Negative people are killing this club

[Snowballs2]

Against Wolves? I didn't notice any ugly scenes myself, what are you referring to?

 

 

Was Rupert standing in the Northam

[londonsaint1604]

Was Rupert standing in the Northam

 

I'd love to see that!

[saintwarwick]

I'd love to see that!

 

You wouldn't see much of Lowe after that!

[SaintRichmond]

The people who continually put a rose-tinted positive spin on our continually poor form, poor team selection, poor tactics, and poor manager are perpetuating the disastrous regime of Rupert and the Quisling.

 

I am POSITIVE that in this way they are having a NEGATIVE influence on the club's chances of survival in this division.

 

 

 

I think you have to .............

 

" Accentuate the positive

Eliminate the negative

Go with the affirmative

Get rid of Mr In Between "

 

 

 

 

 

( couldn't remember all the song words )

[SaintDonkey]

This thread reminds me why I've stopped coming to these boards. Not the original post, that was a fairly honest appraisal of the situation we're in.

 

Everyone leaps on as if it were a person attack against them - grow up please the world doesn't revolve around you. The honest truth of it is without bums on seats the club is in financial freefall and that will kill the club more surely than any misguided action by Rupert Lowe, Michael Wilde or Leon Crouch.

 

Without fans this club will die. We may not be the ones who got it into the state it's in but we're the only ones who can get it out of it.

[saintjay77]

This thread reminds me why I've stopped coming to these boards. Not the original post, that was a fairly honest appraisal of the situation we're in.

 

Everyone leaps on as if it were a person attack against them - grow up please the world doesn't revolve around you. The honest truth of it is without bums on seats the club is in financial freefall and that will kill the club more surely than any misguided action by Rupert Lowe, Michael Wilde or Leon Crouch.

 

Without fans this club will die. We may not be the ones who got it into the state it's in but we're the only ones who can get it out of it.

 

an honest account of the situation.

[hughieslastminutegoal]

IMO its common sence. ...the players that we wouldnt want to see sold would only be gone if there were silly money offers to get them.

 

Yeah but.. WHO says a player is one we wouldn't want to see sold?

As soon as Lowe acepts an offer, by definition the payer is one he is prepared to see sold. And what is a low offer to you and me might be a good enough (or silly in your terms) offer to RL.

 

My point was you said we wouldn't sell anyone we wanted to keep if we got 17000, without the offer being a silly one. I just think that Lowe's idea of who is sellable for a particular offer is VERY different to most of the rest of us, whatever the gate.

 

Having said that, although I'm not sure who we've got who I'd really fight tooth and nail to keep at the moment, selling MUST be dependent on getting a more than adequate replacement who a) isn't already injured when we sign him and b) will fit straight in, preferably playing in his best position, neither of which we've been very good at doing lately.

 

And in any case we are likely to have to loan yet more players to replace the loans who will be returning to their own clubs. So if we lose present loans, and sell others we will probably be seeing a completely different team in January. And how long will it take for them to become a cohesive unit?

 

..wring hands and resignedly mutter "well thats how it has to be"?

[SaintRichmond]

This thread reminds me why I've stopped coming to these boards. Not the original post, that was a fairly honest appraisal of the situation we're in.

 

Everyone leaps on as if it were a person attack against them - grow up please the world doesn't revolve around you. The honest truth of it is without bums on seats the club is in financial freefall and that will kill the club more surely than any misguided action by Rupert Lowe, Michael Wilde or Leon Crouch.

 

Without fans this club will die. We may not be the ones who got it into the state it's in but we're the only ones who can get it out of it.

 

 

I don't see HOW my friend ...... We could have Full Houses at every match, but in itself, it will come nowhere near REDUCING THE DEBTS the Club is amassing by the week .....and that is something that Lowe does not, or will not understand ......

 

.... He could sell ALL our players in the Janusry Window ..... but that will NOT significantly alter the Clubs Financial State ....... it will only have a detrimental effect on how we perform on the pitch

 

You seem to forget, we are in FREEFALL in the League in addition to the Finances

 

IMHO, a lot of Supporters are curently apathetic, mainly towards the "Leadership" of Lowe & Wilde

 

I firmly believe that if those Two Despots could be ousted, many of those same Supporters would come back, give their support, and "raise" the Team on the pitch .......... It very nearly worked v Wolves

[badgerx16]

I think you have to .............

 

" Accentuate the positive

Eliminate the negative

Go with the affirmative

Get rid of Mr In Between "

( couldn't remember all the song words )

Problem is the second verse :

 

You've got to spread joy up to the maximum

Bring gloom down to the minimum

Have faith or pandemonium's

Liable to walk upon the scene

 

Very little joy, plenty of gloom, and losing faith

[saint1977]

Was Rupert standing in the Northam

 

I'd pay his entry and then clean up what was left afterwards with a shovel! Actually, that's a question for you all - who would last longer in there - Rupert or Harry? I would say Guy Askham as my number candidate for putting in there and feeding to the Stella-fuelled Northam but it seems a bit excessive - erm, actually, chuck him in!

Edited 18 November, 2008 by saint1977

[70's Mike]

I'd pay his entry and then clean up what was left afterwards with a shovel! Actually, that's a question for you all - who would last longer in there - Rupert or Harry? I would say Guy Askham as my number candidate for putting in there and feeding to the Stella-fuelled Northam but it seems a bit excessive - erm, actually, chuck him in!

 

Most people could not recognize Guy the Snake.

[Snowballs2]

I'd pay his entry and then clean up what was left afterwards with a shovel! Actually, that's a question for you all - who would last longer in there - Rupert or Harry? I would say Guy Askham as my number candidate for putting in there and feeding to the Stella-fuelled Northam but it seems a bit excessive - erm, actually, chuck him in!

 

 

Add in Wilde too then you really have all the bad guys

[saintjay77]

Add in Wilde too then you really have all the bad guys

 

I very much doubt all of the main share holders would stand much of a chance but there would be a plenty wanting 1st dibs on Lowe.

[um pahars]

The honest truth of it is without bums on seats the club is in financial freefall and that will kill the club more surely than any misguided action by Rupert Lowe, Michael Wilde or Leon Crouch.

 

Without fans this club will die. We may not be the ones who got it into the state it's in but we're the only ones who can get it out of it.

 

But the misguided actions of Lowe and Wilde are the things that have directly, and indirectly, brought this Club down. Their actions have had a disastrous affect on attendances.

 

You can shout, pontificate and moan as much as you want, but that won't make the fans return. They have to be lured back by either winning matches or by believing in those in charge. Neither is happening at the moment.

 

It is the actions of those in charge (both direct and indirect) that has driven the fans away. Let's be clear about that fact.

[Fan The Flames]

This thread reminds me why I've stopped coming to these boards. Not the original post, that was a fairly honest appraisal of the situation we're in.

 

Everyone leaps on as if it were a person attack against them - grow up please the world doesn't revolve around you. The honest truth of it is without bums on seats the club is in financial freefall and that will kill the club more surely than any misguided action by Rupert Lowe, Michael Wilde or Leon Crouch.

 

Without fans this club will die. We may not be the ones who got it into the state it's in but we're the only ones who can get it out of it.

 

I dont see what's wrong with having a debate, I don't see many people acting out of order. We have all appraised the situation and come to our own conclusions, differences are accepted it but untruths are challanged on all sides and there is nothing wrong with that.

[View From The Top]

Its getting more and more obvious by the day that there will be sales come january because we are not getting the gates to avoid it.

 

If we were hitting 17000 to 18000 every home match from the start of the season then the only sales would have been the high earners, players that wanted out and silly money offers. Which would be the same at any club so there is nothing special about us when that happens.

 

With gates so Low the Banks will want to get there money back another way. If we are still hanging around the bottom 3 by Christmas the banks will be thinking that this approach is not working so pay up while you still have things to sell. If we have improved and can start generating higher gates then the banks might be a bit more forgiving but even still its unlikly.

 

so when we sell in jan its not some master plan of lowes to make his world rosey. its something the club have to do to avoid the banks forcing administration on us.

 

And why do you think gates have collapsed?

 

Could it be that people won't pay good money to watch a struggling academy side maquerading as a 1st team?

 

Who made the decision to use the academy side? Lowe.

[Lunatic Fridge]

This thread reminds me why I've stopped coming to these boards. Not the original post, that was a fairly honest appraisal of the situation we're in.

 

Everyone leaps on as if it were a person attack against them - grow up please the world doesn't revolve around you. The honest truth of it is without bums on seats the club is in financial freefall and that will kill the club more surely than any misguided action by Rupert Lowe, Michael Wilde or Leon Crouch.

 

Without fans this club will die. We may not be the ones who got it into the state it's in but we're the only ones who can get it out of it.

 

 

No my mis-guided friend - Lowe Disunited will die hopefully - soon. SFC will exist in one shape or other forever.

[SaintDonkey]

I dont see what's wrong with having a debate, I don't see many people acting out of order. We have all appraised the situation and come to our own conclusions, differences are accepted it but untruths are challanged on all sides and there is nothing wrong with that.

 

There's nothing wrong with debate, but the original post drew replies 'Go away Rupert', 'I am sure that you must be asleep...because you are dreaming. Sod off and take Lowe with you', 'Thanks for that Rupert.', 'hehehehe. A Skate on a wind-up. It must be, considering what complete inflamatory drivel you have written.', 'Well, thank you for that. That`s me, a supporter for over 50 years put in my place.', 'The Red Bag 81 posts Monkadill 82 posts.............no coincidence there then ?','Is that you Shimon?' and more but I get bored of reading the thread for you.

 

None of these contribute to the debate, they merely accuse the original poster of being a PR stooge and do the pointless 'how dare you say I'm not a fan' **** waving. The only one with a hint of truth in it is alpine saying that the post is a wind up. He's right in it being a wind up post, but that's far more to do with the mentalilty of posters on here than the content of the post.

 

SaintRichmond, I'm not certain whether full houses ever week would save the club - but it certainly would help it and make it far more attractive to potential investors.

 

And finally Lunatic fringe. You're right SFC will continue to exist in some form or anotyher - but without the fans that will be as a non-league team looking forwards to the local derby with Eastleigh.

[The Red Bag]

There's nothing wrong with debate, but the original post drew replies 'Go away Rupert', 'I am sure that you must be asleep...because you are dreaming. Sod off and take Lowe with you', 'Thanks for that Rupert.', 'hehehehe. A Skate on a wind-up. It must be, considering what complete inflamatory drivel you have written.', 'Well, thank you for that. That`s me, a supporter for over 50 years put in my place.', 'The Red Bag 81 posts Monkadill 82 posts.............no coincidence there then ?','Is that you Shimon?' and more but I get bored of reading the thread for you.

 

None of these contribute to the debate, they merely accuse the original poster of being a PR stooge and do the pointless 'how dare you say I'm not a fan' **** waving. The only one with a hint of truth in it is alpine saying that the post is a wind up. He's right in it being a wind up post, but that's far more to do with the mentalilty of posters on here than the content of the post.

 

SaintRichmond, I'm not certain whether full houses ever week would save the club - but it certainly would help it and make it far more attractive to potential investors.

 

And finally Lunatic fringe. You're right SFC will continue to exist in some form or anotyher - but without the fans that will be as a non-league team looking forwards to the local derby with Eastleigh.

 

The whole point of starting this thread was to try and point out to those fans that were starting threads about wanting Wolves to win etc that they really aren't helping. The amount of replies accsuing me of being a PR plant, being Rupert Lowe himself, being a Pompey fan were surprising to say the least.

I'm all for having a debate and see no reason why these sort of replies help in any way.

[saintjay77]

And why do you think gates have collapsed?

 

Could it be that people won't pay good money to watch a struggling academy side maquerading as a 1st team?

 

Who made the decision to use the academy side? Lowe.

 

I cant argue with you that no-one wants to see our youth tem play when for so many years we have had teams with several international players week in week out. But right now we cant afford those high class players and if we keep losing fans that go and watch every week then the quality we can afford will get less and less and less until 1 day we are a lowly non league team with players that double up there income working on building sites during the week.

 

Im not saying that we should all pile into the stadium and rescue the club ourselves but at some point I think the fans need to take some responsability and do what they can to make sure this club survives.

 

That point will come when we either get taken over or the team look like promotion candidates or when people get over the fact that Lowe is at our club. If it doesnt happen at all then we will just continue to sink.

[solentstars]

The whole point of starting this thread was to try and point out to those fans that were starting threads about wanting Wolves to win etc that they really aren't helping. The amount of replies accsuing me of being a PR plant, being Rupert Lowe himself, being a Pompey fan were surprising to say the least.

I'm all for having a debate and see no reason why these sort of replies help in any way.

i agree and for wanting saints to lose these people must be of their trolley. they really are the lunitic fringe. i wish they would go the extra mile and f**k of and support pompey.

[Wes Tender]

The Red Bag & Saint Donkey

 

As this is a forum, people raise topics for debate and others respond to them. Inevitably there is potential for some of the threads to be controversial, thought provoking, inspirational, just plain stupid or wind ups.

 

The same goes for the replies.

 

If somebody is put off coming on the board because they don't like the tone of it, then they are perfectly entitled to post their own thoughts and if they argue their corner and viewpoint intelligently and cogently, then they might change the opinions of some, or at least get others to accept grudgingly that they have a point.

 

Otherwise, they are entitled to seek out another forum that more closely mirrors their own viewpoints, but firstly it is unlikely that they will find one, as this forum is probably pretty representative of fans' opninions, but secondly, surely it would be boring having universal agreement on everything.

 

Provided that everybody accepts that anybody else is entitled to have their own opinion and that those opinions have equal validity, then there should be no problems.

[Fowllyd]

The whole point of starting this thread was to try and point out to those fans that were starting threads about wanting Wolves to win etc that they really aren't helping. The amount of replies accsuing me of being a PR plant, being Rupert Lowe himself, being a Pompey fan were surprising to say the least.

I'm all for having a debate and see no reason why these sort of replies help in any way.

 

Let's be clear about this: people starting threads or making posts on here that are negative have precisely the same effect as those posting things that are positive. That effect is precisely nothing. You say that those saying they wanted us to lose "really aren't helping". As I think I may have asked somewhere further up this thread, do you think that people posting positive things on here are helping in some way?

 

This is an internet forum, nothing more than that. Yes, we do know that Michael Wilde reads it, but so what? Does it have any effect on him? Highly unlikely. Does it affect performances on the pitch? Attendances? Equally unlikely.

 

You can post what you like and you'll get no abuse from me; but please bear in mind that what gets posted on this forum influences nothing whatsoever.

[saintjay77]

The Red Bag & Saint Donkey

 

As this is a forum, people raise topics for debate and others respond to them. Inevitably there is potential for some of the threads to be controversial, thought provoking, inspirational, just plain stupid or wind ups.

 

The same goes for the replies.

 

If somebody is put off coming on the board because they don't like the tone of it, then they are perfectly entitled to post their own thoughts and if they argue their corner and viewpoint intelligently and cogently, then they might change the opinions of some, or at least get others to accept grudgingly that they have a point.

 

Otherwise, they are entitled to seek out another forum that more closely mirrors their own viewpoints, but firstly it is unlikely that they will find one, as this forum is probably pretty representative of fans' opninions, but secondly, surely it would be boring having universal agreement on everything.

 

Provided that everybody accepts that anybody else is entitled to have their own opinion and that those opinions have equal validity, then there should be no problems.

 

Well said.

 

Although I dont accept your opinion

 

TBF although less in numbers this forum is pretty wide in its range of ideas and support. we all think we know the best way to do things and I doubt there are any of us that know for a fact why decissions are made at the club so we are all working on guess work.

 

The OP made a thread based on 1 or 2 other threads that I believed were no more than skate wind ups that some others fell for hook line and sinker. As saints fans the 1 thing we all need to remember at times is that we all want the saints to do well. how we believe that may happen is what we can debate.

[SaintRichmond]

Yeah but.. WHO says a player is one we wouldn't want to see sold?

As soon as Lowe acepts an offer, by definition the payer is one he is prepared to see sold. And what is a low offer to you and me might be a good enough (or silly in your terms) offer to RL.

 

My point was you said we wouldn't sell anyone we wanted to keep if we got 17000, without the offer being a silly one. I just think that Lowe's idea of who is sellable for a particular offer is VERY different to most of the rest of us, whatever the gate.

 

Having said that, although I'm not sure who we've got who I'd really fight tooth and nail to keep at the moment, selling MUST be dependent on getting a more than adequate replacement who a) isn't already injured when we sign him and b) will fit straight in, preferably playing in his best position, neither of which we've been very good at doing lately.

 

And in any case we are likely to have to loan yet more players to replace the loans who will be returning to their own clubs. So if we lose present loans, and sell others we will probably be seeing a completely different team in January. And how long will it take for them to become a cohesive unit?

 

..wring hands and resignedly mutter "well thats how it has to be"?

 

 

Very valid point .... Some people STILL do not understand that to Lowe, THE BUSINESSMAN, it matters not one iota HOW MANT people attend St Mary's, come January, Lowe WILL sell any and all players that he can

 

It matters not to him whether or not our Team is starting to gel together, he will have not a second thought in ripping it apart, to get in those Transfer Fees that he loves

 

THAT will leave us even WORSE off than we were, with Poortvliet having to try to piece a Team together from what remains

 

What ( relative ) puny monies are obtained via Sales of our best, will not significantly REDUCE our overal Debt

 

All it will do is make even more "Customers" to stay away from St Mary's, thus reducing our money intake further

 

A wonderful example of Lowe, the visionary Businessman

 

The "vendeta" theory of as to why Lowe was Hell Bent on coming back, gains more creedance by the day

[saintjay77]

Let's be clear about this: people starting threads or making posts on here that are negative have precisely the same effect as those posting things that are positive. That effect is precisely nothing. You say that those saying they wanted us to lose "really aren't helping". As I think I may have asked somewhere further up this thread, do you think that people posting positive things on here are helping in some way?

 

This is an internet forum, nothing more than that. Yes, we do know that Michael Wilde reads it, but so what? Does it have any effect on him? Highly unlikely. Does it affect performances on the pitch? Attendances? Equally unlikely.

 

You can post what you like and you'll get no abuse from me; but please bear in mind that what gets posted on this forum influences nothing whatsoever.

 

We were about to play the top team in the league and some skate knob posts a thread about wanting us to get beat and I was effected by it. If they posted a thread wanting the board to all get lost in the bermuda triangle but hope we dont look silly against the top of the league then i would have been less effected.

 

Some of the threads got allot of peoples backs up with that being the prime reason they were put there. if that transfers accross 5% of the fan base then within weeks it can turn into 25% of the fan base, and so on.

 

the fan base is diveded already due to years of spin and lots of downers. If lowe was to walk through the doors now with his ideas of making our kids the best in the league, fast passing attacking football, get rid of journy men anl so on. I wonder how many people would be supporting him? the support for either side is usually generated by the odd few voicing there opinions somewhere and in this age an internet forum is a pretty good place to start.

[saintjay77]

Yeah but.. WHO says a player is one we wouldn't want to see sold?

As soon as Lowe acepts an offer, by definition the payer is one he is prepared to see sold. And what is a low offer to you and me might be a good enough (or silly in your terms) offer to RL.

 

My point was you said we wouldn't sell anyone we wanted to keep if we got 17000, without the offer being a silly one. I just think that Lowe's idea of who is sellable for a particular offer is VERY different to most of the rest of us, whatever the gate.

 

Having said that, although I'm not sure who we've got who I'd really fight tooth and nail to keep at the moment, selling MUST be dependent on getting a more than adequate replacement who a) isn't already injured when we sign him and b) will fit straight in, preferably playing in his best position, neither of which we've been very good at doing lately.

 

And in any case we are likely to have to loan yet more players to replace the loans who will be returning to their own clubs. So if we lose present loans, and sell others we will probably be seeing a completely different team in January. And how long will it take for them to become a cohesive unit?

 

..wring hands and resignedly mutter "well thats how it has to be"?

 

I understand what your saying but I just think that at the start of the season the plan would have laid out who the club will want to try to keep and who they could let go. If the gates had been high enough they could just have been a bit more choosey when transfer window comes around. as things stand pretty much any offers will have to be accepted just to keep the bank happy.

 

the board know they still need a team for the 2nd half of the season and if the team we currently have is struggling they wont be keen to let people go without replacements. If that happens then administration will come before the season is over. they also know that if the promising kids come good by the end of the season then they will get more money for them should they still need to sell.

 

I believe that the only thing that will keep our better kids at the club will be higher gates. but i think the eates have been too low already this season so an increase now would be too little too late.

[SaintDonkey]

The Red Bag & Saint Donkey

 

As this is a forum, people raise topics for debate and others respond to them. Inevitably there is potential for some of the threads to be controversial, thought provoking, inspirational, just plain stupid or wind ups.

 

The same goes for the replies.

 

If somebody is put off coming on the board because they don't like the tone of it, then they are perfectly entitled to post their own thoughts and if they argue their corner and viewpoint intelligently and cogently, then they might change the opinions of some, or at least get others to accept grudgingly that they have a point.

 

Otherwise, they are entitled to seek out another forum that more closely mirrors their own viewpoints, but firstly it is unlikely that they will find one, as this forum is probably pretty representative of fans' opninions, but secondly, surely it would be boring having universal agreement on everything.

 

Provided that everybody accepts that anybody else is entitled to have their own opinion and that those opinions have equal validity, then there should be no problems.

 

I have no problem with people expressing opinions - I was merely pointing out that replying to a reasonable post with 'Go away Rupert' isn't really contributing to any debate

[charliemiller]

This thread reminds me why I've stopped coming to these boards. Not the original post, that was a fairly honest appraisal of the situation we're in.

 

Everyone leaps on as if it were a person attack against them - grow up please the world doesn't revolve around you. The honest truth of it is without bums on seats the club is in financial freefall and that will kill the club more surely than any misguided action by Rupert Lowe, Michael Wilde or Leon Crouch.

 

Without fans this club will die. We may not be the ones who got it into the state it's in but we're the only ones who can get it out of it.

 

 

Well summarised ......I wish all the stay awayers could try to understand the harm they are doing .

The club is under a very strict and restrictive watching brief with regard to the overdraft facility with Barclays. The month on month losses have now reduced to below 200k and if someone would take the likes of euell, skacel or Thomas of the books it would help greatly.

Cost reduction (wage Bill ) is key critical to the bank continuing to support the overdraft , The alternative is the Bank pulling the plug.

If attendances increased to 18k or above for every match ,the club would be making a profit and the bank pressure would be gone.

If this could happen before January I feel sure we would stand a better chance of keeping certain players in the team that we all want to keep.

 

Dont stay away as a demonstration go to the matches because you support the team and want us to survive .

[Wes Tender]

I have no problem with people expressing opinions - I was merely pointing out that replying to a reasonable post with 'Go away Rupert' isn't really contributing to any debate

 

I totally agree with you. I've said many times that you know that you've won the argument when your oponent has to resort to petty insults or name calling instead of countering your arguments with their own.

 

But as I said, those people are entitled to express those opinions, even if they might be juvenile or lacking in substance. There are measures in place on the forum that prohibit the use of extreme personal attacks, so if you dislike the other stuff, either just ignore it or respond in a sarcastic vein praising the obvious intelligence of the poster. Otherwise a bit of humour is good too. In response to the "hello Rupert" comment, why not a response of "hello Leon" for example?

 

But overall, current opinions on here are natuarally going to generally be anti-Lowe and Wilde unless things improve.

[saint1977]

Well summarised ......I wish all the stay awayers could try to understand the harm they are doing .

The club is under a very strict and restrictive watching brief with regard to the overdraft facility with Barclays. The month on month losses have now reduced to below 200k and if someone would take the likes of euell, skacel or Thomas of the books it would help greatly.

Cost reduction (wage Bill ) is key critical to the bank continuing to support the overdraft , The alternative is the Bank pulling the plug.

If attendances increased to 18k or above for every match ,the club would be making a profit and the bank pressure would be gone.

If this could happen before January I feel sure we would stand a better chance of keeping certain players in the team that we all want to keep.

 

Dont stay away as a demonstration go to the matches because you support the team and want us to survive .

 

Thanks for the info Charlie. This is quite specific info so, and I'm not asking you to name your source directly, but did you get this information from within the club or did you collate it from the forthcoming accounts release?

[Fowllyd]

We were about to play the top team in the league and some skate knob posts a thread about wanting us to get beat and I was effected by it. If they posted a thread wanting the board to all get lost in the bermuda triangle but hope we dont look silly against the top of the league then i would have been less effected.

 

Some of the threads got allot of peoples backs up with that being the prime reason they were put there. if that transfers accross 5% of the fan base then within weeks it can turn into 25% of the fan base, and so on.

 

the fan base is diveded already due to years of spin and lots of downers. If lowe was to walk through the doors now with his ideas of making our kids the best in the league, fast passing attacking football, get rid of journy men anl so on. I wonder how many people would be supporting him? the support for either side is usually generated by the odd few voicing there opinions somewhere and in this age an internet forum is a pretty good place to start.

 

OK, so you were affected by the thread in question in that it made you feel p!ssed off. Fair enough, but that's not what I was getting at. My point was that threads and posts on here don't have any significant effect on the team, on results, on Saints' parlous financial position, etc.

 

I read the thread which Long Shot started; I didn't agree with what he or she put and posted to say as much. On the Saturday I went along to the game and supported the team. If LS's thread had stopped me doing that, then I'd call that a significant effect - but it didn't.

 

I can see the point you're making, but I do think you're confusing an internet message board (totally insignificant in the greater scheme of things) with something - well, rather more real, such as the fan base as a whole. It's worth remembering that there are probably fewer than 100 regular posters on here, many of whom don't go to games for a variety of reasons. So even if 25% of posters here are affected by something, it still adds up to a tiny proportion of the fan base.

Edited 19 November, 2008 by Fowllyd

[Mole]

Well summarised ......I wish all the stay awayers could try to understand the harm they are doing .

The club is under a very strict and restrictive watching brief with regard to the overdraft facility with Barclays. The month on month losses have now reduced to below 200k and if someone would take the likes of euell, skacel or Thomas of the books it would help greatly.

Cost reduction (wage Bill ) is key critical to the bank continuing to support the overdraft , The alternative is the Bank pulling the plug.

If attendances increased to 18k or above for every match ,the club would be making a profit and the bank pressure would be gone.

If this could happen before January I feel sure we would stand a better chance of keeping certain players in the team that we all want to keep.

 

Dont stay away as a demonstration go to the matches because you support the team and want us to survive .

 

I don't believe your figures. I think you just made them up.

 

Lowe Out.

[badgerx16]

.

 

Dont stay away as a demonstration go to the matches because you support the team and want us to survive .

 

And there is the quandary; stay away and stop putting money into the club, with all the potential disasters that can follow; or go to the games, and give the board justification for sustaining their current unpopular policies.

 

This is notwithstanding the point that simply increasing the gates will in no way alter the poor quality of the 'product' on display.

[NickG]

Well summarised ......I wish all the stay awayers could try to understand the harm they are doing .

The club is under a very strict and restrictive watching brief with regard to the overdraft facility with Barclays. The month on month losses have now reduced to below 200k and if someone would take the likes of euell, skacel or Thomas of the books it would help greatly.

Cost reduction (wage Bill ) is key critical to the bank continuing to support the overdraft , The alternative is the Bank pulling the plug.

If attendances increased to 18k or above for every match ,the club would be making a profit and the bank pressure would be gone.

If this could happen before January I feel sure we would stand a better chance of keeping certain players in the team that we all want to keep.

 

Dont stay away as a demonstration go to the matches because you support the team and want us to survive .

 

I don't believe your figures. I think you just made them up.

 

Lowe Out.

 

CharlieMiller - I am sorry youhave to back down after such a reasoned and well argued response!

[saintjay77]

OK, so you were affected by the thread in question in that it made you feel p!ssed off. Fair enough, but that's not what I was getting at. My point was that threads and posts on here don't have any significant effect on the team, on results, on Saints' parlous financial position, etc.

 

I read the thread which Long Shot started; I didn't agree with what he or she put and posted to say as much. On the Saturday I went along to the game and supported the team. If LS's thread had stopped me doing that, then I'd call that a significant effect - but it didn't.

 

I can see the point you're making, but I do think you're confusing an internet message board (totally insignificant in the greater scheme of things) with something - well, rather more real. It's worth remembering that there are probably fewer than 100 regular posters on here, many of whom don't go to games for a variety of reasons. So even if 25% of posters here are affected by something, it still adds up to a tiny proportion of the fan base.

 

I know this forum is nothing compared to the full actual fanbase but I do think there is a fair reflection of the fan base on here.

 

I very much doubt something being said in only here will ever change how the fanbase/club feel but if we ignore the extreme posters from both ends of the scale the average person on here is thinking pretty much the same as the people that can be arsed to go to every game. if you were sat next to a supposed fan at the wolves game and they were cheering wolves on and being generally very happy at the situation we were in would your reaction be any different?

 

Living this far away and generally being skint I dont get to many games at SMS and my only away games are if they are being played in the arse hole of england. So my match day experience is mainly via raido, tv and internet so the negative people (i think they are skates on a wind up mainly but thats my opinion) that come on here to cause trouble do get on my t1ts sometimes. not to the point of getting abusive but they are having an effect all the same.

[John Smith]

Well summarised ......I wish all the stay awayers could try to understand the harm they are doing .

The club is under a very strict and restrictive watching brief with regard to the overdraft facility with Barclays. The month on month losses have now reduced to below 200k and if someone would take the likes of euell, skacel or Thomas of the books it would help greatly.

Cost reduction (wage Bill ) is key critical to the bank continuing to support the overdraft , The alternative is the Bank pulling the plug.

If attendances increased to 18k or above for every match ,the club would be making a profit and the bank pressure would be gone.

If this could happen before January I feel sure we would stand a better chance of keeping certain players in the team that we all want to keep.

 

Dont stay away as a demonstration go to the matches because you support the team and want us to survive .

 

I think you have to build in other factors as well. When I said that I was not renewing my ST, I was quite sure that I was being told 'good riddance', 'the club doesn't need you', 'nobody will even notice', etc, etc. I had made my decision back in MArch/April time and I am sticking to it.

 

I can't see where my stance has changed, or anything that will convince me to return? The club made its decision to bring back Rupert, I disagree, I disagree so vehemently, that I won't be setting foot in M whilst Lowe is in charge.

 

Just because I have my view and opinion, doesn't stop anyone else from going though, I have no issue with people supporting the club financially, I just chose not to, and let's face it, it is a CHOICE. I put the word 'choice' in capitals because, if we, as supporters, are not free to chose whether to go or not, then surely, that would be a dictatorship? We would be 'forced' to go, even though it is against our principals and better judgment.

 

I haven't seen these figures of 200k per month before, where did you get these from? Have they been released to the shareholders? In fact all this stated information -

 

"The month on month losses have now reduced to below 200k and if someone would take the likes of euell, skacel or Thomas of the books it would help greatly.

Cost reduction (wage Bill ) is key critical to the bank continuing to support the overdraft , The alternative is the Bank pulling the plug.

If attendances increased to 18k or above for every match ,the club would be making a profit and the bank pressure would be gone.

If this could happen before January I feel sure we would stand a better chance of keeping certain players in the team that we all want to keep."

 

You seem to be quoting a lot of 'facts' there, have you spoke to the bank about this? 18k, is this a new break even amount? Or is it just supposition based on the guesswork of some that the break even is 17k and therefore we must be making a profit at 18k?

 

There seems to be a lot here without any actual facts, now, if this is your opinion, fine, I respect that, but you must also respect my decision not to go. Choice is the key word here, and I have made mine, it's up to others to make theirs and I feel that Lowe is in a really tough position to change people's minds on this. Many asked him to go the first time, he was replaced by someone who said he must be removed at all costs, and now, there they are, both sitting at the top of this club, looking down, looking down on us fans, begging us for our support.

 

I don't want you here Lowe, and all the time you are, I won't be.

[krissyboy31]

Well summarised ......I wish all the stay awayers could try to understand the harm they are doing .

The club is under a very strict and restrictive watching brief with regard to the overdraft facility with Barclays. The month on month losses have now reduced to below 200k and if someone would take the likes of euell, skacel or Thomas of the books it would help greatly.

Cost reduction (wage Bill ) is key critical to the bank continuing to support the overdraft , The alternative is the Bank pulling the plug.

If attendances increased to 18k or above for every match ,the club would be making a profit and the bank pressure would be gone.

If this could happen before January I feel sure we would stand a better chance of keeping certain players in the team that we all want to keep.

 

Dont stay away as a demonstration go to the matches because you support the team and want us to survive .

 

I agree with most of that, however the problem is WHY are people staying away? We've all got our ideas on that but IMO is because of the contemptuos way the fanbase has been treated (and continues to be treated) by various administrations dating back to Alan Woodford's reign as Chairman.

 

We are continuously told that a Football Club must be run as a business but I know of no other business that holds its customers in such contempt. I think that the powers that be, (which now, once again, is Lowe and Wilde) thought the fans would turn up week after week, whatever sh!t was thrown at them. I think they are now finding out that this is no longer the case.

 

In any other consumer based business the Board of Directors that oversaw such a drastic drop in customers and income, would have been ousted months ago.

 

As M&S found out, if you get the product right, the customers will return but until we have a much more professional management team (from boardroom to bootroom) I feel the fanbase is going to dwindle further.

[um pahars]

Well summarised ......I wish all the stay awayers could try to understand the harm they are doing ..

 

IMHO you are missing the point here.

 

Whilst some are staying away as a form of protest, the majority of the stay ways are doing so because quite simply the product on offer doesn't interest them i.e. poor quality team (seen or perceived), lack of home wins, lack of goals, lack of atmosphere, poor value for money, lack of community spirit/no sense of purpose etc etc etc.

 

They therefore may not be the loyal uber fans that we want, but there is nothing we can about that. That is their decision and as a Club we have to accept that, but at the same time look for a solution to entice them back.

 

For me, the damage starts by all of the problems I have listed above (along with many others) that then manifests itself in reduced attendances.

 

The month on month losses have now reduced to below 200k and if someone would take the likes of euell, skacel or Thomas of the books it would help greatly.

 

That would mean a loss of approx 2.5million, a reduction of some 11m - 12m if you're talking at an Operational level from last years figures. Whilst I'm sure we have made savings, I don't think they have been at that level.

 

Dont stay away as a demonstration go to the matches because you support the team and want us to survive .

 

As I said above, I don't think the majority are staying away as a demonstration (although I fully accept many are staying away in protest).

 

We either need to win them back by on the field performances, or by achieving something off the field that galvanises the support and creates something people believe is worth rallying behind in the absence of those winning performances.

 

Sadly I don't think that the current regime can deliver on either of those fronts, as we stand here today!!!!

Edited 19 November, 2008 by um pahars

[charliemiller]

Its good to see reasoned debate and in truth many of the strong emotions Lowe being envoke are totally understandabe.

 

John Smith of course you have a right to choose not to attend !! we all do however we all should be aware of the very real threat hanging over the club from a very bum twitchy Barclays Bank .

 

I support Saints the Football Club ,I always will no matter who is in the boardroom. Directors and chairman will come and go but the club will survive.

 

Not going to watch Saints just because you dont like the current custodian of the boardroom chair (because thats all he is) current and not permanent is my opinion comparable to not ****ging your wife for 9 months because she has the wrong coloured nickers on.

 

The Club ,the heart and the passion is still there you just have to look beyond the present custodians and remember its the club you support.

 

Lowe and Wilde are having there arms twisted by the bank constantly , this is not normal times and until investment is found or the club makes a profit either from player sales or bums on seats nothing will change .

 

The fans thought can influence this by getting behind the team and attending ........but in the end the choice is always the individuals .

 

But truly supporting a team is something that defies logical individualism normally.

[londonsaint1604]

Whilst some are staying away as a form of protest, the majority of the stay ways are doing so because quite simply the product on offer doesn't interest them i.e. poor quality team (seen or perceived), lack of home wins, lack of goals, lack of atmosphere, poor value for money, lack of community spirit/no sense of purpose etc etc etc.

 

So people stay away partly due to the lack of atmosphere, and the lack of atmosphere is due to people staying away. The same could be said for the poor performances, as people stay away and the team doesn't get that extra lift that might inspire better performances.

 

I assume you weren't there on saturday, but from where I was stood in the northam the atmosphere was great and in turn the players had a real go at it, especially in the 2nd half, and that good performance could have become a good result with just a bit of luck.

 

You can make as many excuses as you like for staying away, but the fact remains that as supporters we should be showing up regardless of what's on display because it can and will make a difference ultimately. Fair enough if you can't afford it or it's not practical to attend sometimes, but many of the reasons listed above should not come into it.

[John Smith]

Its good to see reasoned debate and in truth many of the strong emotions Lowe being envoke are totally understandabe.

 

John Smith of course you have a right to choose not to attend !! we all do however we all should be aware of the very real threat hanging over the club from a very bum twitchy Barclays Bank .

 

I support Saints the Football Club ,I always will no matter who is in the boardroom. Directors and chairman will come and go but the club will survive.

 

Not going to watch Saints just because you dont like the current custodian of the boardroom chair (because thats all he is) current and not permanent is my opinion comparable to not ****ging your wife for 9 months because she has the wrong coloured nickers on.

 

The Club ,the heart and the passion is still there you just have to look beyond the present custodians and remember its the club you support.

 

Lowe and Wilde are having there arms twisted by the bank constantly , this is not normal times and until investment is found or the club makes a profit either from player sales or bums on seats nothing will change .

 

The fans thought can influence this by getting behind the team and attending ........but in the end the choice is always the individuals .

 

But truly supporting a team is something that defies logical individualism normally.

 

But then, that's where we have to agree to differ. Your rationale, if I've understood it right, is that by filling the ground (whether that's 18 or 30 thousand) will mean that the banks will ease off and administration will be staved off for that time in which the crowds continue to come. That's just a synopsis, and apologies if I have completely mis-understood.

 

My counter argument to this position is that, if by going, I allow the very person I believe to be dragging this club down, to have 'more' control, then I believe administration will continue to happen, but under the watchful eye of Rupert Lowe. Now, let's assume that what Lowe 'invested' in this club was 6% of the shares, and somebody out there will tell us exactly how much that initial input amounts to. He has been in charge for 10 years, in that time, he was very handsomely paid, got bonus', obtained a dividend, plus, raising his profile, his image and all other things that go along with being a recognisable 'figure head' and finally, getting a nice cash, lump sum pay-out, for failing this club and not doing the right thing and stepping down. I think, this initial 'investment', has been well and truly paid back. 'Anything' that Lowe makes on the sale of his shares are well and above the initial investment he originally put into this club.

 

So, where does that leave the 'argument'? IMO, Lowe isn't here to 'save' his investment, he is here because he 'wants' to be here. He is here not because he wants to 'save' Southampton, but because he views Southampton ass a Business opportunity to experiment in different area's. Now whether that's a 'boy with his toys' mentality or a Business interest, or a managerial lesson, I don't know. But one thing is for sure, from my perspective is this, by turning up, week in, week out, regardless of who is in charge or what direction we are going in, my support for the team, translates directly into 'support' for the Chairman. Why? Because, only through 'our money' can Lowe follow through on his 'policies' and IMO, those policies are flawed. For what ever reason Lowe is doing this, the outcome for Saints will be dire. We won't EVER be a force to be reckoned with, at any level. IMO, Lowe believes this anyway, and in order to accept that you will never be competitive, you have to adopt a plan that 'rewards' failure. This is bourne out through the academy. We will never sign 'good' players and we will sell our best youngsters, for top dosh, and then invest in a few more 'kids' a couple of journeymen AND return a dividend. This, my friend, is 'the business'.

 

Now, you may argue that this is the best we can ever hope for, but me, I want 'hope', I want 'dreams', I want to believe, that on a good day, with lots of luck, Saints may just win something, and I would hope that those in charge would want this too. However, those in charge view success in football terms as a bi-product as a success of the business. This, for me, isn't 'sport'. This isn't entertainment, this isn't blood, sweat and passion, this is turning up, week in week out, to watch a business grow, or fail. Dull, very very dull. I can do that at work, and they pay me!

 

And so, whereas some fans will turn up week in, week out, just because it says Saints on the outside, I can't avoid looking deeper and when I do, I don't see Saints soul anymore, I don;t see the 'underdog' mentality, I don't see the desire in our clubs heart to want to improve for next season, I think that vision has been stripped away and it will never return. And even if Saints begin to climb the table, I won;t return, even if we get promoted, I won't be there, even if Saints look like surviving in the Prem, I'll be at home, loving my family, spending my money on things that makes others happy, why? Because I'm a family man, and I support a 'family club', but that community of 'love' for our club will never return whilst Lowe is in charge.

 

So, I will not donate my hard earned cash to someone I see is using it to destroy this 'family'. In short, 'my money' will not be used as a mandate to rule, 'my money' will not validate this choice of Chairman, 'my money' will not keep this club afloat for the benefit of the few, at the expense of the many. IMO, when it comes to family and Sport, this approach is wrong, wrong, wrong.

 

But I appreciate the debate.

[eelpie]

Rupert Lowe and Michael Wilde could easily put an end to negativity by confirming that they will not sell our best players in January, and will redress shortcomings in the defence and strikeforce.

 

They are the reason for negativity.

[charliemiller]

But then, that's where we have to agree to differ. Your rationale, if I've understood it right, is that by filling the ground (whether that's 18 or 30 thousand) will mean that the banks will ease off and administration will be staved off for that time in which the crowds continue to come. That's just a synopsis, and apologies if I have completely mis-understood.

 

My counter argument to this position is that, if by going, I allow the very person I believe to be dragging this club down, to have 'more' control, then I believe administration will continue to happen, but under the watchful eye of Rupert Lowe. Now, let's assume that what Lowe 'invested' in this club was 6% of the shares, and somebody out there will tell us exactly how much that initial input amounts to. He has been in charge for 10 years, in that time, he was very handsomely paid, got bonus', obtained a dividend, plus, raising his profile, his image and all other things that go along with being a recognisable 'figure head' and finally, getting a nice cash, lump sum pay-out, for failing this club and not doing the right thing and stepping down. I think, this initial 'investment', has been well and truly paid back. 'Anything' that Lowe makes on the sale of his shares are well and above the initial investment he originally put into this club.

 

So, where does that leave the 'argument'? IMO, Lowe isn't here to 'save' his investment, he is here because he 'wants' to be here. He is here not because he wants to 'save' Southampton, but because he views Southampton ass a Business opportunity to experiment in different area's. Now whether that's a 'boy with his toys' mentality or a Business interest, or a managerial lesson, I don't know. But one thing is for sure, from my perspective is this, by turning up, week in, week out, regardless of who is in charge or what direction we are going in, my support for the team, translates directly into 'support' for the Chairman. Why? Because, only through 'our money' can Lowe follow through on his 'policies' and IMO, those policies are flawed. For what ever reason Lowe is doing this, the outcome for Saints will be dire. We won't EVER be a force to be reckoned with, at any level. IMO, Lowe believes this anyway, and in order to accept that you will never be competitive, you have to adopt a plan that 'rewards' failure. This is bourne out through the academy. We will never sign 'good' players and we will sell our best youngsters, for top dosh, and then invest in a few more 'kids' a couple of journeymen AND return a dividend. This, my friend, is 'the business'.

 

Now, you may argue that this is the best we can ever hope for, but me, I want 'hope', I want 'dreams', I want to believe, that on a good day, with lots of luck, Saints may just win something, and I would hope that those in charge would want this too. However, those in charge view success in football terms as a bi-product as a success of the business. This, for me, isn't 'sport'. This isn't entertainment, this isn't blood, sweat and passion, this is turning up, week in week out, to watch a business grow, or fail. Dull, very very dull. I can do that at work, and they pay me!

 

And so, whereas some fans will turn up week in, week out, just because it says Saints on the outside, I can't avoid looking deeper and when I do, I don't see Saints soul anymore, I don;t see the 'underdog' mentality, I don't see the desire in our clubs heart to want to improve for next season, I think that vision has been stripped away and it will never return. And even if Saints begin to climb the table, I won;t return, even if we get promoted, I won't be there, even if Saints look like surviving in the Prem, I'll be at home, loving my family, spending my money on things that makes others happy, why? Because I'm a family man, and I support a 'family club', but that community of 'love' for our club will never return whilst Lowe is in charge.

 

So, I will not donate my hard earned cash to someone I see is using it to destroy this 'family'. In short, 'my money' will not be used as a mandate to rule, 'my money' will not validate this choice of Chairman, 'my money' will not keep this club afloat for the benefit of the few, at the expense of the many. IMO, when it comes to family and Sport, this approach is wrong, wrong, wrong.

 

But I appreciate the debate.

 

 

 

I appreciate the debate also ..........

 

 

What you have just described above is one of the most intelligent and heartfelt arguments not against Lowe only but against the whole PLC structure installed by Lowe.

Dividends and PLC constraints have been key to every decision made pertaining to the sell of our prize assets and the lack of ambition shown by the board in general. Additionally it is singularly responsible for the political infighting amongst the major shareholders we all have had to endure over the last three years , this has all harm the heart of the club so so much more than you could know.

You stand correct to be against the concept of putting money into the beast which is behind every move that Lowe conducts .....the PLC because yes your correct it has ripped the soul from the club.

 

However he is JUST the figurehead he is not the problem alone .......your best chance of getting rid is to show the strength of support this club can muster , make us more purchasable than the likes of Charlton !!!!

 

The heart and the passion of SAINTS is not a grey money sucking PLC ...its us the fans , we can take the underdog , never surrender , fun loving family club atmosphere away by all giving up because we dont like a personality ....or we can rise above that and scream at the top of our voices that Saints and Saints fans are special and prove that by getting behind the team.

 

This I assure you will do far more than pacify the Bank, it will make saints a very investable entity and your wish of not having a PLC or Lowe driven club may well come to fruition .

 

But it needs 18k plus fans in the stadium and a positive balance sheet.

[charliemiller]

Rupert Lowe and Michael Wilde could easily put an end to negativity by confirming that they will not sell our best players in January, and will redress shortcomings in the defence and strikeforce.

 

They are the reason for negativity.

 

They cant because its not in there control , the bank is dictating who goes not the board.

[saint1977]

I appreciate the debate also ..........

 

 

What you have just described above is one of the most intelligent and heartfelt arguments not against Lowe only but against the whole PLC structure installed by Lowe.

Dividends and PLC constraints have been key to every decision made pertaining to the sell of our prize assets and the lack of ambition shown by the board in general. Additionally it is singularly responsible for the political infighting amongst the major shareholders we all have had to endure over the last three years , this has all harm the heart of the club so so much more than you could know.

You stand correct to be against the concept of putting money into the beast which is behind every move that Lowe conducts .....the PLC because yes your correct it has ripped the soul from the club.

 

However he is JUST the figurehead he is not the problem alone .......your best chance of getting rid is to show the strength of support this club can muster , make us more purchasable than the likes of Charlton !!!!

 

The heart and the passion of SAINTS is not a grey money sucking PLC ...its us the fans , we can take the underdog , never surrender , fun loving family club atmosphere away by all giving up because we dont like a personality ....or we can rise above that and scream at the top of our voices that Saints and Saints fans are special and prove that by getting behind the team.

 

This I assure you will do far more than pacify the Bank, it will make saints a very investable entity and your wish of not having a PLC or Lowe driven club may well come to fruition .

 

But it needs 18k plus fans in the stadium and a positive balance sheet.

 

Perhaps the answer is to have 25k-30k gates (unlikely given the economy and VFM given that most of the players aren't not SFC calibre and many of them will never be tbh) and to really go for Wilde, Askham and Lowe in a concerted and concentrated way. Trouble is, you risk Newcastle syndrome where the outside world views us the fans as neanderthals and sponsors get twitchy. Perhaps though that's what it will take to force the Bank to do the right thing and sent Rupert and Mike and Guy packing and should there be credible interested parties before the point of administration, force a sale even if it puts Rupert and Mike badly out of pocket. Either way, the club hasn't been run properly since 2003 with or without Rupert in control and the fans are now put in an awful position.

 

I'd be interested to find out if we owe HMRC significant money, they would be less understanding than the Bank and wouldn't give a toss about Rupert or Mike's investment.

[Oz]

lowe/wilde out!

[Oz]

Scanning this forum I am shocked by the amount of negativity displayed by people who call themselves supporters of Southampton Football Club.

Granted, we are struggling to keep our heads above the water in the Championship. One league below where most Saints fans believe we belong.

However, its time those fans wake up and smell the coffee.

Its over 3 years since we were relegated. The parachute payments dried up long ago leaving us with major financial constraints.

I was as much against Lowe and wanted him out of our club along everyone. Like the majority I thought the Wilde bunch would save us. Spend the money, back the manager, "give us our club back" and take us back to the promised land of the Premiership.

We were wrong. Michael Wilde made promises and couldn't keep them. Leon Crouch's reign was similarly unsuccessful and we're led to believe that had it continued for much longer we'd probably be in administration by now.

 

We'd all like a multi-millionaire/billionaire to buy the club and splash the cash but we have to realise that's not going to happen. Love him or hate him, Rupert is the only man who had the balls to get involved again (yes, I know he still had his shares etc) and you have to say they're bloody big balls to come back after being almost literally hounded out of the club!

Nigel Pearson did a good job to keep us up last year but would he have been happy to sit back and watch quality players leave with no transfer funds to spend? Almost certainly NO.

Jan Poortvliet deserves a chance......17 games is not enough. He needs at the very, very least 1 full season. In my opinion he should be given at least 2.

He's had his hands tied behind his back from the day he arrived and to get a bunch of kids playing to the level I saw today with more desire and passion than Burley ever achieved he should be given the full backing of the supporters. After all, that's what we're supposed to be isn't it? Supporters.

 

2 seasons of his garbage and we will looking at the conference!

[Oz]

The Red Bag & Saint Donkey

 

As this is a forum, people raise topics for debate and others respond to them. Inevitably there is potential for some of the threads to be controversial, thought provoking, inspirational, just plain stupid or wind ups.

 

The same goes for the replies.

 

If somebody is put off coming on the board because they don't like the tone of it, then they are perfectly entitled to post their own thoughts and if they argue their corner and viewpoint intelligently and cogently, then they might change the opinions of some, or at least get others to accept grudgingly that they have a point.

 

Otherwise, they are entitled to seek out another forum that more closely mirrors their own viewpoints, but firstly it is unlikely that they will find one, as this forum is probably pretty representative of fans' opninions, but secondly, surely it would be boring having universal agreement on everything.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Provided that everybody accepts that anybody else is entitled to have their own opinion and that those opinions have equal validity, then there should be no problems.

 

lowe out

[SaintDonkey]

Rupert Lowe and Michael Wilde could easily put an end to negativity by confirming that they will not sell our best players in January, and will redress shortcomings in the defence and strikeforce.

 

They are the reason for negativity.

 

The problem is can the club afford not to sell the players let alone redress the problems in the team? Maybe they should just come straight about the financial situation.

 

Something along the lines of "If we average 20,000 per match for the Plymouth, Wednesday, Forest, Reading and Doncaster matches we won't have to sell players - if not we will have to sell. If we average 30,000 we will be able to give Jan 2 million quid to spend"

 

Would that make you happy or at least understanding of the situation? (n.b. figures given are pure supersition!)