Statement this morning

[old man villa fan]

Before all of this, I was a supporter of MON and believed he had done a good job, although I was starting to have doubts about the use of certain players in the team and not tackling the deficiencies in the team that I thought stood out a mile.  MON resigning in the way he did has not changed my view in what he did for us but put very serious doubts in my mind that he could ever have taken us on further under a realistic financial plan and that the reasons for what I thought were deficiencies in the team was probably his inflexible attitude.

There have been many comments about Randy being partially/totally to blame for the players contracts as if he was unaware of the increasing problem, insinuating that this was due to his inexperience.  My view is that he allowed MON to spend heavily initially to get us back to top 6 and when we almost made top 4 the season before last MON went back to Randy saying that we were very close to breaking in to the top 4 and he needed a further high investment to do this.  Randy agreed to this and we saw significant spending last summer for another crack at it.  I think MON went back to Randy again before the end of last season saying that he again needed to spend big.  By this time Randy, having gambled at extending his investment, realised that realistically we had missed our chance of breaking in to the top 4 before the new Man City owners had got their game together.  Randy had gambled in full knowledge of what it was doing to our wage bill but knew that this could be rectified over time by careful financial management without too many drastic measures.

I think that Randy told MON back in May (if not before - and it could well have been back at around the time of the chelsea game) that the club could not continue throwing money at trying to get into the top 4 but would need to adopt a more long term strategy.  He possibly said that there would be money to buy players but we had to get rid of some of the players that were on high wages and not figuring in MONs plans together with considering the futures of any existing 1st team players that were going to be replaced by any incoming players.  I think all of this was discussed before Man City coming forward with the offer for Milner, which MON was probably delighted with as he probably thought it solved all of his problems about funding the purchase of new players but forgetting about the increased wage bill.  Since the Man City offer for Milner, MON has not seemed very active in trying to sell the 'deadwood'.  I also think that MON did not want Ireland but preferred to have cash only, although Man City have probably said that there would be no deal if we did not take a player in part exchange so as to reduce their spending and clear a player off their books that would not figure in their 25.

I think Randy, having seen this, had possibly told MON very recently that he would not be getting the balance of the money from the Milner deal as he had made no attempt at shifting any players.  I know transfers are difficult these days but it has taken a long time to get the Milner deal moving and, strangely, we only started to see some light at the end of last week when MON appeared to be removed from the negotiations.  MON reflected on this over the weekend and quit on Monday.

 Randy was in the UK over the weekend and MON could have told him he was resigning but no, he waited until Randy had left the country and with that lost my total respect.  The club was battered by the media when the news of MON quitting came out and many supporters starting to very seriously question the Owner.  Supporters were crying out for a statement from Randy as it appeared (from media speculation) that we were going to be selling everybody and Randy had done the dirty on MON.  The General made a very straight statement saying how it was as he (may be with Randys knowledge, I don't know) thought that MON had let the club down and the supporters should know how it was.  Why anybody should say that it was over the top beats me.  If it had been a very toned down statement, supporters would naturally have said that we weren't being told the full story.  So this only leaves one question, do you believe the General or not.  Randys statement was very professional and just stated that they had differing views on how the club could go forward.  Although it did not say it, it very clearly said to me, "I am the owner who has put the money into the club and if there is differing opinion I will listen but my decision is the one we will go with".

So where do we go from here.  I do not think we will be selling any of our top players after Milner.  The new manager will be given time to reduce the wage bill and in the meantime will be given some money to buy one or two players if there is time before the window closes.

[Guy M]

I had written an article before Monday's late rewrite about how I wasn't looking forward to the season and was bored with it all. I can't bllody wait until Saturday now. It could all fall apart but this has woken me from my Villa slumbers.

Loved your first article of the season last year Stuart so sure I'll succumb and buy this in person at some point. Did you think about leaving the old article in as well as adding the new one?

[Guy M]

Incidentally, Pelty has been proven to be the most "ITK" poster anywhere on the internet.

Food for thought for all those who got their knickers into a twist and dismissed him a few weeks ago.

I seem to recall somebody on here saying
'I don't think he has a fucking clue.'

I'd hope he would be considering.

[garyfouroaks]

Before all of this, I was a supporter of MON etc.............

A very good post OMVF which I agree with and I think is represenatative of a substantial swathe of our support.

I could have readily accepted MON, at the end of last season, feeling that his record of six successive sixth place finishes was as good as it was going to get with no prospect of new fresh net transfer funds. But the realisation that this was the grumpy end to an uneasy impasse is difficult to take.

[villa `cross the mersey]

Before all of this, I was a supporter of MON etc.............

A very good post OMVF which I agree with and I think is represenatative of a substantial swathe of our support.



I could have readily accepted MON, at the end of last season, feeling that his record of six successive sixth place finishes was as good as it was going to get with no prospect of new fresh net transfer funds. But the realisation that this was the grumpy end to an uneasy impasse is difficult to take.

Yes I agree, a well put together piece - When the dust settles I think a fair number of us will reflect upon the manner in which MON left...if what is being reported is accurate of course - to resign after Lerner had left these shores and not to face the players is I feel, unprofessional. Still MON will get the opportunity to put his side of the story to all and sundry when he no doubt appears on the MOTD sofa next to Lineker et al. The fawning over MON by Lineker and Hansen will be unbearable I would imagine.

[Chris Smith]

And before I get the usual tiresome responses, I'm not excusing anything O'Neill has done this week.

Well said Chris.

I know you were a MON supporter, but it's a more mature response than some other answers this week from either side of the bizarre barriers that Villa fans build for themselves.

It's certainly a bit more mature than railing against the Board for not being clairvoyant enough to second guess MON flouncing off when he did.

Except I haven't said any such thing, I'm just not as willing to believe whatever the board decide to spoonfeed us over this.

[Chris Smith]

Can anyone answer the question I posed on the previous page in the discussion on Pelty's post?

It does raise the question though, if this was the official thinking and was how they felt about the manager why the fuck didn't they do something about it?

If it was the official line then they were almost negligent in not doing anything about it. If not then Pelty was just sounding off and no importance should be attached to it.

[cheltenhamlion]

I had written an article before Monday's late rewrite about how I wasn't looking forward to the season and was bored with it all. I can't bllody wait until Saturday now. It could all fall apart but this has woken me from my Villa slumbers.

Loved your first article of the season last year Stuart so sure I'll succumb and buy this in person at some point. Did you think about leaving the old article in as well as adding the new one?

That's for the editor but he asked for a rewrite so I presume it won't be in. I still have the original article though so might put it forward again at the end of the season and do another on how I am feeling then to go with it.

[Dave Cooper please]

Can anyone answer the question I posed on the previous page in the discussion on Pelty's post?

It does raise the question though, if this was the official thinking and was how they felt about the manager why the fuck didn't they do something about it?

If it was the official line then they were almost negligent in not doing anything about it. If not then Pelty was just sounding off and no importance should be attached to it.

Maybe they thought that O'Neill would agree to the terms that Randy was going to set out to him when he first flew over to talk face-to-face? After all, O'Neill is still a very good manager as I'm sure you'll agree, so maybe Randy thought that a good "clear the air" talk would pull MON round to Randy's vision of the next couple of years?
Having to pay him a years wages for terminating his rolling contract may or may not have been in his thoughts as well, who knows.
Obviously this didn't happen so as soon as Randy left again, O'Neill walked.

[Chris Smith]

Can anyone answer the question I posed on the previous page in the discussion on Pelty's post?

It does raise the question though, if this was the official thinking and was how they felt about the manager why the fuck didn't they do something about it?

If it was the official line then they were almost negligent in not doing anything about it. If not then Pelty was just sounding off and no importance should be attached to it.

Maybe they thought that O'Neill would agree to the terms that Randy was going to set out to him when he first flew over to talk face-to-face? After all, O'Neill is still a very good manager as I'm sure you'll agree, so maybe Randy thought that a good "clear the air" talk would pull MON round to Randy's vision of the next couple of years?
Having to pay him a years wages for terminating his rolling contract may or may not have been in his thoughts as well, who knows.
Obviously this didn't happen so as soon as Randy left again, O'Neill walked.

Or they were planning to get rid of him but wanted to do it to their own timescale and on their terms and O'Neill called their bluff.

As you say who knows but if it was because of not wanting to pay the compensation it smacks of constructive dismissal.

All of this is speculation and none of it particularly edifying, for either party.

There's more to this affair than we're being told.