Lies...

[Unbelievable Jeff]

Obviously this has been one of the main criticisms aimed at the board, but I can't remember them actually lying. I thought most of the quotes said that if players left they would be on our terms. There was no evidence of offers prior to Reeds end of season statement etc. Can someone point me towards these lies as I guess I missed them.

[shurlock]

If Lambert's sale wasn't being creative with the truth, I don't know what is.

[ratio_decidendi]

Of course there weren't any lies - just exaggerations and overreactions by many of the members of this board (which is completely natural when following recent events of the club). As I've said in a previous thread, the only substantial criticism you can launch at the board right now is their previous lack of communication. That has now been sorted.

 

EDIT: For example, looking at things completely objectively, one should interpret "there will be no more sales unless it's in the interest of the club" as not closing the door to any transfers. Lambert's subsequent sale does not contradict the above statement. Yet many, simply listening to their knee-jerk emotional reaction (again, a natural thing), decided to lash out at the board. It's a boring process.

Edited 29 July, 2014 by ratio_decidendi

[The9]

There's a reason I transcribed Ralph's SSN comments verbatim on here.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

Of course there weren't any lies - just exaggerations and overreactions by many of the members of this board (which is completely natural when following recent events of the club). As I've said in a previous thread, the only substantial criticism you can launch at the board right now is their previous lack of communication. That has now been sorted.

 

EDIT: For example, looking at things completely objectively, one should interpret "there will be no more sales unless it's in the interest of the club" as not closing the door to any transfers. Lambert's subsequent sale does not contradict the above statement. Yet many, simply listening to their knee-jerk emotional reaction (again, a natural thing), decided to lash out at the board. It's a boring process.

 

Well, exactly. I find it strange how fans can say they don't trust when they haven't been lied to. Perhaps they need to improve their reading and interpretation skills?

[Minty]

Too many people are hearing things without listening, and then interpreting what they hear with their heart, not their head.

 

This is a difficult time, no doubt, and much work needs to be done to bring players in, but the club (Ralph and Ron) have both admitted as much. There haven't been any lies. People have made judgements based on their own misinterpretations.

[InvictaSaint]

Too many people are hearing things without listening, and then interpreting what they hear with their heart, not their head.

 

This is a difficult time, no doubt, and much work needs to be done to bring players in, but the club (Ralph and Ron) have both admitted as much. There haven't been any lies. People have made judgements based on their own misinterpretations.

 

Spot on Minty; the level of emotional maturity on this board is in severe need of elevation.

[Toadhall Saint]

Too many people are hearing things without listening, and then interpreting what they hear with their heart, not their head.

 

This is a difficult time, no doubt, and much work needs to be done to bring players in, but the club (Ralph and Ron) have both admitted as much. There haven't been any lies. People have made judgements based on their own misinterpretations.

 

People also become somewhat word blind when what they are reading doesn't quite match their beliefs. Mind you it doesn't help when quotes are cut mid sentence etc ("blah blah ............ blah") which only adds to the problem.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

Spot on Minty; the level of emotional maturity on this board is in severe need of elevation.

 

I expect a drop off of embarrassing posting for a while, ready to start again when we don't sign the exact players others want.

[St Marco]

"my priority now is to bring some stability and calm to the workings of the club" - KL - Would say things become even more unstable no?

 

 

"We want to retain the players we’ve got. They are all contracted. They all have existing contracts and we intend for them to honour those contracts. Any enquiries we get will probably be met with a ‘no – not for sale’. Our intention is to keep this very good team together and build on it by bringing new players to improve on that." - Les Reed. 5 of those players didn't honour their contracts and were not met with a 'not for sale' were they?

 

"We will tend to develop a squad that’s capable of not just maintaining the position we’re in but improving next season. Therefore, it’s a positive message we want to get out there. I think our fans deserve to understand that there is not going to be a fire-sale here. We have repeatedly said that" - Very positive message, selling your talisman, three of your back four. Your creative midfielder etc. There will be no fire sale. So what do you call selling off potentially 70% of the outfield starters?

 

"However, our intention is to keep all of our core players – I wouldn’t want people to think I’ve just opened the door for transfers, that’s not the case" - - Oh really?

 

"We feel very comfortable that we have a plan that can deal with the situation and we are definitely not factoring in a big player sale," he says. "We're pretty sure that there are no more surprises and that being the case, we feel comfortable that we're going to be good. And that we will be able to keep this group together" - Ralph - Does he mean the group of tea ladies?

 

There are plenty more but I think you get the point.

[The9]

Another one who DOESN'T KNOW WHAT A FIRE SALE IS, FFS.

[St Marco]

Another one who DOESN'T KNOW WHAT A FIRE SALE IS, FFS.

 

Selling the second top assister in the league who also scored 10+ goals for £4m when we supposedly accepted £7m only a few months earlier does not fit your definition of a fire sale?

[Minty]

"my priority now is to bring some stability and calm to the workings of the club" - KL - Would say things become even more unstable no?

Not a lie though.

 

"We want to retain the players we’ve got. They are all contracted. They all have existing contracts and we intend for them to honour those contracts. Any enquiries we get will probably be met with a ‘no – not for sale’. Our intention is to keep this very good team together and build on it by bringing new players to improve on that." - Les Reed. 5 of those players didn't honour their contracts and were not met with a 'not for sale' were they?

We wanted to retain them but the combination of high bids and players wanting these 'short cuts' to Europe going against their way of doing things meant we they were sold. So again, not a lie.

 

"We will tend to develop a squad that’s capable of not just maintaining the position we’re in but improving next season. Therefore, it’s a positive message we want to get out there. I think our fans deserve to understand that there is not going to be a fire-sale here. We have repeatedly said that" - Very positive message, selling your talisman, three of your back four. Your creative midfielder etc. There will be no fire sale. So what do you call selling off potentially 70% of the outfield starters?

Not a fire sale. Getting excellent fees in for players who we agreed to let leave for the above reasons.

 

"However, our intention is to keep all of our core players – I wouldn’t want people to think I’ve just opened the door for transfers, that’s not the case" - - Oh really?

Yes really - again for the reasons about however intentions aren't guarantees. So not a lie.

 

"We feel very comfortable that we have a plan that can deal with the situation and we are definitely not factoring in a big player sale," he says. "We're pretty sure that there are no more surprises and that being the case, we feel comfortable that we're going to be good. And that we will be able to keep this group together" - Ralph - Does he mean the group of tea ladies?

Again, sorry to nitpick, but he is not lying - things may not have worked out how he intended but he didn't lie.

 

As I said before, you need to read what was said, not what you think was said. You've made judgements based on your own misinterpretations. And crucially, even if (I agree) those players leaving is not what we wanted, the club did not lie. And that is the major allegation from some.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

"my priority now is to bring some stability and calm to the workings of the club" - KL - Would say things become even more unstable no?

 

 

"We want to retain the players we’ve got. They are all contracted. They all have existing contracts and we intend for them to honour those contracts. Any enquiries we get will probably be met with a ‘no – not for sale’. Our intention is to keep this very good team together and build on it by bringing new players to improve on that." - Les Reed. 5 of those players didn't honour their contracts and were not met with a 'not for sale' were they?

 

"We will tend to develop a squad that’s capable of not just maintaining the position we’re in but improving next season. Therefore, it’s a positive message we want to get out there. I think our fans deserve to understand that there is not going to be a fire-sale here. We have repeatedly said that" - Very positive message, selling your talisman, three of your back four. Your creative midfielder etc. There will be no fire sale. So what do you call selling off potentially 70% of the outfield starters?

 

"However, our intention is to keep all of our core players – I wouldn’t want people to think I’ve just opened the door for transfers, that’s not the case" - - Oh really?

 

"We feel very comfortable that we have a plan that can deal with the situation and we are definitely not factoring in a big player sale," he says. "We're pretty sure that there are no more surprises and that being the case, we feel comfortable that we're going to be good. And that we will be able to keep this group together" - Ralph - Does he mean the group of tea ladies?

 

There are plenty more but I think you get the point.

 

And as with the debate the other day about asset stripping, you're just not quite getting it. I don't know if you don't like to read the detail, but words like 'want', 'intention', 'probably' so on AREN'T definitives, so this is not lying. I would suggest doing a contract law course or something along those lines, it certainly helped with my critical appraisals of statements.

 

Don't blame the board because you can't read/interpret what was said properly.

[St Marco]

Not a lie though.

We wanted to retain them but the combination of high bids and players wanting these 'short cuts' to Europe going against their way of doing things meant we they were sold. So again, not a lie.

Not a fire sale. Getting excellent fees in for players who we agreed to let leave for the above reasons.

Yes really - again for the reasons about however intentions aren't guarantees. So not a lie.

Again, sorry to nitpick, but he is not lying - things may not have worked out how he intended but he didn't lie.

As I said before, you need to read what was said, not what you think was said. You've made judgements based on your own misinterpretations. And crucially, even if (I agree) those players leaving is not what we wanted, the club did not lie. And that is the major allegation from some.

 

Nit pick away, that's what forums are for!

 

However I disagree. If you tell people your intentions and go the total opposite way then that isn't right. If you told that to shareholders you would be in serious trouble.

 

As I said above Lambert went for less then previously agreed. Isn't that the definition of a fire sale? Either way I think Les meant with that statement many players would not leave. That is my interpretation of it. It would seem the media see it the same way. The words might be different but I believe the intent is the same.

[Bearsy]

Obviously this has been one of the main criticisms aimed at the board, but I can't remember them actually lying. I thought most of the quotes said that if players left they would be on our terms. There was no evidence of offers prior to Reeds end of season statement etc. Can someone point me towards these lies as I guess I missed them.

 

Have you ever told any lies, Sarb?

[shurlock]

What about Lambert's sale - a day or two before Krueger had said the following:

 

We will involve the manager. That is important for everybody to know. That’s why we have been able to not agree to any transfers to date, because we have control of the situation, and anybody who is saying anything else doesn’t understand that we are in a strong position with the Saints

 

Spin it any way you want Dibden, it wasn't particularly clever or confidence-inspiring.

[St Marco]

And as with the debate the other day about asset stripping, you're just not quite getting it. I don't know if you don't like to read the detail, but words like 'want', 'intention', 'probably' so on AREN'T definitives, so this is not lying. I would suggest doing a contract law course or something along those lines, it certainly helped with my critical appraisals of statements.

 

Don't blame the board because you can't read/interpret what was said properly.

 

If you believe that then good for you. I don't.

 

You might want to give Big Adam a call, and those at Sky who said it looked like a fire sale. Maybe you can give them some advice on them misinterpreting those statements too.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

Have you ever told any lies, Sarb?

 

Course I wouldn't lie! How very dare you!

[Unbelievable Jeff]

If you believe that then good for you. I don't.

 

You might want to give Big Adam a call, and those at Sky who said it looked like a fire sale. Maybe you can give them some advice on them misinterpreting those statements too.

 

That's their raison d'etre though, to create hype out of something that isn't happening. If they didn't have that there would be very little news. Have you ever heard of 'sensationalising'? That is what they do and what has happened.

[Dig Dig]

Seems they have been lying about Morgan.

[Minty]

Nit pick away, that's what forums are for!

 

However I disagree. If you tell people your intentions and go the total opposite way then that isn't right. If you told that to shareholders you would be in serious trouble.

 

As I said above Lambert went for less then previously agreed. Isn't that the definition of a fire sale? Either way I think Les meant with that statement many players would not leave. That is my interpretation of it. It would seem the media see it the same way. The words might be different but I believe the intent is the same.

 

Well intentions are one thing but reality can sometimes be another... we have all had intentions that haven't worked out. So yes, I agree that things have not gone as we hoped they would but the crux of the thread and the OP was that some people thought the club had lied... which I do not believe they have.

[Saint Fan CaM]

I simply will not believe a word that man says until we start against Pool with Morgan in the starting line-up and at least 3 decent new starters in the team.

[The9]

Selling the second top assister in the league who also scored 10+ goals for £4m when we supposedly accepted £7m only a few months earlier does not fit your definition of a fire sale?

 

A fire sale is selling damaged goods in volume all at cut down prices to absolutely anyone, not (for instance) selling the antique back to its home for a significant sum.

 

Lambert was the exception anyway, the rest of them went for loads of money (as they were not damaged goods) and all to top sides - I'm actually pleased he went first, imagine if we'd sold him after Lallana and Lovren, might not be looked upon so happily then.

 

If we'd been flogging them all for a fraction of their value to the likes of West Brom and Swansea, THEN it would be a fire sale.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

What about Lambert's sale - a day or two before Krueger had said the following:

 

 

 

Spin it any way you want Dibden, it wasn't particularly clever or confidence-inspiring.

 

That's a better example, for sure. However, I also believe that when negotiating with Koeman he was aware that those 3 initial players would be sold...that is what has been told to us by the club and that he agreed those departures.

[Saint Benali]

And as with the debate the other day about asset stripping, you're just not quite getting it. I don't know if you don't like to read the detail, but words like 'want', 'intention', 'probably' so on AREN'T definitives, so this is not lying. I would suggest doing a contract law course or something along those lines, it certainly helped with my critical appraisals of statements.

 

Don't blame the board because you can't read/interpret what was said properly.

 

So much face palm in here. So you are saying then that when they made those 'intentions' the fans were not supposed to take them to mean players would not be sold, the club would not sell off 7 players (if Morgan and Jay go) and so on? If you interpreted those comments as you say then what is your interpretations of the comments today? If we sell Morgan or Jay what are the get out of jail words in the statement that you will use to defend the sales and say they had not lied?

[Unbelievable Jeff]

Seems they have been lying about Morgan.

 

What about him?

[Unbelievable Jeff]

So much face palm in here. So you are saying then that when they made those 'intentions' the fans were not supposed to take them to mean players would not be sold, the club would not sell off 7 players (if Morgan and Jay go) and so on? If you interpreted those comments as you say then what is your interpretations of the comments today? If we sell Morgan or Jay what are the get out of jail words in the statement that you will use to defend the sales and say they had not lied?

 

Thank you so much for proving my point. Today was an unequivocal statement that both J Rod and Morgan will be at the club September 1st. The first unequivocal statement. If either leave then yes, they have lied. Previously, not so much.

 

As I say, in contract law one of the main things you look at is the intention of the contract. I am sorry, but the intention with those statements was to ensure that if players were sold they were not lying. The fact that a lot of fans didn't pick up on that doesn't surprise me.

Edited 29 July, 2014 by Unbelievable Jeff

[mulletsaint]

What about him?

 

I'd imagine you've seen the other thread by now but if not just have an explore.

 

BTW, saying Chambers was ill the other night looks a bit like a lie to me.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

I'd imagine you've seen the other thread by now but if not just have an explore.

 

BTW, saying Chambers was ill the other night looks a bit like a lie to me.

 

Krueger didn't say that did he?

 

Just seen it. I thought in the Solent interview he said he'd spoken to his agent.

[St Marco]

A fire sale is selling damaged goods in volume all at cut down prices to absolutely anyone, not (for instance) selling the antique back to its home for a significant sum.

 

Lambert was the exception anyway, the rest of them went for loads of money (as they were not damaged goods) and all to top sides - I'm actually pleased he went first, imagine if we'd sold him after Lallana and Lovren, might not be looked upon so happily then.

 

If we'd been flogging them all for a fraction of their value to the likes of West Brom and Swansea, THEN it would be a fire sale.

 

I think there are multiple definitions of what is actually a fire sale. The oxford dictionary also mentions "A sale of goods or assets at a very low price". Now we could argue all we want on what is a really low price or how good a price for xyz player is. But like I said Lambert COULD fall into that definition. That's my opinion. Might be right, might be wrong.

 

But anyhow my point is the comments were meant to reassure fans and that was the 'intent'. It could be seen that we were 'mislead'. Or those of us who interpreted the meaning of the comments in the way I did.

[Whitey Grandad]

Too many people are hearing things without listening, and then interpreting what they hear with their heart, not their head.

 

This is a difficult time, no doubt, and much work needs to be done to bring players in, but the club (Ralph and Ron) have both admitted as much. There haven't been any lies. People have made judgements based on their own misinterpretations.

 

I learnt many years ago that people see what they expect to see and hear what they want to hear.

[The9]

I simply will not believe a word that man says until we start against Pool with Morgan in the starting line-up and at least 3 decent new starters in the team.

 

That's aiming pretty low, I thought we needed 5 new players before we even sold/released any. Now just to break even on league position I want the ones we've lost replaced, plus the ones to improve the side. Targett seems to be a reasonable shout for cover at LB and Reed in midfield, so maybe a couple can be struck off there.

 

So my deluded "improved team" has

 

GK: Boruc, [+New GK], Davis, (Gazzaniga, Cropper)

LB: [+Shaw replacement], Targett

CB: [+Lovren replacement], [+ New CB], Fonte, Yoshida, (Hooiveld, Turnbull, Stephens)

RB: Clyne, [+Chambers replacement]

DM: Scheiderlin, Cork, Wanyama

AM: Tadic [Lallana replacement], [+ New AM], Davis, Ramirez, Ward-Prowse, Reed [Guly replacement] (Isgrove, McQueen)

ST: Pelle [Lambert replacement], Rodriguez, [+New ST], [+Osvaldo replacement], Gallagher, (Mayuka, Sharp, Sinclair, Rowe etc)

 

8 new players from now, minus any academy players integrated that aren't Targett and Reed.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

I think there are multiple definitions of what is actually a fire sale. The oxford dictionary also mentions "A sale of goods or assets at a very low price". Now we could argue all we want on what is a really low price or how good a price for xyz player is. But like I said Lambert COULD fall into that definition. That's my opinion. Might be right, might be wrong.

 

But anyhow my point is the comments were meant to reassure fans and that was the 'intent'. It could be seen that we were 'mislead'. Or those of us who interpreted the meaning of the comments in the way I did.

 

Only Lambert. That would be a sale on one line within a shop. A fire-sale would mean all are for sale at low prices.

[Heisenberg]

My thoughts havent changed on this.

 

I think Ralph did one of his Martin Luther King, Jr. speaches after Mopo left. Probably massively underestimating the players greed and lack of loyalty. I imagine he said "right we are in this together, we will do this the hard way. If your not up for the fight let me know and ill arrange a transfer for you" players immediately went JACKPOT and phoned agents.

 

Ralph seems like an honest chap, i think he just under-estimated our group of players.

 

"Lust and greed are more gullible than innocence."

[shurlock]

That's a better example, for sure. However, I also believe that when negotiating with Koeman he was aware that those 3 initial players would be sold...that is what has been told to us by the club and that he agreed those departures.

 

Wrong - when Krueger made that statement, (May 29) we still hadn't even drawn up a long list of managerial candidates.

 

http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/saints/news/11242017._We_re_aiming_for_Europe____full_interview_with_Saints_chairman_Ralph_Krueger/?ref=mac

 

 

Lallana and Shaw are a different matter. They were sold much later.

 

You seem a bit confused Jeff. Take a break instead of pontificating.

[SaintRobbie]

Obviously this has been one of the main criticisms aimed at the board, but I can't remember them actually lying. I thought most of the quotes said that if players left they would be on our terms. There was no evidence of offers prior to Reeds end of season statement etc. Can someone point me towards these lies as I guess I missed them.

 

Judgment day is 1 Sep. but, I'm sorry but our Board lack integrity and competence.

[Saint Charlie]

Giving the reason Chambers misses the Bmth game as illness was a lie. Pathetic one as the truth came out that night.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

Wrong - when Krueger made that statement, (May 29) we still hadn't even drawn up a long list of managerial candidates.

 

http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/saints/news/11242017._We_re_aiming_for_Europe____full_interview_with_Saints_chairman_Ralph_Krueger/?ref=mac

 

 

Lallana and Shaw are a different matter. They were sold much later.

 

You seem a bit confused Jeff. Take a break instead of pontificating.

 

You didn't put a date on the quote, so I didn't know. As I said it was a good example. However I don't believe that's why people like yourself are spending your days crying into your cornflakes for the lies nasty Southampton are telling you.

[pap]

Judgment day is 1 Sep. but, I'm sorry but our Board lack integrity and competence.

 

It's a movable feast, as we know.

 

http://terminator.wikia.com/wiki/Judgment_Day

 

Top marks to our descendants in the machine controlled future for allowing us a couple more decades of mindless consumption.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

Giving the reason Chambers misses the Bmth game as illness was a lie. Pathetic one as the truth came out that night.

 

Did the board say that? I thought it was Sibley?

[Toon Saint]

Did the board say that? I thought it was Sibley?

 

Feeble. He is the club spokesman.

[Saint_clark]

Well it's clear they lied to someone - either us or Schneiderlin.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

Feeble. He is the club spokesman.

 

I have specifically said 'board'. People are saying they can't trust the board, not that they don't trust Sibley.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

Well it's clear they lied to someone - either us or Schneiderlin.

 

So the story that they told him in the meeting today was untrue then?

[Saint_clark]

So the story that they told him in the meeting today was untrue then?

 

Why would he get so unhappy about that? He was clearly told (or at least was given hints) that he could leave.

[Toon Saint]

I have specifically said 'board'. People are saying they can't trust the board, not that they don't trust Sibley.

 

The two are inextricably linked. No way Sibley said that without directive from the board. He speaks on behalf of the club, that is his job.

[mulletsaint]

Krueger didn't say that did he?

 

Just seen it. I thought in the Solent interview he said he'd spoken to his agent.

 

Your OP seemed to be talking about lies from the club not Kruger specifically.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

Your OP seemed to be talking about lies from the club not Kruger specifically.

 

Board specifically. It even says it in the first sentence to help people out.

 

Either way, these aren't the reems of lies that people on this board would have you think.

[Dig Dig]

I have specifically said 'board'. People are saying they can't trust the board, not that they don't trust Sibley.

 

You don't think that anyone discussed and instructed the club spokesman and the media team on how to handle questions about Chambers absence?

 

It's ok to give it up after making a stupid statement or being proved wrong. You've had enough experience over this summer Jeff. You're having an absolute mare.