Master Bates Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 FORMER SAINTS chairman Leon Crouch has hit back at criticisms from the men who replaced him in power. http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/saints/news/3944399.Stakes_upped_by_Crouch_in_Saints_blame_game/ FORMER Saints chairman Leon Crouch insists the only way the club can ever prosper again is to attract new investment. http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/saints/news/3944398.Crouch__Outside_investment_is_only_way/ LEON Crouch is calling on the thousands of stayaway Saints fans to return – and help ensure supporters aren’t blamed for any more player sales next month. http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/saints/news/3944401.Ex_chairman_calls_for_stayaway_fans_to_back_young_guns/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 And about time. I dont understand why he has put up with months of false accusations and finger-pointing from Lowe. And I fully agree with him that if he and Pearson had continued, this season would not have started such a f**king mess. The most outrageous part of this article is the bit at the end where a "spokesman" (wonder why he didnt want naming, he usually does....) said the club refuses be drawn into a debate over the finances after the ridiculously one-side comments to the press (despite not wanting to dwell on the past, LOL) over the last few months. Welcome to Lowe FC.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 Crouch has class, humanity, humility and business accumen that Lowe could only dream of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thefuriousb Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 Crouch has class, humanity, humility and business accumen that Lowe could only dream of. Is that why he has gone public then? Its about time that all of them took some responsibility instead of always shifting the blame. Whilst I share some of the sentiments in Leon's statement. It is still airing our dirty linen in public once again. I wish they would all stop trying to claim they are looking after the fans' interest. If they did we could have saved ourselves the last "god knows" how many years. They should take some of their own advice and get behind the team!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John B Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 (edited) Is that why he has gone public then? Its about time that all of them took some responsibility instead of always shifting the blame. Whilst I share some of the sentiments in Leon's statement. It is still airing our dirty linen in public once again. I wish they would all stop trying to claim they are looking after the fans' interest. If they did we could have saved ourselves the last "god knows" how many years. They should take some of their own advice and get behind the team!!! I agree Wilde Lowe and Crouch are all to blame for our current demise in that order. However whether Crouch could have stopped the rot is open to question whether Wilde and Lowe can is also open to question but there are slight signs of recovery but only time will tell Why they cannot stop bickering is the main question of course as Crouch says Investment is probably the only way forward but as nothing has happened in three years something else has been tried. They should all keep quiet and as the previous poster says get behind the team. Edited 3 December, 2008 by John B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legod Third Coming Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 I agree Wilde Lowe and Crouch are all to blame for our current demise. Why they cannot stop bickering is the main question. They should all keep quiet. Eventually, these guys have to realise it is Christmas Day and time to call a truce in favour of the club they all want and need to succeed, whatever their motivation - personal, financial, ego, etc. If you are listening now Leon, Rupert, Michael - you can either speak to each other through the press, or over a Cabernet in the boardoom where you could be man enough to let bygones be bygones and work together for the good of us all. Surely, at a time when the world needs conflict like a drowning man needs water, three grown businessmen can debate sensibly and calmly and reach, if not friendship, at least an amicable agreement that our main focus - success for the club - can only be achieved by working together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 "I would give away all my shares to the right person. I don’t care about the money, all I care about is the future of this great club." We just need Lowe, Wilde and co to say the same thing and we might have a chance. Good on you Leon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustMike Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 Still confused why he hasnt "revealed all" about the fulthorpe stuff. Fair play to him for still believing that investment will happen though and for stating that he would give away all his shares. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John B Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 (edited) "I would give away all my shares to the right person. I don’t care about the money, all I care about is the future of this great club." We just need Lowe, Wilde and co to say the same thing and we might have a chance. Good on you Leon. But where is right person? That is my only problem with Crouch he seems to think somebody is going to invest and everything is going to be Ok which makes him sound a bit niave and does not give me confidence in his ability. Plainly investment has not arrived despite many false dawns and if it does there is going to be hard work in order to fashion a team which will perform well and to continue to do so in the future. We tried to buy a team to gain promotion but that failed spectactularly so buying players may not be the complete solution Edited 3 December, 2008 by John B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katalinic Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 But where is right person? That is my only problem with Crouch he seems to think somebody is going to invest and everything is going to be Ok. Plainly investment has not arrived despite many false dawns and if it does there is going to be hard work in order to fashion a team which will perform well and to continue to do so in the future. We tried to buy a team to gain promotion but that failed spectactularly so buying players may not be the complete solution The unrealistic value that Lowe and his gang want for the shares may have put some people off coupled with the debt that they would have to take on - were Lowe and Wilde to take Crouch's line and offer them for free that could only be a positive couldn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John B Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 (edited) The unrealistic value that Lowe and his gang want for the shares may have put some people off coupled with the debt that they would have to take on - were Lowe and Wilde to take Crouch's line and offer them for free that could only be a positive couldn't it? Maybe but I would have thought it is niave to think all shareholders would give their shares away for nothing as currently they do have a value . Edited 3 December, 2008 by John B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slickmick Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 I haven't read the rest of his article yet, but the first paragraph would have been ripped to pieces had Lowe made those comments. Ego has gone into overdrive on this one if he thinks we would have been getting gates of over 20,000 had he and Pearson stayed. Theres no way we would have been getting anymore than 16,000 at the most, then what would Barclays thought of his plan. Sorry Leon, but your talking out of your back passage. 'Crouch insists he had come up with a plan that was supported by Barclays Bank and that crowds would have stayed at over 20,000 this season had Nigel Pearson been kept on.' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonah Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 Crouch is such a muppet: There is no doubt that Rupert Lowe’s reign at the club resulted in our relegation after 27 years in the top flight. Just like Ted Bates' reign resulted in our relegation in 1974 no doubt. And presumably he'll be first to acknowledge that his own reign took us to the brink of relegation to the 3rd tier? Crikey, that sounds even worse doesn't it Leon? Despite receiving tens of millions from player transfers, television, sponsorship revenues and packed houses at St Mary’s, all we were left with when Rupert departed was the second year parachute payment. In other words, Rupert spent every penny we had on the team, Leon is making the point that Rupert wasn't squirreling it away and refusing to spend it... “I do not believe that Harry Redknapp was given a fair chance with only £90,000 spent on Ricardo Fuller Oh no, wait, that doesn't fit in with what I want to say, I'd better try to claim Rupert was squirreling it away and refusing to spend this fictional money after all! after the second or third board meeting, I realised there were no investors waiting in the wings. Could Captain ****up possibly have considered the idea - I know it's outrageous to even suggest this - that he actually checked this triffling matter *before* supporting Wilde? Crouch was booted off the football club board twice in the space of 12 months. He's a loose cannon, no doubt with the best intentions, but with very little clue. You'd almost think he was on a different planet sometimes... Crouch insists he had come up with a plan that was supported by Barclays Bank and that crowds would have stayed at over 20,000 this season had Nigel Pearson been kept on. Ah yes, so he is! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capel Saint Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 Maybe but I would have thought it is niave to think all shareholders would give their shares away for nothing as currently they do have a value . You're right, they probably wouldn't but it would make the club a more attractive investment if a good percentage of the shares were offered for no money in return. Trouble is, I don;t think an investor will come forward as they want to see if the club goes into administration first in which case they won't have to buy any shares, just show the administrators they can service the debt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John B Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 You're right, they probably wouldn't but it would make the club a more attractive investment if a good percentage of the shares were offered for no money in return. QUOTE] So if you were a shareholder you would give your shares to a person to make him richer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintjay77 Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 The unrealistic value that Lowe and his gang want for the shares may have put some people off coupled with the debt that they would have to take on - were Lowe and Wilde to take Crouch's line and offer them for free that could only be a positive couldn't it? Fair play for Crouch saying he would give away his shares. Its 1 thing saying it and another actually doing it though. Personally I dont think he or anyone should give them away for free. Simply buying shares in a club doesnt help the club as its not investment. I own 1 share and you buy it off me I get the money not the club. So anyone that owns shares in SFC have done so as an investment and are not expecting to make a loss on that investment. How many companys do you know that are ready to be sold for nothing? IMO I think all 3 of the main shareholders are tossers as like others have said the best way forward would be for all of them to work together. As long as there is a split there will be this constant bickering between them in the press. Lowe having a dig every 5 mins then trying to make out he wont be drawn into the blame game is fecking histerical. How Crouch would have kept the attendances above 20K is beyond me. He said he wasnt able to impliment his Plan B when Hone Oldcow and co were there yet on his 2nd stint he had his opertunity and outgoings went up even further. The facts are all there and collectivly they have all broke the bank trying there many different tactics. The fans are fed up with all of it so even with Crouch at the helm the gates would still be Low IMO. His last point about the fans turning up is about the only decent point and shows him to be a fan of the club more than anything else. Too little to late i think though and he is just setting himself up to be able to have another dig next month when players get sold. If he said this 4 months ago and people listened keeping gates up near the 20K mark then he and everyone else could be up in arms if Lowe sold the family silver. But saying it when we have 2 or 3 home games before the transfer window opens is a bit like pronouncing your gold fish as dead 3 weeks after it got flushed down the toilet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John B Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 I haven't read the rest of his article yet, but the first paragraph would have been ripped to pieces had Lowe made those comments. Ego has gone into overdrive on this one if he thinks we would have been getting gates of over 20,000 had he and Pearson stayed. Theres no way we would have been getting anymore than 16,000 at the most, then what would Barclays thought of his plan. Sorry Leon, but your talking out of your back passage. 'Crouch insists he had come up with a plan that was supported by Barclays Bank and that crowds would have stayed at over 20,000 this season had Nigel Pearson been kept on.' I have read the articles and find their content rather simplistic and unreal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capel Saint Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 You're right, they probably wouldn't but it would make the club a more attractive investment if a good percentage of the shares were offered for no money in return. QUOTE] So if you were a shareholder you would give your shares to a person to make him richer It's rather academic as I'm not a shareholder but yes, if an investor could prove they had funds to invest in the club and were committed to saving the club then yes. As I said, otherwise it may prove that my shares would become worthless anyway if the plc went under. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintwarwick Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 And about time. I dont understand why he has put up with months of false accusations and finger-pointing from Lowe. And I fully agree with him that if he and Pearson had continued, this season would not have started such a f**king mess. The most outrageous part of this article is the bit at the end where a "spokesman" (wonder why he didnt want naming, he usually does....) said the club refuses be drawn into a debate over the finances after the ridiculously one-side comments to the press (despite not wanting to dwell on the past, LOL) over the last few months. Welcome to Lowe FC.... Where was the months of false accusations and finger pointing from Lowe? Agreed Lowe spoke out on the recent figures but the rest is a typical exaggeration from you. As for the point about Crouch and Pearson continuing, they would of been in the same situation we are now in, ie no dosh and getting rid of the high earners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John B Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 It's rather academic as I'm not a shareholder but yes, if an investor could prove they had funds to invest in the club and were committed to saving the club then yes. As I said, otherwise it may prove that my shares would become worthless anyway if the plc went under. I am not a shareholder either but at the moment the club is not in administration but I take your point. Long term I would rather we succeeded with the current approach than be beholden to some rich guy or guys like West Ham Newcastle Portsmouth or Liverpool Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintjay77 Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 I am not a shareholder either but at the moment the club is not in administration but I take your point. Long term I would rather we succeeded with the current approach than be beholden to some rich guy or guys like West Ham Newcastle Portsmouth or Liverpool Without a crystal ball its hard to say what will happen in the future but on the basis that there will be no investment in the next say 5 years I would rather we carry on the way we are trying than change anything. Not bothered too much at who is at the top but the team is showing signs of doing things the right way and they are playing football which is great to watch at times. Anyone with serious money however should be seriously considered as that could provide the icing on the cake of our team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 Interesting. He keeps quiet for so long and then speaks out this week. I wonder why that is? Tax bills coming up? Last throw of a political dice? Saints back in the media with the cup draw? or simply random timing? He'll give his shares away eh? Wait for the "oh the Echo mis-quoted me should somebody suddenly pop out the woodwork next year. He's obviously not keen to form a "united appraoch" to getting the politics sorted out, so I just go back to the All in or all out Thanks Leon, the sooner you and the other two leave the sooner we can move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
broncoboy Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 "We are pleased that Mr Crouch is enjoying watching the fantastic displays that our young squad have been providing, and are confident we will be able to improve on the encouraging start we have made.” That is the most disgraceful part of the statement. While the young players have had their moments the crowds melting away prove it hasnt always been fantastic displays. Their statement is petty smacks of Lowe and will come back to haunt them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oz Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 of the three, i reckon that crouch is more believable in the sense that lowe and wilde are totally unbelievable! admin is not only are only hope but is inevitable as a result of the actions of the above. bring it on! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scudamore Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 Crouch has class, humanity, humility and business accumen that Lowe could only dream of. Once again i remind you that you did not support Crouch when he was in charge... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Saint Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 Crouch Well he has been very consistant in his comments to friendly groups behind the scenes. There is nothing new here. Why has he decided to go more public now? Well I know he was upset by comments when the Accounts were released. I do not expect him to get into a further slanging match. He has said his piece and will continue to support Saints from the "terraces". Let us not forget he is asking for the supporters to unite and get behind the team by attending. That has to benefit the football club. Is that not what we all want? Lowe He is in the driving seat now. He has been remarkable quiet until the accounts were released and I fully expect he to continue quietly working behind the scenes to stabilise our financial position. Whatever the rights and wrongs he is passionate to develop a side of young talented and motivated players who want to play for Southampton. However, he has to balance that with the more pressing problem of our finances. No matter who is in charge, without investment and income we cannot go forward. We all have to play our part where we can Administration For those that are staying away hoping for Administration in the near future, think again. With careful management of finances and with the continued support of the loan holder, Bank and creditors it is not the expected or the intended path being taken. All that will happen is that some of our younger players will have to be sold resulting in a weaker team and the possibility of relegation and more cutbacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintjay77 Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 Crouch Well he has been very consistant in his comments to friendly groups behind the scenes. There is nothing new here. Why has he decided to go more public now? Well I know he was upset by comments when the Accounts were released. I do not expect him to get into a further slanging match. He has said his piece and will continue to support Saints from the "terraces". Let us not forget he is asking for the supporters to unite and get behind the team by attending. That has to benefit the football club. Is that not what we all want? Lowe He is in the driving seat now. He has been remarkable quiet until the accounts were released and I fully expect he to continue quietly working behind the scenes to stabilise our financial position. Whatever the rights and wrongs he is passionate to develop a side of young talented and motivated players who want to play for Southampton. However, he has to balance that with the more pressing problem of our finances. No matter who is in charge, without investment and income we cannot go forward. We all have to play our part where we can Administration For those that are staying away hoping for Administration in the near future, think again. With careful management of finances and with the continued support of the loan holder, Bank and creditors it is not the expected or the intended path being taken. All that will happen is that some of our younger players will have to be sold resulting in a weaker team and the possibility of relegation and more cutbacks. Fair assesment IMO. But whats your take on Wilde? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Saint Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 Fair assesment IMO. But whats your take on Wilde? I have no take on Wilde. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 When told of Crouch’s comments, a Saints spokesman said: “The club will not be drawn into debate over this issue. As far as we are concerned, the issue of the financial accounts has been dealt with. “We are pleased that Mr Crouch is enjoying watching the fantastic displays that our young squad have been providing, and are confident we will be able to improve on the encouraging start we have made.” Utterly unbelievable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 all this speaking out is childlike, pathetic and lacking any class - both sides. no need to comment -actions speak louder etc. shut up and sort it out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Saint Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 When told of Crouch’s comments, a Saints spokesman said: “The club will not be drawn into debate over this issue. As far as we are concerned, the issue of the financial accounts has been dealt with. “We are pleased that Mr Crouch is enjoying watching the fantastic displays that our young squad have been providing, and are confident we will be able to improve on the encouraging start we have made.” Utterly unbelievable Why? It was Crouch's comment. Lowe agreed with the comment. We have unity Let's not take sides here. There is only one side we should support and it plays 46 league games on the pitch every season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopGun Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 I find it odd that Crouch chooses to speak out just when Saints are possibly putting together a little unbeaten run and look as though they may be starting to get it together on the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 I find it odd that Crouch chooses to speak out just when Saints are possibly putting together a little unbeaten run and look as though they may be starting to get it together on the field. Yeah, if we lose it's his fault. I found it very odd that Lowe decided to reignite the debate in the Annual Statement of a PLC, but there you go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solentstars Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 Crouch Well he has been very consistant in his comments to friendly groups behind the scenes. There is nothing new here. Why has he decided to go more public now? Well I know he was upset by comments when the Accounts were released. I do not expect him to get into a further slanging match. He has said his piece and will continue to support Saints from the "terraces". Let us not forget he is asking for the supporters to unite and get behind the team by attending. That has to benefit the football club. Is that not what we all want? Lowe He is in the driving seat now. He has been remarkable quiet until the accounts were released and I fully expect he to continue quietly working behind the scenes to stabilise our financial position. Whatever the rights and wrongs he is passionate to develop a side of young talented and motivated players who want to play for Southampton. However, he has to balance that with the more pressing problem of our finances. No matter who is in charge, without investment and income we cannot go forward. We all have to play our part where we can Administration For those that are staying away hoping for Administration in the near future, think again. With careful management of finances and with the continued support of the loan holder, Bank and creditors it is not the expected or the intended path being taken. All that will happen is that some of our younger players will have to be sold resulting in a weaker team and the possibility of relegation and more cutbacks.i think that sums it up but i would like to know who,s is responsabile for last season,s mismanagement of the finances Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ART Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 I find it odd that Crouch chooses to speak out just when Saints are possibly putting together a little unbeaten run and look as though they may be starting to get it together on the field. Crouch hasn't been my flavor of the month of quite some time but I do feel that he is justified in replying to the Annual Financial Statement and clarifying where he sees himself in the unfolding events. Each and everyone, Lowe, Wilde and Crouch together with all the standline actors in the pantomine have played a decisive role in our downfall starting from relegation to the events on and off the field that have followed. For me it's Wilde and the Gang of Four Mercenaries that come out of it the worse. I also note and I'm greatly encouraged that Crouch is coming out and telling ALL supporters to get behind the youngsters, that they are playing well and need our backing. It's not Lowe, Wilde and Crouch who have the biggest ego's and driving us into oblivion, but it is the ego's of those who stay away and don't get behind the smashing bunch of lads that "the Club" has assembled together. Unlike past statements by each of the Gang of Three I don't think Crouch's statement is out of place with what he has to say today. "United we stand and divided we bloody well fall, and will fall fast." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 not bothered to read it, nor did I read Lowe's recent one. words are cheap, time to run the club not talk about it -except in here! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INFLUENCED.COM Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 Do not think there is much to speak of other than why he chose to speak now, as Weston stated he is entitled to defend himself against accusations made regarding conduct during his tenure and could have done that sooner, could be he has someone advising him when to speak and the content in order he is not percieved as a mouth piece, again. There are digs about Lowe but in the main my intepretation is that he has restrained from getting invloved too much in a slanging match as has SFC who are entitled to advertise the product as often as possible which they have done in their statement, Crouch has personal grievances against those involved in running the club at the moment but as he highlights he continues to sponsor and support the team, something those who are staying away at the moment should consider. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plumstead_Saint Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 Yeah, if we lose it's his fault. I found it very odd that Lowe decided to reignite the debate in the Annual Statement of a PLC, but there you go. Spot on. Showed how childish Lowe is IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John B Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 (edited) Spot on. Showed how childish Lowe is IMHO. I think he had to explain to the shareholders why the accounts were in such a bad shape with large losses although some of the language could have been tempered. I think it should have not been mentioned it is an official document. It was not aimed at Crouch personally as although he was there the whole year he was not Chairman the whole time If he had come out in a Newspaper Article I would have agreed Edited 3 December, 2008 by John B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plumstead_Saint Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 I dont think it should have been mentioned it is an official document. we agree then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baird of the land Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 Think his first paragraph about how if he and pearson had of stayed we would have had huge gates and therefore would not have to do any of the extensive cost cuttings the current regime have is nonsensical and just a chance to have a dig. There's some interesting stuff that suggests the hone/delieu lot were the utter idiots of the piece. I liked that he said big investment was the only way forward but i think trying to hintwe'd be any closer to be taken over if he was still in charge is unrealistic.It'snice to see he's calling for saints supporters to go see the team. I've always not had a problem with crouch as someone passionate about saints.My big problem with Crouch has always been his ability to work with others. Mike Wilde may be a git but he is the biggest shareholder and needed to be involved and not p*ssing into the tent from outside. If we're going to be taken over he'll have to sell his shares so he has to be in the boardroom. Lowe manages to work with him despite wilde being responsible for him being kicked out the first time round. i don't see crouch being that pragmatic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon Mockles Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 Where was the months of false accusations and finger pointing from Lowe? Agreed Lowe spoke out on the recent figures but the rest is a typical exaggeration from you. As for the point about Crouch and Pearson continuing, they would of been in the same situation we are now in, ie no dosh and getting rid of the high earners. Certainly a lot of hypocritical accusations over the past year (especially the continual blame on Crouch for the muppet board of self-serving execs Wilde appointed, then ran and hid from!) Emanating from both Wilde and Lowe. All across the press, Surprised you missed it…. ***** Rupert Lowe attacks board as he plans return Rupert Lowe yesterday put his name to a wide-ranging attack on the Southampton board and revealed his intention to return as chairman of the club's parent company, Southampton Leisure Holdings. The former chairman issued a joint statement with leading individual shareholder Michael Wilde and former managing director Andrew Cowen in which they criticised a "decline of major proportions" and highlighted what they alleged was "weak management". The statement also accused the club of failing to properly manage and support George Burley, who left to become Scotland manager earlier this year. "Short-sighted policies have replaced long-term planning and it is now time to reintroduce common sense, leadership and clarity to the decision-making process if a crisis has any chance of being averted," said the statement. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/2296108/Rupert-Lowe-attacks-board-as-he-plans-return.html ***** http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/football/football_league/article3665879.ece ***** Lowe slams Saints board for 'failure' Love the continual hypocrisy. And people wonder why fans on this forum and quick to deride or distrust anything Lowe says… Rupert Lowe, the controversial former chairman of Southampton, has criticised the club's new regime for failing to deliver on their promise to attract big-money investors to the Championship club. In an outspoken attack Lowe, who was ousted last summer, also claimed he has no intention of returning to Southampton, despite fears among the club's directors that recent share transactions might be part of a plot to seize back control at St Mary's. "If the club do not go up this season then they are in serious trouble," Lowe told the Daily Telegraph. "These guys have failed to deliver on their promises. They have mismanaged [manager] George Burley, they have mismanaged the assets. People should be asking what's happened to all the money that was promised?" Rich words about money, considering from Lowe! LOL http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/2310250/Lowe-slams-Saints-board-for-%27failure%27.html ***** Have a browse, much more where that came from! In fact, not even included the plethora of Echo articles, the sparring between the various board factions. Juvenile IMHO. All of ‘em! Whilst Crouch is no choir boy, I find it tricky to trust people like Lowe and Wilde, when most words they utter are lies. Continually catching them out. Crouch has his faults but I do feel he cares for the good of the club, unlike the current two, merely safe guarding (rather badly) their assets; despite how they purport to care. Lowe said (Daily Telegraph April 2007): "I have made it abundantly clear to Leon Crouch that I have no aspiration to return to the club. I would like to sell my shares and move on. I was promised that someone would buy my shares off me the day after I stood down, but I am still waiting..." Hmmm?? No offers then?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 Crouch was compelled to say this after the accounts were released. He has been cynically used by Lowe and Wilde as a fallguy and cover for of their more radical plans - many of which are being presented to us as the only way forward. Its only fair that he states his position and it cannot be helped if he comes across as defensive. Is a good guy- dont see many ex-chairmen unassumingly supporting their team at places like Sheff U on a cold and wet tuesday evening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
positivepete Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 I am not a great Leon Crouch fan, but what he says has a lot of sense except for the assertion that gates would have remained above 20,000 in Pearson had still been here. There are no facts to back this up, there is no one reason why gates have dipped, and you cannot say we would have been any more successful on the pitch if Pearson had stayed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VectisSaint Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 Crouch hasn't been my flavor of the month of quite some time but I do feel that he is justified in replying to the Annual Financial Statement and clarifying where he sees himself in the unfolding events. Each and everyone, Lowe, Wilde and Crouch together with all the standline actors in the pantomine have played a decisive role in our downfall starting from relegation to the events on and off the field that have followed. For me it's Wilde and the Gang of Four Mercenaries that come out of it the worse. I also note and I'm greatly encouraged that Crouch is coming out and telling ALL supporters to get behind the youngsters, that they are playing well and need our backing. It's not Lowe, Wilde and Crouch who have the biggest ego's and driving us into oblivion, but it is the ego's of those who stay away and don't get behind the smashing bunch of lads that "the Club" has assembled together. Unlike past statements by each of the Gang of Three I don't think Crouch's statement is out of place with what he has to say today. "United we stand and divided we bloody well fall, and will fall fast." Spot on Art. Like you I have never been Crouch's greatest supporter, and he come out with a restrained response to some absolutely appalling accusations from Lowe and Wilde in the plc annual statement. He may be naive in some ways, that was always my fear about him, hence why he had others around who were more astute at running the plc (I still regret the departure of Lee Hoos who was the one man that Wilde brought in who actually had some skill that we could do with now). But the bottom line is that Crouch will not allow the presence of Lowe and Wilde to stop him supporting the club, both in person and, unlike Lowe, financially through sponsorship from his own business. He is willing to forsake some of his money (and indeed already has) while Nero continues to fiddle trying to save a few of his precious pounds rather than find a way of making the club successful. I fully epect Crouch to say nothing further, but his response was reasonable and measured. And in the end, he is urging supporters to get behind the team, which is what everyone wants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon Mockles Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 (edited) I find it odd that Crouch chooses to speak out just when Saints are possibly putting together a little unbeaten run and look as though they may be starting to get it together on the field. Or, he didn't have a hidden agenda and was merely responing to one snidey comment too many from Messrs Lowe and Wilde! Edited 3 December, 2008 by Gordon Mockles typo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr X Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 crouch has his faults but IMO cares more about the club than the other two clowns, not gonna happen but If the stay away fans did return and we were regularly exceeding 20,000 gates would Lowe and Wilde still sell our key players anyway? my guess is yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slickmick Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 crouch has his faults but IMO cares more about the club than the other two clowns, not gonna happen but If the stay away fans did return and we were regularly exceeding 20,000 gates would Lowe and Wilde still sell our key players anyway? my guess is yes Question is would Crouch ? My guess would be yes also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 LC is putting up an honourable defence and he looks to care a great deal. It is his right to answer to the other things said. It is a shame that the wounds have been opened wider, as his mentioning of NP still being here causes division. If the club did not do his cost cutting he wished for ,why did he not impliment them immediately when he was chairman? He is right that the club needs investment but where that is likely to come from lord knows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 3 December, 2008 Share Posted 3 December, 2008 Question is would Crouch ? My guess would be yes also. Question is would Barclays not be making the demand rather than a decision? My guess is yes also Unless Leon knows where he hid the investors of course Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now