Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 ...I'm just wondering if any of the fans that stayed away when Lowe was here are prepared to take any responsibility for the position we are in now. If we had the money of the supposed 4 or 5,000 a game, we wouldn't be in administration. I was just wondering if these people who have effectively cut off their nose to spite their face, accept any %age of responsibility to where the club is now. I hold them between 60 and 70% responsible myself, with Lowe shouldering the rest of the blame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintsmike25 Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 Get ready for some blame games. Like always on here with Alpine being one of the main culprits in saying how useless Lowe is which we all know, but the fact still stands if we had the fans getting 28,000 a week at SMS we wouldn't be in Administration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRobbie Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 I think the fans who stayed away should take some responsibility for finally ridding the club of a cancer and allowing us to rebuild free of a plc to feed, appalling divided boardroom and renewed hope for the future. So in terms of the big picture. Fans who stayed away due to Lowe will have done much more good than harm to the club. Bring on the new owners!!! This is NOT the fans fault. Purely the boardroom led utlimately by Lowe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastleighSoulBoy Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 Get ready for some blame games. Like always on here with Alpine being one of the main culprits in saying how useless Lowe is which we all know, but the fact still stands if we had the fans getting 28,000 a week at SMS we wouldn't be in Administration. A fair point which supports the premise that football is a product and one which consumers can decide to use or not use depending on how much value they place on that product. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 I think we have done this all before. It will only end up as another anti Lowe debate which carries on being devisive.I do understand your thoughts though but it is best we leave it now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 I think the fans who stayed away should take some responsibility for finally ridding the club of a cancer and allowing us to rebuild free of a plc to feed, appalling divided boardroom and renewed hope for the future. So in terms of the big picture. Fans who stayed away due to Lowe will have done much more good than harm to the club. Bring on the new owners!!! This is NOT the fans fault. Purely the boardroom led utlimately by Lowe.A bit previous I suggest Robbie.I think we should see what we get from the ashes before deciding how clever some were to bring the regime down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Billy Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 Ofcourse the ****e football, the poor players, the cheap managerial gambles, the boardroom upheavals and the economy have nothing to do with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marsdinho Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 ...I'm just wondering if any of the fans that stayed away when Lowe was here are prepared to take any responsibility for the position we are in now. If we had the money of the supposed 4 or 5,000 a game, we wouldn't be in administration. I was just wondering if these people who have effectively cut off their nose to spite their face, accept any %age of responsibility to where the club is now. I hold them between 60 and 70% responsible myself, with Lowe shouldering the rest of the blame. How the hell can you put a figure on it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1576 Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 Strange, now it's our fault. I tought it was only 20 people that stopped going because of Lowe (at least that's what I kept getting told). I wish you people would make up your ****ing minds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 21 April, 2009 Author Share Posted 21 April, 2009 I think the fans who stayed away should take some responsibility for finally ridding the club of a cancer and allowing us to rebuild free of a plc to feed, appalling divided boardroom and renewed hope for the future. So in terms of the big picture. Fans who stayed away due to Lowe will have done much more good than harm to the club. Bring on the new owners!!! This is NOT the fans fault. Purely the boardroom led utlimately by Lowe. I'm not saying that bringing Lowe's reign to an end isn't a good thing, and that they do have responsibility for, but if they so, then surely they also have the responsibility for the negative aspects that administration can bring as well?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Bognor Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 ...I'm just wondering if any of the fans that stayed away when Lowe was here are prepared to take any responsibility for the position we are in now. If we had the money of the supposed 4 or 5,000 a game, we wouldn't be in administration. I was just wondering if these people who have effectively cut off their nose to spite their face, accept any %age of responsibility to where the club is now. I hold them between 60 and 70% responsible myself, with Lowe shouldering the rest of the blame. I was brought up on the premise that the customer is always right. Therefore you have to look at the reasons why they stayed away which will lead you to the root cause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRobbie Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 I'm not saying that bringing Lowe's reign to an end isn't a good thing, and that they do have responsibility for, but if they so, then surely they also have the responsibility for the negative aspects that administration can bring as well?? Nope. Any negative impacts will only be short term IMHO. Long term rebuild with lots of lessons fresh in many of our minds about how NOT to manage a football club, will set us up for success. We will have a new owner shortly. And a new manager. And a new beginning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRobbie Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 I was brought up on the premise that the customer is always right. Therefore you have to look at the reasons why they stayed away which will lead you to the root cause. ...and there's alot of truth in that statement too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 21 April, 2009 Author Share Posted 21 April, 2009 How the hell can you put a figure on it If I saw 10 Lowe's and 10 people who decided to boycott in a burning building, I'd save 7 Lowe's, and 3 fans and let the rest burn. Of course I would then pummel the other 7 Lowe's, but I don't consider him as bad as those poepl who claim to 'love' the club yet not attend (geographically/financially dependant of course).. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Tone Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 I think we have done this all before. It will only end up as another anti Lowe debate which carries on being devisive.I do understand your thoughts though but it is best we leave it now. Quite. What's the point of this? We are where we are. All fans want us to be somewhere better. The best way to achieve that is for us all to pull together, back the club and team as they are now and hope for the best. There is absolutely nothing to be gained from arguing over whose fault it is that we are in this position. K. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 21 April, 2009 Author Share Posted 21 April, 2009 Nope. Any negative impacts will only be short term IMHO. Long term rebuild with lots of lessons fresh in many of our minds about how NOT to manage a football club, will set us up for success. We will have a new owner shortly. And a new manager. And a new beginning. I hope you're right, I just worry we won't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRobbie Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 If I saw 10 Lowe's and 10 people who decided to boycott in a burning building, I'd save 7 Lowe's, and 3 fans and let the rest burn. Of course I would then pummel the other 7 Lowe's, but I don't consider him as bad as those poepl who claim to 'love' the club yet not attend (geographically/financially dependant of course).. I'd call the fire brigade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
londonsaint1604 Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 I think the fans who stayed away should take some responsibility for finally ridding the club of a cancer and allowing us to rebuild free of a plc to feed, appalling divided boardroom and renewed hope for the future. So in terms of the big picture. Fans who stayed away due to Lowe will have done much more good than harm to the club. Bring on the new owners!!! This is NOT the fans fault. Purely the boardroom led utlimately by Lowe. Not sure about that mate. I'd rather have a club with Lowe than no club at all, which is a possible consequence of administration. To be honest I don't think there were that many people who did boycott because of Lowe anyway, because I don't believe so many people could be so petty that they'd give up supporting their football club because of 1 individual. It was probably more of an excuse for not wanting to watch a struggling team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRobbie Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 I hope you're right, I just worry we won't. We will... patience old chap... patience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spain saint Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 I'm not saying that bringing Lowe's reign to an end isn't a good thing, and that they do have responsibility for, but if they so, then surely they also have the responsibility for the negative aspects that administration can bring as well?? A couple of months ago we were told on here that the number of fans staying away because of Lowe was under a hundred! Now you are saying that it is the fans fault. 60 - 70 % !!!! behave!!! Make up your minds! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRobbie Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 Not sure about that mate. I'd rather have a club with Lowe than no club at all, which is a possible consequence of administration. To be honest I don't think there were that many people who did boycott because of Lowe anyway, because I don't believe so many people could be so petty that they'd give up supporting their football club because of 1 individual. It was probably more of an excuse for not wanting to watch a struggling team. Lowe's gone and we're about to be bought out. I think the futures bright. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hurricane163 Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 So if a shop sells rubbish goods with a poor level of service and goes out of business as a result then the customer is to blame for the failure rather than the shop management!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 21 April, 2009 Author Share Posted 21 April, 2009 I'd call the fire brigade. Hahaha, yeah, may be a better idea... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponto1963 Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 I think the fans who stayed away should take some responsibility for finally ridding the club of a cancer and allowing us to rebuild free of a plc to feed, appalling divided boardroom and renewed hope for the future. So in terms of the big picture. Fans who stayed away due to Lowe will have done much more good than harm to the club. Bring on the new owners!!! This is NOT the fans fault. Purely the boardroom led utlimately by Lowe. Agreed, the best thing Lowe could have done is to stay away, in my opinion he was divisive since he didn't have the foresight to keep on investing after the FA cup final. Then we had 2 ways to go, and he chose to not to go to the next level. At the end of the day the buck stops with the MD/Chairman and his arrogance at not accepting that, caused him to be the hate figure of a lot of the fan base. If he wanted to come back on the board he should never have come back as chairman, it was an automatic cause for about 5000 fans to stay away. Also the Dutch fiasco this time round was purely his fault. So 2 tenures as chairman and 2 relegations. Nuf Said Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Block 5 Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 Zzzzzzzzz........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 Does anybody think the home fans have had 'value for money' this season ? The relationship between fans and the club is COMMERCIAL, there is no compulsion, other than blind loyalty to the club, and as 'consumers' they have a free choice as to whether to attend or not. The reasons the club is in the mess it currently is are many and varied; yes the 'stay aways' affected the gate income, but Rupert came back because we were trading at a loss, - BEFORE they decided to stay away. We had p1ssed so much money away on cr4p transfers for grossly overpaid and underperforming players, paying off cr4p managers, and into a myriad other black holes. It is almost certain that administration would have followed relegation anyway, and the standard of "football" this season has always been heading in that direction, so all their attendance would have done is delay the inevitable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 21 April, 2009 Author Share Posted 21 April, 2009 So if a shop sells rubbish goods with a poor level of service and goes out of business as a result then the customer is to blame for the failure rather than the shop management!!!!! Even if these customers used this rubbish shop every time before, and said they 'loved' this shop and no other shop is for them. They then decided to leave because an owner, who previously had sold excellent products but had made a mistake with a supplier and decreased the quality and service, took over again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 21 April, 2009 Author Share Posted 21 April, 2009 Quite. What's the point of this? We are where we are. All fans want us to be somewhere better. The best way to achieve that is for us all to pull together, back the club and team as they are now and hope for the best. There is absolutely nothing to be gained from arguing over whose fault it is that we are in this position. K. The point is I like to remind those on here who did stay away PURELY because of Lowe that I hold them largely responsible for us going into admin, and potentially going out of business full stop. And that if I see them in the street I will kick them squarely in the nuts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 ...I'm just wondering if any of the fans that stayed away when Lowe was here are prepared to take any responsibility for the position we are in now. If we had the money of the supposed 4 or 5,000 a game, we wouldn't be in administration. I was just wondering if these people who have effectively cut off their nose to spite their face, accept any %age of responsibility to where the club is now. I hold them between 60 and 70% responsible myself, with Lowe shouldering the rest of the blame. No, not at all. Had Lowe not returned with the Quisling, I suspect that many others would have attended, so the blame lies squarely on his shoulders, does it not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 The point is I like to remind those on here who did stay away PURELY because of Lowe that I hold them largely responsible for us going into admin, and potentially going out of business full stop. And that if I see them in the street I will kick them squarely in the nuts. I doubt that you'd recognise me, but sure that you'd recognise either Lowe or the Quisling. Feel free to kick them squarely in the nuts, if they have any, that is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 (edited) No, not at all. Had Lowe not returned with the Quisling, I suspect that many others would have attended, so the blame lies squarely on his shoulders, does it not? I suspect Dibden isn't interested in root causes. This thread is more geared at analysing knock-on effects, I believe. Edited 21 April, 2009 by trousers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestSaint Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 I may be willing to take some responsibility if I had been in charge of the day to day affairs of the club. I assume it would have been my responsibility to sell the club and do my best to make the match day experience one that the fans would want to repeat. I think the cowards way is to blame everyone else for your own failure to succceed and personally I think for fans to start threads blaming other supporters is pretty poor. As Ken said we are where we are so lets move on and deal with it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daren W Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 ...I'm just wondering if any of the fans that stayed away when Lowe was here are prepared to take any responsibility for the position we are in now. If we had the money of the supposed 4 or 5,000 a game, we wouldn't be in administration. I was just wondering if these people who have effectively cut off their nose to spite their face, accept any %age of responsibility to where the club is now. I hold them between 60 and 70% responsible myself, with Lowe shouldering the rest of the blame. I see, so between 4,000 and 5,000 boycotted the club because of Lowe?? How on earth did you get that figure? The drop in attendances had nothing to do with the loaning out of our better players and their replacement with youth teamers or relegation and mis-management or countless other **** ups then? The problem we have here is that the rabidly pro Lowe mob seem to want to play the "loyalty card" when it suits them. We are customers, no more, no less. It's only when the club ****s up that they remember us and play the loyal supporter card. I've come across countless stories of loyal season ticket holders who have been shown appalling customer service, appalling treatment and then been expected to renew. They've quite rightly told the club where to go. The reason we're ****ed is because the old board got us relegated, cost us £30 million a year, cost us about 8,000 plastic fans who didn't fancy Championship football and cost us a fair amount of good players who went back to the Premiership. The reason we're ****ed is that the new board gambled on promotion and lost and got us further into debt. To put 60-70% of the blame on the fans is just completely and utterly ridiculous... It's those fans that are now expected to bail the club out and then be blamed for the club entering administration? We're just paying a high, high cost for treating fans like idiots.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 21 April, 2009 Author Share Posted 21 April, 2009 No, not at all. Had Lowe not returned with the Quisling, I suspect that many others would have attended, so the blame lies squarely on his shoulders, does it not? No, because him coming back is not fording people to not go, they're not going because they are stubborn idiots, or as I am starting to see it, because they just don't care about the club in the same way the rest of us do... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Tone Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 The point is I like to remind those on here who did stay away PURELY because of Lowe that I hold them largely responsible for us going into admin, and potentially going out of business full stop. And that if I see them in the street I will kick them squarely in the nuts. Perhaps it would be better to restrain yourself until after they've attended the Burnley game? ;-) K. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stax Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 I think the fans who stayed away should take some responsibility for finally ridding the club of a cancer and allowing us to rebuild free of a plc to feed, appalling divided boardroom and renewed hope for the future. So in terms of the big picture. Fans who stayed away due to Lowe will have done much more good than harm to the club. Bring on the new owners!!! This is NOT the fans fault. Purely the boardroom led utlimately by Lowe. 1oo% agree the club has finally got rid of Lowe and im feeling more positive about the clubs future then i have felt in a long time. Lowe has presided over 2 relegations (well,one is in the post) due to his incompetence at appointing the right manager and a whole host of other things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
londonsaint1604 Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 So if a shop sells rubbish goods with a poor level of service and goes out of business as a result then the customer is to blame for the failure rather than the shop management!!!!! That is a poor analogy, because football clubs don't have customers they have fans/supporters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 21 April, 2009 Author Share Posted 21 April, 2009 I suspect Dibden isn't interested in root causes. This thread is more geared at analysing knock-on effects, I believe. Indeed. The lack of money into the club is the root cause of us going into administration, and I don't think anyone can deny this. And if that money is the money that would have been raised had people not been pig stubborn and went to matches, then I do blame them proportionally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 21 April, 2009 Author Share Posted 21 April, 2009 Perhaps it would be better to restrain yourself until after they've attended the Burnley game? ;-) K. I'll leave the game 5 minutes early and stand outside Turnstile H, giving everyone a kick on their way out. There may be some friendly fire I'm afraid! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 21 April, 2009 Author Share Posted 21 April, 2009 I see, so between 4,000 and 5,000 boycotted the club because of Lowe?? How on earth did you get that figure? The drop in attendances had nothing to do with the loaning out of our better players and their replacement with youth teamers or relegation and mis-management or countless other **** ups then? The problem we have here is that the rabidly pro Lowe mob seem to want to play the "loyalty card" when it suits them. We are customers, no more, no less. It's only when the club ****s up that they remember us and play the loyal supporter card. I've come across countless stories of loyal season ticket holders who have been shown appalling customer service, appalling treatment and then been expected to renew. They've quite rightly told the club where to go. The reason we're ****ed is because the old board got us relegated, cost us £30 million a year, cost us about 8,000 plastic fans who didn't fancy Championship football and cost us a fair amount of good players who went back to the Premiership. The reason we're ****ed is that the new board gambled on promotion and lost and got us further into debt. To put 60-70% of the blame on the fans is just completely and utterly ridiculous... It's those fans that are now expected to bail the club out and then be blamed for the club entering administration? We're just paying a high, high cost for treating fans like idiots.... I'm putting the blame that way because of the difference between being in administration and not, not what has happened previously, otherwise Wilde and Burley would have a lot to answer for. In other words, I think that those fans are 60-70% to blame for the difference between being solvent and insolvent. And the 4-5k number were the numbers the stayaways were pedalling whilst this was all going on, so just using their figures... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GenevaSaint Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 ...I'm just wondering if any of the fans that stayed away when Lowe was here are prepared to take any responsibility for the position we are in now. If we had the money of the supposed 4 or 5,000 a game, we wouldn't be in administration. I was just wondering if these people who have effectively cut off their nose to spite their face, accept any %age of responsibility to where the club is now. I hold them between 60 and 70% responsible myself, with Lowe shouldering the rest of the blame. No, next. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 Indeed. The lack of money into the club is the root cause of us going into administration, and I don't think anyone can deny this. And if that money is the money that would have been raised had people not been pig stubborn and went to matches, then I do blame them proportionally. Some would argue (not me obviously, for I am an open minded kinda chap) that Lowe being present at the club put off certain potential investors in the past. Or indeed visa versa if you believe some trains of thought on here.... Now that would be a (really deep) root cause.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chez Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 The reason we're ****ed is because the old board got us relegated, cost us £30 million a year, cost us about 8,000 plastic fans who didn't fancy Championship football and cost us a fair amount of good players who went back to the Premiership. The reason we're ****ed is that the new board gambled on promotion and lost and got us further into debt. in a nutshell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John B Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 I see, so between 4,000 and 5,000 boycotted the club because of Lowe?? How on earth did you get that figure? The drop in attendances had nothing to do with the loaning out of our better players and their replacement with youth teamers or relegation and mis-management or countless other **** ups then? The problem we have here is that the rabidly pro Lowe mob seem to want to play the "loyalty card" when it suits them. We are customers, no more, no less. It's only when the club ****s up that they remember us and play the loyal supporter card. I've come across countless stories of loyal season ticket holders who have been shown appalling customer service, appalling treatment and then been expected to renew. They've quite rightly told the club where to go. The reason we're ****ed is because the old board got us relegated, cost us £30 million a year, cost us about 8,000 plastic fans who didn't fancy Championship football and cost us a fair amount of good players who went back to the Premiership. The reason we're ****ed is that the new board gambled on promotion and lost and got us further into debt. To put 60-70% of the blame on the fans is just completely and utterly ridiculous... It's those fans that are now expected to bail the club out and then be blamed for the club entering administration? We're just paying a high, high cost for treating fans like idiots.... You are right the fans are not blame just maybe a little 5% or less say. But we are not the only ones to be in a similar situation Just look at Norwich and Charlton and to extent Watford. If Reading dont get back to the Premiership they will be selling their players too and could be in trouble next season. There is a general problem with clubs being relegated from the Premiership with large wage bills and outgoings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victor Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 Let me ask you feeble-minded people who think we are in admin because of the stay-away fans one question - who do you blame for relegation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintstr1 Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 So if a shop sells rubbish goods with a poor level of service and goes out of business as a result then the customer is to blame for the failure rather than the shop management!!!!! Nail on the head !!!! The stay away fans are not even 1% to blame for Saints spectacular demise , You dont pay for a product that is no good........ and the reason for it being no good...... The Chairman,Directors, Management & Players....... aportion the blame in varying percentages to that lot, NOT THE FANS.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintDonkey Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 [... pictures snipped for brevity ...] Okay Groundhog Day and Ever Decreasing Circles I get. But what has Fingermouse go to do with it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 Firstly the responsibilty of any business is to ensure its customers are satisfied and to budget effectively and according to its projected income. So the full responsibilty for teh current predicament lies with the clubs directors, not just Lowe and Wilde, but also due to the spending of Wilde and Crouch. The projected revenue for teh year would have taken into account the summer lay offs, the possible need to dup further high agers in Jan and a good estimate of projected gate receipts This last one the gate has gone down for a number of reasons, but principly because what was on show was not appealling enough to suficient fans. Now we can argue til we are blue in the face about why fans stayed away, and Lowe, the manager he selected and teh players performance all count toward producing a product that too few wanted to see. So they need to take the responibilty for creating a product that was not appealling enough to suppotr our cost base. The only thing the fans need to accept is that like it or not, the ONLY or main revenue source is the gate so this going down by 30% will IMPACT on the club. The controversial question is not who is responsible, because I believe thats pretty clear cut (if ultimately unfair) but what is the true size of our fanbase which should be represented by those who will go whatever - however badly we play, whatever the results - because ultimately thats how its judged. Luton town are not credited with a 40k fanbase because thats what they took to Wembley, but the 4000 whoo go week in week out - Its nnot judged when its easy to support, like the 30k+ against Man Udt, but when its hardest to support like next seasson in League 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 21 April, 2009 Share Posted 21 April, 2009 ...I'm just wondering if any of the fans that stayed away when Lowe was here are prepared to take any responsibility for the position we are in now. If we had the money of the supposed 4 or 5,000 a game, we wouldn't be in administration. I was just wondering if these people who have effectively cut off their nose to spite their face, accept any %age of responsibility to where the club is now. I hold them between 60 and 70% responsible myself, with Lowe shouldering the rest of the blame. Wow, another "blame the fans" thread 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