Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine
Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: Chico Hamilton III on September 22, 2010, 04:00:36 PM
-
Can we change the S.purs word filter back?
-
spurs?
-
Oh! :o
-
Steve Hodge
DOL
Trevor Francis
TTOD
Fickle
Manure
-
spurs
-
Just write Sperms instead of Spurs.
You know it makes sense.
-
Spurs?
-
Haha - I like it!
-
Villadawg FC
haha That's brilliant.
-
Spuds?
Spurzzz?
Cockspuds?
-
Can we have 'Ged' transformed into "Pontius Pilate"?
-
Villadawg FC
-
Villadawg FC
Actually that didn't work. I typed in Villadawg FC to see what would happen. I appreciate that you reading won't know if I'm typing in Villadawg FC, or Villadawg FC. Or if I'm just constantly typing in Villadawg FC and at no point typing Villadawg FC. I'm now tempted to type in Villadawg FC to see what would happen.
I'll look stupid if there isn't actually a word filter on anymore.
-
total hypespurts?
-
Spurs
-
If The Lillywhites are now Villadawg FC, then what are the Toon Army going to get called?
-
then what are the Toon Army going to get called?
Tottenham
-
Did I miss something with Villadawg FC?
-
When will I be able to type Scunthorpe?
Oh, sh1t - I can!! :)
-
So we can't type Spurs any more?
-
Word filters are like typical sixth-form humour. Hysterically funny the first time. So funny in fact that it then gets repeated ad nauseum, until eventually, by the law of diminishing returns, that very same humour gets well and truly on your tits.
-
I think we should change it to Tottenham Hotcarl (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Hot-Carl) personally.
-
Villadawg FC
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Whats happened there then?
Nothing!
-
I think we should change it to Tottenham Hotcarl (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Hot-Carl) personally.
You learn something new every day.
Sadly, some of things can't be un-learned! Cheers, Joe.
-
Word filters are like typical sixth-form humour. Hysterically funny the first time. So funny in fact that it then gets repeated ad nauseum, until eventually, by the law of diminishing returns, that very same humour gets well and truly on your tits.
Yep
Time to change the Spurrs one back please, Pauli. The thread I started on Tickets and Travel looks a if I'm taking the piss out of Villa Dawg and I'm not
I don't mind the one that changes "Birmingham City" to "The Blues". I never stop laughing at that.
-
Spurs
-
After coming up with Total Hypespurt I now bring you...
Troddenin Dogsturd!
Come on you Turds!
-
I do like that one, Maz.
Still can't get Hot Carl out of my head.
-
Still can't get Hot Carl out of my head.
That's exactly where it's aimed at...
-
Did I miss something with Villadawg FC?
You really really haven't. Unless analysing accounts gets you off.
-
Where is he?
Visiting White Hart Lane to pore over their finances?
-
Where is he?
Visiting White Hart Lane to pore over their finances?
I believe he's grown so attached to the club that he now refers to it as "The Lane"
-
spurs
-
What is it supposed to change to ?
-
wagebill borefest
-
Where is he?
Visiting White Hart Lane to pore over their finances?
You're a cheeky fecker. The row started because you were doing your usual "isn't 'arry lovely, aren't $purs better than us" routine.
-
Where is he?
Visiting White Hart Lane to pore over their finances?
You're a cheeky fecker. The row started because you were doing your usual "isn't 'arry lovely, aren't $purs better than us" routine.
How about "FletchDawg FC" then?
-
Where is he?
Visiting White Hart Lane to pore over their finances?
You're a cheeky fecker. The row started because you were doing your usual "isn't 'arry lovely, aren't $purs better than us" routine.
Never said'Arry was 'lovely' as a bloke I find him pretty objectionable, but I was making the correct point that he's done a much better job there than O'Bottler did with us and in half the time to boot.
-
Speaking of the Bottler, how about Moanin' O'Neill?
-
Where is he?
Visiting White Hart Lane to pore over their finances?
You're a cheeky fecker. The row started because you were doing your usual "isn't 'arry lovely, aren't $purs better than us" routine.
Never said'Arry was 'lovely' as a bloke I find him pretty objectionable, but I was making the correct point that he's done a much better job there than O'Bottler did with us and in half the time to boot.
and I was was making the correct point that honest 'arry managed to finish 6 points ahead of us with a squad that has had double spent on it since the summer of 2006 and more than £150m of that spend in just the two seasons leading up to his fine achievement.
I'm not knocking his achievement in reaching 4th and the Champions League. I just happen to hold the opinion that we would have done at least as well, given the same level of investment in the playing squad.
I'll happily consider any coherent argument against my opinion but I'm not going to change it simply because it doesn't fit some people's opinion on O'Neill's character. That is a separate issue.
-
Whatever happened to your old signature? The one about somebody carrying on doing some job because he liked it.
-
Whatever happened to your old signature? The one about somebody carrying on doing some job because he liked it.
I changed it at about the same time as you changed your opinion about how simple it was going to be for Villa to appoint a new top class manager.
-
Haven't checked your figures Villadawg, not sure if they're right, bearing in mind your previous.
-
Whatever happened to your old signature? The one about somebody carrying on doing some job because he liked it.
I changed it at about the same time as you changed your opinion about how simple it was going to be for Villa to appoint a new top class manager.
Took longer than we'd have liked, but we've achieved that.
-
Whatever happened to your old signature? The one about somebody carrying on doing some job because he liked it.
I changed it at about the same time as you changed your opinion about how simple it was going to be for Villa to appoint a new top class manager.
What, you mean how I said we'd get a top-class manager and we promptly got one? I can't remember changing my opinion about that at all.
-
I'm not knocking his achievement in reaching 4th and the Champions League. I just happen to hold the opinion that we would have done at least as well, given the same level of investment in the playing squad.
Nope.
O'Neill would not have made the same signings 'Arry has, overpriced British based players would not have propelled us to 4th. Certainly, the likes of Keane and McGeady wouldn't have (a snip at £18m)
-
I like that I've turned signatures off.
-
Whatever happened to your old signature? The one about somebody carrying on doing some job because he liked it.
I changed it at about the same time as you changed your opinion about how simple it was going to be for Villa to appoint a new top class manager.
What, you mean how I said we'd get a top-class manager and we promptly got one? I can't remember changing my opinion about that at all.
I was thinking more of when you were saying Randy has made sure he won't be caught by surprise if Martin leaves. Still, we're getting a bit off track here aren't we?
-
I'm not knocking his achievement in reaching 4th and the Champions League. I just happen to hold the opinion that we would have done at least as well, given the same level of investment in the playing squad.
Nope.
O'Neill would not have made the same signings 'Arry has, overpriced British based players would not have propelled us to 4th. Certainly, the likes of Keane and McGeady wouldn't have (a snip at £18m)
and it is fine for you that you think that. I think we'd have had more than Keane and McGeady to choose from if we had spent another £120m.
-
I'm not knocking his achievement in reaching 4th and the Champions League. I just happen to hold the opinion that we would have done at least as well, given the same level of investment in the playing squad.
Nope.
O'Neill would not have made the same signings 'Arry has, overpriced British based players would not have propelled us to 4th. Certainly, the likes of Keane and McGeady wouldn't have (a snip at £18m)
and it is fine for you that you think that. I think we'd have had more than Keane and McGeady to choose from if we had spent another £120m.
If Martin had spent another 120m ( as this seems to be your accepted relevant figure), he'd have spent it on a dozen players of the quality of Keane and McGeady.
As you can only play 11 at once, that would have got us no further forward.
-
I was thinking more of when you were saying Randy has made sure he won't be caught by surprise if Martin leaves. Still, we're getting a bit off track here aren't we?
Yes, I must admit I was a bit wrong there. I, like Randy no doubt, thought the previous manager had a bit more decency than to walk out at the most inconvenient time, a short while after saying he had no intention of leaving. Still, you live and learn.
-
I was thinking more of when you were saying Randy has made sure he won't be caught by surprise if Martin leaves. Still, we're getting a bit off track here aren't we?
Yes, I must admit I was a bit wrong there. I, like Randy no doubt, thought the previous manager had a bit more decency than to walk out at the most inconvenient time, a short while after saying he had no intention of leaving. Still, you live and learn.
If ever a situation called for a back him or sack him type approach, this was probably it. As you say, you live and learn.
-
I was thinking more of when you were saying Randy has made sure he won't be caught by surprise if Martin leaves. Still, we're getting a bit off track here aren't we?
Yes, I must admit I was a bit wrong there. I, like Randy no doubt, thought the previous manager had a bit more decency than to walk out at the most inconvenient time, a short while after saying he had no intention of leaving. Still, you live and learn.
If ever a situation called for a back him or sack him type approach, this was probably it. As you say, you live and learn.
Even though no-one wanted him sacked and only you have said he hadn't been backed enough.
-
I was thinking more of when you were saying Randy has made sure he won't be caught by surprise if Martin leaves. Still, we're getting a bit off track here aren't we?
Yes, I must admit I was a bit wrong there. I, like Randy no doubt, thought the previous manager had a bit more decency than to walk out at the most inconvenient time, a short while after saying he had no intention of leaving. Still, you live and learn.
If ever a situation called for a back him or sack him type approach, this was probably it. As you say, you live and learn.
Even though no-one wanted him sacked and only you have said he hadn't been backed enough.
He was certainly backed in the past but that didn't seem to be happening this summer. I'm struggling to think of a single thing that happened to demonstrate he was been backed again.
-
What about those players you reckoned he was about to sign? And in any case, even if Randy didn't give another penny, he's still done more than he had to.
-
So he had been backed more than any other Villa manager in living memory and at the first sign that Randy might want to see some return on his investment or some reassurances that high earning, non-playing wasters were going to be moved on, he walks?
Marvellous, such loyalty.
-
Even if he felt he wasn't being backed, he could have shown more loyalty and - let's face it - gratitude for the 3m pounds a year to the club, and had the decency to handle his departure a bit better.
What was really so bad that he absolutely had to walk when he did?
The board have said that MON knew the situation at the start of the summer, and before, even, and agreed with the strategy on multiple occasions. He then met with the chairman and having given no warning that anything was wrong, walked out two days later.
Villadawg - the board say that is what happened. You're assuming other things happened to provoke it (and "assuming" is the right word, as we've not heard MON say anything thus far, so we don't even know if he'd disagree).
Given that, you're clearly suggesting the board are lying to us, aren't you?
Is that a fair assumption? Are they lying to us?
-
each of the last 3 posts are saying it shouldn't have mattered whether they backed him further this summer or not. My earlier point was that I feel, given what had been going on leading up to the summer, they should have made the decision to either back him or sack him, one way or the other.
Paulie - I'm not assuming anything, I'm saying I still don't know why he resigned. As far as I know there hasn't been anything from the board more explicit that Randy's statement that he and O'Neill ‘no longer shared a common view as to how to move forward". It seems as though the signs of that were there for some time before he announced his resignation.
I agree 100% that O'Neill knew the situation going into the summer. He had made comments himself about using the academy players and maybe even selling one of his star players. It may be that he decided to go back on that or decided that in fact he couldn't handle it. It may also be that something else happened, perhaps related to the Milner/Ireland deal that made his position untenable.
-
each of the last 3 posts are saying it shouldn't have mattered whether they backed him further this summer or not. My earlier point was that I feel, given what had been going on leading up to the summer, they should have made the decision to either back him or sack him, one way or the other.
General K, on behalf of the board, has said that they would be backing him. They obviously didn't want to sack him or they would have done it well before MON resigned surely?
So, cards out, do you think the board are lying?
I agree 100% that O'Neill knew the situation going into the summer. He had made comments himself about using the academy players and maybe even selling one of his star players. It may be that he decided to go back on that or decided that in fact he couldn't handle it. It may also be that something else happened, perhaps related to the Milner/Ireland deal that made his position untenable.
Right, so you think that O'Neill knew the situation, and yet chose to fuck off anyway at the worst possible moment?
-
Yes Dave that's right. He had known what the situation was regarding funding for some time and he fucked off.
So why assume that it was the situation regarding funding that caused him to fuck off, rather than some other issue that had suddenly emerged?
-
Don't know, I'm not assuming anything.
But in the absence of anything from O'Neill himself I can only go on what has come from General K and the board. Not even the O'Neill friendly media have come up with any other feasible reasons except for the funding issue.
Now, do you think the board are lying?
-
I've always thought of The General as a man of integrity, nothing he or the board have done in the last 4 years makes me think otherwise, therefore I'm certain their version of events is the correct one.
We'll probably never get O'Neill's side of the story anyway, the pube headed mentalist always talks in riddles.
-
Here is a question though. Why has MON been so quiet?
For someone who normally flaps his chops at the thought of any injustice, why has he not said anything in the press?
It's difficult to imagine there is any kind of gagging order as he upped sticks and pissed off of his own accord.
-
Here is a question though. Why has MON been so quiet?
For someone who normally flaps his chops at the thought of any injustice, why has he not said anything in the press?
He's too busy waxing his moustache and twirling his cape.
-
Paulie - I'm not assuming anything, I'm saying I still don't know why he resigned. As far as I know there hasn't been anything from the board more explicit that Randy's statement that he and O'Neill ‘no longer shared a common view as to how to move forward". It seems as though the signs of that were there for some time before he announced his resignation.
The General was pretty clear with his description of events - with the agreement on the way things were going to be going forward, that he'd signed up for it, and that at the end of the summer he left abruptly, with nothing having changed, a couple of days after a meeting with the chairman in which he gave no indication of not being up for it.
That's what they told us - are you willing to accept that as the state of affairs?
I don't want to push the point too much, but it strikes me that if you're not going to take them at their word and believe it, you're effectively accusing them of misleading us.
Maybe I'm too naive or trusting with them, but I can't see anything they've done over the last four years that makes me think they would lie to us. Or treat the manager badly either, for what it's worth.
-
I'm afraid you're going to have to help me out here because I didn't read the comments where it was explained why O'Neill had resigned, which is what I think we're talking about.
I read the general's comments at the time of O'Neill's departure, although I perhaps haven't read all of them. The ones I did read, I thought were well crafted comments that could lead people to certain conclusions if that was what they wanted, but they avoided being explicit in any way about the reason for O'Neill's departure. There's nothing wrong with that, it is what I would expect when there is potential scope for legal proceedings, which there often is in the period following the sudden departure of a key employee/s. I thought the comments were designed to tell you what he wanted you to think, rather than providing the information needed to make a personal judgement. Again, nothing wrong with that, if its what he chooses to do. A good example is your comment that O'Neill resigned a couple of days after a meeting with Randy. I may have missed some info but I think what the general actually said was that they had spoken. You've drawn the inference that it was a meeting and presumably that they had an opportunity to discuss any substantive issues.
So, no I don't think he has told any lies or misled me in any way. If you think he has explained the reasons for the departure then please point me at the relevant comments. If you can't do that, then you may want to examine whether you have been misled.
-
I'm with Villadawg on this. The comments were so nebulous (from what I can recall and I too wouldn't mind being pointed to a place where I can refresh my memory) as to be capable of quite a few interpretations.
Have we been lied to? I don't know.
Have we been told the full unvarnished truth? I don't think so.
Isn't there a resignation letter somewhere? If there is then the Board could release it and clear up all the confusion. Unless it contains embarrassing stuff of course.
Didn't MON read out his resignation letter to Faulkner in the latter's office? Or has my brain made that up for some reason?
-
I'm with Villadawg on one thing, I too would love to know what made O'Neill walk out of the club only five days before the start of the season and just two days after a meeting with Lerner at which point everything seemed fine and geared towards the first match.
If it was something other than O'Neill being unhappy at the new budget arrangements then it's going to have to be a very big something for me to stop thinking that O'Neill is a bottling wanker.
-
I'd love to know what happened to change the situation whereby Randy Lerner flew to America only to turn back immediately once he knew O'Neill had walked out. Surely Randy wouldn't have left the country had he thought there was a chance the manager would be leaving.
-
The received wisdom has it that it must have had something to do with transfers and/or budgets:
MON didn't want Ireland as part of the Milner deal.
MON wasn't going to get any of the Milner money.
MON wanted to give Ashley a pay rise because otherwise he would be off to Spurs.
MON was refused funds because fringe players hadn't been sold.
I'd just like to learn the truth. It's out there somewhere isn't it?