Was the General right to comment on O'Neill

[KevinGage]

He's smart enough to know his standing in media circles, and probably envisaged this playing out as it has.

That is, mostly good/ supportive backing for him and his image at the expense of the club.

Doesn't sound particularly ludicrous/ far fetched/ James Bond villain-esque to me.

Sounds pretty straightforward, truth be told.

[Concrete John]

I didn't name you personally John, as I wasn't aware of your stance on the MON issue.
It seemed like you were getting agitated with him yourself towards the end.

But you seem to have taken this personally, so I guess if the cap fits.

It may not have been addressed to me personally, but I still don't like assertation that not fully agreeing with the General's comments = MON loyalist blinded to the truth.

I wasn't getting agitated with him and still felt he was doing a good job, but I was getting less convinced that was able to add the things needed to go that extra distance to qualify for the CL.  Sort of a case of thinking he was an 8/10 manager and not going to become a 9/10 manager.   

[Rudy Can't Fail]

Sort of a case of thinking he was an 8/10 manager and not going to become a 9/10 manager.

Very generous, John. I hope you pick me in the H&V Secret Santa. (winky)

[KevinGage]

This part is crucial, I think:

For the section of our own support who seem to have a problem with the General's comments most (but not all) seem to be in the group that still feel the need to defend MON -even now.

I'm aware that PeterW for example -who wanted MON for a while- was also less than impressed with the General's comments.

But it seems that the most vociferous critics (and I wouldn't have actually put you in that bracket John) of what was said are also the same people who are looking to justify MON's actions. Or blame the board for not being clairvoyant enough to second guess MON's walkout last Monday. Or both.

[darren woolley]

It was not the general who let us down five day's before our first game.

[Concrete John]

This part is crucial, I think:

For the section of our own support who seem to have a problem with the General's comments most (but not all) seem to be in the group that still feel the need to defend MON -even now.

I'm aware that PeterW for example -who wanted MON for a while- was also less than impressed with the General's comments.

But it seems that the most vociferous critics (and I wouldn't have actually put you in that bracket John) of what was said are also the same people who are looking to justify MON's actions. Or blame the board for not being clairvoyant enough to second guess MON's walkout last Monday. Or both.

Fair enough.  It is true that there are those on here who will twist anything and everything to match their view/agenda and those who actually post what they think about each issue as it arises.

[Chris Smith]

It was not the general who let us down five day's before our first game.

Two wrongs don't make a right.

If he'd come out and given a detailed explanation of what went on and why MON fucked off then I could have understood it. He didn't though, he just made a couple of thinly veiled digs and we're non the wiser as to what really happened although that hasn't stopped a few of you from deciding that you know it anyway.

To reiterate, I'm pissed off with MON for walking in the way and at the time he did but I'm not going to be a hypocrite or party to a a rewriting of history and say that I thought he was doing a bad job before that.

[hilts_coolerking]

Whatever the club said, the media reaction to O'Neill's departure would have been the same.  We're not going to win over his supporters among the press so there probably is no 'right' way to go about these things.

But there is a wrong way, and sniping at him in interviews or on fans forums looks pretty childish. I can totally understand why Randy and the General feel the way they do - I feel the same way myself - but if they want to publicise the way they feel then they should do it properly, in an official statement. 

[Billy Walker]

Yes, I do think the General was wrong to say what he did for the simple reason that when the new regime came in one of the club's core values was to be integrity.   Over the past four years Randy and the Board have rebuilt the club's image and made Aston Villa a club to be respected for its outlook and the way it approaches the increasingly immoral business of football.

Washing one's dirty laundry in public (no matter how justified) is an undignified and classless way to behave.  It's not the way Villa should be doing things.  I believe the General compromised his very high standards by saying what he said.  Likewise, the quotes attributed to Randy re. Man City yesterday, and Kevin MacDonald's football style were also disappointing to read.  Leave that kind of playground stuff to Sullivan, Gold and the like.

Obviously I'll put everything I've said into the context of MON walking out and leaving the club deep in the brown stuff.  Clearly such behaviour and rejection would leave any person with any feelings nothing short of furious.  The General's reaction was human and understandable BUT should have been kept within the walls of the boardroom at Villa Park.   

 

[sfx412]

Are we presuming we know or the Board know the real reasons behind Mon's sudden departure, then?

The day after he left I was assured by most every media outlet it was RL's fault, even now sections of it are intimating Mon suggests its because RL changed his policy in a negative way which on sudden reflection Mon said he was not compatible with and left. Yet from RL's earlier in the years statements confirmed recently they chatted and Mon decided all was well.

I thought the General's comments in keeping with his past style and an attempt to deflect the Mon bias, the RL negative bias. It worked too initially.

[cheltenhamlion]

Well that Sunday Supplement thing yesterday was full of media types saying that MON had been told he could not have any of the Milner transfer fee. Which is likely to be bollocks I would suggest.

To be honest, I don't think what The General said initially was anything other than him being rather pissed off that his best buddy in the world was getting shit on unfairly in the press.

It was the post of a man who was annoyed rather than some prepared club snipe.

[Pongos hat2]

Yes, I do think the General was wrong to say what he did for the simple reason that when the new regime came in one of the club's core values was to be integrity.   Over the past four years Randy and the Board have rebuilt the club's image and made Aston Villa a club to be respected for its outlook and the way it approaches the increasingly immoral business of football.

Washing one's dirty laundry in public (no matter how justified) is an undignified and classless way to behave.  It's not the way Villa should be doing things.  I believe the General compromised his very high standards by saying what he said.  Likewise, the quotes attributed to Randy re. Man City yesterday, and Kevin MacDonald's football style were also disappointing to read.  Leave that kind of playground stuff to Sullivan, Gold and the like.

Obviously I'll put everything I've said into the context of MON walking out and leaving the club deep in the brown stuff.  Clearly such behaviour and rejection would leave any person with any feelings nothing short of furious.  The General's reaction was human and understandable BUT should have been kept within the walls of the boardroom at Villa Park.

You people dont half talk some tosh. All Mr Krulak did was give the clubs side of the story to the fans which needed to be done.

The messiahs followers are feeling bitter and sore and are searching for anything they can for comfort. Pathetic really but it's what we've come to expect. I fully expect a few people to be ex Villa fans when MON rocks up at another club.

[Rip Van We Go Again]

Two wrongs don't make a right.

You've just reminded me Chris.
According to SSN, McLeish is trying to sign Zat Knight from Bolton but Carson Yueng insists that he signs two Chinese trialists instead.

McLeish was quoted as saying
'Two Wongs don't make a Knight.'

[pauliewalnuts]

it must be particularly galling for General Krulak and Randy to have to witness the near total support for MON in the media, and some of the absolute bullshit they've spouted about how we're "a selling club" and how he's had the rug pulled from under him.

I'm glad the General said something to redress the balance.

[hilts_coolerking]

Two wrongs don't make a right.

You've just reminded me Chris.
According to SSN, McLeish is trying to sign Zat Knight from Bolton but Carson Yueng insists that he signs two Chinese trialists instead.

McLeish was quoted as saying
'Two Wongs don't make a Knight.'

Oh, the humanity.