Crouch on radio today

[NickG]

saying if he was chairman we would be other end of table, bigger crowds and no financial problems - solent interview

[slickmick]

Bit of a high opinion of himself, but he isn't far off.

If we had him and Pearson still here, I think we would be out of trouble.

[notnowcato]

Nothing like stoking the fire eh??

 

I like him a lot but professionally he leaves a little to be desired.

[skintsaint]

Not sure we would be but IF he did clear the overdraft etc etc like he said then it would of given us a bit of cash to buy better players, and also not to waste half the season playing the kids.

[Give it to Ron]

How would we have "no financial problems"??

 

Can't just say that without explaining it. He says he doesn't have the 6m needed now. So does he know someone that does? If so, why hasn't he sorted it out? If not, how would we have no financial problems under him, given that he couldn't clear the overdraft? An overdraft that stands despite selling and loaning out many experienced players.

 

Fed up of these claims that aren't even being backed up. He should actually do something or shut up until he can. Fair enough if he'd found the 6m and the board had rejected it, then he'd have every right to publicise it so the fans knew, but the subjective self-aggrandising crap can stop.

 

Because we would have bigger gates = more revenue = less pressure from the bank.

The only way we would get bigger gates is by winning and we would not of started the season with a stupid Dutch experiment wasting what little revenue we had on 5 loans who are so poor cant get in ahead of 17 year olds.

Pretty simple really if look at it from the middle ground - I want all 3 out but this current board are a joke and a mess.

[INFLUENCED.COM]

If I was chairman we'd be at the other end of the table, have bigger crowds and no financial problems

 

See, anyone can say it

[OldNick]

if that is what he said im sorry but it is madness to come up with claims like that.

Yes NP is doing very well and Ihave no doubt he would have accumalated more points than Jan but we still would be losing at least 150k a week and so the finanacial pressure would be there.With a team thaqt was doing well we would indeed have had gates of 22-25k and that would add money into the club.Take off his wishing to look good to the fans and so buying/loaning high paid players , added to that him not getting rid of many as well and we wouldnt be any better off financially.

RL has made a massive mistake in not replacing Jan sooner but we are not cut adrift yet and we have to hope things get better.

LC's words do not help the fan as all it does is cause more division, LC come up with the money or stay out of the poilitics it is not helping our club

[Capel Saint]

Words don't cost money, actions do. Have to agree that although Crouch has in the past dipped into his own pocket, compared to Wilde and Lowe who haven't. All three haven't got the financial clout to actually get the club out of the financial mess it is in and if/when administration happens then the best thing for the club will be to get shot of all three.

[Give it to Ron]

.Take off his wishing to look good to the fans and so buying/loaning high paid players , added to that him not getting rid of many as well and we wouldnt be any better off financially.

/QUOTE]

 

So it was not Crouch who loaned out Rasiak and Skacel last season? Sort of ****es on your bonfire there Nick.

Loaning out 2 players that were highly paid and cutting the wage bill and also 2 of the most popular.

[OldNick]

.Take off his wishing to look good to the fans and so buying/loaning high paid players , added to that him not getting rid of many as well and we wouldnt be any better off financially.

/QUOTE]

 

So it was not Crouch who loaned out Rasiak and Skacel last season? Sort of ****es on your bonfire there Nick.

Loaning out 2 players that were highly paid and cutting the wage bill and also 2 of the most popular.

There seems to be a timeline when he took over.Im not sure if he wasw part of that or not, if so yes he did that but he also took on some very highly paid loans.RW was not on a low wage.(he did a great job, but that is not the point) The club accounts do not seperate the costs when he arrived compared to when he left and so it is hard to see what he did to cut or increase costs.All I see is that we had massive losses and the knife was not taken to these quickly enough.Not only during his tenure I might add.

I recall when Wildes bunch came, many said lets throw the dice and spend for promotion,and then worry.Well we are now reaping what we sowed (the club)

[Give it to Ron]

I recall when Wildes bunch came, many said lets throw the dice and spend for promotion,and then worry.Well we are now reaping what we sowed (the club)

 

Exactly and that is where most of this mess came from not Crouch but Wilde and the execs he brought in. Yet he gets away scot free and all the focus gets put onto Lowe and Crouch.

Wilde has a lot to answer for and changing sides like his underpants has got us even further into a mess with this joke of a board.

[NickG]

whoever is right or wrong....

 

 

what possible benefit to SFC is there of him going on radio solent to say this?

 

I can't think of any.

 

 

Just more unnecessary negativity and infighting.

 

actions please not words -from both sides

[OldNick]

 

Exactly and that is where most of this mess came from not Crouch but Wilde and the execs he brought in. Yet he gets away scot free and all the focus gets put onto Lowe and Crouch.

Wilde has a lot to answer for and changing sides like his underpants has got us even further into a mess with this joke of a board.

Askham is the biggest culprit in my eyes, from Branfoot to the reverse takeover. Wilde came and made fools of a lot of fans as he gave them dreams that were never likely to happen.RL is not without blame as well, he has let Jan go too long before acting.Me as a fan have a lot to answer for as well, my anti Hoddle stance was a cost to the clunb as I odubt we would have been relegated under.Saying that I still feel I was right about the principle but wrong about the end result.

[Pancake]

If I was chairman we would be sitting mid table in Prem after spanking Man Utd 3-1 at SMS last night.

 

Whatever...

[stevegrant]

saying if he was chairman we would be other end of table, bigger crowds and no financial problems - solent interview

Christ.

 

I thought he'd perhaps turned a corner with his much-more-reasonable comments in the Echo, but clearly not.

 

Bigger crowds? Probably, I'll give him that one.

Other end of the table? Really? Seriously?!

No financial problems? How?

[OldNick]

Christ.

 

I thought he'd perhaps turned a corner with his much-more-reasonable comments in the Echo, but clearly not.

 

Bigger crowds? Probably, I'll give him that one.

Other end of the table? Really? Seriously?!

No financial problems? How?

he probably thought we had no financial problems when he was chairman last time.Im amazed at a man so good aty his own job could say such naive things.unless it is calculated to cause unrest and more pressure on RL to leave.

the last thing we need saturday is fan unrest to make the players lose concentration

[lordswoodsaints]

we wont know until the end of next season if NP is a good manager or not...he could have found his level in the 1st div......but until he spends a season in the championship then we will never now.he could fall on his arse and go straight back down?

 

i have nothing against crouch and i hope that he can help us but its his stupid outbursts that let him down.

[Sheff Saint]

There seems to be a timeline when he took over.Im not sure if he wasw part of that or not, if so yes he did that but he also took on some very highly paid loans.RW was not on a low wage.(he did a great job, but that is not the point) The club accounts do not seperate the costs when he arrived compared to when he left and so it is hard to see what he did to cut or increase costs.All I see is that we had massive losses and the knife was not taken to these quickly enough.Not only during his tenure I might add.

I recall when Wildes bunch came, many said lets throw the dice and spend for promotion,and then worry.Well we are now reaping what we sowed (the club)

 

 

Of course it's the point!

 

Without RW we would already been in League 1. And how much lost revenue would that be costing us? As much as what we paid RW, no where near.

 

Better spending money on the odd player than peanuts on a team of monkey's which is the current management tactics.

[Sheff Saint]

we wont know until the end of next season if NP is a good manager or not...he could have found his level in the 1st div......but until he spends a season in the championship then we will never now.he could fall on his arse and go straight back down?

 

i have nothing against crouch and i hope that he can help us but its his stupid outbursts that let him down.

 

Give the man a break.

 

This is Wilde's fault. When he came in the first time i think a lot of us thought, 'Anyone but Lowe.'

 

Turns out there was someone worse than Lowe.

 

But does that mean we need to accept Lowe now? Sure he's toss, but there are worse people.

 

Or do we have a bit of ambition and take a calculated risk that there is someone better?

[OldNick]

 

 

Of course it's the point!

 

Without RW we would already been in League 1. And how much lost revenue would that be costing us? As much as what we paid RW, no where near.

 

Better spending money on the odd player than peanuts on a team of monkey's which is the current management tactics.

The point was about LC not concentrating on finances.If the reasoning is get good players who will win games then we should go out and get kAKA etc and not worry about the finance.

In life you have to budget to your means.We as a club have over spent and now have to get the books in order.not carry on spend spend spend as you become bankrupt.LC's comments about not being in financial trouble were the ones in question

[Scummer]

Did anyone else actually hear this on Solent? I'm not going to jump on someone's back based on a 20 word precis of an interview. I'm assuming Crouch said something other than those few words?

[Victor]

Hang on, hang on! IS this what Crouch said, or is it just NickG's interpretation of what he said?

 

Let's have the words verbatim, otherwise this is just another personal agenda-type thread. Link?

[Sheff Saint]

The point was about LC not concentrating on finances.If the reasoning is get good players who will win games then we should go out and get kAKA etc and not worry about the finance.

In life you have to budget to your means.We as a club have over spent and now have to get the books in order.not carry on spend spend spend as you become bankrupt.LC's comments about not being in financial trouble were the ones in question

 

But Crouch didn't spend spend spend.

 

He got out Rasiak and Scakel and with the manager, identifed a weak area (Davies and Bart were injured don't forget) and ensured we got in someone that would do a short term job. That is the sign of a decent chairman, in my eyes. Balancing the books and addressing the teams needs.

[Colinjb]

Not really the kind of statement he should make without available proof. Even if he does totally believe it, its just the kind of thing his opposition could jump on as 'hot air.'

[Channon's Sideburns]

he probably thought we had no financial problems when he was chairman last time.Im amazed at a man so good aty his own job could say such naive things.unless it is calculated to cause unrest and more pressure on RL to leave.

the last thing we need saturday is fan unrest to make the players lose concentration

 

Trouble is Nick, we also don't yet know what real savings have been made by Lowe and Wilde...

 

They SAY things have improved, but where is the proof?

 

Yes, we offloaded some dross towards the end of the season, but now we have even more dross, less quality...which repeated the same mistake as in the last Prem Season....

 

Quantity over Quality.

 

I'll stand corrected when Pulis and Gasmi make the 1st team for 3 games running.

[stevegrant]

Not really the kind of statement he should make without available proof. Even if he does totally believe it, its just the kind of thing his opposition could jump on as 'hot air.'

Spot on, assuming of course that is exactly what he's said.

[Wopper]

We have a choice. A multi millionare Saints fan or Rupert & Mike ?

[JohnnyFartPants]

Askham is the biggest culprit in my eyes, from Branfoot to the reverse takeover. Wilde came and made fools of a lot of fans as he gave them dreams that were never likely to happen.RL is not without blame as well, he has let Jan go too long before acting.Me as a fan have a lot to answer for as well, my anti Hoddle stance was a cost to the clunb as I odubt we would have been relegated under.Saying that I still feel I was right about the principle but wrong about the end result.

 

Was this the principle of him taking word for word some ancient scripture in the Bible or some such book that if everyone who goes to church wasn't full of such double standards should side with too?

[lordswoodsaints]

Give the man a break.

 

This is Wilde's fault. When he came in the first time i think a lot of us thought, 'Anyone but Lowe.'

 

Turns out there was someone worse than Lowe.

 

But does that mean we need to accept Lowe now? Sure he's toss, but there are worse people.

 

Or do we have a bit of ambition and take a calculated risk that there is someone better?

 

what are you rambling on about?

where have i in my post had a dig at crouch?

 

for the record, just to make you happy,i wasnt one of those that thought 'anybody but lowe' and i wasnt one of the fans that got involved in the 'lowe out' campaign.i was very worried about the void left by lowe and who would fill his shoes..which turned out to be right as wilde is a complete ****.

lowe leaving was the right thing to happen but not many people thought about the consequences of that action,the tyre kickers took advantage and rode in on a blaze of glory which turned into what we have now.

sure there are worse people than lowe....hitler,stalin,fred west,mandaric etc etc there is always somebody worse.lowe is a ****,wilde is a ****, crouch is a good man thats needs a bit of media training before he turns into a ****.

the bloke is obviously trying his best to help us out and that has to be applauded but he doesnt need to lower himself to slanging matches and cheap shots to do that.

 

we havnt got time for 'ambition' and we havnt got the money for 'calculated risks' but what we have got is the 2 ****s (wilde and lowe) offering us a way out of the mess by giving crouch the chance to turn things around with a £6mil injection? so its now down to crouch to try his best to get the dosh,fingers crossed he can pull it off but i fear it will be too late in the day to save us from relegation.

Edited 28 January, 2009 by lordswoodsaints

[so22saint]

If I was chairman we'd be at the other end of the table, have bigger crowds and no financial problems

 

See, anyone can say it

 

you're right, anyone would be better than Lowe and Wilde

[Saint Richard of Woolston]

If being a Saints Fan is not bad enough for your mental well-being, the sort of people trying to get in the boardroom and some of those actually there at present is even more frigtening.

 

I reiterate my opinion, the whole lot need to go. Crouch would be no better than anybody else; indeed, he WAS no better.

[saintjay77]

Jesus that guy is full of the same wind as the other 2.

 

When he was here last the only time we had a decent crowd was the last day of the season. before that the numbers were going down week on week.

 

Financial problems were also here when he was here last time and wasnt he planning to close the corners too? And get rid of the bus deal? Didnt he also cash in on the Theo deal and then say he hadnt? so allot of the decissions that have made rupes and wilde so unpopular he would have made too but because he made them we would be OK financially and more people in the gates.

 

Ill give him the benifit of doubt that pearson would have got us more points but the team we have right now has largly been dictated by the financial mess that he is a part of, so I cant honestly say i think Pearson would have done that much better with the same team considering the results he had last season with a team much stronger on paper.

 

Someone needs to come up with the reddys to sort out our problems. I mean actually turn up with cash. not talk about getting the cash or promising cash wouldnt be a problem or talking about investers that will turn up when this person or that person leaves.

 

It just sounds like he is trying to stir up the fans much like Wilde did the 1st time. If we fall for it this time I think there should be a condition that we can throw him off the Itchen Bridge should he be full of hot air.

[itchen]

Words don't cost money, actions do. Have to agree that although Crouch has in the past dipped into his own pocket, compared to Wilde and Lowe who haven't. All three haven't got the financial clout to actually get the club out of the financial mess it is in and if/when administration happens then the best thing for the club will be to get shot of all three.

 

When did Crouch dip into his own pocket? I know he did for the statue (which is laudable but doesn't help the league position) but I mean for the team. There was the much vaunted offer to pay some wages but my understanding was that no money actually changed hands. I stand to be corrected of course.

[Give it to Ron]

Jesus that guy is full of the same wind as the other 2.

 

When he was here last the only time we had a decent crowd was the last day of the season. before that the numbers were going down week on week.

 

 

So the home game against Bristol City was empty?

[St. Jason]

Askham is the biggest culprit in my eyes, from Branfoot to the reverse takeover. Wilde came and made fools of a lot of fans as he gave them dreams that were never likely to happen.RL is not without blame as well, he has let Jan go too long before acting.Me as a fan have a lot to answer for as well, my anti Hoddle stance was a cost to the clunb as I odubt we would have been relegated under.Saying that I still feel I was right about the principle but wrong about the end result.

 

 

I admire your honesty with regards to Hoddle, but it was not the fans that stopped Hoddle taking the job. Hoddle has very publicly stated that "had he had 100% backing from the board" then he'd of taken the job and worked "to win over the fans". As we all know, if Glen had come in and gone on a 13 match unbeaten run it'd of all been forgotten!

 

Just to help you out a bit, as you've posted before about pearson "there's no guarantee he'd of done any better with our kids than Jan" well the same can be said about Hoddle, there is no guarantee he'd of saved us from relegation, he failed at both Spurs and Wolves!!

[eelpie]

Nothing like stoking the fire eh??

 

I like him a lot but professionally he leaves a little to be desired.

 

In what way exactly?

Are you referring to Pearson or Crouch?

[CB Fry]

We have a choice. A multi millionare Saints fan or Rupert & Mike ?

 

 

We have no such choice. Crouch is making grandiose statements (if he did say as described) with the comfort of not needing to do anything.

 

There was no sign of new investment or a spectacular up turn in fortunes during his admittedly brief tenure at the top*.

 

Also, when the time came to make a big decision our "multi millionaire Saints fan" bottled it and appointed Dodd and Gorman to appease the gigantic ego of everyone's favourite FA Cup winning manager who really didn't want a big name coming in and running the team and everything.

 

He got Pearson right, but that was risky and touch and go at the time too (and again, was a McMenemy ego appointment).

 

Let's try not to believe Crouch's own hype too much. These kind of outburst confirms my view that none of them is better than any of them.

 

 

*don't bother with the "where is the investment Lowe is bringing" stuff, really. Lowe's failures do not make Crouch a success by default. He is full of it too.

[JohnnyFartPants]

 

 

I admire your honesty with regards to Hoddle, but it was not the fans that stopped Hoddle taking the job. Hoddle has very publicly stated that "had he had 100% backing from the board" then he'd of taken the job and worked "to win over the fans". As we all know, if Glen had come in and gone on a 13 match unbeaten run it'd of all been forgotten!

 

Just to help you out a bit, as you've posted before about pearson "there's no guarantee he'd of done any better with our kids than Jan" well the same can be said about Hoddle, there is no guarantee he'd of saved us from relegation, he failed at both Spurs and Wolves!!

 

In fairness he failed to win things at Spurs and Wolves, he didn't fail to avoid relegation. That kind of failure I would be very grateful for right now.

[Fitzhugh Fella]

If being a Saints Fan is not bad enough for your mental well-being, the sort of people trying to get in the boardroom and some of those actually there at present is even more frigtening.

 

I reiterate my opinion, the whole lot need to go. Crouch would be no better than anybody else; indeed, he WAS no better.

 

 

I am inclined to agree Richard.

The only thing I will say was Crouch had less time and he had to deal with the Execs but when all said and done the sooner someone new comes in the better but... is that likely?

[eelpie]

if that is what he said im sorry but it is madness to come up with claims like that.

Yes NP is doing very well and Ihave no doubt he would have accumalated more points than Jan but we still would be losing at least 150k a week and so the finanacial pressure would be there.

 

You are assuming that Pearson wouldn't have disposed of some of our more expensive players. Because (scenario 1) if Lowe had stayed with Pearson there would still have been cost-cutting measures. Pearson didn't approve of the whole squad he inherited. He made that quite clear after suffering several defeats. The difference is that Pearson is pragmatic and, as at Leicester, he has proved he would have been able to work with a leaner squad, including youngsters. But a better balanced one, as you agree, I think.

 

The question is whether Lowe would have trusted Pearson's professional judgement, or whether he, the amateur, would not have imposed his own team selection on Pearson, which would have been disastrous. Pearson would not have stood this. He would leave.

 

So what IF Crouch had remained director with Pearson in charge of team matters (scenario 2)?

 

Well, he had already loaned out Rasiak and Skacel, which proves that he was aware of the need to make drastic economies. Most of the expensive players he had inherited and had been brought in by Burley, not Crouch. (Who was it that appointed Burley?)

 

And the Bank would be insisting on drastic economies, just like they have been doing with Lowe. With Crouch, as you admit, Barclays would certainly have not been so exasperated with gates falling as much as they have done under Lowe.

 

Lowe and Wilde's spin against Crouch was effective but misleading.

[St. Jason]

Not really the kind of statement he should make without available proof. Even if he does totally believe it, its just the kind of thing his opposition could jump on as 'hot air.'

 

Not completely 'hot air' though is it Colin. After all he's already said he'll put £2m in, that in it self clears 33.33% of the overdraft. I sincerely believe without Lowe & The Dutch experiment here we'd be averaging 21k, that's 6k more fans, averaging at £25 per game I'd say that's worth an extra £150k per home game equating to roughly £3.5m per season. I know its not quite as easy as that but surely you can see just by my crude math that's almost the overdraft paid of!

Edited 28 January, 2009 by St. Jason

[St. Jason]

 

In fairness he failed to win things at Spurs and Wolves, he didn't fail to avoid relegation. That kind of failure I would be very grateful for right now.

 

You are of course right, my point is just because he succeeded here last time is no guarantee he'd succeed the second time. Is this no the same analogy people are using for Pearson "just because he's top of the league at Div 1 doesn't mean he'd be any better than Jan here"??

[saintjay77]

So the home game against Bristol City was empty?

 

I didnt say any game was empty and I didnt say any game would be empty. I was there for the plymouth game which was his 1st game and the crowd were all that much better than many crowds this season.

 

Bristol City were flying high at the time and we generally get a good crowd when ever we play teams from the top or the bottom of the league. using that as an example is as much use as using the Man U game as an example this season.

 

I accept that if we were at the top of the table we would have much bigger crowds, but that goes for the current lot too right?

 

I dont see how the current mess's would be any better or worse to be honest with him in charge. They are all pr1cks of the highest order and I would only welcome a change if there was more evidence than a solent interview of things being actually better.

[Give it to Ron]

 

They are all pr1cks of the highest order and I would only welcome a change if there was more evidence than a solent interview of things being actually better.

 

With that I totally agree and until all 3 are banished from Saints for good then we will still be in the ****e.

Of all 3 I want Wilde out far more than any other though.

[Wade Garrett]

If being a Saints Fan is not bad enough for your mental well-being, the sort of people trying to get in the boardroom and some of those actually there at present is even more frigtening.

 

I reiterate my opinion, the whole lot need to go. Crouch would be no better than anybody else; indeed, he WAS no better.

 

Fair point.

 

But apart from Crouch, there doesn't seem to be anyone out there who gives a toss. Salz and Gavyn Davies are apparently fans, who surely have the money and nous to run rings around Lowe and Wilde, but don't seem to be interested.

 

I would much rather have Crouch than Lowe and Wilde.

[Jackie@home]

Most of us realise the financial mess we are in, but Crouch is not alone in believing that someone else could do a better job under the same financial constraints.

 

The amount of money that has been wasted since Lowe returned has been criminal - the usual accumulation of a huge squad of average players not even good enough to get on the bench, coaching staff on "gardening leave" that we are obviously still paying.

 

Whoever has been scouting Gasmi, Pulis, Peckhardt, Smith, Robertson, etc., has cost this club a packet. Whoever he is, we don't even know, but he must be getting a fee or salary.

 

I think the vast majority of us would have swap one wage of either John or Rasiak for 6 other nonenties. We might have actually won a couple more home games that would have kept the crowds from dropping so drastically.

 

The vast majority of Championship clubs are working under very tight financial constraints, but most are better run than us. I'm not suprised Crouch thinks he can do a better job than Lowe - I'm pretty sure that I could too.

[NickG]

it would be a start if they all just grew up and shut up

[Give it to Ron]

Most of us realise the financial mess we are in, but Crouch is not alone in believing that someone else could do a better job under the same financial constraints.

 

The amount of money that has been wasted since Lowe returned has been criminal - the usual accumulation of a huge squad of average players not even good enough to get on the bench, coaching staff on "gardening leave" that we are obviously still paying.

 

Whoever has been scouting Gasmi, Pulis, Peckhardt, Smith, Robertson, etc., has cost this club a packet. Whoever he is, we don't even know, but he must be getting a fee or salary.

 

I think the vast majority of us would have swap one wage of either John or Rasiak for 6 other nonenties. We might have actually won a couple more home games that would have kept the crowds from dropping so drastically.

 

The vast majority of Championship clubs are working under very tight financial constraints, but most are better run than us. I'm not suprised Crouch thinks he can do a better job than Lowe - I'm pretty sure that I could too.

 

One of the most sensible posts I have read on here lately IMO and totally concur.

I asked the other day for a Luvvie to name one thing that he has done since his return that has been successful and the silence was deafening.

Ok maybe that we actually haven't gone into admin yet but is that more to do with aviva/Barclays not wanting to pull the plug?

The thing that angers me most was loaning Stern John and then bringing the likes of Gasmi who is no better than anything else we have at the club and is very, very lightweight and added to Pulis, Robertson, Pekhart is absurd.

[saintjay77]

You are assuming that Pearson wouldn't have disposed of some of our more expensive players. Because (scenario 1) if Lowe had stayed with Pearson there would still have been cost-cutting measures. Pearson didn't approve of the whole squad he inherited. He made that quite clear after suffering several defeats. The difference is that Pearson is pragmatic and, as at Leicester, he has proved he would have been able to work with a leaner squad, including youngsters. But a better balanced one, as you agree, I think.

 

The question is whether Lowe would have trusted Pearson's professional judgement, or whether he, the amateur, would not have imposed his own team selection on Pearson, which would have been disastrous. Pearson would not have stood this. He would leave.

 

So what IF Crouch had remained director with Pearson in charge of team matters (scenario 2)?

 

Well, he had already loaned out Rasiak and Skacel, which proves that he was aware of the need to make drastic economies. Most of the expensive players he had inherited and had been brought in by Burley, not Crouch. (Who was it that appointed Burley?)

 

And the Bank would be insisting on drastic economies, just like they have been doing with Lowe. With Crouch, as you admit, Barclays would certainly have not been so exasperated with gates falling as much as they have done under Lowe.

 

Lowe and Wilde's spin against Crouch was effective but misleading.

 

A bit hypocritical this really. You suggest Lowe would be picking the team and players yet you complain about the players GB brought in.

 

GB took us to within a game or 2 of the prem with those players so they cant of been that bad.

 

The idea that Lowe picks the team has come from rumours and have been spouted about so much that many believe them to be fact. IMO its a load of balls and doesnt do anyone any favours by continuing to be spouted out. If the team is restricted due to finances then this would still be the case no matter who is at the top. But as its rupes its told like he picks the team, Rasiak was loaned out when Crouch was here so effectivly he was telling Pearson he coulndt pick him. Same thing in my book only now we dont have anyone wanting to loan the players we cant afford to pay.

 

If we were in the same position in the league under crouch this season then I doubt the gates would be much different as they are now so Barcleys would still be looking for realistic ways of getting the overdraft reduced. Saying that we are all only guessing and IF doesnt mean jack as we will never know.

 

The only thing we can garentee is that Lowe and Wilde are muppets and the sooner they are gone the better. Is Crouch any better? Evidence so far suggests to me that he is not so I cant see the point in changing things to him.

[saintjay77]

With that I totally agree and until all 3 are banished from Saints for good then we will still be in the ****e.

Of all 3 I want Wilde out far more than any other though.

 

My choice on which one I want out the most changes on a daily bases but I try to at least see things how they are or how they could be so rarly get worked up enough to have a go at anyone. Some people on the boards cant see past there hatred for one of the other and that gets in the way of some prety decent debate on here sometimes.