Would you BOYCOTT? Ways to get rid of Lowe and the board

[saint1977]

Absolutely ridiculous Lowe is doing what anyother chairman apart from that well known former successful chairman L Crouch would do.

 

What he is doing is not popular but has to be done so that we can rebuild for the futures

 

Lowe's actions:

 

- Undermine Nigel Pearson in April by denouncing his appointment via the Media with his rentboy Wilde. Just what we needed in a relegation fight.

- Replace Pearson, who didn't win loads of games but got us solid and hard to beat - something we are miles away from now - with a non-league nomark of a manager, however good a player he may have been. Also, if Wotte wasn't good enough for Lowe in 2005, why now?

- Wotton brought in as a good older head - that worked out well didn't it John?

- Brought in lots of poor loan signings and the only decent one has now gone to Watford. One of them may go on to be successful for HMP.

- Daft financial statement that didn't acknowledge the costly overheads Lowe built, not to mention the £8m splurge by his rentboy Mike. I'm no fan of Leon but easier to tell lies and blame him eh Rupert?

- Disgraceful performance at the AGM. Now roundly condemned by MLT today. The fans are fermenting. Matchdays are about to become seriously uncomfortable for Lowe and Askham.

[NickG]

if, for arguements sake, we agreed on a form of protest, in the hope to improve our club, what exactly would your full request be?

 

For example if you take a motion to an EGM you detail exactly what you want, who to go, who to replace them etc.

 

Just feel this is bit of half of a protest at the moment with people knowing things aren't good but not really sure what they are asking for.:confused:

 

genuinely interested, anyone?

[um pahars]

genuinely interested, anyone?

 

OK, let's start with a simple question for you.

 

Do you still support the appointment of Jan?

[NickG]

I would not have replaced NP.

 

Find it hard to judge Jan due to what he has had available to him, recent weeks his interviews have sounded desperate.

 

But the question was what would protest be asking for, I am not saying Lowe should have come back or not but what, if Wilde for instance said ok I will meet fans what are you after? OK Lowe out but what else?

[NickG]

and my question is quite simple!

[um pahars]

I would not have replaced NP.

 

Find it hard to judge Jan due to what he has had available to him, recent weeks his interviews have sounded desperate.

 

But the question was what would protest be asking for, I am not saying Lowe should have come back or not but what, if Wilde for instance said ok I will meet fans what are you after? OK Lowe out but what else?

 

Perhaps I didn't phrase my question right. How about, as we stand today would you like to see Jan step aside?

[NickG]

similar to my views on GB (which proved correct) he is not doing well enough but would only want him to leave if there was a replacement already set up who was better -not an even cheaper option.

 

So you are after protest against Jan?

[um pahars]

similar to my views on GB (which proved correct) he is not doing well enough but would only want him to leave if there was a replacement already set up who was better -not an even cheaper option

 

As we stand here today, do you support Jan staying or going?

 

(Only asking the question again, because I dont think you've answered it. Certainly just by saying you would if there was someone who was better is not answering it, as how would you be able to judge whether or not they would be better, it's totally hypothetical?)

[NickG]

staying.

 

So, my question? the boycott is asking for what?

[um pahars]

staying.

 

So, my question? the boycott is asking for what?

 

In the first instance I would be asking for the majority shareholders to try and secure a more competent and unifying CEO (and PLC Chairman). I would not be averse to someone from within the existing ranks taking on either of these roles, but only an interim basis (e.g. Cowen or Richards respectively), until a suitable appointment is found, but the search for suitable replacements must be swift and honest.

 

On the managerial front I would replace Jan ASAP with a more experienced manager. If it could work for all parties, then I would not be averse to keeping him on in a coaching capacity.

 

As with both of these appointments sometimes you can have a replacement lined up and sometimes you have to go and search for one. To say change should (or could not) happen unless people are lined up for these roles is just nonsense (particularly when you consider you often have to look for a replacement when someone has resigned or been poached against your wishes).

 

Neither are a gaurantee of success as we had Strachan, Poortvliet and Wigley lined up, whereas we went out and searched for Nicholl, Pearson and Sturrock.

 

The same applies for CEO's (have a look at Trevor Birch's employment history to see sometimes he was lined up for new jobs, whilst other times people trawled the available talent before appointing him. Of course when CEO's resign - as Birch has done - clubs have no choice but to trawl the available talent).

[Gemmel]

The same applies for CEO's (have a look at Trevor Birch's employment history to see sometimes he was lined up for new jobs, whilst other times people trawled the available talent before appointing him. Of course when CEO's resign - as Birch has done - clubs have no choice but to trawl the available talent).

 

Most companies have some sort of succession planning, that recognises potential "C" talent within the organisation and keeps tabs on external people who have been identified as having the appropriate skill set, experience etc.

 

I some how doubt lowe has this in place, othan than lowe jnr.

[NickG]

In the first instance I would be asking for the majority shareholders to try and secure a more competent and unifying CEO (and PLC Chairman). I would not be averse to someone from within the existing ranks taking on either of these roles, but only an interim basis (e.g. Cowen or Richards respectively), until a suitable appointment is found, but the search for suitable replacements must be swift and honest.

 

On the managerial front I would replace Jan ASAP with a more experienced manager. If it could work for all parties, then I would not be averse to keeping him on in a coaching capacity.

 

As with both of these appointments sometimes you can have a replacement lined up and sometimes you have to go and search for one. To say change should (or could not) happen unless people are lined up for these roles is just nonsense (particularly when you consider you often have to look for a replacement when someone has resigned or been poached against your wishes).

 

Neither are a gaurantee of success as we had Strachan, Poortvliet and Wigley lined up, whereas we went out and searched for Nicholl, Pearson and Sturrock.

 

The same applies for CEO's (have a look at Trevor Birch's employment history to see sometimes he was lined up for new jobs, whilst other times people trawled the available talent before appointing him. Of course when CEO's resign - as Birch has done - clubs have no choice but to trawl the available talent).

 

whilst I agree that makes sense, as an outsider and not decision maker I am not in that position and fear for the decision making of the board/shareholders -which is why I am concerned about further change -I am concerned that each replacement will be progressively worse!

 

although yours is well reasoned I fear that a lot of the Lowe out (as with anit-Crouch posts) are not particularly well reasoned and are asking for a boycott and not actually sure what they want -apart from Lowe to go -but with no idea of who or how they want him replaced. Its very well saying there are a lot of good cEOs out there (whether football experience is beneficial or not is another arguement) but who will be selecting Lowe's replacement? - the shareholders, currently Wilde having the major say. Wilde wanted Hone and then Lowe - so what makes people so confident that if they do drive Lowe out (which I don't think for a minute they will) Wilde will have a great replacement?

 

Worth remembering the Lowe totally ignored all protests last time, didn't even go when a great number of shareholders turned against him, only when it was totally forced by Crouch's shareholding -and despite this lacking of popularity he came back.

I am not defeatist, but really do not see a boycott effecting Lowe's resolve, nor it forcing other shareholders into action. So why make this club even more of a negative embaressment?

[ALWAYS_SFC]

staying.

 

So, my question? the boycott is asking for what?

 

Oh dear!!

 

You are clearly blinkered...

[um pahars]

whilst I agree that makes sense, as an outsider and not decision maker I am not in that position and fear for the decision making of the board/shareholders -which is why I am concerned about further change -I am concerned that each replacement will be progressively worse!

 

The problem is that I and many others fear for the decision making of the current set up.

 

And as for getting worse, well quite frankly I reckon you would find it very hard to get much worse than what we are currently lumbered with.

 

although yours is well reasoned I fear that a lot of the Lowe out (as with anit-Crouch posts) are not particularly well reasoned and are asking for a boycott and not actually sure what they want -apart from Lowe to go -but with no idea of who or how they want him replaced.

 

I have to say that I think you and many others are rather insulting when you continue to class all those who are against Lowe as being rabid, not well reasoned, not knowing what they want etc etc etc.

 

I think you'll find that a good many fans out there have a very good idea of what is right and what is wrong, and although they may all be armchair managers/chairmen, I think it is obvious to the vast majority that as we stand, things just aren't working.

 

And it's not up to the supporters to be headhunting replacements or to be told that they must have a replacement lined up before their opinion is deemed valid enough to be heard.

 

Firstly, as I pointed out, there are occasions where you have to go and seek out talent, and secondly it's not our job to go and seek out that talent.

 

Its very well saying there are a lot of good cEOs out there (whether football experience is beneficial or not is another arguement) but who will be selecting Lowe's replacement? - the shareholders, currently Wilde having the major say. Wilde wanted Hone and then Lowe - so what makes people so confident that if they do drive Lowe out (which I don't think for a minute they will) Wilde will have a great replacement?

 

And as I said to Buctootim, I accept it won't be easy and that it might be fraught with egos and battles, but I fear we have no choice than to ask the major shareholders from all sides to sit down and sort out a replacement for both Lowe and Jan. Perhaps someone independent to all the groups could play some sort of a mediating role (Salz???).

 

Saying it's too difficult as we slide in to the third division is just defeatist IMHO. I would much rather people said we need to give the current regime time, as at least that strategy has some balls about it (even if I personally think it's madness). Just saying it would be too difficult is being defeatist.

 

Worth remembering the Lowe totally ignored all protests last time, didn't even go when a great number of shareholders turned against him, only when it was totally forced by Crouch's shareholding -and despite this lacking of popularity he came back. I am not defeatist, but really do not see a boycott effecting Lowe's resolve, nor it forcing other shareholders into action. So why make this club even more of a negative embaressment?

 

Lowe may be oblivious, thick skinned and obstinate but I think other shareholders and perhaps more importantly major players, such as creditors or the bank, may sit up and take notice if money falls from the top line due to fans protests.

[Topcat]

We are 8 weeks away from March and the start of ST renewals. A boycott of that will remove Lowe.

 

Now all it needs is for the Saints Trust to step forward and lead the fight......

 

Problem is, they seem to think life is ok with Lowe.

[NickG]

We are 8 weeks away from March and the start of ST renewals. A boycott of that will remove Lowe.

 

Now all it needs is for the Saints Trust to step forward and lead the fight......

 

Problem is, they seem to think life is ok with Lowe.

 

thats the sort of thing that would make them listen -however it would have to be a huge percentage or it will just be seen as a natural drop. As only 60% on here want to boycott a game (guess more militant crowd) doubt it would get enough support

[Amesbury Saint]

Are we going to have a good shout against Lowe tomorrow?

 

I still think we should walk down to concourse after 15 minutes and return at 30, thereafter support the team.

[CB Fry]

if, for arguements sake, we agreed on a form of protest, in the hope to improve our club, what exactly would your full request be?

 

For example if you take a motion to an EGM you detail exactly what you want, who to go, who to replace them etc.

 

Just feel this is bit of half of a protest at the moment with people knowing things aren't good but not really sure what they are asking for.:confused:

 

 

Seriously, Lowe out. I don't think a boycott needs much more than that. This isn't the People's Front of Judea. We don't need a manifesto on parchment to get going.

 

Anyone who reads my post history would know typically I'm not someone who thinks "anyone but Lowe" would be so much better, but now, in 2009, anyone but Lowe would be so much better.

 

A boycott/protest etc to remove Lowe (which very quickly would rid us of the worst manager in the top four divisions pretty quick too) is fine. I am gutted that Forest have taken Billy Davies who would have taken the Saints job any day of the week minus Lowe.

 

Lance the boil, get him out and lets try not to get relegated.

[Saint 76er]

Seriously, Lowe out. I don't think a boycott needs much more than that. This isn't the People's Front of Judea. We don't need a manifesto on parchment to get going.

 

Anyone who reads my post history would know typically I'm not someone who thinks "anyone but Lowe" would be so much better, but now, in 2009, anyone but Lowe would be so much better.

 

A boycott/protest etc to remove Lowe (which very quickly would rid us of the worst manager in the top four divisions pretty quick too) is fine. I am gutted that Forest have taken Billy Davies who would have taken the Saints job any day of the week minus Lowe.

 

Lance the boil, get him out and lets try not to get relegated.

 

Good post, sums up the frustration of most Saints supporters I should think.

 

Yes, it really has got to the stage of SFC needing to be rid of Lowe before good things can start to happen again. We all know that no decent manager would contemplate this job whilst Lowe is here.

 

We really are a laughing stock in the football world thanks to Lowe and therefore his departure would immediately give us some dignity back regardless of his replacement. Lowe out NOW is so imperative that things like succession plans, quite frankly, can be sorted after the event. This may not be the normal case, but we long since left normalcy behind and sheer desperation beckons if this club IMO is to be saved from ruination by a dictator who has simply lost the plot.

 

Yes, it is time for protests and boycotts because Lowe feeds on inaction from his opponents. Why do you think he has so many PR operatives on here trying to persuade everyone to sit tight and do nothing? Lowe will not leave until his departure is forced upon him.

 

In any event I'm not sure the 'who will replace him' line stacks up as Crouch would likely step straight into any power vacuum left by Lowe and his people or they will have sold their shares to a third party who would then assume control. I think most of us are past caring who that may be so long as his/her name is NOT Rupert Lowe....

[Johnny Bognor]

seriously, lowe out. I don't think a boycott needs much more than that. This isn't the people's front of judea. We don't need a manifesto on parchment to get going.

 

Anyone who reads my post history would know typically i'm not someone who thinks "anyone but lowe" would be so much better, but now, in 2009, anyone but lowe would be so much better.

 

A boycott/protest etc to remove lowe (which very quickly would rid us of the worst manager in the top four divisions pretty quick too) is fine. I am gutted that forest have taken billy davies who would have taken the saints job any day of the week minus lowe.

 

Lance the boil, get him out and lets try not to get relegated.

 

 

Spot On

Edited 4 January, 2009 by Johnny Bognor

[Iowsaintsfan]

Are we going to have a good shout against Lowe tomorrow?

 

I still think we should walk down to concourse after 15 minutes and return at 30, thereafter support the team.

 

 

I heard a swing low just before full time in the itchen!

[SFC Forever]

There could be another way to move us forward. If we could have a massive turnout that waited till time of kick off to gain entry. The game would have to be held up in the need for Health and safety of us the fans. Sheffield Utd game is far enough away to get it organised and would show the board that we mean business.

Living in Salisbury as I do I would be prepared to use my car for the benefit of any fans in the area who could miss the last bus etc due to the delay we cause. Others could do a similar thing to help the cause.

The delay we cause which in theory could put the game back an hour would not be appreciated by the football authorities or the opposition. With the publicity we would have to use for the benefit of away supporters it is possible that some United fans could decide not to bother coming so far. We could all take our time entering the ground and if someone could get some cards printed for fans to sign stating their determination to boycott the next game we could have a double whammy.

The first step with some refining would cost our club less than a boycott but the boycott could be used at the next home game. With or without a mass demo.

I am a man who does not like a fight unless my family is threatened. The club is in my blood and we have to fight to save our club before it is to late. Thoughts good or bad welcomed.

[saintalan]

I am not anti Doncaster and it was a nice gesture for them to give us a picture of a train, however, I'm sure like a lot of other supporters I feel aggrieved ( as a small shareholder also) that RL could only find one place to put it, by replacing the LM/FA cup picture.

 

For those good at organising, would you think it a good idea (copyright allowing?) for a protest, to have all willing supporters hold up a picture of the LM/FA cup picture at the Donny match. Most people probably have or have access to a PC and printer.

 

Not exactly a strong anti Lowe protest but just a thought.

[timbatop]

Utter nonsense and no more justified than stating that "not to change now means certain relegation".

 

In fact, given one home win in half a season, I would say it is very much less justified.

 

"Every time the club faces a crisis the rally call is "sack the board"". No it isn't. It wasn't when the club faced a final day relegation decider last season. If it helps you to try and dismiss the manifestly fair derision that the current regime faces then continue to believe that though.

 

'manifestly fair derision that the current regime faces'.... and every other regime faces, because people on this board will clearly be negative about any regime... oh - other than our great saviour Wilde - great call!

 

The sad fact is that our current problems are far greater than any board can deal with: a fundamental mismatch between revenues in the Championship & the costs of St Mary's & running an even half-way respectable team. Only a significant cash infusion will save us from that problem... we could have Steve Jobs or Peter Kenyon or anyone else in charge of the business side, but until we get the cash - nothing is likely to be different.

 

All this moaning about firing Pearson is completely futile... the fact is we couldn't afford him or his well-paid journeymen squad.

 

We dont have the money. We dont have the money. Stop moaning about ifs and buts.

[CB Fry]

'manifestly fair derision that the current regime faces'.... and every other regime faces, because people on this board will clearly be negative about any regime... oh - other than our great saviour Wilde - great call!

 

The sad fact is that our current problems are far greater than any board can deal with: a fundamental mismatch between revenues in the Championship & the costs of St Mary's & running an even half-way respectable team. Only a significant cash infusion will save us from that problem... we could have Steve Jobs or Peter Kenyon or anyone else in charge of the business side, but until we get the cash - nothing is likely to be different.

 

All this moaning about firing Pearson is completely futile... the fact is we couldn't afford him or his well-paid journeymen squad.

 

We dont have the money. We dont have the money. Stop moaning about ifs and buts.

 

 

It is not a "fact" we couldn't afford Pearson. Of course we could.

 

We could afford Pearson. We could afford Pearson. Stop making up shi te.

 

And we are no more financially poor than Blackpool, or Barnsley or Plymouth, all of which sit above in the table without the need for "Steve Jobs or Peter Keynon" at the helm.

 

Running a club on a shoestring is not that difficult, but its a hell of a lot harder when the idiot in charge of it replaces a decent promising manager we could afford to keep with a no mark no hoper from the Dutch semi pro leagues.

 

Lots can be different with someone else in charge and not a penny more in the bank.

 

A decent manager and a decent squad blending some youth and some experience and organised by a manager with a degree of experience and ability - Pearson, Cotterill, Holloway, Davies as was available, Dowie, Adams, Tilson etc etc.

 

None of those managers are dream appointments for me but all of them are better than the berk from Dutch park football we have in charge now.

[70's Mike]

It is not a "fact" we couldn't afford Pearson. Of course we could.

 

We could afford Pearson. We could afford Pearson. Stop making up shi te.

 

And we are no more financially poor than Blackpool, or Barnsley or Plymouth, all of which sit above in the table without the need for "Steve Jobs or Peter Keynon" at the helm.

 

Running a club on a shoestring is not that difficult, but its a hell of a lot harder when the idiot in charge of it replaces a decent promising manager we could afford to keep with a no mark no hoper from the Dutch semi pro leagues.

 

Lots can be different with someone else in charge and not a penny more in the bank.

 

A decent manager and a decent squad blending some youth and some experience and organised by a manager with a degree of experience and ability - Pearson, Cotterill, Holloway, Davies as was available, Dowie, Adams, Tilson etc etc.

 

None of those managers are dream appointments for me but all of them are better than the berk from Dutch park football we have in charge now.

 

Good last paragraph.

[um pahars]

All this moaning about firing Pearson is completely futile... the fact is we couldn't afford him or his well-paid journeymen squad.

 

Absolute rubbish.

 

Pearson was easily affordable and when you consider that the manager is the single most important person at any Club it is a total false economy to go for the cheap option.

 

WE COULD HAVE AFFORDED PEARSON!

 

As for his liking for a journeyman squad, here are some words from Pearson, which make it clear that he was aware of the financial constraints he would have to work under, but how he still felt he could improve the team:

 

 

"It will be a combination. The reality is there will be comings and goings, there is no doubt about that.

 

Economics will play a part and there will be some natural wastage as players come to the end of their contracts. Then it will be a case of finding players who fit the bill.

 

We need a side capable of getting success but which fits in with the financial situation. But we are not going to be splashing fortunes on players.

 

Even in the short time I have been here, I have been looking to see if we can get players on loan. Short-term is the immediate priority but I am looking long-term too."

 

He was also up for using the Academy and the youth players in the future.

 

 

"A lot of my background is working with youngsters. I worked with the England youth teams for three years and I see the Academy as a massive part of the club.

 

I have worked at clubs where the academy and first-team are separate entities and not integrated at all and those clubs are the poorer for it.

 

If you put the right effort into recruiting and developing the right players then it can save the club a lot of money on transfer fees."

 

 

The decision to sack Pearson and replace him with Poortvliet was a massive, massive, massive mistake and one that is hitting us on the pitch with lost points and hitting us off the pitch with lost fans in the stands and lost pounds in the bank.

Edited 5 January, 2009 by um pahars

[NickG]

I believe Lowe had his heart set on this set up and would have been something major for him to change his mind, e.g. NP winning most games and not wanting big salary.

 

Bottom line, in an attempt to close the money arguement;)WE DO NOT KNOW if we could afford him, none of us really know the financial situation and none of know the salary he was asking nor whether he had any backroom staff demands

[um pahars]

I believe Lowe had his heart set on this set up

 

And that's where you should have ended your post!!!!!!!!

 

This was a footballing decision, pure and simple and to think otherwise is ridiculous.

[NickG]

my guess is that he thought it would be better system AND cheaper - is that such a ridiculous guess?

[um pahars]

my guess is that he thought it would be better system AND cheaper - is that such a ridiculous guess?

 

that he thought it would be better is not a problem for me. If that's what he thought, then as the man in charge that's up to him and he will be judged by its success or failure.

 

But I don't get the cheaper bit.

 

I bet the disparity between Wotte/Poortvliet and Pearson isn't that much. Even if it is a six figure sum (and I dont think it's even that big), then in the grand scheme of things that's not a lot to ensure you've got the best man.

 

And there is nothing in anything that Pearson has ever said to suggest that he was not willing to play the youngsters, nor that he was not willing to lose some of the higher paid earners (see the comments from him above).

 

He was acutely aware of the financial constraints he would have to operate under and I quite frankly if Lowe held the purse strings, then he would have no other option but to work to his budgets.

[70's Mike]

that he thought it would be better is not a problem for me. If that's what he thought, then as the man in charge that's up to him and he will be judged by its success or failure.

 

But I don't get the cheaper bit.

 

I bet the disparity between Wotte/Poortvliet and Pearson isn't that much. Even if it is a six figure sum (and I dont think it's even that big), then in the grand scheme of things that's not a lot to ensure you've got the best man.

 

And there is nothing in anything that Pearson has ever said to suggest that he was not willing to play the youngsters, nor that he was not willing to lose some of the higher paid earners (see the comments from him above).

 

He was acutely aware of the financial constraints he would have to operate under and I quite frankly if Lowe held the purse strings, then he would have no other option but to work to his budgets.

 

nothing to do with purse strings, rupert just wants to pull ALL THE STRINGS.

only fly in the ointment has been that it has not worked, if it had he would have been leading the pre game warm ups by now

[Mole]

Lowe sacked (sorry didn't renew Pearsons contract) because:

 

a) he wanted to get one over Crouch and McMenemy.

 

b) becaused he couldn't tolerate Perason doing well and Crouch/LM getting the praise instead of him.

 

c) he wanted a desperate yes man manager who would roll over and implement Lowes imbalanced strategy.

 

As Lawrie McMenemy says Lowe is "pompous, arrogant and ignorant of football matters"

[NickG]

that he thought it would be better is not a problem for me. If that's what he thought, then as the man in charge that's up to him and he will be judged by its success or failure.I think its long been his masterplan!

 

But I don't get the cheaper bit.it's been widely stated and Lowe is arrogant enough to say he thought Jan would be better and that would justify it enough in his eyes don't think he would have made up cheaper to satisfy lunatic fringe

 

I bet the disparity between Wotte/Poortvliet and Pearson isn't that much. Even if it is a six figure sum (and I dont think it's even that big), then in the grand scheme of things that's not a lot to ensure you've got the best man.would agree with you here - but difficult as we are all guessing the figures, and if he thought Jan would be better you wouldn't pay a penny more for a worse product

 

And there is nothing in anything that Pearson has ever said to suggest that he was not willing to play the youngsters, nor that he was not willing to lose some of the higher paid earners (see the comments from him above).no, but don't know whether they spoke at all?? Can't remember a lot of youth playing under him

 

He was acutely aware of the financial constraints he would have to operate under and I quite frankly if Lowe held the purse strings, then he would have no other option but to work to his budgets.again true

 

as above. Bottom lines for me

1) we do not know how much more expensive NP would have been and whether his demands were too high

2) Lowe would probably gone with his experiment even if they were the same!

3) NP was no WGS or Hoddle for us, but we should have kept him if we could!

[NickG]

Lowe sacked (sorry didn't renew Pearsons contract) because:

 

a) he wanted to get one over Crouch and McMenemy.

 

b) becaused he couldn't tolerate Perason doing well and Crouch/LM getting the praise instead of him.

 

c) he wanted a desperate yes man manager who would roll over and implement Lowes imbalanced strategy.

 

As Lawrie McMenemy says Lowe is "pompous, arrogant and ignorant of football matters"

Think it is really sad how an icon is coming across over this.

[NickG]

sorry icon being Lawrie not Stanley!

[Mole]

Think it is really sad how an icon is coming across over this.

 

LM is saying what every Saints fan is saying except you and few other oddballs that post on here.

[NickG]

no he is getting his wife to sulk at a meeting and carrying a picture around under his arm.

 

several people I have spoken to think its a shame how personal and bitter he is.

 

slag off lowe about manager appointments, failure to invest but this picture -embarrassing and worse than my kids

[Mole]

as above. Bottom lines for me

1) we do not know how much more expensive NP would have been and whether his demands were too high

2) Lowe would probably gone with his experiment even if they were the same!

3) NP was no WGS or Hoddle for us, but we should have kept him if we could!

 

Is this guy another version of saint marc aka mike wilde?

 

http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?p=5999#post5999

[NickG]

lost me:confused:

 

anyway back to UP, think we think much the same on this -only thing I was saying is we cannot say salary wasn't a factor as we don't know the facts -but I also agree he would have done it anyway.

[um pahars]

-only thing I was saying is we cannot say salary wasn't a factor as we don't know the facts -

 

Come off it.

 

You don't need to know the full details of the comparable packages to get a good gut feel on this one. If we were only ever dealing in facts, then nothing would ever be discussed on here.

 

But as you say he would have done it anyway and money was not the motivator, a new footballing strategy was. A strategy that Lowe will have to stand or fall by.

[Mole]

But as you say he would have done it anyway and money was not the motivator, a new footballing strategy was. A strategy that Lowe will have to stand or fall by.

 

Cue the usual drivel about us having to play kids because we couldn't afford a balanced side.

[Popester]

We have got to get Lowe out !

 

The Rudi Skacel story is the last straw! Our club is a laughing stock.

 

Remember the Ipswich home game when the whole ground protested to get him out - We need to do that again at the Doncaster home game.

 

We need a revolution and we need it now. Not sure what the alternative will be but let's get the f****r OUT

[St. Jason]

We have got to get Lowe out !

 

The Rudi Skacel story is the last straw! Our club is a laughing stock.

 

Remember the Ipswich home game when the whole ground protested to get him out - We need to do that again at the Doncaster home game.

 

We need a revolution and we need it now. Not sure what the alternative will be but let's get the f****r OUT

 

I agree 100%, the only problem i see is if Doncaster beat us you can see all the spin now cant you "how do you expect our youngster to perform against a back drop like that" funny though isn't it, the fans have supported the team pretty well yet only 1 home win!!!

[Popester]

That's a good point but we need a plan - Maybe the white hankie approach might be worth a shout ! We can't allow it to go on any longer.

[Saintrowe]

I agree 100%, the only problem i see is if Doncaster beat us you can see all the spin now cant you "how do you expect our youngster to perform against a back drop like that" funny though isn't it, the fans have supported the team pretty well yet only 1 home win!!!

 

I agree, but do it before,and at half time and the final whistle. but support the boys 110% during the game it cannot affect them then.

 

But then again i could be wrong?

[St. Jason]

I agree, but do it before,and at half time and the final whistle. but support the boys 110% during the game it cannot affect them then.

 

But then again i could be wrong?

 

you know your right big man, but you and I both know Lowe will still spin it!

 

Ps: No point doing it unless lowe can hear it, so needs to be done during the game.

 

Pps. Half time is also no good, how would i get a pint!

[Saintrowe]

you know your right big man, but you and I both know Lowe will still spin it!

 

Ps: No point doing it unless lowe can hear it, so needs to be done during the game.

 

Pps. Half time is also no good, how would i get a pint!

 

 

The press and TV would pick up on it, also do the white hanky while backing the boys.

 

Also you have enough booze in you before the game so on e more is not needed , and i heard you were on the red wine??:smt044 poof!!

[St. Jason]

The press and TV would pick up on it, also do the white hanky while backing the boys.

 

Also you have enough booze in you before the game so on e more is not needed , and i heard you were on the red wine??:smt044 poof!!

 

I had a pint, a bottle of magners and a red wine, didn't do much work yesterday!!

[saint1977]

I recall how effective the red cards were against Branfoot at the Port Vale FA Cup game. White hankies would be useful. Either way, they are items that can go in the pocket easily and the stewards cannot stop them being raised.

 

Whilst the primary focus should be Lowe, let's not forget about Mike Wilde either. 90 minutes solid of singing "Wilde is a Judas" and "Judas sort it out, Judas, Judas sort it out".