

I'm not a Lowe luvvie but he is good at managing the financial side (eg reducing costs) but is a very poor communicator (eg to the fans). He has also made the biggest gamble of his tenure by hoping that the young players can learn very quickly in 6 months rather than what would probably take 2-3 years. Unfortunately, the stats show that winning one home game so far, is relegation form and this gamble will end up costing the club relegation and administration. For Lowe, it is a no brainer, he knows that administration will end his association with the club and will walk away having ultimately failed. (Not that his arrogance will see it that way). I also think, despite what other posters have said, he hasn't got the financial muscle to buy the club back from the administrators, as he won't have enough to service the debt and buy the assets of the club.

 

All in my humble opinion of course!

 

A well reasoneed response, thanks! It's a huge gamble, one I wasn't happy with from the start. But, what can we do?!

[Capel Saint]

Unfortunately nothing except individually decide if we want to part with our hard earned pennies and go along and support the team.

 

As I said, this is the last roll of the dice for Lowe and if it doesn't work (which currently it isn't) then relegation and the inevitable administration will follow.

 

Cheer up though, it will soon be Christmas!