UNLESS Steve Wigley guides Saints into a position of Premiership respectability, Rupert Lowe is the man who cannot win.
He has been criticised for saying too much, he is now being criticised for staying silent as the debate over Steve Wigley's future rumbles on.
The chairman is damned if he does, damned if he doesn't.
I believe Lowe is right to maintain a silence in the wake of continued speculation regarding his latest managerial appointment.
His problems stem from the fact he hasn't always done just that.
When he dispensed with Stuart Gray's services after just 17 games as manager in October 2001 he said football was a "results-driven" business and Gray had only won four times.
He also said a similar thing before the start of the current season when asked about Paul Sturrock's future.
Nothing has changed. Results are still the be-all and end-all. Forget academies and youthful promise, fans fork out big money for season tickets etc for one reason only - to see the first team perform and win.
Were Lowe to utter the words "results-driven business" now it would be viewed by many as just heaping more (unwanted) pressure on Wigley.
A vote of confidence, like the ones handed out to Birmingham boss Steve Bruce recently?
What good do they do? Is a vote of confidence not seen by the national press as the prelude to a managerial parting of the ways?
Lowe has gone on record as saying Wigley will be in charge until the end of the season at the very earliest.
How often does he have to repeat it? Would every week satisfy some? He can hardly say it this week and make a change next Monday.
Wigley is under pressure, and he knows it. He doesn't need his chairman, who is unfairly viewed by the national press as a 'hire them and fire them' merchant as it is, uttering words which could easily be twisted to any suitable agenda.
No, Lowe has been sitting tight and, more so than anyone, keeping his fingers crossed that results improve quickly. That is all he really can do.
The brave decision he must take is deciding whether Wigley is STILL the right man to lead Saints.
Does he keep faith in Wigley who, lest we forget, has only been in charge for 12 Premiership matches - one less than Paul Sturrock was manager for?
Or does he bring in a more experienced manager?
It is a remarkable, and indeed damning, indictment of the crazy world of the Premiership.
Lowe, criticised for not giving Sturrock more time, is now being urged to appoint someone else when Sturrock's replacement has been in charge of even fewer league games than the ex-Plymouth boss was.
Where do you stop?
If Hoddle - or anyone else - DOES come in and Saints end up going down next May, what then? Another change?
And if the next man doesn't make a good start to 2005/06, what then? Yet another change?
No club needs stability more than Saints due to the number of managers they have lost for a variety of reasons in recent years.
But Lowe has to weigh up stability against what ex-Saints boss Alan Ball this week called the 'Golden Carrot' of the Premiership.
It is obvious that Lowe DESPERATELY wants Wigley to succeed as head coach. That is why he will give him as much time as is humanly possible.
It will be the chairman who will cop the most flak if Wigley is replaced. Fans have criticised his decision to give the head coach role to someone with no previous managerial experience rather than blame Wigley for accepting what has to be viewed as something of a poisoned challice.
If an experienced manager is brought in, Lowe will get the fans' grief for not having done it back in August and 'wasting' a few months.
And if Lowe keeps faith in Wigley - as he HAS to do really, given he only recently asked the LMA for special dispensation regarding his head coach's coaching qualifications - and Saints fail to haul themselves out of a relegation dogfight, then he will be ultimately blamed again.
As I said, the man who cannot win in the current circumstances due to the hole he has dug himself into ... unless Saints can improve on a statistic which shows just two wins in 18 league games.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article