docker-p Posted 4 February, 2009 Share Posted 4 February, 2009 Has there been any word yet from that jelly like organisation the Saints Trust after last nights performance, or are they still trying to find diplomatic language that won't upset Rupert? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 4 February, 2009 Share Posted 4 February, 2009 Has there been any word yet from that jelly like organisation the Saints Trust after last nights performance, or are they still trying to find diplomatic language that won't upset Rupert? Think the clue is in the name 'Trust' - whatever you think about the shareholders and the way the club is run, you need to have some degree of mutual repsect and trust if you are to be taken seriously. You can have the loudest most organised voice, but you cant force folk to listen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 4 February, 2009 Share Posted 4 February, 2009 They are pointless, while the last protest was going on they had a meeting at a pub. Illingsworth is scared of upsetting Lowe, at the moment he has a cosy meeting with him after every board meeting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 4 February, 2009 Share Posted 4 February, 2009 isnt um pahars part of the trust.. I asked him last night on here what ideas they had in removing lowe and how it could be done and what they propose to move the club forward.. still waiting for a response... all quick to put the boot in... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 4 February, 2009 Share Posted 4 February, 2009 Does anyone really believe that 'upsetting Lowe' will actually make a blind bit of difference? The guy is so thick skinned, its pointless to fight this in that way... FFS if you want to challenge and enemy, you need to understand him and find the true weakness, not just keep shouting louder.... Lowe, whatever you may think of him, will listen to what he believes is serious and sensible debate that will find solutions that are in his personal interest. Tap into that psychology and you might get somewhere. 12 Years of Richard Chorley ranting at him has got him where exactly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 4 February, 2009 Share Posted 4 February, 2009 Does anyone really believe that 'upsetting Lowe' will actually make a blind bit of difference? The guy is so thick skinned, its pointless to fight this in that way... FFS if you want to challenge and enemy, you need to understand him and find the true weakness, not just keep shouting louder.... Lowe, whatever you may think of him, will listen to what he believes is serious and sensible debate that will find solutions that are in his personal interest. Tap into that psychology and you might get somewhere. 12 Years of Richard Chorley ranting at him has got him where exactly? all this is so true.....yet will be lost on here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StuRomseySaint Posted 4 February, 2009 Share Posted 4 February, 2009 Does anyone really believe that 'upsetting Lowe' will actually make a blind bit of difference? The guy is so thick skinned, its pointless to fight this in that way... FFS if you want to challenge and enemy, you need to understand him and find the true weakness, not just keep shouting louder.... Lowe, whatever you may think of him, will listen to what he believes is serious and sensible debate that will find solutions that are in his personal interest. Tap into that psychology and you might get somewhere. 12 Years of Richard Chorley ranting at him has got him where exactly? Exactly, which is why I propose the boycott.... Lowe will not react to a march to the ground, to being insulted, shouted at etc.... the only way him and Wilde will ever leave is if Barclays force them to step down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 4 February, 2009 Share Posted 4 February, 2009 Exactly, which is why I propose the boycott.... Lowe will not react to a march to the ground, to being insulted, shouted at etc.... the only way him and Wilde will ever leave is if Barclays force them to step down. If the only conseqyuence of forcing his hand through financial pain was Lowe ou, I would not stand in your way, but the more we make Barclays nervous about revenue, the greater the risk of them saying enough is enough... Lowe might be gone, but administration would come with it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snowballs2 Posted 4 February, 2009 Share Posted 4 February, 2009 The deafening silence from the Trust will not do anything to get new members or to get them taken seriously as a voice of the supporters. The organisation now appears to represent Lowe and not the fans. Quite honestly it is another platform for Illingsworth etc to show his love for Rupert. No longer can it be taken as a serious group. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint1977 Posted 4 February, 2009 Share Posted 4 February, 2009 If the only conseqyuence of forcing his hand through financial pain was Lowe ou' date=' I would not stand in your way, but the more we make Barclays nervous about revenue, the greater the risk of them saying enough is enough... Lowe might be gone, but administration would come with it?[/quote'] I agree up to a point Frank but administration will come with the drop in CCC to League 1 income anyway so we might even limit the points penalty to next season. Administration would be horrific but it wil happen under Wilde and co. anyway. I agree, a combination of marches with several thousand fans - Saturday's turnout was superb but we must build on it - and an empty SMS with sub-7,000 inside including the away fans will soon make the heat in the kitchen unbearable for Wilde and Askham. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INFLUENCED.COM Posted 4 February, 2009 Share Posted 4 February, 2009 A lad, only just out of short trousers, organised something that got local and national exposure, yet an 'organisation' supposedly for the fans does nothing, this, at a time where they should be able capitalise on our situation by actively getting people to subscribe with disclosure on how, they as a body, will attempt to get those that control our club to act in "the best interest of the club" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
COMEONYOUREDS Posted 4 February, 2009 Share Posted 4 February, 2009 the saints trust is a joke. They are pointless and should hang their heads in shame. Nick Illingsworth can just **** off IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topcat Posted 4 February, 2009 Share Posted 4 February, 2009 The Trust should be using this period to recruit people. Instead it is choosing to go into hibernation. It should of course have been organising the march but chose instead to organise drinks at a pub. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 4 February, 2009 Share Posted 4 February, 2009 Does anyone really believe that 'upsetting Lowe' will actually make a blind bit of difference? The guy is so thick skinned, its pointless to fight this in that way... FFS if you want to challenge and enemy, you need to understand him and find the true weakness, not just keep shouting louder.... Lowe, whatever you may think of him, will listen to what he believes is serious and sensible debate that will find solutions that are in his personal interest. Tap into that psychology and you might get somewhere. 12 Years of Richard Chorley ranting at him has got him where exactly? I didn't say 'upsetting Lowe' should be what they should try to do, I just said they were scared to do anything in case of upsetting him. While the people of Southampton went on a march to try and help save the club they sat around having a meeting - they are a joke of Monty Python proportions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole Posted 4 February, 2009 Share Posted 4 February, 2009 The Trust have been a joke from day 1. Organising quiz nights is all they are good for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 4 February, 2009 Share Posted 4 February, 2009 isnt um pahars part of the trust.. I asked him last night on here what ideas they had in removing lowe and how it could be done and what they propose to move the club forward.. still waiting for a response... all quick to put the boot in... :confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ladysaint Posted 4 February, 2009 Share Posted 4 February, 2009 Um Pahars hasnt been part of the trust committee for over a year now so its unfair to lay any blame on him, in fact since he and a few others left it lost its impetus as I am sure if he was involved it would be doing something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebel Posted 4 February, 2009 Share Posted 4 February, 2009 isnt um pahars part of the trust.. I asked him last night on here what ideas they had in removing lowe and how it could be done and what they propose to move the club forward.. still waiting for a response... all quick to put the boot in... Um Pahars, Steve Grant, Exit2, Ladysaint, and fos1 were all on the Saints Trust working group, committee and then the board - all have since stepped down along with myself for a number of reasons Nick Illingsworth is the only original committee/board members still on the Trust Board many others have come and gone since then there has long been an argument over whether the Trust should be a social organisation setting up quizes etc and organising away coaches, an organisation focussed on big issues affecting Saints - or both personally I think we wasted too much time on things like the Saints Trust bar and tried to do too much at once one of the main reasons the Trust has failed to fly is because hardly anyone else wanted to get involved in helping - the idea was to have sub-committees or whatever looking after the Trust Bar, Away day travel, regional supporters groups and things like that - but no one else stepped forward some people also failed to step up and deliver on what they promised - or what they took ownership off - but not the responsibilty that goes with it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halo Stickman Posted 4 February, 2009 Share Posted 4 February, 2009 I don’t know enough about their internal machinations to be able to make fair comment on the Saints Trust. However, there is something I do know: the day of reckoning for Southampton Football Club is fast approaching. On that sorry day, the fools that have used our club as a stage on which to strut their own profiles, egos and agendas will be held to account. Leading protagonists, supporting cast members, mere bit-part players - all their names, and the roles they played in the demise of our once proud club, will be writ large, forever. This - and their own consciences - is something they will have to live with for the rest of their days. And those of us that have sat idly by watching this comic-tragedy, what will be our footnote in the history of SFC? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snowballs2 Posted 4 February, 2009 Share Posted 4 February, 2009 I don’t know enough about their internal machinations to be able to make fair comment on the Saints Trust. However, there is something I do know: the day of reckoning for Southampton Football Club is fast approaching. On that sorry day, the fools that have used our club as a stage on which to strut their own profiles, egos and agendas will be held to account. Leading protagonists, supporting cast members, mere bit-part players - all their names, and the roles they played in the demise of our once proud club, will be writ large, forever. This - and their own consciences - is something they will have to live with for the rest of their days. And those of us that have sat idly by watching this comic-tragedy, what will be our footnote in the history of SFC? The footnote will be Lowe and Co sat on their hands while Rome burned Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 4 February, 2009 Share Posted 4 February, 2009 I have never been a member of the Trust and only casually know LS, but I think it is wrong to have a go at all of these people who care enough to give their free time.Many of the directors should take note. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Bones Posted 4 February, 2009 Share Posted 4 February, 2009 Not a member myself. I do however hope those that are critizining are members themselves. Easy to sit back and whine - Easy for me to have a whine at the people whining myself too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole Posted 4 February, 2009 Share Posted 4 February, 2009 Not a member myself. I do however hope those that are critizining are members themselves. Easy to sit back and whine - Easy for me to have a whine at the people whining myself too I was a member but will never make that mistake again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 4 February, 2009 Share Posted 4 February, 2009 isnt um pahars part of the trust.. I asked him last night on here what ideas they had in removing lowe and how it could be done and what they propose to move the club forward.. still waiting for a response... all quick to put the boot in... Yeah, you asked me at about half 11 last night, just as I was going to bed and I obviously missed your post. You may also notice that I don't post during the day, so sorry that it's taken me that long to get back to you FFS (and feel free to wind in the cheap digs just cos I'm nto at your beck and call). As someone else has already pointed out, I am no longer involved on the Trust Board (but remain a grass roots member). As for some ideas about removing Lowe and moving forward, then I have never been shy in putting forward a number of ideas of how it could be achieved, what would come next, or at least an idea of what we could be doing. Removing Lowe could take a number of guises and to be honest most of them have been mentioned on here ad nauseum, e.g. protests, boycotts, "petitioning" shareholders and other stakeholders right up to more militant and direct action etc etc etc. There are a number of good ideas already being mooted and it looks as though there are people who are willing to try and do something to remove such a divisive and failing individual, both as CEO and as PLC Chairman. As for what can take his place, well my original suggestion around the time of the Runnymede meeting was to have all three major shareholding blocks represented on the board, but to have an independent salaried CEO alonmg with a non aligned Non Executive Chairman. (As Lowe is such a divisive (and failed) figure I suggested that maybe Cowen and/or Richards would represent that cabal, Wilde would also get a seat along with Crouch as Non Execs). I think a similar set up would still need to apply, with a proviso that there may have to be some short termism in some of the appointments until ling term appointees can be found. In the first instance the major shareholders should be looking for a suitably qualified and able CEO to take over the reins ASAP. At the same time they need to looking for a suitable Chairman (or maybe one of those in the shadows would step forward if they knew there was an appetite for change). Then the board needs to reflect the major shareholding groups (top include Crouch, but replacxe Lowe with say Richards). I'm afraid to say that along with these two appointments I would be thinking very hard about replacing Wotte, who IMHO is too tied up with the "Revolutionary Coaching Set Up". As an interim, I wouldn't be averse to Cowen taking the reins on a day to day basis, perhaps even assisted by Crouch or someone else. As for PLC Chairman then once again as a stopgap how about Salz, Green, Richards, Wiseman or even Cowen again. There could be any number of different permutations based on some of the above ideas and there should be no sacred cows when it comes to this Club's future. It won't be easy, it would rely on some hatchets being buried (but not buried in each others backs!!!!) and there may be major compromises, but IMHO maintaining the status quo is not the way forward. None of the above would be a guarantee of success, but neither is any of the above impossible if there is a will amongst the shareholders and key players. (see I'm not just quick to put the boot in) 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