Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine
Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: kippaxvilla2 on December 20, 2015, 01:19:15 PM
-
A little bit about the Lerner fallout.
http://www.skysports.com/watch/video/tv-shows/goals-on-sunday/10106034/oneill-villa-need-momentum
-
First thought is to defend himself against accusations of over-spending. He really is thin-skinned.
-
He did come off as quite self-serving yes, but they did open the door for that. Think he spoke a lot of common sense though, mostly about working with what we have, and just stringling together a few results, because I don't think we will do much business in January.
-
A striker to support Ayew is a must. Doing none or little business in January would be suicidal. People need to wake up - VILLA ARE 10 POINTS FROM SAFETY!!!
-
A striker to support Ayew is a must. Doing none or little business in January would be suicidal. People need to wake up - VILLA ARE 10 POINTS FROM SAFETY!!!
It won't be through choice though I just think in our position its going to be an up hill struggle to attract anyone of any note. Charlie Austin would be ideal I think.
-
I thought MON was spot on there in his assessment of events.Interesting that the majority of Villa fans give MON pelters for his departure yet are now coming to realise that the Lerner they sided with is a million times less trustworthy. MON conceded some time ago that his resignation timing was awful and hasn't put forward his side of events often, if at all,so I don't blame him for hijacking this Sky question with a revisit of summer 2010.
Let the record show, whether it suits your argument or not, that under MON we were top 6 thrice and since his departure have stank out the Premiership like a rotting fish hidden in the mother-in'law's sitting room curtain rail (little tip for you there this Yuletide season).
-
I thought MON was spot on there in his assessment of events.Interesting that the majority of Villa fans give MON pelters for his departure yet are now coming to realise that the Lerner they sided with is a million times less trustworthy. MON conceded some time ago that his resignation timing was awful and hasn't put forward his side of events often, if at all,so I don't blame him for hijacking this Sky question with a revisit of summer 2010.
Let the record show, whether it suits your argument or not, that under MON we were top 6 thrice and since his departure have stank out the Premiership like a rotting fish hidden in the mother-in'law's sitting room curtain rail (little tip for you there this Yuletide season).
And that's the thing, no matter your feelings on MON since his depature, fact is with our rapid decline history is in his favour not ours.
-
I don't think it's a case of siding with Lerner over the MON fall-out, most realise how naive our owner was/is. He was dumb, she was selfish
-
My issue with MON was the timing of his departure. If he had left at the end of the previous season most people would of held him in high esteem and wished him good luck. Whatever his disagreement with Lerner it's the fans that he let down by his walk out
-
O'Neil doesn't have a leg to stand on, as his refusal to say why he actually left shows.
'Those who stay write the history' did he say? Lerner kept pretty much schtum as I recall, whereas Martin's pals in the media like Olly Holt somehow seemed to know that none of it was his fault and weren't shy in saying so.
Wanker.
-
O'Neil doesn't have a leg to stand on, as his refusal to say why he actually left shows.
'Those who stay write the history' did he say? Lerner kept pretty much schtum as I recall, whereas Martin's pals in the media like Olly Holt somehow seemed to know that none of it was his fault and weren't shy in saying so.
Wanker.
But maybe he can't say for legal reasons. This is an old issue for me anyway, we just need to focus on the here and now.
-
I thought MON was spot on there in his assessment of events.Interesting that the majority of Villa fans give MON pelters for his departure yet are now coming to realise that the Lerner they sided with is a million times less trustworthy. MON conceded some time ago that his resignation timing was awful and hasn't put forward his side of events often, if at all,so I don't blame him for hijacking this Sky question with a revisit of summer 2010.
Let the record show, whether it suits your argument or not, that under MON we were top 6 thrice and since his departure have stank out the Premiership like a rotting fish hidden in the mother-in'law's sitting room curtain rail (little tip for you there this Yuletide season).
Hear hear.
-
History will show that after Villa he went to Sunderland followed the same transfer spending and left them in the shit just like us..
Imo with budget he had here 6th was a bare minimum requirement and that's all he achieved ,any other half decent manger would have managed the same.
-
Ironically structure being put in place now is exactly what was missing when MON walked out since there was no continuity in place.
MON is correct that we made money on Milner, Young and Downing. There are very few others where you could argue value for money was delivered.
For every Milner/Young/Downing there are 3/4 Davies/NRC/Beye/Heskey.
-
I've spent most of the post MON era thinking he was the villain of the piece. But every year of relentless, consistent Lerner fuck uppery shifts my thinking a bit more.
-
Feel free to re-write history now that we have all fallen out with Lerner but nothing will ever excuse Quitty's calculated action to create the maximum amount of damage on our football club with the timing of his gutless act.
What happened then and what is happening now are two separate issues - back then was belt tightening and trying to add structure, now is just giving up whilst trying to run it to the bone.
With the money he had at his disposal in a time unlike now where half the league were beaten most weeks before taking the field he 100% failed by not delivering champions league football.
-
History will show that after Villa he went to Sunderland followed the same transfer spending and left them in the shit just like us..
Imo with budget he had here 6th was a bare minimum requirement and that's all he achieved ,any other half decent manger would have managed the same.
I always think the state that a manager leaves a club in reflects a lot on them. Look at O'Neill's record -
Leicester - They got relegated after he left and it took them several years to get back
Celtic - a 2-team league back then and they didn't win for several years after he left
Us - constant relegation fights for 6 years and may finally go down this year
Sunderland - like us, constant relegation battles and have been barely surviving
-
I don't blame O Neill for leaving. The timing and manner of it though was shitty, but clearly he could see what was on the horizon and like anyone with half a brain decided to run before his reputation hit the shitter. He left as top 6 manager. Now granted his follow up gig didn't end too well (boo hoo) but if there's one thing O Neill isn't, it's naive. He probably knew what was coming.
I don't really blame him for our financial state either. O Neill didn't sign the checks. He didn't control the budget. He might have signed Habib Beye yes, but if the chairman gives you carte blanche you're not going to refuse it. We wasted money under O Neill but his better signings made us a hell of a lot back. None of our managers since have had as much of a success rate since. Lambert will dine out on signing Benteke for the rest of his days, but we never made money on any of his other signings and nor will we. McLeish's signings were disastrous. Houllier was clever in identifying and really pushing to get Bent. Now granted we paid a hell of a lot for him and he left for nothing but he kept us up for two seasons.
Lerner is the rotten apple here. He's gone from bumbling and naive, to inept and seemingly now just totally indifferent, like he couldn't give two fucks.
-
Feel free to re-write history now that we have all fallen out with Lerner but nothing will ever excuse Quitty's calculated action to create the maximum amount of damage on our football club with the timing of his gutless act.
What happened then and what is happening now are two separate issues - back then was belt tightening and trying to add structure, now is just giving up whilst trying to run it to the bone.
With the money he had at his disposal in a time unlike now where half the league were beaten most weeks before taking the field he 100% failed by not delivering champions league football.
You can't say that with any certainty though. None of us know the specifics of the behind the scenes goings on immediately before mon left so we don't know how justified or calculated it was.
But even if I accept that he left in an attempt to derail us, how shocking is it that this succeeded? So, back to Lerner for leaving us so vulnerable in the first place and getting every big decision since then hopelessly wrong.
-
He made a couple of good points and was smart enough to not touch the actual details of his leaving.
Its worth bearing in mind though that even though he resigned and so was owed nothing he did win compensation from the tribunal as he argued Villa were in breach of contract, so there is something there to his side.
He is still miserable bugger though isnt he? He gives me no good nostalgia watching him speak, which any other 6 place manager would.
-
He made a couple of good points and was smart enough to not touch the actual details of his leaving.
Its worth bearing in mind though that even though he resigned and so was owed nothing he did win compensation from the tribunal as he argued Villa were in breach of contract, so there is something there to his side.
He is still miserable bugger though isnt he? He gives me no good nostalgia watching him speak, which any other 6 place manager would.
The sad part is, that we so often felt frustrated at O Neill's brand of football, even during the good times, but looking back, we were Brazil 1970 in comparison to the last 4 years. Particularly on our good days away from home with Gabby, Ash and Big John in their pomp. When our counter-attacking game was effective it was a joy to watch.
-
Its worth bearing in mind though that even though he resigned and so was owed nothing he did win compensation from the tribunal as he argued Villa were in breach of contract, so there is something there to his side.
No.
We've had this one 100 times at least. He didn't "win" anything "from the tribunal", the two parties settled. Not the same thing.
-
History will show that after Villa he went to Sunderland followed the same transfer spending and left them in the shit just like us..
Imo with budget he had here 6th was a bare minimum requirement and that's all he achieved ,any other half decent manger would have managed the same.
I always think the state that a manager leaves a club in reflects a lot on them. Look at O'Neill's record -
Leicester - They got relegated after he left and it took them several years to get back
Celtic - a 2-team league back then and they didn't win for several years after he left
Us - constant relegation fights for 6 years and may finally go down this year
Sunderland - like us, constant relegation battles and have been barely surviving
Celtic won the league in the three seasons after O'Neill left but dont let facts get in the way of your point
Leicster nearly got relegated last year. Was that O'Neills fault?
Sunderland have always been a yo-yo team
Blaming our misfortune in 2015 for what he did in 2010 is stretching it a bit. EVen Germany was re-building by the 1950s. Although in fairness the Americans were actually putting some money into the place
-
Which was Lerner's first big mistake in my opinion and the foundations of the Kremlin walls at VP which are only now starting to be demolished brick by brick by plain speaking and open planning for the future. In my opinion it was a black day in Villa history when we accepted the concept of Martin O'Neill being a victim.
-
He was the wrong man to be given the keys to the Lerner bankvault in retrospect. He gunged the club up with non playing reserves on high wages and never looked likely to have the tactical nounce to break the top4. Add to that buying Heskey at a crucial moment and flogging Cahill in favour of players with half the talent. Guilty as charged for all of that.
The terrible policies afterwards - selling the best players and replacing them with those same reserves and youth players, running the club by wage bill, the so called Ajax of the north plan that seemed to involved buying lower league players in the hope of selling them when they became superstars (!), the shit managers who either bought into this plan or just went along with it because they liked the money..All of that, Lerner's fault.
Ironic that though i can't stand the guy, MON would probably be perfect to get us back in the premiership when the inevitable happens
-
I would sooner stay in the Championship.
-
Its worth bearing in mind though that even though he resigned and so was owed nothing he did win compensation from the tribunal as he argued Villa were in breach of contract, so there is something there to his side.
No.
We've had this one 100 times at least. He didn't "win" anything "from the tribunal", the two parties settled. Not the same thing.
Mind if we go over it 101 times then? Because I dont understand. Why settle? He resigned, owed nothing. Why would Lerner give him money unless there was something in the contract that was breached.
-
I thought MON was spot on there in his assessment of events.Interesting that the majority of Villa fans give MON pelters for his departure yet are now coming to realise that the Lerner they sided with is a million times less trustworthy. MON conceded some time ago that his resignation timing was awful and hasn't put forward his side of events often, if at all,so I don't blame him for hijacking this Sky question with a revisit of summer 2010.
Let the record show, whether it suits your argument or not, that under MON we were top 6 thrice and since his departure have stank out the Premiership like a rotting fish hidden in the mother-in'law's sitting room curtain rail (little tip for you there this Yuletide season).
Did he explain what would have happened if Lerner had done something about his overspend earlier? No because all that would have done was O'Neil leaving earlier, or did he also explain why he choose the Sunderland job when Quinn had left, thought Not as a football brain would have sussed O'Neil and that wouldn't have been good for Brand O'Neil.
If we'd have appointed someone like Houllier when we appointed O'Neil the money would have gone further and probably with more success as in modern football O'Neil management skills are extremely limited.
-
I would sooner stay in the Championship.
And who would that benefit? No-one
Not that any scenario involving us and O'Neill is at all likely. Lerner has been the defining influence of the first half of this decade. Not O'Neill
-
I probably would too Brian. Still think he'd do it though
-
MON taking credit for Downing is a bit much, he was crap that season for us. Came good the year after MON left.
It wasn't the net spend that the problem was, it was the wage bill that spiraled out of control with the likes of Beye, Sidwell, Davies and Heskey chewing up crazy wages for no return. Selling Cahill and Davis wasn't a good idea either.
Interesting that he mentioned about two players Villa bought after his time that cost more. Bent and who was the other one?
-
It would benefit me for a start because I would not have to follow a club with a manager I loathe and detest.
-
Which was Lerner's first big mistake in my opinion and the foundations of the Kremlin walls at VP which are only now starting to be demolished brick by brick by plain speaking and open planning for the future. In my opinion it was a black day in Villa history when we accepted the concept of Martin O'Neill being a victim.
I must of dreamt about the 3 top 6 finishes. The European football. The carling cup final where the referee awarded the cup to man United. The f.a cup semi final the 6-0 away to Derby & the 5-1 victory over the Scum.
-
It would benefit me for a start because I would not have to follow a club with a manager I loathe and detest.
Fair enough that answered my question. Somewhat of a narrow short term view in my opinion. As I said I doubt it is a scenario we will have to contemplate. There is nothing like an O'Neill thread to get the dander up. On both sides of the equation.Lambert, O'Leary. Dr Jo etc. None of them have the ability of this man to get people onto the keyboards
-
Its worth bearing in mind though that even though he resigned and so was owed nothing he did win compensation from the tribunal as he argued Villa were in breach of contract, so there is something there to his side.
No.
We've had this one 100 times at least. He didn't "win" anything "from the tribunal", the two parties settled. Not the same thing.
Mind if we go over it 101 times then? Because I dont understand. Why settle? He resigned, owed nothing. Why would Lerner give him money unless there was something in the contract that was breached.
Honestly, I can't face it.
Sometimes organisations will agree a deal to make a case go away. It happens all the time, it is cheaper, less distracting and quicker to meet someone half way.
The reason you haven't heard him say he "won" his case is the same reason you haven't heard the club say it either, because it's a compromise agreement.
It doesn't make any difference that the club paid him, it's no admission of being in the wrong, it's just an admission that they've come to an agreement - the details of which we don't know and never will.
Even if the club adamantly think they've done nothing wrong and not breached the contract, it still costs a huge amount of money (and time) to fight it in court, it can be cheaper just to find a figure they're happy with and fuck them off and get on with life.
-
Which was Lerner's first big mistake in my opinion and the foundations of the Kremlin walls at VP which are only now starting to be demolished brick by brick by plain speaking and open planning for the future. In my opinion it was a black day in Villa history when we accepted the concept of Martin O'Neill being a victim.
I must of dreamt about the 3 top 6 finishes. The European football. The carling cup final where the referee awarded the cup to man United. The f.a cup semi final the 6-0 away to Derby & the 5-1 victory over the Scum.
And the five years subsequently paying the price.
-
Its worth bearing in mind though that even though he resigned and so was owed nothing he did win compensation from the tribunal as he argued Villa were in breach of contract, so there is something there to his side.
No.
We've had this one 100 times at least. He didn't "win" anything "from the tribunal", the two parties settled. Not the same thing.
Mind if we go over it 101 times then? Because I dont understand. Why settle? He resigned, owed nothing. Why would Lerner give him money unless there was something in the contract that was breached.
Honestly, I can't face it.
Sometimes organisations will agree a deal to make a case go away. It happens all the time, it is cheaper, less distracting and quicker to meet someone half way.
The reason you haven't heard him say he "won" his case is the same reason you haven't heard the club say it either, because it's a compromise agreement.
It doesn't make any difference that the club paid him, it's no admission of being in the wrong, it's just an admission that they've come to an agreement - the details of which we don't know and never will.
Even if the club adamantly think they've done nothing wrong and not breached the contract, it still costs a huge amount of money (and time) to fight it in court, it can be cheaper just to find a figure they're happy with and fuck them off and get on with life.
Fair enough. We have bigger things to worry about anyway :)
-
Which was Lerner's first big mistake in my opinion and the foundations of the Kremlin walls at VP which are only now starting to be demolished brick by brick by plain speaking and open planning for the future. In my opinion it was a black day in Villa history when we accepted the concept of Martin O'Neill being a victim.
I must of dreamt about the 3 top 6 finishes. The European football. The carling cup final where the referee awarded the cup to man United. The f.a cup semi final the 6-0 away to Derby & the 5-1 victory over the Scum.
And the five years subsequently paying the price.
Sorry but when a manager leaves a club regardless of the circumstances it's ridiculous to blame him for the shit we are in 5 years later.
-
Which was Lerner's first big mistake in my opinion and the foundations of the Kremlin walls at VP which are only now starting to be demolished brick by brick by plain speaking and open planning for the future. In my opinion it was a black day in Villa history when we accepted the concept of Martin O'Neill being a victim.
I must of dreamt about the 3 top 6 finishes. The European football. The carling cup final where the referee awarded the cup to man United. The f.a cup semi final the 6-0 away to Derby & the 5-1 victory over the Scum.
You didn't dream those. But had we given the best part of three hundred million quid to a better manager with greater vision and a proper strategy you may now be reminiscing about top four finishes, Champions League football and cup finals that didn't end in tears.
-
History will show that after Villa he went to Sunderland followed the same transfer spending and left them in the shit just like us..
Imo with budget he had here 6th was a bare minimum requirement and that's all he achieved ,any other half decent manger would have managed the same.
You mean like the ex Chelsea manager with a title winning squad? O'Neil did a largely good job over the first 3 seasons.
-
Which was Lerner's first big mistake in my opinion and the foundations of the Kremlin walls at VP which are only now starting to be demolished brick by brick by plain speaking and open planning for the future. In my opinion it was a black day in Villa history when we accepted the concept of Martin O'Neill being a victim.
I must of dreamt about the 3 top 6 finishes. The European football. The carling cup final where the referee awarded the cup to man United. The f.a cup semi final the 6-0 away to Derby & the 5-1 victory over the Scum.
And the five years subsequently paying the price.
Sorry but when a manager leaves a club regardless of the circumstances it's ridiculous to blame him for the shit we are in 5 years later.
The current malaise isn't all his fault, but he sowed the seeds of our demise. Or do you think that Leeds fans think the Champions League semi final was worth the price they've had to pay since?
-
Which was Lerner's first big mistake in my opinion and the foundations of the Kremlin walls at VP which are only now starting to be demolished brick by brick by plain speaking and open planning for the future. In my opinion it was a black day in Villa history when we accepted the concept of Martin O'Neill being a victim.
I must of dreamt about the 3 top 6 finishes. The European football. The carling cup final where the referee awarded the cup to man United. The f.a cup semi final the 6-0 away to Derby & the 5-1 victory over the Scum.
And the five years subsequently paying the price.
Sorry but when a manager leaves a club regardless of the circumstances it's ridiculous to blame him for the shit we are in 5 years later.
It depends what shite he's left you with. And, I realise that he was not operating entirely in a vacuum, but he was calling the shots on the long-term expensive deals that we have only fairly recently rinsed through the system.
-
Which was Lerner's first big mistake in my opinion and the foundations of the Kremlin walls at VP which are only now starting to be demolished brick by brick by plain speaking and open planning for the future. In my opinion it was a black day in Villa history when we accepted the concept of Martin O'Neill being a victim.
I must of dreamt about the 3 top 6 finishes. The European football. The carling cup final where the referee awarded the cup to man United. The f.a cup semi final the 6-0 away to Derby & the 5-1 victory over the Scum.
And the five years subsequently paying the price.
Sorry but when a manager leaves a club regardless of the circumstances it's ridiculous to blame him for the shit we are in 5 years later.
The current malaise isn't all his fault, but he sowed the seeds of our demise. Or do you think that Leeds fans think the Champions League semi final was worth the price they've had to pay since?
And I bet they still blame Peter Ridsdale.
-
Which was Lerner's first big mistake in my opinion and the foundations of the Kremlin walls at VP which are only now starting to be demolished brick by brick by plain speaking and open planning for the future. In my opinion it was a black day in Villa history when we accepted the concept of Martin O'Neill being a victim.
I must of dreamt about the 3 top 6 finishes. The European football. The carling cup final where the referee awarded the cup to man United. The f.a cup semi final the 6-0 away to Derby & the 5-1 victory over the Scum.
And the five years subsequently paying the price.
Sorry but when a manager leaves a club regardless of the circumstances it's ridiculous to blame him for the shit we are in 5 years later.
The current malaise isn't all his fault, but he sowed the seeds of our demise. Or do you think that Leeds fans think the Champions League semi final was worth the price they've had to pay since?
And I bet they still blame Peter Ridsdale.
I bet they dont go on about him like we do about O'Neill
-
Which was Lerner's first big mistake in my opinion and the foundations of the Kremlin walls at VP which are only now starting to be demolished brick by brick by plain speaking and open planning for the future. In my opinion it was a black day in Villa history when we accepted the concept of Martin O'Neill being a victim.
I must of dreamt about the 3 top 6 finishes. The European football. The carling cup final where the referee awarded the cup to man United. The f.a cup semi final the 6-0 away to Derby & the 5-1 victory over the Scum.
And the five years subsequently paying the price.
Sorry but when a manager leaves a club regardless of the circumstances it's ridiculous to blame him for the shit we are in 5 years later.
The current malaise isn't all his fault, but he sowed the seeds of our demise. Or do you think that Leeds fans think the Champions League semi final was worth the price they've had to pay since?
And I bet they still blame Peter Ridsdale.
They're not fickle they just don't like him....
-
I would sooner stay in the Championship.
I wouldn't Aston Villa for me come first over any individual associated with the club.
-
He defends the fact that the most he spent on any single player was 12m and the profits made on the likes of Young and Milner. Fine, they were two of his all too few successful ventures into the transfer market. But he conveniently omits to mention the tens of millions wasted on the likes of Shorey, Knight, Reo-Coker, Beye, Davies, Sidwell etc, etc, not just transfer fees but salaries way above what they were worth and contracts long enough to continue to bleed the club for years. The fact is that despite 3 top 6 finishes O'Neill's approach was completely unsustainable. He knew that full well and legged it before the wheels came off. I blame Lerner for allowing that to happen but O'Neill should not get away with it because he got three 6th places by wasting 10 years worth of budget. Many a manager could have achieved as much without being a contemptible arsehole into the bargain and leaving the cupboard almost bare.
-
It's hard to find a winner out of Lerner vs MON, but I'm damn sure I know who the losers have been ever since...we deserve better.
-
I think we all forget that Randy pumped a lot of money into AVFC. After years of trying to breach the top four along came the Arabs and Man City.
Top four became a Top Five (Man U, L/Pool, Chelsea.Arsenal, Man City). With the odd pretender.
His & our dream went when Man City were bought out.
-
I'm not minded to excuse the c**t, as previous posters have pointed out his departure renders any sympathy null.
But there are, I think some mitigating factors. The mandate was for Champions League football, we got close, and I think the key is we got there quickly.
The squad he took over was poor, and needed a complete overhaul. Realistically, we needed to be spending more than probably any other team to make up that kind of ground.
With hindsight, given that support from the chairman was going have its limits, it would have been wise to plan that investment over a longer more sustainable period, but it is hard to blame a manager for asking for players and getting them, it is his job.
-
Which was Lerner's first big mistake in my opinion and the foundations of the Kremlin walls at VP which are only now starting to be demolished brick by brick by plain speaking and open planning for the future. In my opinion it was a black day in Villa history when we accepted the concept of Martin O'Neill being a victim.
I must of dreamt about the 3 top 6 finishes. The European football. The carling cup final where the referee awarded the cup to man United. The f.a cup semi final the 6-0 away to Derby & the 5-1 victory over the Scum.
And the five years subsequently paying the price.
Sorry but when a manager leaves a club regardless of the circumstances it's ridiculous to blame him for the shit we are in 5 years later.
The current malaise isn't all his fault, but he sowed the seeds of our demise. Or do you think that Leeds fans think the Champions League semi final was worth the price they've had to pay since?
And I bet they still blame Peter Ridsdale.
They're not fickle they just don't like him....
He was our best manager for 20 years. And grudging respect to Deadly he done the deal wirh Oneill.Lerner has proved his utter incompetence ever since. O'Neill wasn't perfect by a long shot but he had something about him. His motivation skilks were top drawer..A better chairman / owner would of controlled the situation better and built on it. The buck stops right at the top in my opinion.
-
Which was Lerner's first big mistake in my opinion and the foundations of the Kremlin walls at VP which are only now starting to be demolished brick by brick by plain speaking and open planning for the future. In my opinion it was a black day in Villa history when we accepted the concept of Martin O'Neill being a victim.
I must of dreamt about the 3 top 6 finishes. The European football. The carling cup final where the referee awarded the cup to man United. The f.a cup semi final the 6-0 away to Derby & the 5-1 victory over the Scum.
And the five years subsequently paying the price.
Sorry but when a manager leaves a club regardless of the circumstances it's ridiculous to blame him for the shit we are in 5 years later.
The current malaise isn't all his fault, but he sowed the seeds of our demise. Or do you think that Leeds fans think the Champions League semi final was worth the price they've had to pay since?
And I bet they still blame Peter Ridsdale.
They're not fickle they just don't like him....
He was our best manager for 20 years. And grudging respect to Deadly he done the deal wirh Oneill.Lerner has proved his utter incompetence ever since. O'Neill wasn't perfect by a long shot but he had something about him. His motivation skilks were top drawer..A better chairman / owner would of controlled the situation better and built on it. The buck stops right at the top in my opinion.
Was he fuck.
-
I'm not minded to excuse the c**t, as previous posters have pointed out his departure renders any sympathy null.
But there are, I think some mitigating factors. The mandate was for Champions League football, we got close, and I think the key is we got there quickly.
The squad he took over was poor, and needed a complete overhaul. Realistically, we needed to be spending more than probably any other team to make up that kind of ground.
With hindsight, given that support from the chairman was going have its limits, it would have been wise to plan that investment over a longer more sustainable period, but it is hard to blame a manager for asking for players and getting them, it is his job.
That's the crux; we gambled on the CL and that qualifying would cover the spending to get there. We didn't and Lerner went into reverse gear and MON had a hissy fit. Neither come out of the way it ended with much credit.
-
Which was Lerner's first big mistake in my opinion and the foundations of the Kremlin walls at VP which are only now starting to be demolished brick by brick by plain speaking and open planning for the future. In my opinion it was a black day in Villa history when we accepted the concept of Martin O'Neill being a victim.
I must of dreamt about the 3 top 6 finishes. The European football. The carling cup final where the referee awarded the cup to man United. The f.a cup semi final the 6-0 away to Derby & the 5-1 victory over the Scum.
And the five years subsequently paying the price.
Sorry but when a manager leaves a club regardless of the circumstances it's ridiculous to blame him for the shit we are in 5 years later.
The current malaise isn't all his fault, but he sowed the seeds of our demise. Or do you think that Leeds fans think the Champions League semi final was worth the price they've had to pay since?
And I bet they still blame Peter Ridsdale.
They're not fickle they just don't like him....
He was our best manager for 20 years. And grudging respect to Deadly he done the deal wirh Oneill.Lerner has proved his utter incompetence ever since. O'Neill wasn't perfect by a long shot but he had something about him. His motivation skilks were top drawer..A better chairman / owner would of controlled the situation better and built on it. The buck stops right at the top in my opinion.
Was he fuck.
Yes, that's absolute bollocks and verging on blasphemy.
-
But Lee, if Champions League Football was the mandate, I'm struggling to see how Marlon Harewood and Zat Knight, amongst many others, were the kind of player to take us there. Good enough to come second in the "sub-league" outside the big four, which was a sea of mediocrity, but in my view there was never serious chance of them making the CL. And even if we had scraped 4th, I couldn't have seen us even getting through the qualifier at time when we were being comfortably beaten by the likes of Rapid Vienna.
-
You'd have to be on crack to think that he was a better manager for us than Brian Little.
-
Its worth bearing in mind though that even though he resigned and so was owed nothing he did win compensation from the tribunal as he argued Villa were in breach of contract, so there is something there to his side.
No.
We've had this one 100 times at least. He didn't "win" anything "from the tribunal", the two parties settled. Not the same thing.
Mind if we go over it 101 times then? Because I dont understand. Why settle? He resigned, owed nothing. Why would Lerner give him money unless there was something in the contract that was breached.
Honestly, I can't face it.
Sometimes organisations will agree a deal to make a case go away. It happens all the time, it is cheaper, less distracting and quicker to meet someone half way.
The reason you haven't heard him say he "won" his case is the same reason you haven't heard the club say it either, because it's a compromise agreement.
It doesn't make any difference that the club paid him, it's no admission of being in the wrong, it's just an admission that they've come to an agreement - the details of which we don't know and never will.
Even if the club adamantly think they've done nothing wrong and not breached the contract, it still costs a huge amount of money (and time) to fight it in court, it can be cheaper just to find a figure they're happy with and fuck them off and get on with life.
It's one area of life where football is similar to other jobs. Settlement Agreements are quite common. It doesn't matter how good a case either side thinks they have, there's always a risk an Employment Tribunal may see things differently. My employers don't advertise it, but basically there's a certain sum they'll pay to be rid of some of the more challenging employees. Too many people see tribunals as winning/losing. Settlement Agreements are a pragmatic solution. Better to pay say £5K and have a quick resolution than to spend a small fortune on legal fees and potential pay outs. Not to mention the stress involved.
-
He was our best manager for 20 years. And grudging respect to Deadly he done the deal wirh Oneill.Lerner has proved his utter incompetence ever since. O'Neill wasn't perfect by a long shot but he had something about him. His motivation skilks were top drawer..A better chairman / owner would of controlled the situation better and built on it. The buck stops right at the top in my opinion.
He won nothing, he wouldn't have come anywhere near the club if Doug hadn't been on the way out and the minute he knew he no longer had unlimited power and influence - in other words, he was going to have the same working conditions as every other manager - he was off, causing maximum damage as he left. He had something about him all right.
-
Which was Lerner's first big mistake in my opinion and the foundations of the Kremlin walls at VP which are only now starting to be demolished brick by brick by plain speaking and open planning for the future. In my opinion it was a black day in Villa history when we accepted the concept of Martin O'Neill being a victim.
I must of dreamt about the 3 top 6 finishes. The European football. The carling cup final where the referee awarded the cup to man United. The f.a cup semi final the 6-0 away to Derby & the 5-1 victory over the Scum.
And the five years subsequently paying the price.
Sorry but when a manager leaves a club regardless of the circumstances it's ridiculous to blame him for the shit we are in 5 years later.
The current malaise isn't all his fault, but he sowed the seeds of our demise. Or do you think that Leeds fans think the Champions League semi final was worth the price they've had to pay since?
And I bet they still blame Peter Ridsdale.
They're not fickle they just don't like him....
He was our best manager for 20 years. And grudging respect to Deadly he done the deal wirh Oneill.Lerner has proved his utter incompetence ever since. O'Neill wasn't perfect by a long shot but he had something about him. His motivation skilks were top drawer..A better chairman / owner would of controlled the situation better and built on it. The buck stops right at the top in my opinion.
Was he fuck.
Yes, that's absolute bollocks and verging on blasphemy.
Well who the fuck was better in the last 20 years?
-
Well who the fuck was better in the last 20 years?
This is who the fuck was better.
(http://www.avfc.co.uk/javaImages/8c/15/0,,10265~10229132,00.jpg)
-
You'd have to be on crack to think that he was a better manager for us than Brian Little.
Ok 19 fucking years.
-
You'd have to be on crack to think that he was a better manager for us than Brian Little.
Ok 19 fucking years.
I think you need to do some work on your 'fucking' maths.
-
We finished 5th in 1997 under Brian. Keep fucking trying.
-
We finished sixth under David O'Leary.
-
4th, 5th and a cup. Three things O'Cuntychops didn't manage, and all inside the the last 20 years.
Not to mention a team actually worth watching.
-
Atkinson was a better Villa manager than Little. Best football I've ever seen at Villa was under Big Ron.
O'Neill was top notch though and he built a bloody good team here, and I loved the "never say die" attitude of his players. How many games did we get late winners or equalisers? Pity it all turned sour when Lerner bottled it and gave up. I'll never forgive him for what he's done to our club since O'Neill walked.
-
But Lee, if Champions League Football was the mandate, I'm struggling to see how Marlon Harewood and Zat Knight, amongst many others, were the kind of player to take us there. Good enough to come second in the "sub-league" outside the big four, which was a sea of mediocrity, but in my view there was never serious chance of them making the CL. And even if we had scraped 4th, I couldn't have seen us even getting through the qualifier at time when we were being comfortably beaten by the likes of Rapid Vienna.
I agree. I think he made some shit signings, in fact I think he totally blew the fantastic work he did in the first 18 months.
He'd turned the juggernaught around with relatively little outlay, a few really good deals (Petrov, Young, Carew) on key players that improved the team, and then suddenly all we seem to do is buy loads of squad fillers to sit in behind his favourite 11.
No, I think it was doomed to failure, but I do recognise two things.
1: He did a good job in the first place. There are many, many managers out there that would have fucked up the opportunity he was given.
2: The owner was massively culpable. When he was making us that big fancy slap up meal, he neglected to tell us that was the last of the food for a month.
-
You'd have to be on crack to think that he was a better manager for us than Brian Little.
Ok 19 fucking years.
I think you need to do some work on your 'fucking' maths.
Maths you reckon? I started by saying that in my opinion, Oneill was our best manager in 20.years. Well since 1995/6 we are in the 20th season So you do the fuckin maths. Yes Sir Brian won us the league cup and finished 4th but O'Neills team was robbed of a cup against man u. Plus 3 top six finishes for good measure.
-
Atkinson was a better Villa manager than Little. Best football I've ever seen at Villa was under Big Ron.
O'Neill was top notch though and he built a bloody good team here, and I loved the "never say die" attitude of his players. How many games did we get late winners or equalisers? Pity it all turned sour when Lerner bottled it and gave up. I'll never forgive him for what he's done to our club since O'Neill walked.
I'll never forgive him for his timing either. And BFR was a top manager till Deadly pulled the trigger.
-
No denying our managers since MON make it hard to judge him properly, as they have all been, in their different ways, shit.
-
You'd have to be on crack to think that he was a better manager for us than Brian Little.
Ok 19 fucking years.
I think you need to do some work on your 'fucking' maths.
Maths you reckon? I started by saying that in my opinion, Oneill was our best manager in 20.years. Well since 1995/6 we are in the 20th season So you do the fuckin maths. Yes Sir Brian won us the league cup and finished 4th but O'Neills team was robbed of a cup against man u. Plus 3 top six finishes for good measure.
Please don't swear so much. It isn't big and it isn't clever.
-
You'd have to be on crack to think that he was a better manager for us than Brian Little.
Ok 19 fucking years.
I think you need to do some work on your 'fucking' maths.
Maths you reckon? I started by saying that in my opinion, Oneill was our best manager in 20.years. Well since 1995/6 we are in the 20th season So you do the fuckin maths. Yes Sir Brian won us the league cup and finished 4th but O'Neills team was robbed of a cup against man u. Plus 3 top six finishes for good measure.
John Gregory managed sixth as well, and he'd had to sell our best player after the season had kicked off.
Didn't make him strop off though, probably because he wasn't a spiteful ******.
-
You'd have to be on crack to think that he was a better manager for us than Brian Little.
Ok 19 fucking years.
I think you need to do some work on your 'fucking' maths.
Maths you reckon? I started by saying that in my opinion, Oneill was our best manager in 20.years. Well since 1995/6 we are in the 20th season So you do the fuckin maths. Yes Sir Brian won us the league cup and finished 4th but O'Neills team was robbed of a cup against man u. Plus 3 top six finishes for good measure.
Please don't swear so much. It isn't big and it isn't clever.
But the big boys are picking on me... (only joking; )
-
You'd have to be on crack to think that he was a better manager for us than Brian Little.
Ok 19 fucking years.
I think you need to do some work on your 'fucking' maths.
Maths you reckon? I started by saying that in my opinion, Oneill was our best manager in 20.years. Well since 1995/6 we are in the 20th season So you do the fuckin maths. Yes Sir Brian won us the league cup and finished 4th but O'Neills team was robbed of a cup against man u. Plus 3 top six finishes for good measure.
Please don't swear so much. It isn't big and it isn't clever.
But the big boys are picking on me... (only joking; )
Nobody likes a sneak.
-
You'd have to be on crack to think that he was a better manager for us than Brian Little.
Ok 19 fucking years.
I think you need to do some work on your 'fucking' maths.
Maths you reckon? I started by saying that in my opinion, Oneill was our best manager in 20.years. Well since 1995/6 we are in the 20th season So you do the fuckin maths. Yes Sir Brian won us the league cup and finished 4th but O'Neills team was robbed of a cup against man u. Plus 3 top six finishes for good measure.
Please don't swear so much. It isn't big and it isn't clever.
But the big boys are picking on me... (only joking; )
Nobody likes a sneak.
LOL
-
But Lee, if Champions League Football was the mandate, I'm struggling to see how Marlon Harewood and Zat Knight, amongst many others, were the kind of player to take us there. Good enough to come second in the "sub-league" outside the big four, which was a sea of mediocrity, but in my view there was never serious chance of them making the CL. And even if we had scraped 4th, I couldn't have seen us even getting through the qualifier at time when we were being comfortably beaten by the likes of Rapid Vienna.
I agree. I think he made some shit signings, in fact I think he totally blew the fantastic work he did in the first 18 months.
He'd turned the juggernaught around with relatively little outlay, a few really good deals (Petrov, Young, Carew) on key players that improved the team, and then suddenly all we seem to do is buy loads of squad fillers to sit in behind his favourite 11.
No, I think it was doomed to failure, but I do recognise two things.
1: He did a good job in the first place. There are many, many managers out there that would have fucked up the opportunity he was given.
2: The owner was massively culpable. When he was making us that big fancy slap up meal, he neglected to tell us that was the last of the food for a month.
Agree. I just think he reached the end of his managerial shelf life when he was with us. The game had moved on and he was left behind. His time at Sunderland just confirmed that. I still think to this day that he timed his departure to cause maximum disruption and that it sent us spinning into a downward spiral from which we are yet to recover.
-
But Lee, if Champions League Football was the mandate, I'm struggling to see how Marlon Harewood and Zat Knight, amongst many others, were the kind of player to take us there. Good enough to come second in the "sub-league" outside the big four, which was a sea of mediocrity, but in my view there was never serious chance of them making the CL. And even if we had scraped 4th, I couldn't have seen us even getting through the qualifier at time when we were being comfortably beaten by the likes of Rapid Vienna.
I agree. I think he made some shit signings, in fact I think he totally blew the fantastic work he did in the first 18 months.
He'd turned the juggernaught around with relatively little outlay, a few really good deals (Petrov, Young, Carew) on key players that improved the team, and then suddenly all we seem to do is buy loads of squad fillers to sit in behind his favourite 11.
No, I think it was doomed to failure, but I do recognise two things.
1: He did a good job in the first place. There are many, many managers out there that would have fucked up the opportunity he was given.
2: The owner was massively culpable. When he was making us that big fancy slap up meal, he neglected to tell us that was the last of the food for a month.
Agree. I just think he reached the end of his managerial shelf life when he was with us. The game had moved on and he was left behind. His time at Sunderland just confirmed that. I still think to this day that he timed his departure to cause maximum disruption and that it sent us spinning into a downward spiral from which we are yet to recover.
I'd agree the first 18 months were full of promise, he'd turned us around and made a few very good signings. He'd established a platform and I looked forward with relish to the transfer window where I was optimistic he would sign the 3 or 4 players that would take us to the next level. And we got Harewood. And Knight. And I knew right then that this bloke was not going to take us any further than that. And so it proved.
-
While the timing of O'Neill's departure was spiteful, we shouldn't be blaming that on our current problems. It was in 2010.
The correct appointments since would have made the situation recoverable. FWIW I think Houllier would have proved to be the correct appointment had his health not let him down.
Beyond Houllier, well, the plot was lost. Not necessarily just with first team manager appointments.
-
While the timing of O'Neill's departure was spiteful, we shouldn't be blaming that on our current problems. It was in 2010.
The correct appointments since would have made the situation recoverable. FWIW I think Houllier would have proved to be the correct appointment had his health not let him down.
Me too. The real disaster was the lunacy of replacing him with TSM. Soild downhill ever since.
-
While the timing of O'Neill's departure was spiteful, we shouldn't be blaming that on our current problems. It was in 2010.
The correct appointments since would have made the situation recoverable. FWIW I think Houllier would have proved to be the correct appointment had his health not let him down.
Me too. The real disaster was the lunacy of replacing him with TSM. Soild downhill ever since.
Houllier was the wrong appointment because of his health issues. It didn't suddenly crop up.
If we'd have got someone with a similar profile abroad, and not insisted on bloody "premier league experience", we might have had a bloody chance.
-
While the timing of O'Neill's departure was spiteful, we shouldn't be blaming that on our current problems. It was in 2010.
The correct appointments since would have made the situation recoverable. FWIW I think Houllier would have proved to be the correct appointment had his health not let him down.
Me too. The real disaster was the lunacy of replacing him with TSM. Soild downhill ever since.
Houllier was the wrong appointment because of his health issues. It didn't suddenly crop up.
If we'd have got someone with a similar profile abroad, and not insisted on bloody "premier league experience", we might have had a bloody chance.
This with great big bells on.
Plenty of us predicted Houlier would struggle with health issues, we weren't all Nostradamus. A massive missed opportunity due to very poor research and decision making. And what's particularly galling is their decision making didn't get any better afterwards.
-
While the timing of O'Neill's departure was spiteful, we shouldn't be blaming that on our current problems. It was in 2010.
The correct appointments since would have made the situation recoverable. FWIW I think Houllier would have proved to be the correct appointment had his health not let him down.
Beyond Houllier, well, the plot was lost. Not necessarily just with first team manager appointments.
Although I think O'Neill's departure was the catalyst for what has followed, I agree Chris that the situation should have been recoverable. Although I think the investment hasn't been of the level it was under O'Neill since his departure, it certainly has been enough for us not to be in the position we are in now.
-
Is it just me who wishes we'd kept up the "unsustainable" levels of spending so we might have a decent team?
-
Is it just me who wishes we'd kept up the "unsustainable" levels of spending so we might have a decent team?
The clue's in the word 'unsustainable'.
-
Is it just me who wishes we'd kept up the "unsustainable" levels of spending so we might have a decent team?
The clue's in the word 'unsustainable'.
Unsustainable for who? Randy's still a billionaire isn't he and this was pre the rigging of financial fair play. The way I see it is if we'd spent more on wages since O'Neill left we wouldn't be the worst team in the league.
-
Is it just me who wishes we'd kept up the "unsustainable" levels of spending so we might have a decent team?
The clue's in the word 'unsustainable'.
Unsustainable for who? Randy's still a billionaire isn't he and this was pre the rigging of financial fair play. The way I see it is if we'd spent more on wages since O'Neill left we wouldn't be the worst team in the league.
How many more hundreds of millions of pounds would you like him to have put in, and how would we have paid it back?
-
It's not necessarily the amounts spent it's the way it's been spent that's the issue. It's been the issue to differing degrees since Randy first opened his chequebook.
-
Is it just me who wishes we'd kept up the "unsustainable" levels of spending so we might have a decent team?
The clue's in the word 'unsustainable'.
Unsustainable for who? Randy's still a billionaire isn't he and this was pre the rigging of financial fair play. The way I see it is if we'd spent more on wages since O'Neill left we wouldn't be the worst team in the league.
How many more hundreds of millions of pounds would you like him to have put in, and how would we have paid it back?
How many hundreds of millions of pounds did he think it would take to be a suitable custodian of the club when he bought us? Why would we have to pay it back? I get the criticism of O'Neill wasting money but the subsequent pulling of the plug is what's left us where we are now. Sad as it is, the game's all about money. Our owner's cut the budget and as a direct result we're shite. Personally I'd rather he'd have put shitloads of money in and we were good. Harsh on a personal level perhaps but frankly all I'm interested in with Randy is his wallet.
-
While the timing of O'Neill's departure was spiteful, we shouldn't be blaming that on our current problems. It was in 2010.
The correct appointments since would have made the situation recoverable. FWIW I think Houllier would have proved to be the correct appointment had his health not let him down.
Me too. The real disaster was the lunacy of replacing him with TSM. Soild downhill ever since.
Houllier was the wrong appointment because of his health issues. It didn't suddenly crop up.
If we'd have got someone with a similar profile abroad, and not insisted on bloody "premier league experience", we might have had a bloody chance.
It's all 'ifs and buts' though isn't it. If we have learned anything from the past few years is that we could always find a new way to fuck up.
Garde seems to be made of the right stuff and I think Fox might be getting a proper structure in place to support him but, based on recent experience, would anyone be in the least surprised if they both turn out to be completely useless?
-
While the timing of O'Neill's departure was spiteful, we shouldn't be blaming that on our current problems. It was in 2010.
The correct appointments since would have made the situation recoverable. FWIW I think Houllier would have proved to be the correct appointment had his health not let him down.
Me too. The real disaster was the lunacy of replacing him with TSM. Soild downhill ever since.
Houllier was the wrong appointment because of his health issues. It didn't suddenly crop up.
If we'd have got someone with a similar profile abroad, and not insisted on bloody "premier league experience", we might have had a bloody chance.
Correct. It was a gamble, on our future competitiveness as a premier league team. The more I think about it the more gambles there have been under this regime. That houllier's health will hold, that the fans will accept mcleish, that deals can be done in the last year of a player's contract. Solskjær would have been a punt. Replacing your prize assets with unproven French players has been a disastrous punt. Sherwood, garde. This era has been characterised by a perverse will to take the left field option and it's fucked us.
Edit - of course, to bring it back to MON, it all started with a gamble, with the front loaded investment and lack of proper accountability when he was first in place. This all makes the safe stewardship stuff sound pretty hollow.
-
How many hundreds of millions of pounds did he think it would take to be a suitable custodian of the club when he bought us? Why would we have to pay it back? I get the criticism of O'Neill wasting money but the subsequent pulling of the plug is what's left us where we are now. Sad as it is, the game's all about money. Our owner's cut the budget and as a direct result we're shite. Personally I'd rather he'd have put shitloads of money in and we were good. Harsh on a personal level perhaps but frankly all I'm interested in with Randy is his wallet.
Look back at what you've just written and think about it. You expect a football club owner to invest an unlimited amount of money - which by now would be in the region of half a billion pounds - and you don't expect his club to have to pay it back. Seriously?
-
How many hundreds of millions of pounds did he think it would take to be a suitable custodian of the club when he bought us? Why would we have to pay it back? I get the criticism of O'Neill wasting money but the subsequent pulling of the plug is what's left us where we are now. Sad as it is, the game's all about money. Our owner's cut the budget and as a direct result we're shite. Personally I'd rather he'd have put shitloads of money in and we were good. Harsh on a personal level perhaps but frankly all I'm interested in with Randy is his wallet.
Look back at what you've just written and think about it. You expect a football club owner to invest an unlimited amount of money - which by now would be in the region of half a billion pounds - and you don't expect his club to have to pay it back. Seriously?
Well he'd get to keep the money from Sky and all the prize money from our multiple trophies every season. Speculate to accumulate. I dunno, it's just all depressing how it's turned out. I was more excited about Randy joining than O'Neill because I thought he'd buy us success.
-
ive said it loads of times but I really cant blame lerner
he is, imo,being very badly advised
-
ive said it loads of times but I really cant blame lerner
he is, imo,being very badly advised
Oh no, Randy Lerner has to take his share of the blame. There have been a succession of very poor decisions which he is ultimately responsible for.
-
How many hundreds of millions of pounds did he think it would take to be a suitable custodian of the club when he bought us? Why would we have to pay it back? I get the criticism of O'Neill wasting money but the subsequent pulling of the plug is what's left us where we are now. Sad as it is, the game's all about money. Our owner's cut the budget and as a direct result we're shite. Personally I'd rather he'd have put shitloads of money in and we were good. Harsh on a personal level perhaps but frankly all I'm interested in with Randy is his wallet.
Look back at what you've just written and think about it. You expect a football club owner to invest an unlimited amount of money - which by now would be in the region of half a billion pounds - and you don't expect his club to have to pay it back. Seriously?
Well he'd get to keep the money from Sky and all the prize money from our multiple trophies every season. Speculate to accumulate. I dunno, it's just all depressing how it's turned out. I was more excited about Randy joining than O'Neill because I thought he'd buy us success.
You mean like Manchester United (£380 million in debt), Chelsea (£1 billion), Liverpool (£127 million), Manchester City (somehow debt free despite one annual profit in the past seven years so how they do it is beyond me) or Arsenal (£240 million)? That sort of speculating to accumulate?
-
ive said it loads of times but I really cant blame lerner
he is, imo,being very badly advised
For me it's not just about lack of investment. I think the players might get a bit of a boost (or kick up the arse) to actually see the owner in his seat a la
Roman Abramovich. It can't be great to look up to the directors box and see a block of empty seats. 2 years since he showed his face in B6.
-
MON taking credit for Downing is a bit much, he was crap that season for us. Came good the year after MON left.
It wasn't the net spend that the problem was, it was the wage bill that spiraled out of control with the likes of Beye, Sidwell, Davies and Heskey chewing up crazy wages for no return. Selling Cahill and Davis wasn't a good idea either.
Interesting that he mentioned about two players Villa bought after his time that cost more. Bent and who was the other one?
Jean II Makoun
-
ive said it loads of times but I really cant blame lerner
he is, imo,being very badly advised
Oh no, Randy Lerner has to take his share of the blame. There have been a succession of very poor decisions which he is ultimately responsible for.
tom fox has more to answer for
end of story
-
ive said it loads of times but I really cant blame lerner
he is, imo,being very badly advised
Oh no, Randy Lerner has to take his share of the blame. There have been a succession of very poor decisions which he is ultimately responsible for.
tom fox has more to answer for
end of story
I'm not sure about that.
-
ive said it loads of times but I really cant blame lerner
he is, imo,being very badly advised
Oh no, Randy Lerner has to take his share of the blame. There have been a succession of very poor decisions which he is ultimately responsible for.
tom fox has more to answer for
end of story
I'm not sure about that.
who is running our club.it isn't lerner its fox
-
How many hundreds of millions of pounds did he think it would take to be a suitable custodian of the club when he bought us? Why would we have to pay it back? I get the criticism of O'Neill wasting money but the subsequent pulling of the plug is what's left us where we are now. Sad as it is, the game's all about money. Our owner's cut the budget and as a direct result we're shite. Personally I'd rather he'd have put shitloads of money in and we were good. Harsh on a personal level perhaps but frankly all I'm interested in with Randy is his wallet.
Look back at what you've just written and think about it. You expect a football club owner to invest an unlimited amount of money - which by now would be in the region of half a billion pounds - and you don't expect his club to have to pay it back. Seriously?
Well he'd get to keep the money from Sky and all the prize money from our multiple trophies every season. Speculate to accumulate. I dunno, it's just all depressing how it's turned out. I was more excited about Randy joining than O'Neill because I thought he'd buy us success.
You mean like Manchester United (£380 million in debt), Chelsea (£1 billion), Liverpool (£127 million), Manchester City (somehow debt free despite one annual profit in the past seven years so how they do it is beyond me) or Arsenal (£240 million)? That sort of speculating to accumulate?
I'm not too up on how football finances run but if your asking if I'd swap places with those clubs then yes I would in a heartbeat. I understand Real Madrid have always run costantly in debt.
-
ive said it loads of times but I really cant blame lerner
he is, imo,being very badly advised
Oh no, Randy Lerner has to take his share of the blame. There have been a succession of very poor decisions which he is ultimately responsible for.
tom fox has more to answer for
end of story
Which is why I said Lerner has to take his share of the blame. As does Faulkner, as does Fox and as do the managers who have been in the hot seat. All have made poor decisions at various times over the past five years that have contributed to where we now find ourselves.
-
How many hundreds of millions of pounds did he think it would take to be a suitable custodian of the club when he bought us? Why would we have to pay it back? I get the criticism of O'Neill wasting money but the subsequent pulling of the plug is what's left us where we are now. Sad as it is, the game's all about money. Our owner's cut the budget and as a direct result we're shite. Personally I'd rather he'd have put shitloads of money in and we were good. Harsh on a personal level perhaps but frankly all I'm interested in with Randy is his wallet.
Look back at what you've just written and think about it. You expect a football club owner to invest an unlimited amount of money - which by now would be in the region of half a billion pounds - and you don't expect his club to have to pay it back. Seriously?
Well he'd get to keep the money from Sky and all the prize money from our multiple trophies every season. Speculate to accumulate. I dunno, it's just all depressing how it's turned out. I was more excited about Randy joining than O'Neill because I thought he'd buy us success.
You mean like Manchester United (£380 million in debt), Chelsea (£1 billion), Liverpool (£127 million), Manchester City (somehow debt free despite one annual profit in the past seven years so how they do it is beyond me) or Arsenal (£240 million)? That sort of speculating to accumulate?
I'm not too up on how football finances run but if your asking if I'd swap places with those clubs then yes I would in a heartbeat. I understand Real Madrid have always run costantly in debt.
Of course you'd swap places with them. Two clubs bankrolled by bottomless wealth, the biggest club in the English-speaking world, probably the widest-supported, the one with the biggest matchday income in the world and a final one who are the biggest anywhere. Please tell me how we'd compete with them because I'd love to know.
-
MO'N's three biggest mistakes.
1. Heskey signing
2. Heskey starting the cup final ahead of Carew.
3. Moscow
-
While the timing of O'Neill's departure was spiteful, we shouldn't be blaming that on our current problems. It was in 2010.
The correct appointments since would have made the situation recoverable. FWIW I think Houllier would have proved to be the correct appointment had his health not let him down.
Me too. The real disaster was the lunacy of replacing him with TSM. Soild downhill ever since.
Houllier was the wrong appointment because of his health issues. It didn't suddenly crop up.
If we'd have got someone with a similar profile abroad, and not insisted on bloody "premier league experience", we might have had a bloody chance.
Correct. It was a gamble, on our future competitiveness as a premier league team. The more I think about it the more gambles there have been under this regime. That houllier's health will hold, that the fans will accept mcleish, that deals can be done in the last year of a player's contract. Solskjær would have been a punt. Replacing your prize assets with unproven French players has been a disastrous punt. Sherwood, garde. This era has been characterised by a perverse will to take the left field option and it's fucked us.
Edit - of course, to bring it back to MON, it all started with a gamble, with the front loaded investment and lack of proper accountability when he was first in place. This all makes the safe stewardship stuff sound pretty hollow.
If there was accountability from the start then O'Neil would never of been our manager. This situation we find ourselves in isn't 1 persons fault it was started by O'Neil massive over spend on limited players then his perfectly timed departure to cause maximum impact. Then the calamity of managerial appointments following that have brought us to where we are today, Lerner and O'Neil are both to blame.
-
While the timing of O'Neill's departure was spiteful, we shouldn't be blaming that on our current problems. It was in 2010.
The correct appointments since would have made the situation recoverable. FWIW I think Houllier would have proved to be the correct appointment had his health not let him down.
Me too. The real disaster was the lunacy of replacing him with TSM. Soild downhill ever since.
Houllier was the wrong appointment because of his health issues. It didn't suddenly crop up.
If we'd have got someone with a similar profile abroad, and not insisted on bloody "premier league experience", we might have had a bloody chance.
Correct. It was a gamble, on our future competitiveness as a premier league team. The more I think about it the more gambles there have been under this regime. That houllier's health will hold, that the fans will accept mcleish, that deals can be done in the last year of a player's contract. Solskjær would have been a punt. Replacing your prize assets with unproven French players has been a disastrous punt. Sherwood, garde. This era has been characterised by a perverse will to take the left field option and it's fucked us.
Edit - of course, to bring it back to MON, it all started with a gamble, with the front loaded investment and lack of proper accountability when he was first in place. This all makes the safe stewardship stuff sound pretty hollow.
If there was accountability from the start then O'Neil would never of been our manager. This situation we find ourselves in isn't 1 persons fault it was started by O'Neil massive over spend on limited players then his perfectly timed departure to cause maximum impact. Then the calamity of managerial appointments following that have brought us to where we are today, Lerner and O'Neil are both to blame.
Not so sure about that Stuart. It was a big appointment at the time and I for one was delighted about it.
-
ive said it loads of times but I really cant blame lerner
he is, imo,being very badly advised
For me it's not just about lack of investment. I think the players might get a bit of a boost (or kick up the arse) to actually see the owner in his seat a la
Roman Abramovich. It can't be great to look up to the directors box and see a block of empty seats. 2 years since he showed his face in B6.
was Gardes first game really 2 years ago? I must have been looking the other way. Can someone tell me did we stay up? if not have we managed to gain promotion at the first attempt?
-
While the timing of O'Neill's departure was spiteful, we shouldn't be blaming that on our current problems. It was in 2010.
The correct appointments since would have made the situation recoverable. FWIW I think Houllier would have proved to be the correct appointment had his health not let him down.
Me too. The real disaster was the lunacy of replacing him with TSM. Soild downhill ever since.
Houllier was the wrong appointment because of his health issues. It didn't suddenly crop up.
If we'd have got someone with a similar profile abroad, and not insisted on bloody "premier league experience", we might have had a bloody chance.
Correct. It was a gamble, on our future competitiveness as a premier league team. The more I think about it the more gambles there have been under this regime. That houllier's health will hold, that the fans will accept mcleish, that deals can be done in the last year of a player's contract. Solskjær would have been a punt. Replacing your prize assets with unproven French players has been a disastrous punt. Sherwood, garde. This era has been characterised by a perverse will to take the left field option and it's fucked us.
Edit - of course, to bring it back to MON, it all started with a gamble, with the front loaded investment and lack of proper accountability when he was first in place. This all makes the safe stewardship stuff sound pretty hollow.
If there was accountability from the start then O'Neil would never of been our manager. This situation we find ourselves in isn't 1 persons fault it was started by O'Neil massive over spend on limited players then his perfectly timed departure to cause maximum impact. Then the calamity of managerial appointments following that have brought us to where we are today, Lerner and O'Neil are both to blame.
Not so sure about that Stuart. It was a big appointment at the time and I for one was delighted about it.
Seeing as at the first hint of accountability O'Neil ran away I think you find I'm right.
-
While the timing of O'Neill's departure was spiteful, we shouldn't be blaming that on our current problems. It was in 2010.
The correct appointments since would have made the situation recoverable. FWIW I think Houllier would have proved to be the correct appointment had his health not let him down.
Me too. The real disaster was the lunacy of replacing him with TSM. Soild downhill ever since.
Houllier was the wrong appointment because of his health issues. It didn't suddenly crop up.
If we'd have got someone with a similar profile abroad, and not insisted on bloody "premier league experience", we might have had a bloody chance.
Correct. It was a gamble, on our future competitiveness as a premier league team. The more I think about it the more gambles there have been under this regime. That houllier's health will hold, that the fans will accept mcleish, that deals can be done in the last year of a player's contract. Solskjær would have been a punt. Replacing your prize assets with unproven French players has been a disastrous punt. Sherwood, garde. This era has been characterised by a perverse will to take the left field option and it's fucked us.
Edit - of course, to bring it back to MON, it all started with a gamble, with the front loaded investment and lack of proper accountability when he was first in place. This all makes the safe stewardship stuff sound pretty hollow.
If there was accountability from the start then O'Neil would never of been our manager. This situation we find ourselves in isn't 1 persons fault it was started by O'Neil massive over spend on limited players then his perfectly timed departure to cause maximum impact. Then the calamity of managerial appointments following that have brought us to where we are today, Lerner and O'Neil are both to blame.
Not so sure about that Stuart. It was a big appointment at the time and I for one was delighted about it.
Seeing as at the first hint of accountability O'Neil ran away I think you find I'm right.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing!
-
If the Lerner money had been invested more wisely then there would be need to pay it back.
The question now is how much does he Invest to try to salvage some of his original investment and does he have the right people in place to make that happen?
-
Of course where we are isn't because of O'Neill but the plethora of bad football decisions post O'Neill. But what also has to be recognised is that he bought some real donkeys who we couldn't shift. That was the start of the mess that we're in. Once the club made their ambitions clear all our valuable players cleared off one by one. Post O'Neill we haven't dealt with finance side very well and that isn't O'Neills fault. What is is that he wasted a lot of our money on a group of players who largely not good enough - save the odd exception or two - but when told to pull up the drawbridge him, or whoever, needed to be able to shift players to use that money on a cheaper but probably better option. He ruined our chance to do that and for that I do think he has to shoulder a large part of the blame.
-
It's not necessarily the amounts spent it's the way it's been spent that's the issue. It's been the issue to differing degrees since Randy first opened his chequebook.
That's it exactly. With Randy Lerner came a glorious opportunity to embark on a long-term plan, to invest in the infrastructure of the club and build some solid foundations that would see us make steady progress. That was the key to success. Instead what we've had is a fatally short-sighted, short-termist approach to everything, beginning with Lerner handing great wodges of his fortune to completely the wrong man. Two hundred and fifty million quid may not even have bought a title winning squad, but it should have been ample to buy the knowledge and expertise required to run a club capable of challenging for trophies for years. Lerner didn't have to know anything about football, he just needed to employ people who did. He failed to do that.
I despair to think that after so many years of Ellis strangling us with his miserly approach we finally got what we wanted, what we needed, what any club needs to compete these days in the money-driven world of the Premier League: we got our sugar daddy: we got his millions: and then O'Neill wasted the lot on a glut of Sidwells and Shoreys. And for what? Sixth place finishes? Even O'Leary managed that, with a fraction of O'Neills' funding. And that was our chance, folks. That was our future and O'Neill blew it. Anyone who thinks he's is in no way culpable for this mess five years down the line is as short-sighted as he is. His reckless spending crippled us, his behaviour clearly damaged Lerner, and our current predicament is the result. Lerner is to blame for trusting him, for not knowing that he was a very limited football manager, and for the car crash we've witnessed since, but it's not his fault that O'Neill is a spiteful, self-serving litigious bastard.
-
It's not necessarily the amounts spent it's the way it's been spent that's the issue. It's been the issue to differing degrees since Randy first opened his chequebook.
That's it exactly. With Randy Lerner came a glorious opportunity to embark on a long-term plan, to invest in the infrastructure of the club and build some solid foundations that would see us make steady progress. That was the key to success. Instead what we've had is a fatally short-sighted, short-termist approach to everything, beginning with Lerner handing great wodges of his fortune to completely the wrong man. Two hundred and fifty million quid may not even have bought a title winning squad, but it should have been ample to buy the knowledge and expertise required to run a club capable of challenging for trophies for years. Lerner didn't have to know anything about football, he just needed to employ people who did. He failed to do that.
I despair to think that after so many years of Ellis strangling us with his miserly approach we finally got what we wanted, what we needed, what any club needs to compete these days in the money-driven world of the Premier League: we got our sugar daddy: we got his millions: and then O'Neill wasted the lot on a glut of Sidwells and Shoreys. And for what? Sixth place finishes? Even O'Leary managed that, with a fraction of O'Neills' funding. And that was our chance, folks. That was our future and O'Neill blew it. Anyone who thinks he's is in no way culpable for this mess five years down the line is as short-sighted as he is. His reckless spending crippled us, his behaviour clearly damaged Lerner, and our current predicament is the result. Lerner is to blame for trusting him, for not knowing that he was a very limited football manager, and for the car crash we've witnessed since, but it's not his fault that O'Neill is a spiteful, self-serving litigious bastard.
I'd agree with that.
-
ive said it loads of times but I really cant blame lerner
he is, imo,being very badly advised
For me it's not just about lack of investment. I think the players might get a bit of a boost (or kick up the arse) to actually see the owner in his seat a la
Roman Abramovich. It can't be great to look up to the directors box and see a block of empty seats. 2 years since he showed his face in B6.
was Gardes first game really 2 years ago? I must have been looking the other way. Can someone tell me did we stay up? if not have we managed to gain promotion at the first attempt?
Yes that's right. Remi Garde is the owner of Aston Villa and hasn't been to Villa Park for 2 years
-
It's not necessarily the amounts spent it's the way it's been spent that's the issue. It's been the issue to differing degrees since Randy first opened his chequebook.
That's it exactly. With Randy Lerner came a glorious opportunity to embark on a long-term plan, to invest in the infrastructure of the club and build some solid foundations that would see us make steady progress. That was the key to success. Instead what we've had is a fatally short-sighted, short-termist approach to everything, beginning with Lerner handing great wodges of his fortune to completely the wrong man. Two hundred and fifty million quid may not even have bought a title winning squad, but it should have been ample to buy the knowledge and expertise required to run a club capable of challenging for trophies for years. Lerner didn't have to know anything about football, he just needed to employ people who did. He failed to do that.
I despair to think that after so many years of Ellis strangling us with his miserly approach we finally got what we wanted, what we needed, what any club needs to compete these days in the money-driven world of the Premier League: we got our sugar daddy: we got his millions: and then O'Neill wasted the lot on a glut of Sidwells and Shoreys. And for what? Sixth place finishes? Even O'Leary managed that, with a fraction of O'Neills' funding. And that was our chance, folks. That was our future and O'Neill blew it. Anyone who thinks he's is in no way culpable for this mess five years down the line is as short-sighted as he is. His reckless spending crippled us, his behaviour clearly damaged Lerner, and our current predicament is the result. Lerner is to blame for trusting him, for not knowing that he was a very limited football manager, and for the car crash we've witnessed since, but it's not his fault that O'Neill is a spiteful, self-serving litigious bastard.
100% agree
-
While the timing of O'Neill's departure was spiteful, we shouldn't be blaming that on our current problems. It was in 2010.
The correct appointments since would have made the situation recoverable. FWIW I think Houllier would have proved to be the correct appointment had his health not let him down.
Me too. The real disaster was the lunacy of replacing him with TSM. Soild downhill ever since.
Houllier was the wrong appointment because of his health issues. It didn't suddenly crop up.
If we'd have got someone with a similar profile abroad, and not insisted on bloody "premier league experience", we might have had a bloody chance.
I wasn't impressed by our idea of Premier League experience. A bloke who had been out of it for six years, a bloke who had just been relegated from it for the second time in four years and two blokes with about one years experience each.
-
It's not necessarily the amounts spent it's the way it's been spent that's the issue. It's been the issue to differing degrees since Randy first opened his chequebook.
That's it exactly. With Randy Lerner came a glorious opportunity to embark on a long-term plan, to invest in the infrastructure of the club and build some solid foundations that would see us make steady progress. That was the key to success. Instead what we've had is a fatally short-sighted, short-termist approach to everything, beginning with Lerner handing great wodges of his fortune to completely the wrong man. Two hundred and fifty million quid may not even have bought a title winning squad, but it should have been ample to buy the knowledge and expertise required to run a club capable of challenging for trophies for years. Lerner didn't have to know anything about football, he just needed to employ people who did. He failed to do that.
I despair to think that after so many years of Ellis strangling us with his miserly approach we finally got what we wanted, what we needed, what any club needs to compete these days in the money-driven world of the Premier League: we got our sugar daddy: we got his millions: and then O'Neill wasted the lot on a glut of Sidwells and Shoreys. And for what? Sixth place finishes? Even O'Leary managed that, with a fraction of O'Neills' funding. And that was our chance, folks. That was our future and O'Neill blew it. Anyone who thinks he's is in no way culpable for this mess five years down the line is as short-sighted as he is. His reckless spending crippled us, his behaviour clearly damaged Lerner, and our current predicament is the result. Lerner is to blame for trusting him, for not knowing that he was a very limited football manager, and for the car crash we've witnessed since, but it's not his fault that O'Neill is a spiteful, self-serving litigious bastard.
I'd agree with that.
Same here spot on.
-
And here. Spot on the facts of the matter.
-
Rubbish! Just trying to be different......it's probably about right really.
-
It's not necessarily the amounts spent it's the way it's been spent that's the issue. It's been the issue to differing degrees since Randy first opened his chequebook.
That's it exactly. With Randy Lerner came a glorious opportunity to embark on a long-term plan, to invest in the infrastructure of the club and build some solid foundations that would see us make steady progress. That was the key to success. Instead what we've had is a fatally short-sighted, short-termist approach to everything, beginning with Lerner handing great wodges of his fortune to completely the wrong man. Two hundred and fifty million quid may not even have bought a title winning squad, but it should have been ample to buy the knowledge and expertise required to run a club capable of challenging for trophies for years. Lerner didn't have to know anything about football, he just needed to employ people who did. He failed to do that.
I despair to think that after so many years of Ellis strangling us with his miserly approach we finally got what we wanted, what we needed, what any club needs to compete these days in the money-driven world of the Premier League: we got our sugar daddy: we got his millions: and then O'Neill wasted the lot on a glut of Sidwells and Shoreys. And for what? Sixth place finishes? Even O'Leary managed that, with a fraction of O'Neills' funding. And that was our chance, folks. That was our future and O'Neill blew it. Anyone who thinks he's is in no way culpable for this mess five years down the line is as short-sighted as he is. His reckless spending crippled us, his behaviour clearly damaged Lerner, and our current predicament is the result. Lerner is to blame for trusting him, for not knowing that he was a very limited football manager, and for the car crash we've witnessed since, but it's not his fault that O'Neill is a spiteful, self-serving litigious bastard.
Can we have this copied and pasted on every thread about O'Neill. people accuse many of the people who could see through the O'Neill media induced love in of being blind to the facts of three 6th place finishes and a cup final. If that's your definition of success under the limited O'Neill you need to have a word with yourself.
-
It's not necessarily the amounts spent it's the way it's been spent that's the issue. It's been the issue to differing degrees since Randy first opened his chequebook.
That's it exactly. With Randy Lerner came a glorious opportunity to embark on a long-term plan, to invest in the infrastructure of the club and build some solid foundations that would see us make steady progress. That was the key to success. Instead what we've had is a fatally short-sighted, short-termist approach to everything, beginning with Lerner handing great wodges of his fortune to completely the wrong man. Two hundred and fifty million quid may not even have bought a title winning squad, but it should have been ample to buy the knowledge and expertise required to run a club capable of challenging for trophies for years. Lerner didn't have to know anything about football, he just needed to employ people who did. He failed to do that.
I despair to think that after so many years of Ellis strangling us with his miserly approach we finally got what we wanted, what we needed, what any club needs to compete these days in the money-driven world of the Premier League: we got our sugar daddy: we got his millions: and then O'Neill wasted the lot on a glut of Sidwells and Shoreys. And for what? Sixth place finishes? Even O'Leary managed that, with a fraction of O'Neills' funding. And that was our chance, folks. That was our future and O'Neill blew it. Anyone who thinks he's is in no way culpable for this mess five years down the line is as short-sighted as he is. His reckless spending crippled us, his behaviour clearly damaged Lerner, and our current predicament is the result. Lerner is to blame for trusting him, for not knowing that he was a very limited football manager, and for the car crash we've witnessed since, but it's not his fault that O'Neill is a spiteful, self-serving litigious bastard.
Excellent CB. That's articulated what many of us feel about the O'Neill era and the catalist for our demise. Lerner was incredibly naive and doesn't he (and we) know it now.
-
I agree with the assessment but the fact is no club should be set up such that one manager with a chip on his shoulder can derail the whole thing. Seriously, how man many examples are there of a manager not only leaving a club on his terms, but getting the better of an entire (big) club? Fair to say it takes a 'special' set of circumstances.
-
It's not necessarily the amounts spent it's the way it's been spent that's the issue. It's been the issue to differing degrees since Randy first opened his chequebook.
That's it exactly. With Randy Lerner came a glorious opportunity to embark on a long-term plan, to invest in the infrastructure of the club and build some solid foundations that would see us make steady progress. That was the key to success. Instead what we've had is a fatally short-sighted, short-termist approach to everything, beginning with Lerner handing great wodges of his fortune to completely the wrong man. Two hundred and fifty million quid may not even have bought a title winning squad, but it should have been ample to buy the knowledge and expertise required to run a club capable of challenging for trophies for years. Lerner didn't have to know anything about football, he just needed to employ people who did. He failed to do that.
I despair to think that after so many years of Ellis strangling us with his miserly approach we finally got what we wanted, what we needed, what any club needs to compete these days in the money-driven world of the Premier League: we got our sugar daddy: we got his millions: and then O'Neill wasted the lot on a glut of Sidwells and Shoreys. And for what? Sixth place finishes? Even O'Leary managed that, with a fraction of O'Neills' funding. And that was our chance, folks. That was our future and O'Neill blew it. Anyone who thinks he's is in no way culpable for this mess five years down the line is as short-sighted as he is. His reckless spending crippled us, his behaviour clearly damaged Lerner, and our current predicament is the result. Lerner is to blame for trusting him, for not knowing that he was a very limited football manager, and for the car crash we've witnessed since, but it's not his fault that O'Neill is a spiteful, self-serving litigious bastard.
Can we have this copied and pasted on every thread about O'Neill. people accuse many of the people who could see through the O'Neill media induced love in of being blind to the facts of three 6th place finishes and a cup final. If that's your definition of success under the limited O'Neill you need to have a word with yourself.
I think Jason Burt saw through him in the end - I am sure there is a video clip somewhere.
-
As I manfully row against the tide of anti-MON sentiment, beneath the waves drowns the nation in personal debt. How ironic then that some will close their laptops having lambasted MON for his fiscal shortcomings to journey into the Bull Ring and purchase pieces of Yuletide tat they can ill afford. The credit card will take some hammer and you're mortgaged beyond the hilt but still capable of criticising a football manager who was gifted money and told to spend it as he saw fit. Hypocrisy it's called. Who among us wouldn't have done the same? Mistakes were made in buying football's equivalent of Christmas tat (Ivanhoe, Beye) but let's not pretend we too wouldn't have spent the lot. And by the way I count myself amongst the drowning millions so this isn't a criticism of those in debt, many are in desperate financial straits due to unemployment, failed business ventures etc but I don't doubt some are financially challenged purely through the profligacy they accuse MON of.
This has been a party political broadcast on behalf of the MON Defence League.
-
Egotistical chequebook manager in throwing toys out of pram when cash is cut shocker.
-
I saw the shittiest lantern you could ever wish to set eyes on whilst passing that so called German market the other day. At the competitive price of......£30.
-
You're basically right though. Any manager in the world will spend as much as they are allowed to, on the players they think are the best value for the spend. Why would they do otherwise when the manager job is so precarious and success is measured over such short periods? In hindsight it's absurd to think beye/heskey/Davies were the best use of those funds but MON thought it was so it is a crime that he took the money and spent it on them?
Also, I distinctly remember a lot of transfer day angst because he wasn't spending the fund being made available (pelty?) and talk of him spending money like it was his own, so I don't necessarily buy the whole he sold the farm argument which has become accepted fact.
-
From Vital Villa's web page - list of O'Neill ins and outs.
FIRST SEASON 2006/2007 :
Out
Kevin Phillips WBA £700k
Matthieu Berson Levante £1m
Ulises De La Cruz Reading Free
Peter Whittingham Cardiff City £250k
Eric Djemba Djemba Quatar Free
Juan Pablo Angel New York Red Bulls Free
Milan Baros Lyon Swap
Mark Delaney Retired
In
Stiliyan Petrov Celtic £6.5m
Didier Agathe Celtic Free
Chris Sutton Celtic Free
Phil Bardsley Manchester United Loan
Gabor Kiraly Crystal Palace Loan
John Carew Lyon Swap
Ashley Young Watford £9.65m
Shaun Maloney Celtic £1.1m
SECOND SEASON 2007/2008:
Out
Gary Cahill Bolton Undisc (in region of £4m?)
Liam Ridgewell Birmingham £2m
Jlloyd Samuel Bolton Free
Lee Hendrie Sheffield United Free
Chris Sutton Retired
Didier Agathe released
Steven Davis Fulham £4m
Aaron Hughes Fulham £1m
Gavin McCann Bolton £1m
Robert Olejnik Falkirk Free
In
Wayne Routledge Tottenham £1.5m
Moustapha Salifou FC Wil Undisc.
Curtis Davies West Brom Loan
Zat Knight Fulham £3.5m
Scott Carson Liverpool Loan
Harry Forrester Watford £250 000 initial fee rising on appearances
Eric Lichaj Unattached Free
Marlon Harewood West Ham Undisc (region of £3.5m?)
Nigel Reo-Coker West Ham £8.5m
THIRD SEASON 2008/2009
Out:
Luke Moore (West Brom - £3.5million)
Olof Mellberg (Juventus - free)
Patrick Berger (Sparta Prague - free)
Thomas Sorensen (released)
Shaun Maloney (Celtic, £1million)
Wayne Routledge (undisclosed)
In:
Curtis Davies (WBA undisclosed but around £7.5million?)
Steve Sidwell (Chelsea £5.5million)
Brad Friedel (Blackburn, undisclosed but in the region of £2 - £2.5million)
Brad Guzan (Chivas US, undisclosed, starts at around £800k up to £2m on appearances etc?)
Nicky Shorey (Reading, around £4m?)
Luke Young (Middlesbrough, around £5m?)
Carlos Cuellar (Rangers £7.8million)
James Milner (Newcastle, around £12million?)
Arsenio Halfhuid from Excelsior (undisclosed)
Emile Heskey from Wigan Athletic (£3.5m)
FOURTH SEASON 2009/2010
Out:
Gareth Barry (Manchester City, £12million)
Stuart Taylor (Manchester City, free)
Zat Knight (Bolton £4 - £4.5million)
Martin Laursen (retired)
Craig Garnder (Blues in January, £3.5million)
In
Stewart Downing (Middlesbrough around £10m + add ons)
Fabian Delph (Leeds United - undisclosed fee - around £6m including add ons?)
Habib Beye (Newcastle, undisclosed but around £3m?)
Andy Marshall (free agent)
Stephen Warnock (Blackburn Rovers - around £6m + add ons?)
James Collins (West Ham United - around £5m)
Richard Dunne (Manchester City - around £6m)
*Loan fees not included. Figures rounded up or down. Only a rough guideline!*
-
You're basically right though. Any manager in the world will spend as much as they are allowed to, on the players they think are the best value for the spend. Why would they do otherwise when the manager job is so precarious and success is measured over such short periods? In hindsight it's absurd to think beye/heskey/Davies were the best use of those funds but MON thought it was so it is a crime that he took the money and spent it on them?
Also, I distinctly remember a lot of transfer day angst because he wasn't spending the fund being made available (pelty?) and talk of him spending money like it was his own, so I don't necessarily buy the whole he sold the farm argument which has become accepted fact.
The fact that he was seemingly unaware of the existence of a transfer market outside the UK and Ireland was a definite black mark against him. That isn't speaking from hindsight either, as I remember a lot of people saying that at the time. At that time, the money spent on the likes of Curtis Davies could have bought some top players from abroad.
-
It is a myth that the default position of the British people is debt brought on by profligacy. It is an excuse perpetrated by the weak to excuse their weakness by claiming it is normal. And by the purveyors of overpriced tat.
-
The spending argument is only part of the issue. It should not be allowed to overshadow the issue of O'Neill's personal conduct, which was conniving, spoilt and shitty, and arguably caused more damage than anything he did with Lerner's chequebook. Lerner still had some money left when O'Neill buggered off, but he no longer had the faith, the trust, the ambition or the drive. It seems O'Neill broke him.
If you can defend O'Neill by asking who amongst us wouldn't have spent that money given the chance, you can also put yourself in Lerner's shoes and ask who amongst us wouldn't be far more cautious once we'd had our fingers burned?
-
The assumption is made that he left so close to the new season in order to maximize the damage to AVFC but that's not something I choose to believe. Why not entertain the opposite angle and consider he spent the summer arguing his corner with the chairman until having to concede the relationship was no longer tenable? Neither argument can be supported with any genuine proof and given Lerner doesn't have the common courtesy to ever speak with the club's supporters why on earth would you want to reject the suggestion that he was at fault rather than a man who'd taken 2 years out of football to support his cancer ridden wife? He concedes his timing was poor but the idea that it was deliberate sabotage I believe is a step too far.
-
O'Neill left a week before the season started. We finished 9th that season. Hardly catastrophic. Pulis left the night before the season began at Palace, yet they finished 12th that season and at some points since, some people of this parish would have had him as our manager.
We continued to spend big money for a while after he'd gone. The two highest earners in our history he mentioned will probably be found in Bent, N'Zogbia or Stephen Ireland. Not his signings. He is within his rights IMO to not have the 'He spent all the money' arguement thrown at him and defend himself.
-
The spending argument is only part of the issue. It should not be allowed to overshadow the issue of O'Neill's personal conduct, which was conniving, spoilt and shitty, and arguably caused more damage than anything he did with Lerner's chequebook. Lerner still had some money left when O'Neill buggered off, but he no longer had the faith, the trust, the ambition or the drive. It seems O'Neill broke him.
If you can defend O'Neill by asking who amongst us wouldn't have spent that money given the chance, you can also put yourself in Lerner's shoes and ask who amongst us wouldn't be far more cautious once we'd had our fingers burned?
Fair point. But I'd frankly expect more of our owner than our manager. Lerner is a billionaire and formerly controlled a gigantic multinational company. He should be able to deal with the antics of a nasty little little oik like MON without losing his faith in humankind and becoming fatally unconvinced of his own strategy.
-
He has more financial backing that any other Villa manager in history, and yet he opted for the likes of Harewood, Heskey and co. The unimaginative dullard.
Nowhere near as good a manager as Sir Brian was for us, or even JG, for that matter.
-
He has more financial backing that any other Villa manager in history, and yet he opted for the likes of Harewood, Heskey and co. The unimaginative dullard.
Nowhere near as good a manager as Sir Brian was for us, or even JG, for that matter.
Or Saunders or Atkinson or Taylor.
-
Well, quite.
But the suggestions was he was our best manager in the last 20 years. I think most of us would have at least two, if not three candidates ahead of him even just focussing on that era.
-
My issue with MON was the timing of his departure. If he had left at the end of the previous season most people would of held him in high esteem and wished him good luck. Whatever his disagreement with Lerner it's the fans that he let down by his walk out
This. He must have known Lerner was pulling the plug well before a couple of days before the season started. He hadn't bought a player all summer. If he'd resigned earlier and given a new manager time to bed in we'd have had a chance to settle. Instead he gave us no time to identify a replacement, and consequently no time to add to the squad. We've been in terminal decline since.
-
The assumption is made that he left so close to the new season in order to maximize the damage to AVFC but that's not something I choose to believe. Why not entertain the opposite angle and consider he spent the summer arguing his corner with the chairman until having to concede the relationship was no longer tenable? Neither argument can be supported with any genuine proof and given Lerner doesn't have the common courtesy to ever speak with the club's supporters why on earth would you want to reject the suggestion that he was at fault rather than a man who'd taken 2 years out of football to support his cancer ridden wife? He concedes his timing was poor but the idea that it was deliberate sabotage I believe is a step too far.
What is the relevance of that to matters being discussed here?
-
It's not necessarily the amounts spent it's the way it's been spent that's the issue. It's been the issue to differing degrees since Randy first opened his chequebook.
That's it exactly. With Randy Lerner came a glorious opportunity to embark on a long-term plan, to invest in the infrastructure of the club and build some solid foundations that would see us make steady progress. That was the key to success. Instead what we've had is a fatally short-sighted, short-termist approach to everything, beginning with Lerner handing great wodges of his fortune to completely the wrong man. Two hundred and fifty million quid may not even have bought a title winning squad, but it should have been ample to buy the knowledge and expertise required to run a club capable of challenging for trophies for years. Lerner didn't have to know anything about football, he just needed to employ people who did. He failed to do that.
I despair to think that after so many years of Ellis strangling us with his miserly approach we finally got what we wanted, what we needed, what any club needs to compete these days in the money-driven world of the Premier League: we got our sugar daddy: we got his millions: and then O'Neill wasted the lot on a glut of Sidwells and Shoreys. And for what? Sixth place finishes? Even O'Leary managed that, with a fraction of O'Neills' funding. And that was our chance, folks. That was our future and O'Neill blew it. Anyone who thinks he's is in no way culpable for this mess five years down the line is as short-sighted as he is. His reckless spending crippled us, his behaviour clearly damaged Lerner, and our current predicament is the result. Lerner is to blame for trusting him, for not knowing that he was a very limited football manager, and for the car crash we've witnessed since, but it's not his fault that O'Neill is a spiteful, self-serving litigious bastard.
100% agree
Me too.
Moving forward to where we are now, and I know events since doing this haven't really represented much of an argument in favour, but we now have a set up at the club - even if you don't much rate the people in the jobs - which Lerner should have set up on day one.
Instead he watched huge sums of money get pissed away for nothing.
The other thing - "yeah, but what about the sixth place finishes?" as if nobody recognises that was much more fun than our current position of being a more spangly Wigan - yes, that was fun, of course it was, but was it really a good enough return for the amounts of money we spent?
The profligacy is there in black and white. What sort of manager spunks 30m one summer on almost an entire defence, decides he doesn't rate some of them, and spends the same amount on another entire defence the next season.
Uncontrolled, ill-considered, scattergun wasting of transfer money. Lerner's fault was letting that go on for so long, and to the point at which we start to annually risk our top flight status as we're trying to recover.
And yes, MON left five years ago, but there's still an impact - that's why we're watching cheap dross like Westwood or Bacuna week in, week out.
-
My issue with MON was the timing of his departure. If he had left at the end of the previous season most people would of held him in high esteem and wished him good luck. Whatever his disagreement with Lerner it's the fans that he let down by his walk out
This. He must have known Lerner was pulling the plug well before a couple of days before the season started. He hadn't bought a player all summer. If he'd resigned earlier and given a new manager time to bed in we'd have had a chance to settle. Instead he gave us no time to identify a replacement, and consequently no time to add to the squad. We've been in terminal decline since.
I seem to remember it being reported that he was asked a question about his future at a meeting at the end of his last season and he replied something along the lines of "you better ask Mark Hughes about that". It was pretty clear from his body language and general manner at the end of that season that all wasn't well.
-
We're where we are because we as a club bought Darren Bent, Jean II Makoun, Jermaine Jenas, Charles N'Zogbia, Stephen Ireland, Shay Given and paid them all silly money for no return. Players bought with money earnt from sales of the much better players we bought during O'Neills tenure. He bought some players that didn't return much, but not huge sums individually were spent on them. Beye and Heskey were probably the worst.
(I'll add that I think had Fabian Delphs contract been handled better by the club, he'd have been another £20m sale. £8m for him was a steal.)
His impact was over after we'd struggled in the league the season after, then clambered up to 9th in the last few games.
At that point the club appointed Alex McLeish.
The lack of structure could have been looked at then, couldn't it?
We are where we are, because the owner hasn't put the right people in charge of his investment. He's a rich boy who inherited wealth and businesses, and has pretty much failed at all of them.
-
Darren Bent paid for his transfer in spades by keeping us up twice. We didn't buy Jenas.
-
Darren Bent paid for his transfer in spades by keeping us up twice. We didn't buy Jenas.
He did. His goals were great, then he went for nothing. James Milner and co nearly got us into the top 4 and a trophy. We paid Jenas a fortune for nothing.
My only point being that we've done a decent enough job of wasting money without big bad MON
-
My issue with MON was the timing of his departure. If he had left at the end of the previous season most people would of held him in high esteem and wished him good luck. Whatever his disagreement with Lerner it's the fans that he let down by his walk out
This. He must have known Lerner was pulling the plug well before a couple of days before the season started. He hadn't bought a player all summer. If he'd resigned earlier and given a new manager time to bed in we'd have had a chance to settle. Instead he gave us no time to identify a replacement, and consequently no time to add to the squad. We've been in terminal decline since.
I'm no MON fan, far from it but maybe he was given assurances that Milner wasn't going to be sold? Or maybe he was told that if Milner did go, he would be given all of the funds to spend how he liked but then had Ireland forced on him? None of us know for definite what made him quit and when he decided to do it.
Personally I think he had taken us as far as he was going to anyway with his style of football and management, we should have been looking to replace him with someone able to take us to the next level
-
What did for Lerner and MON was man city. Their wealth effectively ended our hopes of getting in the champions league. Lerner knew it and pulled the plug on spending to get in it, and refocused the spending on staying in the premier league. The shit managerial appointments since then have had an impact but in truth are a result of the limitations around budgets.
-
MoN is conscientious in a scurrilous minefield of wntreneurial capitalism which has zero/zilch regard for club or supporters. Good luck with Irish endeavours Martin.
-
Darren Bent paid for his transfer in spades by keeping us up twice. We didn't buy Jenas.
He did. His goals were great, then he went for nothing. James Milner and co nearly got us into the top 4 and a trophy. We paid Jenas a fortune for nothing.
My only point being that we've done a decent enough job of wasting money without big bad MON
True, we have. I'd say a lot/all of the spending in those two seasons after he went smacks, in hindsight, of us trying to dig ourselves out of a bit of a hole we'd already dug. One last desperate, futile attempt to cling onto the coattails of those then charging off into the distance.
But as for top 4 and a trophy, "nearly" might just as well be "miles away". Both count as fuck-all. DOL, JG, HWWOW, BFR, SGT, you have to go quite a way back to find a Villa manager who failed to make top six.
-
I'd look at it as Lerner would not have said ok Martin I'm gona have to cut the funding as over 3 years you have wiped me out but carry on and I expect another top 4 challenge.
No expectations would have been lowered and Martin like most over managers was going to have to spend what he brought in from sales.As a so called top manager he should of taken the challenge on to steady things instead he quit.
We had no manager for the first few games , lost Milner , had a crippling injury list and a manager whose health issues returned yet still scraped to 9th.There was enough left in that squad for him to achieve a sold league position and rebuild slowly.
I'd suggest he walked out knowing the endless cash was gone and he actually had to manage the budget and you know actually scout players and use the youth coming through.No he wonder off and resurfaced at Sunderland and made same mistakes.
He was lauded as a great man manager and certainly at times he could motivate some average players and Leicester but at Celtic ,Villa and Sunderland he was a short term ,cheque book manager not much better than Redknapp
-
He has more financial backing that any other Villa manager in history, and yet he opted for the likes of Harewood, Heskey and co. The unimaginative dullard.
Nowhere near as good a manager as Sir Brian was for us, or even JG, for that matter.
I think the O'Neill haters are behaving like a jilted boyfriend. He bought some rubbish and bought some quality.All managers do that. I genuinely believe that if we had backed him when he was asking we would of made champions league football with all the riches that brings. He just pulled off a miracle and will be at the next World Cup pitting his wits against the top coaches in the World. We are still fighting relegation 5 YEAR after he left. He can maybe blamed for 2010/11 season but all the utter shite we have endured since? I don't think so.
-
We're where we are because we as a club bought Darren Bent, Jean II Makoun, Jermaine Jenas, Charles N'Zogbia, Stephen Ireland, Shay Given and paid them all silly money for no return. Players bought with money earnt from sales of the much better players we bought during O'Neills tenure. He bought some players that didn't return much, but not huge sums individually were spent on them. Beye and Heskey were probably the worst.
(I'll add that I think had Fabian Delphs contract been handled better by the club, he'd have been another £20m sale. £8m for him was a steal.)
His impact was over after we'd struggled in the league the season after, then clambered up to 9th in the last few games.
At that point the club appointed Alex McLeish.
The lack of structure could have been looked at then, couldn't it?
We are where we are, because the owner hasn't put the right people in charge of his investment. He's a rich boy who inherited wealth and businesses, and has pretty much failed at all of them.
100% right mate.
-
What did for Lerner and MON was man city. Their wealth effectively ended our hopes of getting in the champions league. Lerner knew it and pulled the plug on spending to get in it, and refocused the spending on staying in the premier league. The shit managerial appointments since then have had an impact but in truth are a result of the limitations around budgets.
That's a really interesting point.
-
I think the O'Neill haters are behaving like a jilted boyfriend. He bought some rubbish and bought some quality.All managers do that. I genuinely believe that if we had backed him when he was asking we would of made champions league football with all the riches that brings. He just pulled off a miracle and will be at the next World Cup pitting his wits against the top coaches in the World. We are still fighting relegation 5 YEAR after he left. He can maybe blamed for 2010/11 season but all the utter shite we have endured since? I don't think so.
Pulled off a miracle? Is that not overstating it somewhat? It was the European Championships not the World Cup, and Ireland finished 3rd in the group above Scotland, Georgia and Gibraltar. Hardly achievement of the century.
Nobody is blaming him for everything that has happened since, but the amount of money he spent on players he then changed his mind on and left out the team kickstarted the problems.
-
We're where we are because we as a club bought Darren Bent, Jean II Makoun, Jermaine Jenas, Charles N'Zogbia, Stephen Ireland, Shay Given and paid them all silly money for no return. Players bought with money earnt from sales of the much better players we bought during O'Neills tenure. He bought some players that didn't return much, but not huge sums individually were spent on them. Beye and Heskey were probably the worst.
(I'll add that I think had Fabian Delphs contract been handled better by the club, he'd have been another £20m sale. £8m for him was a steal.)
His impact was over after we'd struggled in the league the season after, then clambered up to 9th in the last few games.
At that point the club appointed Alex McLeish.
The lack of structure could have been looked at then, couldn't it?
We are where we are, because the owner hasn't put the right people in charge of his investment. He's a rich boy who inherited wealth and businesses, and has pretty much failed at all of them.
100% right mate.
Except the bits that are wrong.
-
What did for Lerner and MON was man city. Their wealth effectively ended our hopes of getting in the champions league. Lerner knew it and pulled the plug on spending to get in it, and refocused the spending on staying in the premier league. The shit managerial appointments since then have had an impact but in truth are a result of the limitations around budgets.
I don't buy the Man City excuse sorry. If anything, it should make the top 4 slightly easier to achieve, because every year there's going to a big team like Liverpool missing out. What did for Lerner was idiocy at every key step. When you look at his tenure as a whole it's been an unmitigated disaster leading to where we are now.
-
We're where we are because we as a club bought Darren Bent, Jean II Makoun, Jermaine Jenas, Charles N'Zogbia, Stephen Ireland, Shay Given and paid them all silly money for no return. Players bought with money earnt from sales of the much better players we bought during O'Neills tenure. He bought some players that didn't return much, but not huge sums individually were spent on them. Beye and Heskey were probably the worst.
(I'll add that I think had Fabian Delphs contract been handled better by the club, he'd have been another £20m sale. £8m for him was a steal.)
His impact was over after we'd struggled in the league the season after, then clambered up to 9th in the last few games.
At that point the club appointed Alex McLeish.
The lack of structure could have been looked at then, couldn't it?
We are where we are, because the owner hasn't put the right people in charge of his investment. He's a rich boy who inherited wealth and businesses, and has pretty much failed at all of them.
100% right mate.
Except the bits that are wrong.
We didn't buy Jermaine Jenas. Care to elaborate
-
With Eire he can only pick the players who are available..grealish err? Good luck to them man. No chance he will ever darken VP doorstep again
-
He has more financial backing that any other Villa manager in history, and yet he opted for the likes of Harewood, Heskey and co. The unimaginative dullard.
Nowhere near as good a manager as Sir Brian was for us, or even JG, for that matter.
think the O'Neill haters are behaving like a jilted boyfriend. He bought some rubbish and bought some quality.All managers do that. I genuinely believe that if we had backed him when he was asking we would of made champions league football with all the riches that brings. He just pulled off a miracle and will be at the next World Cup pitting his wits against the top coaches in the World. We are still fighting relegation 5 YEAR after he left. He can maybe blamed for 2010/11 season but all the utter shite we have endured since? I don't think so.
I think the opposite is true. There remains a sizeable faction of our support who still want his babies despite the manner of his departure and the state that he left the club in. You picked a fine time to leave us, O'Neill.
-
I'd love MON to face these charges as brought against him by the good folk of H&V. He's so defensive, it would be hilarious. There's a clip of him on youtube I can't find, where his reaction is priceless to a more delicate question by an interviewer than he's used to.
-
You picked a fine time to leave us, O'Neill.
Loving your work Joe.
-
You picked a fine time to leave us, O'Neill.
Loving your work Joe.
Yes, despite me arguing that the effect of said departure really should have ended years ago, that line deserves a cap doffing
-
I genuinely believe that if we had backed him when he was asking we would of made champions league football with all the riches that brings.
Riches? We'd have been knocked out in the pre-qualification round. The man was/is a footballing dinosaur. You only have to look at our home record under him to see how limited he was. Still, it never stopped him constantly referring post match to us playing "scintillating football", the delusional twat.
-
But as for top 4 and a trophy, "nearly" might just as well be "miles away". Both count as fuck-all. DOL, JG, HWWOW, BFR, SGT, you have to go quite a way back to find a Villa manager who failed to make top six.
Since we got back into the top flight 40 years ago I think Turner & Lambert are the only managers that spent more than a year at the club and didn't manage a top 6 finish.
-
We're where we are because we as a club bought Darren Bent, Jean II Makoun, Jermaine Jenas, Charles N'Zogbia, Stephen Ireland, Shay Given and paid them all silly money for no return. Players bought with money earnt from sales of the much better players we bought during O'Neills tenure. He bought some players that didn't return much, but not huge sums individually were spent on them. Beye and Heskey were probably the worst.
(I'll add that I think had Fabian Delphs contract been handled better by the club, he'd have been another £20m sale. £8m for him was a steal.)
His impact was over after we'd struggled in the league the season after, then clambered up to 9th in the last few games.
At that point the club appointed Alex McLeish.
The lack of structure could have been looked at then, couldn't it?
We are where we are, because the owner hasn't put the right people in charge of his investment. He's a rich boy who inherited wealth and businesses, and has pretty much failed at all of them.
100% right mate.
Except the bits that are wrong.
We didn't buy Jermaine Jenas. Care to elaborate
We got plenty of return from Bent, right up until he suffered a career-ruining injury. The other players were on the whole more miss than hit but none of them damaged us either then or now as much as O'Neill's behaviour. As I've said before, I believe that his, and to a lesser extent Houllier's, behaviour altered Lerner's ideas to a radical and detriimental extent.
-
But as for top 4 and a trophy, "nearly" might just as well be "miles away". Both count as fuck-all. DOL, JG, HWWOW, BFR, SGT, you have to go quite a way back to find a Villa manager who failed to make top six.
Since we got back into the top flight 40 years ago I think Turner & Lambert are the only managers that spent more than a year at the club and didn't manage a top 6 finish.
Crackin' Villa-quiz question that.
-
We're where we are because we as a club bought Darren Bent, Jean II Makoun, Jermaine Jenas, Charles N'Zogbia, Stephen Ireland, Shay Given and paid them all silly money for no return. Players bought with money earnt from sales of the much better players we bought during O'Neills tenure. He bought some players that didn't return much, but not huge sums individually were spent on them. Beye and Heskey were probably the worst.
(I'll add that I think had Fabian Delphs contract been handled better by the club, he'd have been another £20m sale. £8m for him was a steal.)
His impact was over after we'd struggled in the league the season after, then clambered up to 9th in the last few games.
At that point the club appointed Alex McLeish.
The lack of structure could have been looked at then, couldn't it?
We are where we are, because the owner hasn't put the right people in charge of his investment. He's a rich boy who inherited wealth and businesses, and has pretty much failed at all of them.
100% right mate.
Except the bits that are wrong.
We didn't buy Jermaine Jenas. Care to elaborate
We got plenty of return from Bent, right up until he suffered a career-ruining injury. The other players were on the whole more miss than hit but none of them damaged us either then or now as much as O'Neill's behaviour. As I've said before, I believe that his, and to a lesser extent Houllier's, behaviour altered Lerner's ideas to a radical and detriimental extent.
For a £24m outlay, and at least £60k a week, his goals were acceptable.
I use him as an example of an over-priced English player, the sort O'Neill gets slaughtered for making. One that left on a free transfer. Isn't that what makes NRC and Davies failiures? I use him as an example that O'Neill didn't just use all of the money. We were happy to keep spending that season, and once the injured players started to drop back in we finished in a correct and respectable position.
You're telling me that selling Ashley Young, Stewart Downing and appointing Alex McLeish (who was supported with funds to sign Given 5yr contract at 60k a week and N'zogbia) was O'Neills fault?
-
But as for top 4 and a trophy, "nearly" might just as well be "miles away". Both count as fuck-all. DOL, JG, HWWOW, BFR, SGT, you have to go quite a way back to find a Villa manager who failed to make top six.
Since we got back into the top flight 40 years ago I think Turner & Lambert are the only managers that spent more than a year at the club and didn't manage a top 6 finish.
That is a very interesting fact. I'm not saying what O'Neill achieved was amazing or anything, and believe me there are things that went on I could never understand. No rotation etc, drove me nuts. What I won't have though is blaming fuck up after fuck up behind the scenes since being blamed on him.
-
We're where we are because we as a club bought Darren Bent, Jean II Makoun, Jermaine Jenas, Charles N'Zogbia, Stephen Ireland, Shay Given and paid them all silly money for no return. Players bought with money earnt from sales of the much better players we bought during O'Neills tenure. He bought some players that didn't return much, but not huge sums individually were spent on them. Beye and Heskey were probably the worst.
(I'll add that I think had Fabian Delphs contract been handled better by the club, he'd have been another £20m sale. £8m for him was a steal.)
His impact was over after we'd struggled in the league the season after, then clambered up to 9th in the last few games.
At that point the club appointed Alex McLeish.
The lack of structure could have been looked at then, couldn't it?
We are where we are, because the owner hasn't put the right people in charge of his investment. He's a rich boy who inherited wealth and businesses, and has pretty much failed at all of them.
100% right mate.
Except the bits that are wrong.
We didn't buy Jermaine Jenas. Care to elaborate
We got plenty of return from Bent, right up until he suffered a career-ruining injury. The other players were on the whole more miss than hit but none of them damaged us either then or now as much as O'Neill's behaviour. As I've said before, I believe that his, and to a lesser extent Houllier's, behaviour altered Lerner's ideas to a radical and detriimental extent.
For a £24m outlay, and at least £60k a week, his goals were acceptable.
I use him as an example of an over-priced English player, the sort O'Neill gets slaughtered for making. One that left on a free transfer. Isn't that what makes NRC and Davies failiures? I use him as an example that O'Neill didn't just use all of the money. We were happy to keep spending that season, and once the injured players started to drop back in we finished in a correct and respectable position.
You're telling me that selling Ashley Young, Stewart Downing and appointing Alex McLeish (who was supported with funds to sign Given 5yr contract at 60k a week and N'zogbia) was O'Neills fault?
and Hutton on 40k a week
-
We're where we are because we as a club bought Darren Bent, Jean II Makoun, Jermaine Jenas, Charles N'Zogbia, Stephen Ireland, Shay Given and paid them all silly money for no return. Players bought with money earnt from sales of the much better players we bought during O'Neills tenure. He bought some players that didn't return much, but not huge sums individually were spent on them. Beye and Heskey were probably the worst.
(I'll add that I think had Fabian Delphs contract been handled better by the club, he'd have been another £20m sale. £8m for him was a steal.)
His impact was over after we'd struggled in the league the season after, then clambered up to 9th in the last few games.
At that point the club appointed Alex McLeish.
The lack of structure could have been looked at then, couldn't it?
We are where we are, because the owner hasn't put the right people in charge of his investment. He's a rich boy who inherited wealth and businesses, and has pretty much failed at all of them.
100% right mate.
Except the bits that are wrong.
We didn't buy Jermaine Jenas. Care to elaborate
We got plenty of return from Bent, right up until he suffered a career-ruining injury. The other players were on the whole more miss than hit but none of them damaged us either then or now as much as O'Neill's behaviour. As I've said before, I believe that his, and to a lesser extent Houllier's, behaviour altered Lerner's ideas to a radical and detriimental extent.
For a £24m outlay, and at least £60k a week, his goals were acceptable.
I use him as an example of an over-priced English player, the sort O'Neill gets slaughtered for making. One that left on a free transfer. Isn't that what makes NRC and Davies failiures? I use him as an example that O'Neill didn't just use all of the money. We were happy to keep spending that season, and once the injured players started to drop back in we finished in a correct and respectable position.
You're telling me that selling Ashley Young, Stewart Downing and appointing Alex McLeish (who was supported with funds to sign Given 5yr contract at 60k a week and N'zogbia) was O'Neills fault?
and Hutton on 40k a week
Who was then bombed out, then brought back in and given a contract extension!!
-
My issue with MON was the timing of his departure. If he had left at the end of the previous season most people would of held him in high esteem and wished him good luck. Whatever his disagreement with Lerner it's the fans that he let down by his walk out
I totally agree, he had taken us as far as he or his tactics could take us
This. He must have known Lerner was pulling the plug well before a couple of days before the season started. He hadn't bought a player all summer. If he'd resigned earlier and given a new manager time to bed in we'd have had a chance to settle. Instead he gave us no time to identify a replacement, and consequently no time to add to the squad. We've been in terminal decline since.
I'm no MON fan, far from it but maybe he was given assurances that Milner wasn't going to be sold? Or maybe he was told that if Milner did go, he would be given all of the funds to spend how he liked but then had Ireland forced on him? None of us know for definite what made him quit and when he decided to do it.
Personally I think he had taken us as far as he was going to anyway with his style of football and management, we should have been looking to replace him with someone able to take us to the next level
-
MoN is conscientious in a scurrilous minefield of wntreneurial capitalism which has zero/zilch regard for club or supporters. Good luck with Irish endeavours Martin.
What are you smoking man
-
But as for top 4 and a trophy, "nearly" might just as well be "miles away". Both count as fuck-all. DOL, JG, HWWOW, BFR, SGT, you have to go quite a way back to find a Villa manager who failed to make top six.
Since we got back into the top flight 40 years ago I think Turner & Lambert are the only managers that spent more than a year at the club and didn't manage a top 6 finish.
That is a very interesting fact. I'm not saying what O'Neill achieved was amazing or anything, and believe me there are things that went on I could never understand. No rotation etc, drove me nuts. What I won't have though is blaming fuck up after fuck up behind the scenes since being blamed on him.
Well said mate. In a nutshell how I see it.......now I'll wait for the onslaught from the O'Neill haters.
-
You can argue all night about how much blame is apportioned where but we're in this position because of them both. If MON was a slightly better manager, especially in his transfer dealings, we probably would have made the top 4 during the initial splurge and gone off in a different and presumably much better direction which might have excused lerner's shortcomings. But if Lerner and his proxies weren't so apparently gullible and/or spineless and/or clueless before and after MON left then we wouldn't be getting relegated.
-
We haven't had one of these debates in a while! For my two penneth as to why he is the devil incarnate, then read on.
A few points of order first though. What I post about his departure is based at least 90% in fact (others here can comment on the bona fides of my ITK info). In small part I have had to read between the lines but they are very much educated guesses based on what I do know to be fact.
The time line of events started around the time Chelsea smashed us (by 7?). Anyhow, it was the third year and not long before his Wembley trips.
Faulkner was in post by then and MON had kicked up a storm about it. He had seen off proper business types before and wasn't going to accept having to report to this fucker.
The first questions had started to be asked about his lack of use of the expensively assembled squad he had and the players were getting pissed off by the lack of progress on the pitch, as well as annoyed by his archaic methods.
That day broke the spirit in the team. An injured Milner forced to travel to the game at the 11th hour. Luke Young thrown in as a sacrificial lamb as he was pissed off at being questioned as to why we were playing anyone at right back but the one you spent £5m and £60k a week on. Shortly after, he announced his own bomb squad.
You all know what happened on the Wembley visits. The season ends. Now this is where my first dig at the club comes. They knew it wasn't right but didn't have the bollocks to remove him. And so started the battle of Randy/Faulkner/MON.
MON was convinced that he could keep the doors to the bank vault open if he could just get the annoying call centre bloke out of the way. It had always worked on the past with better qualified business types. But he misread Lerner and the fact he wanted shot of him. Therefore, Faulkner stays.
The club put up what were perfectly reasonable requests of how he ought to approach the summer business, that couldn't possibly fall foul of a tribunal evidentially, but did so knowing he wouldn't stand for it and would likely jack it in at the end of season 4 when diminishing performance would start to damage brand MON.
He had been a prickly fucker all of the pre season for what should have been year four. He realised he wasn't going to win with the chairman chucking another £30m in the mix without some being moved on and that Faulkner was sharing Lerner's position, rather than it being his own.
The high water mark came when he was told by Faulkner he would not sign off on signing Aiden McGeady from some Russian club for 2 reasons.
For one, we already have 2 England international wingers in the squad, and 2, you haven't shifted Luke Young, Davies etc as requested for the bank to open again.
Man Citeh then pile in with a bid for Milner. Ireland plus the money for McGeady and another? Do the deal.
But he didn't immediately get the money as he wanted to spend it on McGeady and had not come up with a good reason as to why he was a vital signing.
At the 11th hour he tried again. Luke Young to Liverpool. Little fee but his wage was gone (Young decided against it and we found out at Walsall away when Percy and I were eavesdropping a Sky journo on the premise of a fag break outside the ground at half time).
Young hasn't gone and you can't sign a player we don't need Martin. Randy will support you, but you have to explain who you want and why. I will be part of the discussion. Says Faulkner.
MON knew the game was up. We won't do better than last year ever if I am asked to manage like everyone else. I can't have brand MON damaged.
A last ditch meeting was arranged with just Randy so he could reconcile himself with what Faulkner was saying and get closure that Randy meant it. He did.
And ten days later, for no good reason why that day should be the catalyst (other than Randy was half way home and would have to turn back Mid Atlantic) he jacks it in. 5 days before the season starts and spends the next year hitting out time and again at the club through his mates in the media. Like a cleverer version of Sherwood.
Come the tribunal, it was very much "pay him off and finish this unedifying episode" rather than him having a winnable case.
And with that burning his arse and fortune, Lerner gave up on being involved. Personally feeling brutalised and let down by a man he trusted.
He has done himself no favours since and has plenty of accountability. But do not dare to defend that self serving, 4 eyed, snivelling, bottler in my presence. He is a malignant little bastard.
-
We're where we are because we as a club bought Darren Bent, Jean II Makoun, Jermaine Jenas, Charles N'Zogbia, Stephen Ireland, Shay Given and paid them all silly money for no return. Players bought with money earnt from sales of the much better players we bought during O'Neills tenure. He bought some players that didn't return much, but not huge sums individually were spent on them. Beye and Heskey were probably the worst.
(I'll add that I think had Fabian Delphs contract been handled better by the club, he'd have been another £20m sale. £8m for him was a steal.)
His impact was over after we'd struggled in the league the season after, then clambered up to 9th in the last few games.
At that point the club appointed Alex McLeish.
The lack of structure could have been looked at then, couldn't it?
We are where we are, because the owner hasn't put the right people in charge of his investment. He's a rich boy who inherited wealth and businesses, and has pretty much failed at all of them.
100% right mate.
Except the bits that are wrong.
Which bits are wrong?
-
Thanks for that cheltenham.
-
The high water mark came when he was told by Faulkner he would not sign off on signing Aiden McGeady from some Russian club for 2 reasons.
Fairly trivial compared to the rest of it, but that bit's not right - McGeady only joined Spartak four days after O'Neill quit. He'd have been signing him from Celtic.
-
We haven't had one of these debates in a while! For my two penneth as to why he is the devil incarnate, then read on.
A few points of order first though. What I post about his departure is based at least 90% in fact (others here can comment on the bona fides of my ITK info). In small part I have had to read between the lines but they are very much educated guesses based on what I do know to be fact.
The time line of events started around the time Chelsea smashed us (by 7?). Anyhow, it was the third year and not long before his Wembley trips.
Faulkner was in post by then and MON had kicked up a storm about it. He had seen off proper business types before and wasn't going to accept having to report to this fucker.
The first questions had started to be asked about his lack of use of the expensively assembled squad he had and the players were getting pissed off by the lack of progress on the pitch, as well as annoyed by his archaic methods.
That day broke the spirit in the team. An injured Milner forced to travel to the game at the 11th hour. Luke Young thrown in as a sacrificial lamb as he was pissed off at being questioned as to why we were playing anyone at right back but the one you spent £5m and £60k a week on. Shortly after, he announced his own bomb squad.
You all know what happened on the Wembley visits. The season ends. Now this is where my first dig at the club comes. They knew it wasn't right but didn't have the bollocks to remove him. And so started the battle of Randy/Faulkner/MON.
MON was convinced that he could keep the doors to the bank vault open if he could just get the annoying call centre bloke out of the way. It had always worked on the past with better qualified business types. But he misread Lerner and the fact he wanted shot of him. Therefore, Faulkner stays.
The club put up what were perfectly reasonable requests of how he ought to approach the summer business, that couldn't possibly fall foul of a tribunal evidentially, but did so knowing he wouldn't stand for it and would likely jack it in at the end of season 4 when diminishing performance would start to damage brand MON.
He had been a prickly fucker all of the pre season for what should have been year four. He realised he wasn't going to win with the chairman chucking another £30m in the mix without some being moved on and that Faulkner was sharing Lerner's position, rather than it being his own.
The high water mark came when he was told by Faulkner he would not sign off on signing Aiden McGeady from some Russian club for 2 reasons.
For one, we already have 2 England international wingers in the squad, and 2, you haven't shifted Luke Young, Davies etc as requested for the bank to open again.
Man Citeh then pile in with a bid for Milner. Ireland plus the money for McGeady and another? Do the deal.
But he didn't immediately get the money as he wanted to spend it on McGeady and had not come up with a good reason as to why he was a vital signing.
At the 11th hour he tried again. Luke Young to Liverpool. Little fee but his wage was gone (Young decided against it and we found out at Walsall away when Percy and I were eavesdropping a Sky journo on the premise of a fag break outside the ground at half time).
Young hasn't gone and you can't sign a player we don't need Martin. Randy will support you, but you have to explain who you want and why. I will be part of the discussion. Says Faulkner.
MON knew the game was up. We won't do better than last year ever if I am asked to manage like everyone else. I can't have brand MON damaged.
A last ditch meeting was arranged with just Randy so he could reconcile himself with what Faulkner was saying and get closure that Randy meant it. He did.
And ten days later, for no good reason why that day should be the catalyst (other than Randy was half way home and would have to turn back Mid Atlantic) he jacks it in. 5 days before the season starts and spends the next year hitting out time and again at the club through his mates in the media. Like a cleverer version of Sherwood.
Come the tribunal, it was very much "pay him off and finish this unedifying episode" rather than him having a winnable case.
And with that burning his arse and fortune, Lerner gave up on being involved. Personally feeling brutalised and let down by a man he trusted.
He has done himself no favours since and has plenty of accountability. But do not dare to defend that self serving, 4 eyed, snivelling, bottler in my presence. He is a malignant little bastard.
I just wish you'd say what you think and stop sitting on the fence. 😉
-
Thanks Cheltenham very enlightening. For me it damns Lerner more for not pulling the trigger when he knew it was all over with MON. Why try and manage out a man like him, who, whether you love or hate him, has a clear gift for wily self preservation. Why not just sack him, which in this scenario would be more straightforward and dignified and with less risk of long term fallout?
I mean, if MON was being asked to justify purely football related decisions (why mcgeady not player X) by Faulkner and they knew he wouldn't tolerate it, then they were in a ridiculous situation. He shouldn't have still been in the position he was. Can you then blame MON if he reacts exactly the way they expect? And if they are trying to push him out why should he resign at a convenient time for them?
On the last point, sorry but that does grind my gears. Am I to be sympathetic with a billionaire who abandons us to nosedive into the championship because he has his ego bruised by his one time ally? Sorry but grow a set, randy.
-
I have to say though that as much as I do agree with cheltenham and O'Neill's culpability. I real don't think he left because he was consiously thinking of a "Brand O'Neill". I think he decided to go because he didn't want to work under Faulkner and wanted to stomp his feet rather than protecting an image, which to be fair is the natural progression.
-
The high water mark came when he was told by Faulkner he would not sign off on signing Aiden McGeady from some Russian club for 2 reasons.
Fairly trivial compared to the rest of it, but that bit's not right - McGeady only joined Spartak four days after O'Neill quit. He'd have been signing him from Celtic.
If that is all I fucked up from my recollection of 5 years ago I will live with it!
-
The high water mark came when he was told by Faulkner he would not sign off on signing Aiden McGeady from some Russian club for 2 reasons.
Fairly trivial compared to the rest of it, but that bit's not right - McGeady only joined Spartak four days after O'Neill quit. He'd have been signing him from Celtic.
If that is all I fucked up from my recollection of 5 years ago I will live with it!
Indeed.
Just wouldn't want what looks to be a highly plausible story to be discredited on a technicality.
-
The high water mark came when he was told by Faulkner he would not sign off on signing Aiden McGeady from some Russian club for 2 reasons.
Fairly trivial compared to the rest of it, but that bit's not right - McGeady only joined Spartak four days after O'Neill quit. He'd have been signing him from Celtic.
He signed for Spartak for 9m or so, a farcical fee given the individual involved.
Thought MON wanted Keane and McGeady in that summer?
-
We haven't had one of these debates in a while! For my two penneth as to why he is the devil incarnate, then read on.
A few points of order first though. What I post about his departure is based at least 90% in fact (others here can comment on the bona fides of my ITK info). In small part I have had to read between the lines but they are very much educated guesses based on what I do know to be fact.
The time line of events started around the time Chelsea smashed us (by 7?). Anyhow, it was the third year and not long before his Wembley trips.
Faulkner was in post by then and MON had kicked up a storm about it. He had seen off proper business types before and wasn't going to accept having to report to this fucker.
The first questions had started to be asked about his lack of use of the expensively assembled squad he had and the players were getting pissed off by the lack of progress on the pitch, as well as annoyed by his archaic methods.
That day broke the spirit in the team. An injured Milner forced to travel to the game at the 11th hour. Luke Young thrown in as a sacrificial lamb as he was pissed off at being questioned as to why we were playing anyone at right back but the one you spent £5m and £60k a week on. Shortly after, he announced his own bomb squad.
You all know what happened on the Wembley visits. The season ends. Now this is where my first dig at the club comes. They knew it wasn't right but didn't have the bollocks to remove him. And so started the battle of Randy/Faulkner/MON.
MON was convinced that he could keep the doors to the bank vault open if he could just get the annoying call centre bloke out of the way. It had always worked on the past with better qualified business types. But he misread Lerner and the fact he wanted shot of him. Therefore, Faulkner stays.
The club put up what were perfectly reasonable requests of how he ought to approach the summer business, that couldn't possibly fall foul of a tribunal evidentially, but did so knowing he wouldn't stand for it and would likely jack it in at the end of season 4 when diminishing performance would start to damage brand MON.
He had been a prickly fucker all of the pre season for what should have been year four. He realised he wasn't going to win with the chairman chucking another £30m in the mix without some being moved on and that Faulkner was sharing Lerner's position, rather than it being his own.
The high water mark came when he was told by Faulkner he would not sign off on signing Aiden McGeady from some Russian club for 2 reasons.
For one, we already have 2 England international wingers in the squad, and 2, you haven't shifted Luke Young, Davies etc as requested for the bank to open again.
Man Citeh then pile in with a bid for Milner. Ireland plus the money for McGeady and another? Do the deal.
But he didn't immediately get the money as he wanted to spend it on McGeady and had not come up with a good reason as to why he was a vital signing.
At the 11th hour he tried again. Luke Young to Liverpool. Little fee but his wage was gone (Young decided against it and we found out at Walsall away when Percy and I were eavesdropping a Sky journo on the premise of a fag break outside the ground at half time).
Young hasn't gone and you can't sign a player we don't need Martin. Randy will support you, but you have to explain who you want and why. I will be part of the discussion. Says Faulkner.
MON knew the game was up. We won't do better than last year ever if I am asked to manage like everyone else. I can't have brand MON damaged.
A last ditch meeting was arranged with just Randy so he could reconcile himself with what Faulkner was saying and get closure that Randy meant it. He did.
And ten days later, for no good reason why that day should be the catalyst (other than Randy was half way home and would have to turn back Mid Atlantic) he jacks it in. 5 days before the season starts and spends the next year hitting out time and again at the club through his mates in the media. Like a cleverer version of Sherwood.
Come the tribunal, it was very much "pay him off and finish this unedifying episode" rather than him having a winnable case.
And with that burning his arse and fortune, Lerner gave up on being involved. Personally feeling brutalised and let down by a man he trusted.
He has done himself no favours since and has plenty of accountability. But do not dare to defend that self serving, 4 eyed, snivelling, bottler in my presence. He is a malignant little bastard.
I just wish you'd say what you think and stop sitting on the fence. 😉
Apologies. I got all Trevor Brooking!
-
The high water mark came when he was told by Faulkner he would not sign off on signing Aiden McGeady from some Russian club for 2 reasons.
Fairly trivial compared to the rest of it, but that bit's not right - McGeady only joined Spartak four days after O'Neill quit. He'd have been signing him from Celtic.
He signed for Spartak for 9m or so, a farcical fee given the individual involved.
Thought MON wanted Keane and McGeady in that summer?
There was talk of Keane but McGeady was where it hit the buffers.
-
Thanks Cheltenhamlion, I am in the same corner mate and get pretty angry when people try to defend the snivelling little s**t.
-
lets make randy feel wanted then
he aint the devil incarnate
he really could,if he wanted to
make us great again
-
Thanks Cheltenham very enlightening. For me it damns Lerner more for not pulling the trigger when he knew it was all over with MON. Why try and manage out a man like him, who, whether you love or hate him, has a clear gift for wily self preservation. Why not just sack him, which in this scenario would be more straightforward and dignified and with less risk of long term fallout?
I mean, if MON was being asked to justify purely football related decisions (why mcgeady not player X) by Faulkner and they knew he wouldn't tolerate it, then they were in a ridiculous situation. He shouldn't have still been in the position he was. Can you then blame MON if he reacts exactly the way they expect? And if they are trying to push him out why should he resign at a convenient time for them?
On the last point, sorry but that does grind my gears. Am I to be sympathetic with a billionaire who abandons us to nosedive into the championship because he has his ego bruised by his one time ally? Sorry but grow a set, randy.
In part I agree, and I can assure you that my post is not to exonerate our board of blame. They thought they were playing a canny game. Fucked it up. Decided that there would be no more games, they knew best and would only deal with "nice" blokes from thereon out.
I have hammered this point in the fanzine many times. From MON to Houllier? Chalk and cheese football wise but the right idea. From Houllier to next big thing Martinez? Makes sense from a football perspective.
From Martinez to McLeish? Alarm bells. And that is where the board have fucked it in recent years. They are a very long way from lacking in culpability. But, when as recent my as last February when Lambert got his cards, he was still citing how tough a job he had fixing MON's profligacy with finances, it is very hard to take when people argue he is some latter day Messiah for crippling the club financially to finish in the Intertoto a few times.
-
Stuart, I don't know whether you are old enough to remember the Burgess and McLean spy scandal, probably not, but this Keane and McGeady plot reminds me of it because the peripheral characters, Kim Philby, Wystan Auden and the rest, are more interesting than the known individuals. I raise this because I thought Scott Parker played a role in the big pre flounce showdown with pubehead. Did he? and were there others he wanted but could not have?
-
You know what, there was talk of Parker at one point, but that was also a bit of a smokescreen. Part of the same "have you sold them yet?" argument.
-
As selfish and self centered as he was (and as many football managers need to be, TBF) I still don't think he sat on his hands and waited for the perfect moment to phuck us up as has often been suggested on here and elsewhere.
For one thing, if that was the mindset, why not bail the day before the first game of the season? Leaving KMac or whoever virtually no time at all to rally the troops. Better yet, if he hated the club that much, why not ditch Milner for whatever he could get, move a few more on to technically play by the 'sell to buy' mantra, and then pack the wage bill with a few David Nugent-types on long contracts before bailing on September 1st?
I have long been of the belief that when he initially agreed to the sell to buy condition in April/May 2010 (when the list of names available were circulated to the dailies and nationals) he did so in the belief that it most likely wouldn't apply to him anyway, as he'd soon be on his way to Anfield. His mate Kenny Dalglish had touted him as a successor to Benitez, and had even had a lengthy newspaper article on the subject printed in one of the Sunday's around that time.
Hicks and Gillett had personally asked Dalgish who he recommended for the role. He said O'Neill and they went with the tepid Woy Hodgson instead. It's probably understandable that they wanted some one a bit less volatile and prone to tantrums after their various spats with FSW.
Woy becomes Liverpool boss on July 1st 2009.
O'Neill then has to wrap his head around the fact that the Villa job and its new limitations is as good as its going to get for the foreseeable. He agrees to the Milner deal, with Ireland coming in the opposite direction, thinking the loss of such a key player will give him some room for maneuver with the board.
But the issue has always been the combined wages of Shorey, Harewood, Davies, Luke Young and NRC and co, so losing one high earner isn't going to cut it.
He wants Keane and McGeedy on top of the Ireland deal, and thinks he is close when Liverpool come in for Luke Young and Blackburn express an interest in Nigel Reo Coker. Both players decline those respective moves around the time we play Valencia and -with little interest in the other deadbeats and (crucially) RL no longer being as malleable as previous years- the game is up.
O'Neill doesn't get his way and flounces off.
I have seen nothing in Aiden McGeedy either before or since that makes me believe we missed out on a special talent.
-
It must have been when I was in the shower with Bobby Ewing but somebody told me that MON agreed to pay Parker £100k a week and it was blocked. Such a pity that the most interesting footballers are too thick to write their own biographies so we never get to know the things that get buried.
-
I had the fortune of working for the ex Leicester chairman, Phil Smith. He relayed a story to me that put me in no doubt whatsoever that Martin O'Neill is a horrible little bastard who looks after number one. I fully believe Chelts story. O'Neill is a shithead of the highest order.
-
What are you going on about? Maybe you're not Very bright so I'll dumb it down for you. Randy Lerner was at Remi Gardes first match
-
What are you going on about? Maybe you're not Very bright so I'll dumb it down for you. Randy Lerner was at Remi Gardes first match
Really? Fucking O'Neill truly is a cu*t.
-
What are you going on about? Maybe you're not Very bright so I'll dumb it down for you. Randy Lerner was at Remi Gardes first match
Is this some kind of Star Wars shit?
O'Neill is a Sith, I get that, but is Garde Luke Skywalker, a new hope?
And does this leave Joe Cole as R2D2?
-
No. R2G2 says we are all offside, inbreds or in the corner.
-
Pretty boy Jack must be Leia.
-
"I am disturbed by your lack of points"
-
"I am disturbed by your lack of points"
"I find your lack of points disturbing"
(http://www.balladofironpercy.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/simpsons-comic-book-guy.jpg)
-
That'll learn me not to OK Google it!
-
Gabby the Hutt
-
Gabby the Hutt
Very good.
These are not the goals that you're looking for.
I've got a bad feeling about this.
-
What did for Lerner and MON was man city. Their wealth effectively ended our hopes of getting in the champions league. Lerner knew it and pulled the plug on spending to get in it, and refocused the spending on staying in the premier league. The shit managerial appointments since then have had an impact but in truth are a result of the limitations around budgets.
I don't buy the Man City excuse sorry. If anything, it should make the top 4 slightly easier to achieve, because every year there's going to a big team like Liverpool missing out. What did for Lerner was idiocy at every key step. When you look at his tenure as a whole it's been an unmitigated disaster leading to where we are now.
It's not an excuse for what's been a litany of fuck ups since 2011. But Citeh getting rich beyond little old Randy's wildest dreams meant one less place up there in the clouds. I think that was the biggest factor in Lerner backing off.
-
Thanks for that cheltenham.
A Plausible Supposition.
-
"Don't get technical with me! What position?"
-
Thanks Cheltenham very enlightening. For me it damns Lerner more for not pulling the trigger when he knew it was all over with MON. Why try and manage out a man like him, who, whether you love or hate him, has a clear gift for wily self preservation. Why not just sack him, which in this scenario would be more straightforward and dignified and with less risk of long term fallout?
I mean, if MON was being asked to justify purely football related decisions (why mcgeady not player X) by Faulkner and they knew he wouldn't tolerate it, then they were in a ridiculous situation. He shouldn't have still been in the position he was. Can you then blame MON if he reacts exactly the way they expect? And if they are trying to push him out why should he resign at a convenient time for them?
On the last point, sorry but that does grind my gears. Am I to be sympathetic with a billionaire who abandons us to nosedive into the championship because he has his ego bruised by his one time ally? Sorry but grow a set, randy.
I agree that it shows Lerner and Faulkner up as pretty poor and weak leaders. They let the scenario drag out all summer and then were eventually taken to the cleaners paying O'Neill a fortune. Saying that, thinking back to 2011, it would have been a big call at the time to sack O'Neill and wouldn't have gone down well in many quarters.
-
No matter how much time and money O'Neill was given I don't think he ever would have made us a top 4 club. The teams style of play was turgid at the best of times and woefully outdated. He bought Emile Heskey; really can't say any more than that.
-
Thanks Cheltenham very enlightening. For me it damns Lerner more for not pulling the trigger when he knew it was all over with MON. Why try and manage out a man like him, who, whether you love or hate him, has a clear gift for wily self preservation. Why not just sack him, which in this scenario would be more straightforward and dignified and with less risk of long term fallout?
I mean, if MON was being asked to justify purely football related decisions (why mcgeady not player X) by Faulkner and they knew he wouldn't tolerate it, then they were in a ridiculous situation. He shouldn't have still been in the position he was. Can you then blame MON if he reacts exactly the way they expect? And if they are trying to push him out why should he resign at a convenient time for them?
On the last point, sorry but that does grind my gears. Am I to be sympathetic with a billionaire who abandons us to nosedive into the championship because he has his ego bruised by his one time ally? Sorry but grow a set, randy.
I agree that it shows Lerner and Faulkner up as pretty poor and weak leaders. They let the scenario drag out all summer and then were eventually taken to the cleaners paying O'Neill a fortune. Saying that, thinking back to 2011, it would have been a big call at the time to sack O'Neill and wouldn't have gone down well in many quarters.
It would have been a big call but it all depended on who the replacement was. Memories are short when the football and results improve. Southampton getting rid of Nigel Adkins was a big call at the time but then they got Mauricio Pochettino in and they never looked back. If you like, MON was our upmarket Nigel Adkins, we just stuffed up the next bit........................................................ continually.
-
The thing i remember a lot about MONs time, is that we were always successful signing players.
Historically we would be linked with players but they never materialised (Carlton Palmer, Benni McCarthy etc'), under MON they always came. I can't remember us missing out on anybody at that time.
Obviously it was the massive wages we were paying them, highlighted by the example of Luke Young turning down Liverpool.
It was the same scenario that Leeds found themselves in, paying over the odds for mediocre squad fillers.
Trouble was the massive wages bill vs turnover was not sustainable unless you had Champions League income, we tried to break into the top 4, and only reached 6th, and the plug had to be pulled.
The rub really came when Man Citeh waded in to take up one of the champions league places with ManU, Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool, it was obvious Randy would not be able to compete financially with these clubs turnovers, and decided to cut his cloth accordingly. This didn't fit in with the plan that MON had been sold so he walked.
I am just grateful that now relegation is a reality, we shouldn't be crippled by the big wages, and we will not become the new Leeds.
-
Hmm, always successful signing players maybe but its not difficult when you're the only one silly enough to spend five or six million on Luke Young a year after you could have got him for a quarter of that on wages so generous that the player later turns down a move to Liverpool.
Apart from Ashley Young, I'm not sure which other signings were coups and it was a gamble (which to be fairto him, paid off) to spend £10m on him in the first place ( I.e. as paying a lot for potential rather than proven often is). I remember there were stories that we were trying to get Van Der Vaart but not really in with much of a chance.
-
Its worth bearing in mind though that even though he resigned and so was owed nothing he did win compensation from the tribunal as he argued Villa were in breach of contract, so there is something there to his side.
No.
We've had this one 100 times at least. He didn't "win" anything "from the tribunal", the two parties settled. Not the same thing.
Same as when you are the victim of an accident and the insurance company make you an offer to settle out of court.Its the cheaper option . It doesnt mean you lostt your case because you accepted their offer.
I do wish people would stop using the settlement as proof that he did not win his case.
-
Its worth bearing in mind though that even though he resigned and so was owed nothing he did win compensation from the tribunal as he argued Villa were in breach of contract, so there is something there to his side.
No.
We've had this one 100 times at least. He didn't "win" anything "from the tribunal", the two parties settled. Not the same thing.
Same as when you are the victim of an accident and the insurance company make you an offer to settle out of court.Its the cheaper option . It doesnt mean you lostt your case because you accepted their offer.
It also doesn't mean that you won your case either.
-
I'm not minded to excuse the c**t, as previous posters have pointed out his departure renders any sympathy null.
But there are, I think some mitigating factors. The mandate was for Champions League football, we got close, and I think the key is we got there quickly.
The squad he took over was poor, and needed a complete overhaul. Realistically, we needed to be spending more than probably any other team to make up that kind of ground.
With hindsight, given that support from the chairman was going have its limits, it would have been wise to plan that investment over a longer more sustainable period, but it is hard to blame a manager for asking for players and getting them, it is his job.
Blimy some common sense.
-
Its worth bearing in mind though that even though he resigned and so was owed nothing he did win compensation from the tribunal as he argued Villa were in breach of contract, so there is something there to his side.
No.
We've had this one 100 times at least. He didn't "win" anything "from the tribunal", the two parties settled. Not the same thing.
Same as when you are the victim of an accident and the insurance company make you an offer to settle out of court.Its the cheaper option . It doesnt mean you lostt your case because you accepted their offer.
It also doesn't mean that you won your case either.
Sigh
-
Its worth bearing in mind though that even though he resigned and so was owed nothing he did win compensation from the tribunal as he argued Villa were in breach of contract, so there is something there to his side.
No.
We've had this one 100 times at least. He didn't "win" anything "from the tribunal", the two parties settled. Not the same thing.
Same as when you are the victim of an accident and the insurance company make you an offer to settle out of court.Its the cheaper option . It doesnt mean you lostt your case because you accepted their offer.
It also doesn't mean that you won your case either.
Sigh
I know, facts can be such tiresome things.
-
Yes indeed it would appear so.
-
It's not necessarily the amounts spent it's the way it's been spent that's the issue. It's been the issue to differing degrees since Randy first opened his chequebook.
That's it exactly. With Randy Lerner came a glorious opportunity to embark on a long-term plan, to invest in the infrastructure of the club and build some solid foundations that would see us make steady progress. That was the key to success. Instead what we've had is a fatally short-sighted, short-termist approach to everything, beginning with Lerner handing great wodges of his fortune to completely the wrong man. Two hundred and fifty million quid may not even have bought a title winning squad, but it should have been ample to buy the knowledge and expertise required to run a club capable of challenging for trophies for years. Lerner didn't have to know anything about football, he just needed to employ people who did. He failed to do that.
I despair to think that after so many years of Ellis strangling us with his miserly approach we finally got what we wanted, what we needed, what any club needs to compete these days in the money-driven world of the Premier League: we got our sugar daddy: we got his millions: and then O'Neill wasted the lot on a glut of Sidwells and Shoreys. And for what? Sixth place finishes? Even O'Leary managed that, with a fraction of O'Neills' funding. And that was our chance, folks. That was our future and O'Neill blew it. Anyone who thinks he's is in no way culpable for this mess five years down the line is as short-sighted as he is. His reckless spending crippled us, his behaviour clearly damaged Lerner, and our current predicament is the result. Lerner is to blame for trusting him, for not knowing that he was a very limited football manager, and for the car crash we've witnessed since, but it's not his fault that O'Neill is a spiteful, self-serving litigious bastard.
Strange post. The first paragraph correctly describes what should have happened. The second paragraph then blames somebody who was not to blame that it didn't.
Blaming O'Neill for Randy's largesse is like blaming Sidwell and Shorey for O'Neill's.
-
I wonder what sort of hissy fits we would have seen on here had the internet existed when Saunders walked. I daresay some would have been blaming Sir Ron for all sorts.
-
I wonder what sort of hissy fits we would have seen on here had the internet existed when Saunders walked. I daresay some would have been blaming Sir Ron for all sorts.
Great manager he may have been, but he still did what he did.
-
Dear god
-
Dear god
What was that about facts?
-
Whose version?
-
Whose version?
If you mean the Saunders episode, the fact is that regardless of why he left, the circumstances surrounding what hapened next were very dubious.
-
I wonder what sort of hissy fits we would have seen on here had the internet existed when Saunders walked. I daresay some would have been blaming Sir Ron for all sorts.
Wasn't he being dicked about by the board, prompting him to walk out?
Still, he had a glorious career after leaving. He managed to relegate both of our neighbours.
-
The thing i remember a lot about MONs time, is that we were always successful signing players.
Historically we would be linked with players but they never materialised (Carlton Palmer, Benni McCarthy etc'), under MON they always came. I can't remember us missing out on anybody at that time.
Obviously it was the massive wages we were paying them, highlighted by the example of Luke Young turning down Liverpool.
It was the same scenario that Leeds found themselves in, paying over the odds for mediocre squad fillers.
Trouble was the massive wages bill vs turnover was not sustainable unless you had Champions League income, we tried to break into the top 4, and only reached 6th, and the plug had to be pulled.
The rub really came when Man Citeh waded in to take up one of the champions league places with ManU, Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool, it was obvious Randy would not be able to compete financially with these clubs turnovers, and decided to cut his cloth accordingly. This didn't fit in with the plan that MON had been sold so he walked.
I am just grateful that now relegation is a reality, we shouldn't be crippled by the big wages, and we will not become the new Leeds.
That is where his transfer policy really fell down. Again speaking with the benefit of hindsight (though it was said by many at the time), he should have used the cheaper foreign market (certainly in terms of wages) to build the squad and also shown some faith in the young players coming through. His treatment of Cahill still really sticks in the craw.
-
CBs post about Martin O'Neill was not in the least bit "strange". What I find strange is that O'Neill still has those whose excuse what he did and the way he did it. Premeditated spite it was and premeditated spite it will always remain.
-
CBs post about Martin O'Neill was not in the least bit "strange". What I find strange is that O'Neill still has those whose excuse what he did and the way he did it. Premeditated spite it was and premeditated spite it will always remain.
Fair enough, but the first paragraph read as a rant against everything Randy did wrong. Then the second paragraph blamed O'Neill for it.
-
CBs post about Martin O'Neill was not in the least bit "strange". What I find strange is that O'Neill still has those whose excuse what he did and the way he did it. Premeditated spite it was and premeditated spite it will always remain.
Fair enough, but the first paragraph read as a rant against everything Randy did wrong. Then the second paragraph blamed O'Neill for it.
Maybe if there was a short segue between the two paragraphs along the lines of "Lerner should have employed better people and made better decisions than he did. And the reason that he needed to employ better people is because Martin O'Neill... (second paragraph)"
-
Cahill and Davis (anyone else?) are two players he didn't give enough game time to who have gone on to play for better sides than us in the same period.
-
Cahill and Davis (anyone else?) are two players he didn't give enough game time to who have gone on to play for better sides than us in the same period.
On Cahill you won't find much disagreement, but Fulham and Rangers were far worse than us in the period Davis was there and he joined Southampton when they were newly promoted with little expectation of success beyond survival at that time. A solid player rather than the first name on the team sheet.
-
Cahill and Davis (anyone else?) are two players he didn't give enough game time to who have gone on to play for better sides than us in the same period.
On Cahill you won't find much disagreement, but Fulham and Rangers were far worse than us in the period Davis was there and he joined Southampton when they were newly promoted with little expectation of success beyond survival at that time.
Yup - if we're including Davis because he has been playing for a side higher up the table than us while we've been shit, we can include Sidwell, Gardner, Routledge and Sorensen as well.
But I'm not sure any of them would have made a huge difference (apart from they wouldn't have been able to score the few goals that they got against us).
-
It was more that he had the talent to play long-term at a top-half team and I don't think that's just revisionism. He was our great white hope in O'Dreary's last season (linked with ManUre during that time) but O'Neill never got the best out of him.
-
Wait for his book for it to come out or maybe we will just never know why he left?
-
Wait for his book for it to come out or maybe we will just never know why he left?
See Brian's post further up. I doubt very much that he'll confess in any book he might ever write.
-
Wasn't the general feeling at the time that he wanted the Milner money to spend straight away but was told to reduce the wage bill first by offloading players he signed on big contracts and then wasn't playing...toys out the pram and stomped off?
-
Wasn't the general feeling at the time that he wanted the Milner money to spend straight away but was told to reduce the wage bill first by offloading players he signed on big contracts and then wasn't playing...toys out the pram and stomped off?
There's a big difference between a general feeling and what actually happened. A book would be very interesting reading as I doubt he would open himself up to a libel charge so we would finally hear the truth. My take is a mixture of him wanting more money for transfers and Randy losing his nerve. And the sheikhs buying Man City effectively ruled us out of the champions league gold rush. As Leicester have shown it can be done on a budget but this involves some clever long term thinking. I don't think Randy wants to do it. He's given the running of the club to a chosen few and will do what the rest of us will have to. Just wait and see and hope for the best.
-
Wasn't the general feeling at the time that he wanted the Milner money to spend straight away but was told to reduce the wage bill first by offloading players he signed on big contracts and then wasn't playing...toys out the pram and stomped off?
There's a big difference between a general feeling and what actually happened. A book would be very interesting reading as I doubt he would open himself up to a libel charge so we would finally hear the truth. My take is a mixture of him wanting more money for transfers and Randy losing his nerve. And the sheikhs buying Man City effectively ruled us out of the champions league gold rush. As Leicester have shown it can be done on a budget but this involves some clever long term thinking. I don't think Randy wants to do it. He's given the running of the club to a chosen few and will do what the rest of us will have to. Just wait and see and hope for the best.
I can't quite work out if that's a criticism of he employing a CEO who genuinely has that mandate or not, including putting a management structure in place around him as he ses fit. (Rather than the role it felt like Faulkner had, which to me seemed like Lerner's underling who had to get everything signed off from above)
Given that just about the only thing you can get the majority of people to agree on on this site is that Lerner is appalling at running sports teams, handing the day to day running over to someone empowered to do it makes sense.
If he can find the right person to operate as chairman even better, that removes him completely from the running of the club.
Then his only role remains that of shareholder. Hire & fire the chairman and in this instance CEO and agree or decline requests for extra capital or alternatively in his position act as lender of first resort instead.
Time will tell whether we've got the right people in the right places.
Even if we drop drop, as we most probably will, I'd be hesitant to point too much at Fox straight away.
He'll have potentially made 2 duff decisions, Lambert's extension and Sherwood, in 12 months whilst trying to perform the equivalent of a handbrake turn in an oil tanker. Personally I think Sherwood was a direct consequence of Lambert's new contract in terms of who was available, who he knew he could get quickly given the timing.
That doesn't necessarily make him bad at his job, just not perfect.
Personally I will always have a suspicion that the Lambert contract reeked of Lerner's "loyalty the likes of which I've never known" statement about Lambert at the end of the previous season. Pretty much every job I've taken has started with a "whilst your finding your feet, he's a couple of things to get sorted" list from the new boss. I think the contract was one of Fox's "welcome to B6" list.
-
Can anyone find an example on any of the MON threads over the years when anyone on one side of this debate has changed their minds due to the well constructed arguments of the other?
(Actually - anywhere on the entire message board!)
-
Can anyone find an example on any of the MON threads over the years when anyone on one side of this debate has changed their minds due to the well constructed arguments of the other?
(Actually - anywhere on the entire message board!)
just had a look , and i cant
-
Can anyone find an example on any of the MON threads over the years when anyone on one side of this debate has changed their minds due to the well constructed arguments of the other?
(Actually - anywhere on the entire message board!)
I kind of have. I supported him right up until the day he left and then I thought he was a total and utter c***.
I did listen to the arguments on here at the time of his leaving and it very much opened my eyes to realising what a limited football manager he was. I suppose I'd been swept along in a kind of he'll get it right eventually without ever actually analysing what I was watching (enjoying the ride so to speak) I do always look On the optimistic side but I've been much more sceptical of his predecessors.
It's taken me slightly longer to accept Lerners role in all of this but he really is a bumbling buffoon.
-
Can anyone find an example on any of the MON threads over the years when anyone on one side of this debate has changed their minds due to the well constructed arguments of the other?
(Actually - anywhere on the entire message board!)
Thats because we are debating the issue without the full facts. Into that vacuum comes conjecture often dressed upvas fact. Its those sorts of posts that get my goat.
-
Atkinson was a better Villa manager than Little. Best football I've ever seen at Villa was under Big Ron.
O'Neill was top notch though and he built a bloody good team here, and I loved the "never say die" attitude of his players. How many games did we get late winners or equalisers? Pity it all turned sour when Lerner bottled it and gave up. I'll never forgive him for what he's done to our club since O'Neill walked.
Apologies for the late quote but only now I'm having a read right through the whole thread.
I wouldn't say O'Neill was top notch even though he did get us back in the league as a respected competitive force in this league.
Top Notch would've been a manager who'd find a way to win us more than 8 home games a season. In his final season we finished 5 points off Spurs or thereabouts. They won 14 home games that season, we won 8.
Top notch would've been a manager who would've rotated well during the season so our players weren't completely fcuked by the time we got to March. Like the clocks going back we'd never bleeding win a game in March under him, one of the most crucial parts of the season.
Top notch managers wouldn't sign Habib Beye when Luke Young was already in the squad as a good right back option. And then decide to play Cuellar at RB anyway.
Top notch wouldn't make a lazy signing like Emile Heskey.
Top notch would've actually bothered to scout players from abroad.
Don't get me wrong the results were good and what I did like was how respected in the press and among rival fans around that time. Remember all the positive stuff about us providing a good third of the england side when Downing, Milner, YOung and Gabby were all in good form?
We were respected back then even if we typically couldn't make the final step. I miss that now when we're derided as a joke to everyone given our results over the last 5 years.
A man who'll divide opinion forever. What's certain to me is everyone involved in this club in the last 5 years needs to take responsibility for when we are relegated. They've all played a part, even if some of it is minor.
-
MON taking credit for Downing is a bit much, he was crap that season for us. Came good the year after MON left.
It wasn't the net spend that the problem was, it was the wage bill that spiraled out of control with the likes of Beye, Sidwell, Davies and Heskey chewing up crazy wages for no return. Selling Cahill and Davis wasn't a good idea either.
Interesting that he mentioned about two players Villa bought after his time that cost more. Bent and who was the other one?
Jean II Makoun
No way would Makoun be anywhere near what Heskey got. He did come from the French league.
I guessed given the deal was pretty much done when he walked that Ireland would've been on 60k +.
-
What did for Lerner and MON was man city. Their wealth effectively ended our hopes of getting in the champions league. Lerner knew it and pulled the plug on spending to get in it, and refocused the spending on staying in the premier league. The shit managerial appointments since then have had an impact but in truth are a result of the limitations around budgets.
That's a really interesting point.
Disagree. Man. City were taken over in August 2008 and immediately blew 30m on Robinho. We still spent a very significant net amount in summer 2009 and I think the following season was our best opportunity even with the cup runs as Man. City weren't quite ready.
It's also worth noting that season Liverpool dropped out of the top 4 for the first time in a while and didn't return to the CL until 2014 so they'd have still been an opportunity even with Man. City as Spurs finished twice in the top 4 in 3 seasons and came very close in two other seasons.
To me the bonkers decision to appoint McLeish signaled the end of Lerner wanting to get us in the top 4 and it's been cost cutting and dumbing down on and off the pitch ever since.
-
History will show that after Villa he went to Sunderland followed the same transfer spending and left them in the shit just like us..
Imo with budget he had here 6th was a bare minimum requirement and that's all he achieved ,any other half decent manger would have managed the same.
To say any half decent manager would have done it is borderline dillusional.
-
History will show that after Villa he went to Sunderland followed the same transfer spending and left them in the shit just like us..
Imo with budget he had here 6th was a bare minimum requirement and that's all he achieved ,any other half decent manger would have managed the same.
To say any half decent manager would have done it is borderline dillusional.
Well... a half-decent manager did do it.
So why wouldn't a different half-decent manager have managed it?
-
History will show that after Villa he went to Sunderland followed the same transfer spending and left them in the shit just like us..
Imo with budget he had here 6th was a bare minimum requirement and that's all he achieved ,any other half decent manger would have managed the same.
To say any half decent manager would have done it is borderline dillusional.
No it isn't, it really isn't.
-
I could give MON more credit for our top 6 standing under him if he hadn't needed to cripple us for the next 2-3 years with players on over-inflated, long contracts and no re-sale value. It's all been done before but no way does the profit on Young, Milner and Downing cover the 8-10 duffers we lost big money on.
-
History will show that after Villa he went to Sunderland followed the same transfer spending and left them in the shit just like us..
Imo with budget he had here 6th was a bare minimum requirement and that's all he achieved ,any other half decent manger would have managed the same.
To say any half decent manager would have done it is borderline dillusional.
I am wondering where David O'Leary would rate on the half-decentometer.
-
History will show that after Villa he went to Sunderland followed the same transfer spending and left them in the shit just like us..
Imo with budget he had here 6th was a bare minimum requirement and that's all he achieved ,any other half decent manger would have managed the same.
To say any half decent manager would have done it is borderline dillusional.
I am wondering where David O'Leary would rate on the half-decentometer.
The needle would point straight to "******".
-
People talk about DOL and Gregory in the same way as MON because all three finished sixth, but for me there is a big difference between doing it once and finishing consistently there, like MON did.
-
People talk about DOL and Gregory in the same way as MON because all three finished sixth, but for me there is a big difference between doing it once and finishing consistently there, like MON did.
Yeah, about £150m.
-
Under Gregory we regularly finished top 6th I thought, we also had that brilliant start to the season right up to Christmas, the sort of form Leicester are in and winning all the praise. We also had the FA Cup final, OK the final was a disaster but the run up to it as ace.
I remember Greyorys time more fondly than MON, a lot of that could be my age, memory and a hut of revervison.
-
People talk about DOL and Gregory in the same way as MON because all three finished sixth, but for me there is a big difference between doing it once and finishing consistently there, like MON did.
Yeah, about £150m.
Precisely. It's not about comparing. 30-odd years of his predecessors had shown that getting Aston Villa into the top six is pretty much a prerequisite of the abilities of anyone wanting the job. People's big gripe is that sixth, and no trophies, was all he achieved in 4 seasons with free rein and an open cheque book.
-
Moyes and Redknapp finished above MON. He's a myth, his success came in the 90's and Scotland where he won the same amount of trophies as Mcrelegation.
-
People talk about DOL and Gregory in the same way as MON because all three finished sixth, but for me there is a big difference between doing it once and finishing consistently there, like MON did.
Yeah, about £150m.
Precisely. It's not about comparing. 30-odd years of his predecessors had shown that getting Aston Villa into the top six is pretty much a prerequisite of the abilities of anyone wanting the job. People's big gripe is that sixth, and no trophies, was all he achieved in 4 seasons with free rein and an open cheque book.
Equally you can't compare fees/wages between eras due to the distortional effects of the recent TV money. We still spent loads back in the day on the likes of Curcic, Collymore, Angel etc
-
People talk about DOL and Gregory in the same way as MON because all three finished sixth, but for me there is a big difference between doing it once and finishing consistently there, like MON did.
Yeah, about £150m.
Precisely. It's not about comparing. 30-odd years of his predecessors had shown that getting Aston Villa into the top six is pretty much a prerequisite of the abilities of anyone wanting the job. People's big gripe is that sixth, and no trophies, was all he achieved in 4 seasons with free rein and an open cheque book.
Equally you can't compare fees/wages between eras due to the distortional effects of the recent TV money. We still spent loads back in the day on the likes of Curcic, Collymore, Angel etc
Which is why I said it's not about comparing. It's about my last sentence above. He was the man entrusted with realising our "dreams come true" scenario, and he blew it.
-
Atkinson was a better Villa manager than Little. Best football I've ever seen at Villa was under Big Ron.
O'Neill was top notch though and he built a bloody good team here, and I loved the "never say die" attitude of his players. How many games did we get late winners or equalisers? Pity it all turned sour when Lerner bottled it and gave up. I'll never forgive him for what he's done to our club since O'Neill walked.
Apologies for the late quote but only now I'm having a read right through the whole thread.
I wouldn't say O'Neill was top notch even though he did get us back in the league as a respected competitive force in this league.
Top Notch would've been a manager who'd find a way to win us more than 8 home games a season. In his final season we finished 5 points off Spurs or thereabouts. They won 14 home games that season, we won 8.
Top notch would've been a manager who would've rotated well during the season so our players weren't completely fcuked by the time we got to March. Like the clocks going back we'd never bleeding win a game in March under him, one of the most crucial parts of the season.
Top notch managers wouldn't sign Habib Beye when Luke Young was already in the squad as a good right back option. And then decide to play Cuellar at RB anyway.
Top notch wouldn't make a lazy signing like Emile Heskey.
Top notch would've actually bothered to scout players from abroad.
Don't get me wrong the results were good and what I did like was how respected in the press and among rival fans around that time. Remember all the positive stuff about us providing a good third of the england side when Downing, Milner, YOung and Gabby were all in good form?
We were respected back then even if we typically couldn't make the final step. I miss that now when we're derided as a joke to everyone given our results over the last 5 years.
A man who'll divide opinion forever. What's certain to me is everyone involved in this club in the last 5 years needs to take responsibility for when we are relegated. They've all played a part, even if some of it is minor.
His transfer policy was one of his biggest weaknesses for me. He relied on the same core of players week-in-week-out, but instead of building the rest of the squad from foreign markets and the academy set up, he blew crazy money on players that he refused to play. He could have had a core squad on big money and then added to that with cheaper foreign and academy players, therefore avoiding the huge debt levels. Amavi, Ayew and Veretout are examples of players from the type of market he should have been signing from. Young, wouldn't have been on big wages and could have been eased into the first team.
-
Equally you can't compare fees/wages between eras due to the distortional effects of the recent TV money. We still spent loads back in the day on the likes of Curcic, Collymore, Angel etc
Difference is the signings were one or two a season and were often offset by sales. So we signed Savo but sold Saunders as an example. Savo cost about a million more but would have been on equal or probably lower wages.
-
I could give MON more credit for our top 6 standing under him if he hadn't needed to cripple us for the next 2-3 years with players on over-inflated, long contracts and no re-sale value. It's all been done before but no way does the profit on Young, Milner and Downing cover the 8-10 duffers we lost big money on.
I'm going to go back to my point about not blaming o Neill for where we are based on that last sentence. How much have we lost on players signed since he left? Charles N'zogbia, steven Ireland, Darren Bent, Shay given. So far, Benteke is the only one who we have made money on, and arguably the only half decent player we have bought with return on the pitch and sale value. Enlighten me on how many other signings if you can. Is Alan Hutton going to 'wipe his face' in terms of value? Ron Vlaar, Karim el ahmadi? How about Jean II Makoun?
We've had 5 years to get over him leaving, which is more than enough time. The fact that we haven't got over it is down to what has been employed since in all areas of the club. Ultimately, we're where we are because Randy Lerner is a shit businessman.
-
http://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2016/03/24/martin-oneill-makes-shocking-remark-about-his-aston-villa-select/
Anyone see this little snippet yesterday? Sly dig at Curtis.
-
That's the point that Paulie usually raises and it's a very good one....the luxury he had each summer of being given 30-40m to rebuild the defence.
Summer 2008- IN- Shorey, Luke Young, Davies (permanent deal was confirmed at end of 2008 season), Friedel, Cuellar.
Summer 2009 IN- Warnock, Dunne, Beye, Collins.
-
http://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2016/03/24/martin-oneill-makes-shocking-remark-about-his-aston-villa-select/
Anyone see this little snippet yesterday? Sly dig at Curtis.
He's a bitter man, quite sad really.
-
The annoying thing about MON was he had the right idea how to play but picked poor players to do it.
Every time I look at Leicester I see a MON team but with a good striker, a good attacking midfielder and a team ethic of work until you drop.
Heskey or Vardy, Downing or Mahrez? Infuriating in hindsight
-
I think the importance of the squad rotation thing is a bit overstated. Ranieri, who is being lauded as a genius this season, has relied on relatively few players. A core of nine players have started all or nearly all of their league games. Where they have impressed is keeping those players fit and energy levels consistently high.
My biggest gripe with O'Neill was the shit fitness of the team.
-
That's the point that Paulie usually raises and it's a very good one....the luxury he had each summer of being given 30-40m to rebuild the defence.
Summer 2008- IN- Shorey, Luke Young, Davies (permanent deal was confirmed at end of 2008 season), Friedel, Cuellar.
Summer 2009 IN- Warnock, Dunne, Beye, Collins.
Were any of them better then the defence he could have started with from the beginning of his reign that were already at the club?
End of 2005/2006 think our defence options were Bouma, Samuel, Laursen, Mellberg, Cahill, Ridgewell, Hughes and Delaney (I know he was basically retired due to an injury when O'Neill signed)
So even with the injuries and players moving on surely it did not need a complete new one each season.
I think what gets forgotten with O'Neill is he had a fairly decent defence to start with so wasting that money on a new defence each season was stupid.
-
That's the point that Paulie usually raises and it's a very good one....the luxury he had each summer of being given 30-40m to rebuild the defence.
Summer 2008- IN- Shorey, Luke Young, Davies (permanent deal was confirmed at end of 2008 season), Friedel, Cuellar.
Summer 2009 IN- Warnock, Dunne, Beye, Collins.
Were any of them better then the defence he could have started with from the beginning of his reign that were already at the club?
End of 2005/2006 think our defence options were Bouma, Samuel, Laursen, Mellberg, Cahill, Ridgewell, Hughes and Delaney (I know he was basically retired due to an injury when O'Neill signed)
So even with the injuries and players moving on surely it did not need a complete new one each season.
I think what gets forgotten with O'Neill is he had a fairly decent defence to start with so wasting that money on a new defence each season was stupid.
We were supposed to be challenging for the CL places and I'd argue that not one of defenders signed by O'Neill were top 4 or CL standard. Whereas you could make a case for 2 or 3 of the defenders he inherited being of that standard. Just one of the reasons that 6th was his glass ceiling even with an open chequebook.
-
http://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2016/03/24/martin-oneill-makes-shocking-remark-about-his-aston-villa-select/
Anyone see this little snippet yesterday? Sly dig at Curtis.
He's a bitter man, quite sad really.
Yep. The bit about how he probably did always pick certain players - 'usually the best ones' made me laugh. Yes Martin, of course you did. You never left good players sitting in the stands because you'd fallen out with them.
-
We were supposed to be challenging for the CL places and I'd argue that not one of defenders signed by O'Neill were top 4 or CL standard.chequebook.
Guess we'll see where James Collins and West Ham finish this season...
-
The annoying thing about MON was he had the right idea how to play but picked poor players to do it.
Every time I look at Leicester I see a MON team but with a good striker, a good attacking midfielder and a team ethic of work until you drop.
Heskey or Vardy, Downing or Mahrez? Infuriating in hindsight
Well I'd say that's a touch unfair in as much as I'd directly compare Gabby and Young with Vardy and Mahrez. The latter two of course have found levels of consistency that evaded Gabby and Young. Though Young in fairness had 18 months where he was absolutely superb. I'd also imagine that the Ash Young of 07-09 would be tearing up the current Premier League given the chance. He'd be finding the net more consistently. Not to diminish what Leicester have done but the league is shitter now than it was 5-6 years ago and defences are even worse.
-
We were supposed to be challenging for the CL places and I'd argue that not one of defenders signed by O'Neill were top 4 or CL standard.chequebook.
Guess we'll see where James Collins and West Ham finish this season...
True enough but to be fair despite the odd good run of games, Collins never showed the form consistently at Villa that he's showing at west Ham. If we had this player then, I think we would have seriously threatened the top 4.
-
The annoying thing about MON was he had the right idea how to play but picked poor players to do it.
Every time I look at Leicester I see a MON team but with a good striker, a good attacking midfielder and a team ethic of work until you drop.
Heskey or Vardy, Downing or Mahrez? Infuriating in hindsight
Well I'd say that's a touch unfair in as much as I'd directly compare Gabby and Young with Vardy and Mahrez. The latter two of course have found levels of consistency that evaded Gabby and Young. Though Young in fairness had 18 months where he was absolutely superb. I'd also imagine that the Ash Young of 07-09 would be tearing up the current Premier League given the chance. He'd be finding the net more consistently. Not to diminish what Leicester have done but the league is shitter now than it was 5-6 years ago and defences are even worse.
I think young at his best was better than Mahrez but Gabby has never been a good enough finisher. On top of that when mon was with us man u, chelsea, arsenal and liverpool were a firmly established top 4 with solid squads and strong management 3 of them have fallen apart in the last few years with only Arsenal even remotely interested in the title race this season. On top of that Man City went into freefall after announcing their new manager 5 months ahead and with the existing manager expected to just get on with it in the meantime. I think villa from the 3rd mon season would be right up with these Leicester and Tottenham teams. I'm not belittling the achievements of Leicester, just pointing out that they've been helped by circumstances which were against us.
-
The annoying thing about MON was he had the right idea how to play but picked poor players to do it.
Every time I look at Leicester I see a MON team but with a good striker, a good attacking midfielder and a team ethic of work until you drop.
Heskey or Vardy, Downing or Mahrez? Infuriating in hindsight
Well I'd say that's a touch unfair in as much as I'd directly compare Gabby and Young with Vardy and Mahrez. The latter two of course have found levels of consistency that evaded Gabby and Young. Though Young in fairness had 18 months where he was absolutely superb. I'd also imagine that the Ash Young of 07-09 would be tearing up the current Premier League given the chance. He'd be finding the net more consistently. Not to diminish what Leicester have done but the league is shitter now than it was 5-6 years ago and defences are even worse.
I think young at his best was better than Mahrez but Gabby has never been a good enough finisher. On top of that when mon was with us man u, chelsea, arsenal and liverpool were a firmly established top 4 with solid squads and strong management 3 of them have fallen apart in the last few years with only Arsenal even remotely interested in the title race this season. On top of that Man City went into freefall after announcing their new manager 5 months ahead and with the existing manager expected to just get on with it in the meantime. I think villa from the 3rd mon season would be right up with these Leicester and Tottenham teams. I'm not belittling the achievements of Leicester, just pointing out that they've been helped by circumstances which were against us.
I agree. I've said it in another thread before, I think O Neill's Villa side would be pushing for the title this year. That said I think that says more about the standard of the Premier League now more than the quality of O Neill's side.
I'll be interested to see if Vardy continues this level next season. And Mahrez for that matter. Both players have found a whole new level almost unexpected from them before.
Mahrez has been player of the season for me but I can still see him jumping too soon to a big club and then slowly fading into obscurity as a one season wonder. He should keep his head on his shoulders and give Leicester another season or two and most certainly enjoy playing in the CL with them next season. I can see him ending up on Real Madrid or Barcelonas bench for a year before being sold on though.
I'd fancy the Ash Young of 07-09 to be scoring 15-20 in the current league. He had around the same amount of assists as Mahrez is posting this season.
-
Moyes and Redknapp finished above MON. He's a myth, his success came in the 90's and Scotland where he won the same amount of trophies as Mcrelegation.
Not sure about that, as he did very well with Leicester. I just think he reached the end of his managerial shelf life whilst with us.
-
People talk about DOL and Gregory in the same way as MON because all three finished sixth, but for me there is a big difference between doing it once and finishing consistently there, like MON did.
Yeah, about £150m.
Precisely. It's not about comparing. 30-odd years of his predecessors had shown that getting Aston Villa into the top six is pretty much a prerequisite of the abilities of anyone wanting the job. People's big gripe is that sixth, and no trophies, was all he achieved in 4 seasons with free rein and an open cheque book.
Equally you can't compare fees/wages between eras due to the distortional effects of the recent TV money. We still spent loads back in the day on the likes of Curcic, Collymore, Angel etc
angel would be an absolute steal these days at 9.5m
Which is why I said it's not about comparing. It's about my last sentence above. He was the man entrusted with realising our "dreams come true" scenario, and he blew it.