Nick Illingsworth - the voice of SFC speaks

[Mole]

Lets nail a few things down from the start of this piece, so there can be no doubt as to my thoughts on several matters.

 

Firstly I dont think it is the fault of the supporters as to the situation that Southampton Football Club finds itself in today, its in this mess not just because of the actions of one man but those of a number of people all of whom have served on the board of the club in the past decade or so.

 

Secondly as I have just said, I dont blame Lowe completely for this mess, but that doesnt mean that I am in any way sticking up for him, I am merely calling it as I see it, I blame Lowe for those things that he is responsible for, not for that which he isnt and i apply that to every other director of Southampton Football Club past and present.

 

So to cover the protests at the Doncaster game, once again I fully support the rights of every supporter to protest against this regime or indeed any regime running the Club, however i do content that there is a place and time for such protests and the timing yesterday was, lets say, not great.

 

I have spoken to a few supporters today and several of them have said the same thing, that when the first Doncaster goal went in it was the final straw and that was why the fans turned so quickly, I dont buy that, the team is on the back of a victory at Barnsley and a credible home draw with Reading, when Forest scored a month ago at St Mary's I could have concurred with it being the straw that broke the camels back, coming after a string of defeats, but until that Doncaster goal the form for the past two games has been good and with 45 minutes of the game left we still had every chance to get back in the game and a win would have dragged us out of the relegation zone, the time for protesting was after the game not in the middle of it.

 

But I do understand what supporters are feeling and their frustrations, however its difficult to see what can be changed in the short term, of course the ideal thing would be for the major shareholders to all get together and work towards getting the club on an even keel, but the blunt facts is that all of them are glazed over with hatred for those in the other camp and are past the stage of putting the Club before their own agendas.

 

That being the case there are only two ways for lwoe to leave the club, that is to be bought out by other shareholders or a complete and utter takeover, fact is the latter is the only truly workable option, it needs a complete change within the club no more no less, last season we were on the very brink of disaster, in some respects it would have been better for Lowe that we were relegated, fans would have blamed Crouch & Pearson and he could have then came in with no real alternative options, luckily we didnt go down, meaning that we find ourselves with the same old boardroom arguments.

 

Personally Im sick of it and change has to be made, but make no mistake unless we want to go on repeating the last couple of seasons endlessly we need that change to be drastic, with no director curent or past involved with the club.

 

But if there are no buyers out there how can we move forward, simply speaking it would only be possible if Lowe, Crouch & Wilde agreed to work together on the PLC board, but did not involve themselves with the day to day running of the fotball club, that would mean appointing a Chief Executive to be responsible for the day to day running of the club, reporting back to the major shareholders on the PLC Board, I reiterate, Lowe, Crouch & Wilde would then have no say in running the club, appointing managers or signing players, all they would be responsible for would be appointing this Chief Executive, setting him a budget and then monitoring his performance to ensure he was doing his job properly.

 

OK for some supporters it wouldnt be the total removal of Lowe from Saints, but it would remove him from the day to day running of the Club and accusations of interference.

 

If supporters want to protest they need to do it with a united front and before and after games, not during, this was the tactics during the Branfoot protests of 93/94 and it worked well on several fronts, firstly it focused the fans on the true targets and secondly the energy unleashed in support of the team won us several points that really mattered come the end of the season long after Branfoot had gone, it meant that Alan Ball had a base to build on, surely we want that today, we may want the removal of Lowe and the rest and ultimately a takeover, but do we want to be so far behind if and when it happens that relegation is a certainty.

 

The Saints Trust offfers fans a central point to rally round, the aim of the Trust is to encourage fans ownership in the Club, although you dont need to be a shareholder to join, I have said this many times, but if every season ticket holder and member had ticked the box on the season ticket renewal forms last season and joined the Trust then we would now own a nice chunk of the club, however if we scroll back three year to the trust formation and the departure of Lowe, if for the past three years 20,000 Saints fans, roughly half the data base had joined then, at a rough estimate using the share price over th past year we would now on behalf of the supporters own 10% of the Club, enough to tip the balance of power.

 

The real message here is supporters can really change things, we have missed a big opportunity, but we have a chance to rectify it.

 

I dont blame Lowe completely for this mess

 

Big suprise there Nick.

 

i do content that there is a place and time for such protests and the timing yesterday was, lets say, not great.

 

Like we give a **** what you think.

 

 

I have spoken to a few supporters today and several of them have said the same thing, that when the first Doncaster goal went in it was the final straw and that was why the fans turned so quickly, I dont buy that

 

Of course you don't Nick, you are god.

 

the time for protesting was after the game not in the middle of it.

 

Do shut up.

 

I do understand what supporters are feeling and their frustrations

 

You don't understand the feeling amongst the fanbase.

 

I reiterate, Lowe, Crouch & Wilde would then have no say in running the club, appointing managers or signing players, all they would be responsible for would be appointing this Chief Executive, setting him a budget and then monitoring his performance to ensure he was doing his job properly.

OK for some supporters it wouldnt be the total removal of Lowe from Saints, but it would remove him from the day to day running of the Club and accusations of interference.

 

It would not remove any of them from accusations of interference you fool.

 

If supporters want to protest they need to do it with a united front and before and after games, not during

 

Like we give a **** what you think.

 

The Saints Trust offfers fans a central point to rally round

 

I don't think so.

[Master Bates]

Nick's spelling gets worse and worse.

[alpine_saint]

Illingsworth is a busted flush. His credibility is shot to pieces. No-one takes him seriously anymore. He is completely biased to the current regime.

 

His post-Doncaster articles have been his worst yet, and he even tried to plug the Trust at the end of one of them.

[Wade Garrett]

He is nothing more than a Lowe apologist.

 

Saints Trust my arse.

[JohnnyFartPants]

I dont blame Lowe completely for this mess

 

Big suprise there Nick.

 

i do content that there is a place and time for such protests and the timing yesterday was, lets say, not great.

 

Like we give a **** what you think.

 

 

I have spoken to a few supporters today and several of them have said the same thing, that when the first Doncaster goal went in it was the final straw and that was why the fans turned so quickly, I dont buy that

 

Of course you don't Nick, you are god.

 

the time for protesting was after the game not in the middle of it.

 

Do shut up.

 

I do understand what supporters are feeling and their frustrations

 

You don't understand the feeling amongst the fanbase.

 

I reiterate, Lowe, Crouch & Wilde would then have no say in running the club, appointing managers or signing players, all they would be responsible for would be appointing this Chief Executive, setting him a budget and then monitoring his performance to ensure he was doing his job properly.

OK for some supporters it wouldnt be the total removal of Lowe from Saints, but it would remove him from the day to day running of the Club and accusations of interference.

 

It would not remove any of them from accusations of interference you fool.

 

If supporters want to protest they need to do it with a united front and before and after games, not during

 

Like we give a **** what you think.

 

The Saints Trust offfers fans a central point to rally round

 

I don't think so.

 

It was his opinion. Better what he wrote than the stupid spastication of the , don't you think?

[stevegrant]

Like we give a **** what you think.

So much so that you went to the trouble of creating a thread and copying and pasting his entire article into it...

[Channon's Sideburns]

I would have probably included the sentences...

 

'With this show of supporter feeling it should indicate to Lowe that his presence in the Boardroom is at best, devisive. The fans have no faith in plans which have proved ill-thought out and unsuccessful - the table rarely lies. For Wilde, it should indicate how poor his business judgement is'.

 

See...easy eh???

[Mole]

So much so that you went to the trouble of creating a thread and copying and pasting his entire article into it...

 

He speaks as chairman of the Saints Trust that has a website claiming 838 members. Nick Illingsworth therefore speaks on behalf of those 838 supposed members. He uses this mandate to elevate himself and his opinions to the local and national media. I have a problem with this even if you don't.

[Mole]

The Saints Trust under Nick Illingsworth should be avoided like the plague for the reasons you have given.

 

On their site it states the board is comprised of:

 

Chairman - Nick Illingsworth

 

Vice-Chairman - Steve Grant

 

Secretary - Bert Curtis

 

Treasurer - James Barnard

 

Membership Secretary - James Jablonski

 

Stephen Godwin

 

Richard Bennett

 

Robin Howard

 

Chris Brown

 

Alan Ediss

 

Paul Radley

 

Is this list how it is, or is it as accurate as the 838 members they claim to have?

 

Out of date by at least a year. I've not been involved for a year, Steve Godwin is the same.

 

This says it all.

[NickG]

I dont blame Lowe completely for this mess

 

Big suprise there Nick.

 

i do content that there is a place and time for such protests and the timing yesterday was, lets say, not great.

 

Like we give a **** what you think.

I have spoken to a few supporters today and several of them have said the same thing, that when the first Doncaster goal went in it was the final straw and that was why the fans turned so quickly, I dont buy that

 

Of course you don't Nick, you are god.

 

the time for protesting was after the game not in the middle of it.

 

Do shut up.

 

I do understand what supporters are feeling and their frustrations

 

You don't understand the feeling amongst the fanbase.

 

I reiterate, Lowe, Crouch & Wilde would then have no say in running the club, appointing managers or signing players, all they would be responsible for would be appointing this Chief Executive, setting him a budget and then monitoring his performance to ensure he was doing his job properly.

OK for some supporters it wouldnt be the total removal of Lowe from Saints, but it would remove him from the day to day running of the Club and accusations of interference.

 

It would not remove any of them from accusations of interference you fool.

 

If supporters want to protest they need to do it with a united front and before and after games, not during

 

Like we give a **** what you think.

 

The Saints Trust offfers fans a central point to rally round

 

I don't think so.

 

you posted it?!

[JohnnyFartPants]

This says it all.

 

Actually this, , shows how limited you are.

[Dan Johnson]

I think in this case Nick is spot on.

 

Many fans blind bitterness towards Lowe, lead them to believe he is the ONLY reason we are in the mess we're in... When he's not the ONLY reason.

 

I'm also convinced that many are now so infatuated with removing Lowe, that they don’t care that these protests could be having a detrimental effect on the team, and by protesting against the team during matches if it contributes to us going down, they don’t really care any more... as long as it results in Lowe leaving.

 

The infighting on Saturday proved that for me.

[aintforever]

The Saints Trust is pointless, the fact that the situation has arrived at how it is without them uttering a word proves this.

 

They do not represent the fans in any shape or form IMO, in fact, they are actively making it harder for change and for the fans as a whole to get their opinion across.

Edited 19 January, 2009 by aintforever

[Mole]

Well you Lowe Luvvies at least have a spokesman now. The Saints Trust represents you so you all may as well join.

[Weston Super Saint]

I think in this case Nick is spot on.

 

Many fans blind bitterness towards Lowe, lead them to believe he is the ONLY reason we are in the mess we're in... When he's not the ONLY reason.

 

I'm also convinced that many are now so infatuated with removing Lowe, that they don’t care that these protests could be having a detrimental effect on the team, and by protesting against the team during matches if it contributes to us going down, they don’t really care any more... as long as it results in Lowe leaving.

 

The infighting on Saturday proved that for me.

 

To be fair the current manager and board room set up is having a far more detrimental affect on the team...

[Channon's Sideburns]

I think in this case Nick is spot on.

 

Many fans blind bitterness towards Lowe, lead them to believe he is the ONLY reason we are in the mess we're in... When he's not the ONLY reason.

 

I'm also convinced that many are now so infatuated with removing Lowe, that they don’t care that these protests could be having a detrimental effect on the team, and by protesting against the team during matches if it contributes to us going down, they don’t really care any more... as long as it results in Lowe leaving.

 

The infighting on Saturday proved that for me.

 

The team have been sh1te for the majority of this season.

We are 2nd from bottom with no signs of hitting ANY form.

Lowe created the problem, came back 'supposedly' to stop the rot and has made it worse.

 

Not shouting for Lowe's removal will not affect the team - in fact they scored once it kicked off. In my view they need to have a kick up the arse, I've had it with the excuses - I think most of them know someone will apologise for them.

 

Explain that one then.

[Roger]

No, people blame lowe because they think he is the main reason for where we are. Supporters pay their money and they have a right to protest if they want to. Christ, no one has given them anything positive to shout about for a long time. It shows they care by protesting. So nick I, if the fans arent aloud to boycott as a protest or cheer for lowe out in the ground, what the hell are they supposed to do to show how they feel?

[trousers]

"luckily we didn't go down, meaning that we find ourselves with the same old boardroom arguments."

 

A contradictory statement?

[Mole]

A selection of comments to Nicks ramblings:

 

Why does there have to be an alternative before we can protest? Really Nick, how much "lower" can Saints fall before it sinks in that Lowe is the cancer that is killing this club? Relegation to League One? Relegation to League Two? You were never shy about getting rid of Branfoot or Lowe the first time? Why are you so anti change now? Did the "donation" from Wilde really buy your soul?

 

Nick, where have you been for the last 10 years ?! Have you not seen, as the rest of us have, what that man has done to our club ? Why do you insist on insulting those who show any passion when it may involve upsetting your mate Rupert. How a person in your position could post such undeserved comments: "The problem is how can Saints move forward, a large section of the support will not let nor give Lowe a chance to try and turn the club round, yet it is hard to see what other options there are." We are not stupid. We know that there aren't a queue of wealthy options out there waiting to step in, but does that mean we have to sit back and let that tosser completely destroy our club and say "well, what other option do we have". He's had chances to put things right, too many. Everytime he's chosen the cheap, no ambition route and we, the club, are paying the price. You'd do well to remember the old saying 'whatch how you treat people on the way up because you'll meet them again on the way down'. I personally can't wait for that day.

 

I knew this piece would end with a promo for the Saints Trust. The Promo should read "Join the Saints trust because we do absolutely nothing, except take hush money from Michael Wilde"

 

This "donation" from Wilde is news to me, can anyone expand on this?

[Give it to Ron]

I think in this case Nick is spot on.

 

Many fans blind bitterness towards Lowe, lead them to believe he is the ONLY reason we are in the mess we're in... When he's not the ONLY reason.

 

I'm also convinced that many are now so infatuated with removing Lowe, that they don’t care that these protests could be having a detrimental effect on the team, and by protesting against the team during matches if it contributes to us going down, they don’t really care any more... as long as it results in Lowe leaving.

 

The infighting on Saturday proved that for me.

 

Sorry Dan that is complete hogwash - there has been total support in the stadium for the manager and team for 12 out of the 14 games - on 2 occasions there has been Lowe out chants maybe 3 but at one they got drowned out.

Has the constant support in the other games seen us win? I do not believe anyone at the ground on Saturday wanted us relegated or to lose.

What happend on Saturday was the final straw that broke the camels back for many supporters due to frustration at forwards and midfield that couldnt hit a cows arse with a banjo and a manager that is so far out of his depth its criminal.

Would there of been any fights if we had a successful manager and team? Were we fighting in the Strachan era...of course not and nor have we on many occasions during Lowes stay but many are now fed up with his abysmal management where everything he touches turns to ****e.

[stevegrant]

He speaks as chairman of the Saints Trust that has a website claiming 838 members. Nick Illingsworth therefore speaks on behalf of those 838 supposed members. He uses this mandate to elevate himself and his opinions to the local and national media. I have a problem with this even if you don't.

At the end of the day, the media always go to him when they want a quote or an interview. That's not his fault - as the chairman of the supporters group with the largest membership, you would expect him to be the first port of call, but - having spoken to a few people I know in local media circles - he's pretty much the only fan who a) has made himself available to the various media outlets, b) is almost always available during the day when said media outlets want interviews, quotes, etc, and c) also has a "position" within a supporters' organisation which (believe it or not) does give credence to the views he expresses.

 

If there were more options who tick those boxes available, there would be a much more varied take on matters. Journalists, by their very nature, are lazy. If they know that 99 times out of 100 an individual will be available to help them fill column inches or TV space, they'll use that individual, because he/she is reliable. Until other fans put themselves forward for it, the media will continue to go to Nick for Saints-related opinions, whether you or I like it or not.

[Master Bates]

Christ, all he's said is he doesn't blame Lowe completely. To me that means in isolation, ie. there are others to blame too, Askham, Wilde, Redknapp, Burley and so on and so on.

 

How can anyone disagree with that?! Must we always be so simplistic that everything must be one persons fault? It's just letting a lot of others get away with their actions.

 

Yet I get the impression as soon as he, or anyone else says such a thing, however rational, most people take it to mean he's sticking up for Lowe and get really angry and abusive. When in reality, he's blatantly not doing so.

 

tbf it is easier when it's only one persons fault as opposed to lots, makes my head hurt.............

[Thedelldays]

agree adrian....

 

it seems the default view that lowe is totally to blame..

 

of course he is a ***** and needs to go but to blame him completely ON HIS OWN spasticated

[bridge too far]

At the end of the day, the media always go to him when they want a quote or an interview. That's not his fault - as the chairman of the supporters group with the largest membership, you would expect him to be the first port of call, but - having spoken to a few people I know in local media circles - he's pretty much the only fan who a) has made himself available to the various media outlets, b) is almost always available during the day when said media outlets want interviews, quotes, etc, and c) also has a "position" within a supporters' organisation which (believe it or not) does give credence to the views he expresses.

 

If there were more options who tick those boxes available, there would be a much more varied take on matters. Journalists, by their very nature, are lazy. If they know that 99 times out of 100 an individual will be available to help them fill column inches or TV space, they'll use that individual, because he/she is reliable. Until other fans put themselves forward for it, the media will continue to go to Nick for Saints-related opinions, whether you or I like it or not.

 

It's up to the individual, but I would have thought that Duncan would have been the best person for the media to approach.

 

Apart from the fact that he's articulate (not saying NI isn't BTW) what Duncan doesn't know about this club probably isn't worth knowing.

 

However, to repeat myself - I guess it's up to him.

[aintforever]

But we all accept we are skint. The main gripe is the way Pearson was sacked and this useless dutch gamble implemented - that is just Lowe's fault.

 

Illingsworth is up Lowe's ass - we all know that. As head of an organisation he should try and get across the fans views not his own distorted agenda. He is abusing his platform IMO.

[Mole]

as the chairman of the supporters group with the largest membership, you would expect him to be the first port of call.

 

It probably does have the largest membership but we don't know because they won't tell us the actual number. 838 it says on the website and you know as well as i do this is as out of date as the rest of the site. If they've got half that number of members i'd be amazed.

 

c) also has a "position" within a supporters' organisation which (believe it or not) does give credence to the views he expresses..

 

But the views he expresses aren't the views of Saints Trust members, they are Nicks views.

 

"I have spoken to a few supporters today and several of them have said the same thing, that when the first Doncaster goal went in it was the final straw and that was why the fans turned so quickly, I dont buy that"

 

People criticise Richard Chorley but he's no different to Illingsworth really is he?

[Frank's cousin]

I dont always agree with Nick, but I dont think he says much wrong here IMHO. And typical on here that the usual suspects come out and give him a kicking simply for trying to provide a balanced response rather than the ignorant band wagon jumping expected of late - 'with us or against us' mantra that seems to be taking over this forum... was that not what f*cked up S4E?

[stevegrant]

It's up to the individual, but I would have thought that Duncan would have been the best person for the media to approach.

 

Apart from the fact that he's articulate (not saying NI isn't BTW) what Duncan doesn't know about this club probably isn't worth knowing.

 

However, to repeat myself - I guess it's up to him.

I guess that would then depend on whether Duncan has made himself available. I know that Nick's job allows him the time to do it at pretty much immediate notice - I don't know if Duncan (or anyone else, for that matter) would have the same flexibility.

[Marsdinho]

Did Nick get jan to write that little speach, it makes about as much sense as jan post match....

 

A touch of the old "chemical ali" about it...

 

Nick, Im afraid that your attempt to get the protests under the Saints Trust umbrella are a bit late in the day. These protests have now gone too far for you or you band of few to have any effect on them. Most people will now do whatever they feel will get the results they want.

[Mole]

I dont always agree with Nick' date=' but I dont think he says much wrong here IMHO. And typical on here that the usual suspects come out and give him a kicking simply for trying to provide a balanced response rather than the ignorant band wagon jumping expected of late - 'with us or against us' mantra that seems to be taking over this forum... was that not what f*cked up S4E?[/quote']

 

With respect Frank if Nick Illigsworth is saying stuff you agree with then he's speaking for the minority.

[Thedelldays]

But the main gripe is the way Pearson was sacked and this useless dutch gamble implemented - that is just Lowe's fault.

 

Illingsworth is up Lowe's ass - we all know that. As head of an organisation he should try and get across the fans views not his own distorted agenda. He is abusing his platform IMO.

thing is..how can you say he is up lowes arse when he is saying that is it NOT all lowes fault and simply just removing lowe wont solve a huge amount that is wrong...

 

that is pretty sensible and rational thinking..

 

I remember years ago when nick mentioned in one of his articles that during singing abide with me at cardiff in 2003..some large bloke was threatening towards him due to nicks (believe it or not) anti-lowe stance then....

 

i think the bloke turned to nick in the ground and said....(so nick reckons)

 

"what do you think of lowe now then you f-ing pr1ck"...

 

and now he is a up lowes arse...he was out of it whilst many of you were still firmly rooted right up there.

 

 

on a personal note..I was at the plymouth friendly in 2004 when sturrock was in charge..the locals hated lowe due to the way that he "poached luggy"..(which he did)...the 1000 or so saints fans took great pleasure in singing "rupert lowes red and white army"...

 

of course...that will all be denied and everyone will say we never poached luggy (when living down here it was painfully obvious we lured him away)...

[slickmick]

I dont blame Lowe completely for this mess

 

Big suprise there Nick. Wilde and Crouch blamless then ?

 

i do content that there is a place and time for such protests and the timing yesterday was, lets say, not great.

 

Like we give a **** what you think.

 

 

I have spoken to a few supporters today and several of them have said the same thing, that when the first Doncaster goal went in it was the final straw and that was why the fans turned so quickly, I dont buy that

 

Of course you don't Nick, you are god.

 

the time for protesting was after the game not in the middle of it.

 

Do shut up.

 

I do understand what supporters are feeling and their frustrations

 

You don't understand the feeling amongst the fanbase. And you do ?

Perhaps you should speak for us all instead.

 

I reiterate, Lowe, Crouch & Wilde would then have no say in running the club, appointing managers or signing players, all they would be responsible for would be appointing this Chief Executive, setting him a budget and then monitoring his performance to ensure he was doing his job properly.

OK for some supporters it wouldnt be the total removal of Lowe from Saints, but it would remove him from the day to day running of the Club and accusations of interference.

 

It would not remove any of them from accusations of interference you fool.

 

If supporters want to protest they need to do it with a united front and before and after games, not during

 

Like we give a **** what you think. Why the WE, this is your opinion so why speak as if your the spokeman of all fans.

 

The Saints Trust offfers fans a central point to rally round

 

I don't think so.

 

What a response. By all means disagree or argue against it, but trying to make a fool out of someone is not big or clever.

[Give it to Ron]

You can't state his opinion is "hogwash", it's an opinion ffs.

 

I don't know if he's right or wrong, but I certainly haven't seen constant support at any of the games I've been to in the last few months. The last 4 of 5 home games I've seen have all been horrible atmospheres actually and I don't doubt it makes it a hell of a lot harder for the players. NO, I AM NOT SAYING THEY'D WIN WITH BETTER SUPPORT OR THAT THEY ARE GOOD ENOUGH, I'm just saying I don't believe the atmosphere helps one bit.

 

Lowe is a tool but to say all our problems are down to him and no-one else is ridiculous.

Well there is a contradiction if ever there was!

OK I missed out an IMO - he expressed his opinion I have mine and now you have yours!

I don't know where you sit at the matches so suggest you move as around my ST (block 34) it has been fine up to this week - OK when we lose its pretty crap but at the start of games there is nothing but pro Saints chants - a lot of Anti Skates but thats it.

This is not the fans fault - the atmoshere is not to blame - its shocking tactics, poor players, lack of technic, game plan and a manager way out of his depth.

I never heard anything at home to Reading but pure support, same against Wednesday - Forest was shocking after the second goal but not before.

Change your seat Adrian you are obviously sat amongst the wrong crowd.

[slickmick]

With respect Frank if Nick Illigsworth is saying stuff you agree with then he's speaking for the minority.

 

 

You really have a high opinion of yourself if you think everyone agrees with you.

[Thedelldays]

What a response. By all means disagree or argue against it, but trying to make a fool out of someone is not big or clever.

 

 

stanley does that...he has been to one game (due to his suppose self ban on sms) and think he knows what the fan base thinks..

 

Im not saying I do but I dont claim to either.

[stevegrant]

But the views he expresses aren't the views of Saints Trust members, they are Nicks views.

So you recognise here that they are his views, rather than those of the Trust, and yet have a go at him because he gets asked his opinion by the media? As far as I'm aware, unless he's been given mandate to do so on the basis of a members' vote, Nick hasn't ever come out and said "The Saints Trust thinks ".

 

He gets quoted by the press as "Nick Illingsworth, chairman of the Saints Trust" because the press like to use "credible" sources as much as possible, as it gives weight to their story. That doesn't mean to say that it's the opinion of that particular organisation.

 

"I have spoken to a few supporters today and several of them have said the same thing, that when the first Doncaster goal went in it was the final straw and that was why the fans turned so quickly, I dont buy that"

He's stated his opinion. What's the big deal?

 

People criticise Richard Chorley but he's no different to Illingsworth really is he?

In what way?

[Mole]

With respect Frank if Nick Illigsworth is saying stuff you agree with then he's speaking for the minority.

 

You really have a high opinion of yourself if you think everyone agrees with you.

 

Of course they don't, but you cannot deny that the vast majority of fans want Lowe Out. The St Marys crowd made that quite clear on Saturday and as the saying goes "you aint seen nothing yet"!

[Snowballs2]

Illingsworth has shown yet again how out of touch with the supporters he is and his trust group. Give it a rest Nick we all know you are a Lowe luvvey

[Weston Super Saint]

Christ, all he's said is he doesn't blame Lowe completely. To me that means in isolation, ie. there are others to blame too, Askham, Wilde, Redknapp, Burley and so on and so on.

 

How can anyone disagree with that?! Must we always be so simplistic that everything must be one persons fault? It's just letting a lot of others get away with their actions.

 

Yet I get the impression as soon as he, or anyone else says such a thing, however rational, most people take it to mean he's sticking up for Lowe and get really angry and abusive. When in reality, he's blatantly not doing so.

 

Adrian.

 

Have you ever heard of the phrase 'the buck stops here'?

 

The man at the top always gets the blame, because ultimately it is his responsibility when things go wrong.

[Give it to Ron]

agree adrian....

 

it seems the default view that lowe is totally to blame..

 

of course he is a ***** and needs to go but to blame him completely ON HIS OWN spasticated

 

That was what annoyed me most on Saturday that there was not one Wilde Out chant and all aimed at one man....the main Judas Coward gets off scot free evertime.

Wilde is as responsible for this mess as Lowe is - he appointed Hone/Dulieu/Hoos and told a pack of lies with his manifesto.....boy did I swallow that hook line and sinker!

[Thedelldays]

That was what annoyed me most on Saturday that there was not one Wilde Out chant and all aimed at one man....the main Judas Coward gets off scot free evertime.

Wilde is as responsible for this mess as Lowe is - he appointed Hone/Dulieu/Hoos and told a pack of lies with his manifesto.....boy did I swallow that hook line and sinker!

because lowe is the long term hate figure..we hated him before and it seems the default opinion (and easy one) to sing about him again..

 

im sure if most fans talked about it they would agree that wilde is a **** too....but for the purpose of a song..lowe is the target and the fact he is far more well known too

[saintinlondon]

I agree with almost all nick is saying here and think, sadly, that your response stanley sums up the misguided views of many of the anti lowe vigilantes. whilst i agree that he has much to answer for and has made some bad calls he is clearly not to blame for everything. to think so is madness but I dont see that as the problem. To me your response to nick's comment about our situation not being entirely lowe's fault highlights the personal hatred towards lowe by many of the fans. To an extent this hatred (although strong) I agree can be justified but it has now become totally irrational and a case of him taking the flak for everything. Your inability to accept any valid points from N I (personal reasons again??) also shows a complete lack of sense on your part and sadly you are not the only one. shame.

[Mole]

People criticise Richard Chorley but he's no different to Illingsworth really is he?

 

In what way?

 

Because SISA have no members - it's RC's platform. The Saints Trust have hardly any members (they won't even give the figure - that's how democratic they are) and it gives Nick Illingsworth an elevated voice.

[aintforever]

thing is..how can you say he is up lowes arse when he is saying that is it NOT all lowes fault and simply just removing lowe wont solve a huge amount that is wrong...

 

that is pretty sensible and rational thinking..

 

I remember years ago when nick mentioned in one of his articles that during singing abide with me at cardiff in 2003..some large bloke was threatening towards him due to nicks (believe it or not) anti-lowe stance then....

 

i think the bloke turned to nick in the ground and said....(so nick reckons)

 

"what do you think of lowe now then you f-ing pr1ck"...

 

and now he is a up lowes arse...he was out of it whilst many of you were still firmly rooted right up there.

 

 

on a personal note..I was at the plymouth friendly in 2004 when sturrock was in charge..the locals hated lowe due to the way that he "poached luggy"..(which he did)...the 1000 or so saints fans took great pleasure in singing "rupert lowes red and white army"...

 

of course...that will all be denied and everyone will say we never poached luggy (when living down here it was painfully obvious we lured him away)...

 

I don't disagree with most of what he says, my problem is he just skirts around the issue - he doesn't even mention Pearson or the Dutch disaster - that is ALL Lowe's fault and why most Saints fans want him strung up - surely as a representative of the fans he should have given it a little mention?

[Weston Super Saint]

I agree with almost all nick is saying here and think, sadly, that your response stanley sums up the misguided views of many of the anti lowe vigilantes. whilst i agree that he has much to answer for and has made some bad calls he is clearly not to blame for everything. to think so is madness but I dont see that as the problem. To me your response to nick's comment about our situation not being entirely lowe's fault highlights the personal hatred towards lowe by many of the fans. To an extent this hatred (although strong) I agree can be justified but it has now become totally irrational and a case of him taking the flak for everything. Your inability to accept any valid points from N I (personal reasons again??) also shows a complete lack of sense on your part and sadly you are not the only one. shame.

 

And rightly so!!

 

He is the man at the top.

 

He is the man who sanctioned ALL the decisions [while in charge], and therefore MUST shoulder the blame for the problems.

 

In any other industry he would have been gone long ago.

[Give it to Ron]

because lowe is the long term hate figure..we hated him before and it seems the default opinion (and easy one) to sing about him again..

 

im sure if most fans talked about it they would agree that wilde is a **** too....but for the purpose of a song..lowe is the target and the fact he is far more well known too

 

Well Lowe is responsible for the inept management we have this year, but Wilde is the alleged football board chairman so his sanctioning of players who have been **** poor also have some bearing here...that is if you believe that Wilde is in governance of that role and not just Lowes puppet.

Like most fans I beleieve there is little we can do to change without money so are left with just voicing our opinions on here and at the ground.

[slickmick]

Of course they don't, but you cannot deny that the vast majority of fans want Lowe Out. The St Marys crowd made that quite clear on Saturday and as the saying goes "you aint seen nothing yet"!

 

 

Your response was hypocritical, you critically suggest that Nick is the voice of the fans and yet you respond with WE.

[Doctoroncall]

From the original article, I thought he was blaming the ST for not doing more to help resolve the situation!

 

ST members (as of oct 08) 320

 

The committee comprises 9 people: Nick Illingsworth, Robin Howard, Jason McFeat, Paul Radders, Bert Curtis, Chris Dodman, Ed Young, Fiona Harrison and James Jablonski.

 

So is someone going to challenge Nick to be the Chair of the ST?

[Mole]

So what's all this about a donation from Wilde?

[Mole]

ST members (as of oct 08 ) 320

 

LOL, if this is correct. That really is pathetic.

 

The committee comprises 9 people: Nick Illingsworth, Robin Howard, Jason McFeat, Paul Radders, Bert Curtis, Chris Dodman, Ed Young, Fiona Harrison and James Jablonski.

 

Robin Howard writes on the ST site and i do agree with a lot of what he says, but it's more like reading a blog than articles for a democratic body that acts on behalf of it's members.

 

With the current situation at the club the ST could quadruple it's membership if it represented fans.