sadoldgit Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 Hypothetically speaking, if we were in exactly the same financial predicament and exactly the same situation football-wise and if Leon Crouch was in charge and Nigel Pearson managing the team, would you have demonstrated yesterday? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 Hypothetically speaking, if we were in exactly the same financial predicament and exactly the same situation football-wise and if Leon Crouch was in charge and Nigel Pearson managing the team, would you have demonstrated yesterday? We were, and we didn't.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted 1 February, 2009 Author Share Posted 1 February, 2009 I am talking about now Ginge, not last year when both were only here a short while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintBobby Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 Hypothetically speaking, if we were in exactly the same financial predicament and exactly the same situation football-wise and if Leon Crouch was in charge and Nigel Pearson managing the team, would you have demonstrated yesterday? Presumably not. The protest was against Lowe - not specifically related to the performances of the team on the pitch. (Although many fans claim that Lowe's stewardship has had a direct and negative impact on the on-field results). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 Christ......I've been telling him that for day's. He won't listen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SFC Forever Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 No we wouldn't have demonstrated. Pearson had our backing and would probably have turned it round this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted 1 February, 2009 Author Share Posted 1 February, 2009 No we wouldn't have demonstrated. Pearson had our backing and would probably have turned it round this season. Ah but my question was specificaly about if he hadn't turned it around and we were still in the cr*p league position wise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Paul Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 Lowe not retaining Pearson was a significant event in my opinion. This together with the rubbish that we couldn't have afforded him put the Club on this course from the very start. Had Crouch ran the club in the same manner as Lowe , made the same decisions and showed the same arrogance, then I'm sure people would have been protesting against him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 Ah but my question was specificaly about if he hadn't turned it around and we were still in the cr*p league position wise. No because Crouch would have not trumpeted the revolutionary new coaching policy and would have signed some older pros rather than playing mostly the kids, especially the defense which we neglected until January. That will prove crucial IMO. Crouch would also have listened to the fans and communicated effectively with them so it would never have got to that point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 Lowe not retaining Pearson was a significant event in my opinion. This together with the rubbish that we couldn't have afforded him put the Club on this course from the very start. Had Crouch ran the club in the same manner as Lowe , made the same decisions and showed the same arrogance, then I'm sure people would have been protesting against him. Precisely, but he doesn't so I don't really see the point of this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 Hypothetically speaking, if we were in exactly the same financial predicament and exactly the same situation football-wise and if Leon Crouch was in charge and Nigel Pearson managing the team, would you have demonstrated yesterday? Yes, because it is running of the club, not the person for me. And I didn't/don't rate Pearson either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 Presumably not. The protest was against Lowe - not specifically related to the performances of the team on the pitch. (Although many fans claim that Lowe's stewardship has had a direct and negative impact on the on-field results). Quite right. The protest was against Lowe's continuing involvement with SFC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
70's Mike Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 Precisely, but he doesn't so I don't really see the point of this thread. That makes two of us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 The point of this thread is that SOG is attempting to deflect attention away from a succesful protest against his hero, and is asking in his own funny little way, that we all agree, should the shoe be on the other foot, we would of reacted the same way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelkel31 Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 the answer is a simple no. this protest and others are about the fundamental structure and upper management of our club, the lies, the disrespect and contempt shown to us as supporters. without speaking for for all, we seek the removal of RL, MW and preferably the entire board from there positions and also as share holders, with the view of removing SFC as a PLC. this is of course the ultimate goal, not entirely realistic and with obvious priority's! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 The point of this thread is that SOG is attempting to deflect attention away from a succesful protest against his hero, and is asking in his own funny little way, that we all agree, should the shoe be on the other foot, we would of reacted the same way. But clearly we wouldn't? :smt102 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Smith Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 Hypothetically speaking, if we were in exactly the same financial predicament and exactly the same situation football-wise and if Leon Crouch was in charge and Nigel Pearson managing the team, would you have demonstrated yesterday? Hypothetically speaking, if Crouch had remained and Pearson was still in charge and we were running away with this league would some of the idiots on here STILL be claiming that Lowe would do a better job? FACT IS, Lowe is cr*p, hates the fans, despises turning up and has now disassociated himself with football altogether. Brings in unproven substandard managers, loans out our best players to the opposition, claims that youth is the way to go, even though experienced pro's warned him against this, got into bed with the very person he believed to have been responsible for destroying the finances of this club and removing him from power. At the time when this club is in free fall, finances are pinnacle, balances need to be made, loanee's are being recalled, manager has resigned, a new one in place and a new assistant coach, where's Lowe - SKIING. You couldn't make it up could you. And then people like you have the audaciuty to ask a question like this. I ask you, would any other Chairman of any other club OR business come to that, act like this in a time of crisis? You;re have a larf, seriously, think about it, don;t make yourself look anymore stupid and ask anymore stupid questions, see it for what it really is - there were better options, there still are better options but every minute Lowe remains, our chances of relegation and administration get closer. LOWE OUT! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daren W Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 Ah but my question was specificaly about if he hadn't turned it around and we were still in the cr*p league position wise. So what you're effectively saying is "What if Crouch was a ****"? Bit of a redundant argument isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted 1 February, 2009 Author Share Posted 1 February, 2009 You are missing the point Hypo, I am asking if we were in the same position despite Crouch doing whatever... I appreciate that you have a high opinion of Leon, but last season he too loaned out our better players, presided over an unsustainable wage bill and took us to the brink of relegation. I have also heard, and I don't know how true it is, that if he had stayed the club would have been in administration by now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 You are missing the point Hypo, I am asking if we were in the same position despite Crouch doing whatever... I appreciate that you have a high opinion of Leon, but last season he too loaned out our better players, presided over an unsustainable wage bill and took us to the brink of relegation. I have also heard, and I don't know how true it is, that if he had stayed the club would have been in administration by now. Another make up........go on then, where did you get this gem from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintBobby Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 So what you're effectively saying is "What if Crouch was a ****"? Bit of a redundant argument isn't it? Actually I agree. It is a totally redundant argument. The question to the protestors seems to be "Is there anything Saints-related, other than the Chairmanship of Rupert Lowe - perhaps even something totally hypothetical - that you might just possibly ever demonstrate against?" I'd be amazed if the answer isn't a 100% unanimous "yes". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spain saint Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 SOG, you get on your high horse about supporting the team and the fanbase being united then you start threads like this that will be seen by many of the people on this site as precalculated antagonism! I really fail to see what your point is! I also read your posts and fail to see where you are coming from! Are you pro Lowe, anti Lowe or just a very confused man? :smt102 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted 1 February, 2009 Author Share Posted 1 February, 2009 The point of this thread is that SOG is attempting to deflect attention away from a succesful protest against his hero, and is asking in his own funny little way, that we all agree, should the shoe be on the other foot, we would of reacted the same way. I am doing no such thing and please give me the respect of not assuming someone is my hero when they are not. Unlike many here I do not get hung up om personalities. You talk about deflection but that is what you are doing. The whole labelling of people that don't agree with your views as "Lowe Luvvies" deflects from the arguement. Its the whole "if you are for us your ag'in us" ethos. I am just curious as to the standards of the protesters here. Would be happier in this position if someone else was in charge??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daren W Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 Actually I agree. It is a totally redundant argument. The question to the protestors seems to be "Is there anything Saints-related, other than the Chairmanship of Rupert Lowe - perhaps even something totally hypothetical - that you might just possibly ever demonstrate against?" I'd be amazed if the answer isn't a 100% unanimous "yes". I take it you don't remember Ian Branfoot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted 1 February, 2009 Author Share Posted 1 February, 2009 SOG, you get on your high horse about supporting the team and the fanbase being united then you start threads like this that will be seen by many of the people on this site as precalculated antagonism! I really fail to see what your point is! I also read your posts and fail to see where you are coming from! Are you pro Lowe, anti Lowe or just a very confused man? :smt102 You fall into the same trap. In what universe to you have to be only pro or anti anyone or anything to be taken seriously? Jeez, you peple. It is all about taking sides isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintBobby Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 I take it you don't remember Ian Branfoot? Err...that was exactly my point..... An example of something else that people will (did) protest about.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted 1 February, 2009 Author Share Posted 1 February, 2009 Ginge mate, successful demonstration? Has Lowe resigned then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted 1 February, 2009 Author Share Posted 1 February, 2009 Another make up........go on then, where did you get this gem from?[/QUOT I could tell you but Id' have to kill you. Seriously, I thought it had well documented? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 He did last time...............he will this time. If memory serves, you ended up with egg on your face then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 Another make up........go on then, where did you get this gem from?[/QUOT I could tell you but Id' have to kill you. Seriously, I thought it had well documented? Where....direct me. My understanding is that he had a good relationship with the bank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daren W Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 Err...that was exactly my point..... An example of something else that people will (did) protest about.... Shoot sorry, didn't read the post properly! lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delmary Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 (edited) sadoldgit, let's hear your cure for Southampton FC? Don't forget we've got a disenchanted customer base, spiralling debt, threat of administration and relegation. What do you want to see happen? Edited 1 February, 2009 by Delmary quoted wrong post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctoroncall Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 You are missing the point Hypo, I am asking if we were in the same position despite Crouch doing whatever... I appreciate that you have a high opinion of Leon, but last season he too loaned out our better players, presided over an unsustainable wage bill and took us to the brink of relegation. I have also heard, and I don't know how true it is, that if he had stayed the club would have been in administration by now. Crounch didn't loan all the experienced strikers for one thing. Dave Jones said the wage bill was a blip. Crouch didn't experiment with the coaching staff, at least has a connection with the fans, got on well with the staff and worked for free. I also heard he had the backing of the bank for his business plan...! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted 1 February, 2009 Author Share Posted 1 February, 2009 Where....direct me. My understanding is that he had a good relationship with the bank. That is what he says. I heard different but I didn't hear it direct from the bank, so who knows? What I would say is that you would not believe Lowe if he said that, so why believe Crouch? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilko Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 What a pointless question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted 1 February, 2009 Author Share Posted 1 February, 2009 Crounch didn't loan all the experienced strikers for one thing. Dave Jones said the wage bill was a blip. Crouch didn't experiment with the coaching staff, at least has a connection with the fans, got on well with the staff and worked for free. I also heard he had the backing of the bank for his business plan...! Who did you hear that from? Crouch? For all of the marvellous things Leon did for us last year we were still 20 minutes from relegation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 Crounch didn't loan all the experienced strikers for one thing. Dave Jones said the wage bill was a blip. Crouch didn't experiment with the coaching staff, at least has a connection with the fans, got on well with the staff and worked for free. I also heard he had the backing of the bank for his business plan...! He didn't go on holiday during the season either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted 1 February, 2009 Author Share Posted 1 February, 2009 What a pointless question. So ignore it then. Not hard is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 That is what he says. I heard different but I didn't hear it direct from the bank, so who knows? What I would say is that you would not believe Lowe if he said that, so why believe Crouch? Round and round and round he go's, where he'll stop, no-body knows. That sums you up SOG, you made the statement, now back it up. Who told you?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spain saint Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 You fall into the same trap. In what universe to you have to be only pro or anti anyone or anything to be taken seriously? Jeez, you peple. It is all about taking sides isn't it? I see you only commented on the Pro or anti bit! There was alittle more to it, But hey ho! Come on you cant sit on the fence all your life and to me this seems a pretty cut and dried situation. You either like the club being run by Rupert Lowe or you don't. Please show me where you sit on the fence with this one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 This really is a candidate for the dumbest thread ever started. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toomer Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 I take it you don't remember Ian Branfoot? Daren wonder how that swear word has missed the filter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted 1 February, 2009 Author Share Posted 1 February, 2009 Round and round and round he go's, where he'll stop, no-body knows. That sums you up SOG, you made the statement, now back it up. Who told you?? Lets see, so someone can come and and say Crouch had the backing of the bank and does not have to back it up and I do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 Lets see, so someone can come and and say Crouch had the backing of the bank and does not have to back it up and I do? Right.......I'll start. It may not be fact, but it was reported as such in our local paper, the Echo. Now it's your turn.......who told you he would of taken us into administration??. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 Ah but my question was specificaly about if he hadn't turned it around and we were still in the cr*p league position wise. Pearson turned a season around. This question is utterly pathetic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted 1 February, 2009 Author Share Posted 1 February, 2009 sadoldgit, let's hear your cure for Southampton FC? Don't forget we've got a disenchanted customer base, spiralling debt, threat of administration and relegation. What do you want to see happen? I want to see the end to this bickering. Like Lowe or not he is in the driving seat and he has plan. We are stuck with Lowe and Wilde and Wotte until the end of the season probably. I would like to see them and the club given support. If we end up by staving off relegation and administration I think they should continue until a buyer is found. It saddens me but I think there are a lot of people who will be happy to see the club implode just because of their hatred of one man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocknrollman no2 Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 Hypothetically speaking, if Crouch had remained and Pearson was still in charge and we were running away with this league would some of the idiots on here STILL be claiming that Lowe would do a better job? FACT IS, Lowe is cr*p, hates the fans, despises turning up and has now disassociated himself with football altogether. Brings in unproven substandard managers, loans out our best players to the opposition, claims that youth is the way to go, even though experienced pro's warned him against this, got into bed with the very person he believed to have been responsible for destroying the finances of this club and removing him from power. At the time when this club is in free fall, finances are pinnacle, balances need to be made, loanee's are being recalled, manager has resigned, a new one in place and a new assistant coach, where's Lowe - SKIING. You couldn't make it up could you. And then people like you have the audaciuty to ask a question like this. I ask you, would any other Chairman of any other club OR business come to that, act like this in a time of crisis? You;re have a larf, seriously, think about it, don;t make yourself look anymore stupid and ask anymore stupid questions, see it for what it really is - there were better options, there still are better options but every minute Lowe remains, our chances of relegation and administration get closer. LOWE OUT! A very good post. Puts my views exactly and is straight to the point. Thanks John Smith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offix Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 This protest is about Ru**rt and Quisling's POLICIES. If Leon had retained his position AND if he had retained Pearson then hypothetically IF we were in the same league position and financially as much in the sh@tter as we are now then I assume there would be discontent, but nowhere near the protest and concern that you see now. There is only one possible outcome if the current POLICIES continue (youth players, marginal coaches,"Total football" adventure), and that's relegation and administration (in any order). That's what the protest is about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted 1 February, 2009 Author Share Posted 1 February, 2009 Right.......I'll start. It may not be fact, but it was reported as such in our local paper, the Echo. Now it's your turn.......who told you he would of taken us into administration??. Because it was in the Echo it was true was it? Didn't occur to you that the story could have been planted. I didn't read it in that bastion of truth, the Echo, but I have read elsewhere from reasonably reliable sources that if Crouch had stayed the backers would have pulled the plug. I am not staking my life on it but I am sure it has just as much validity as something plnated in the Echo. Cast your mind back, didn't Wilde also give us the impression that he had money behind him when he took over??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 1 February, 2009 Share Posted 1 February, 2009 Because it was in the Echo it was true was it? Didn't occur to you that the story could have been planted. I didn't read it in that bastion of truth, the Echo, but I have read elsewhere from reasonably reliable sources that if Crouch had stayed the backers would have pulled the plug. I am not staking my life on it but I am sure it has just as much validity as something plnated in the Echo. Cast your mind back, didn't Wilde also give us the impression that he had money behind him when he took over??? "The backers would have pulled the plug" - don't be a moron. You think they give a toss about who is in charge? It's the bottom line that counts. If you honestly think Crouch would have continued letting the club spunk money, despite the clear factual evidence to the contrary (ie. loaning out Skacel and Rasiak), then you are quite, quite odd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now