Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine
Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: Hookeysmith on September 16, 2010, 10:09:19 AM
-
Whilst i appreciate we have had a difficult time since MON left us in the shit i find it amazing how the media have really started to talk about us like we are a pub team.
Terms like, chaos, disgrace, shambles, dont know what they are doing
FFS we are 5th in the league losing 2 out of 5 games
we are above manshitty / Spurs yet the slag us off when we dont even have a manager in place yet
Really fucks me off - maybe if they rely on their info from message boards then maybe i should not be suprised as they can get all the nbegative vibes they want from off here for a start
Maybe its time we all stuck together and stood by the management / board and players and see them through this shit time
I bet MON is laughing his cock off as mission accomplished as far as he must be concnered
-
Just ignore them.
-
http://www.expressandstar.com/sport/aston-villa-fc/2010/09/15/why-villa-really-need-to-get-a-grip/
The club have given them the amunition to shoot us with, but no doubt the owner/management will lean from it.
-
Fuck 'em!
-
I love it
haven't read many tabloids lately but have any of them been doing that thing where they show the Villa badge ripped in half with the headline across the top of the page "Villa in crisis...Villa in crisis...Villa in crisis...."
-
The amount of crap Ive been getting from txts from mates and customers saying Villa are finished...
Fook em, they havent got a clue... Its just because the own clubs are already fooked...
-
The end is nigh.
-
It makes me laugh.
Maybe they think MON is the pope.
-
The two games we've lost could have been so different too. Carew scores his penalty v Newcastle...different story. Young scores header at Stoke...different story.
If this is a crisis, I'd like to see a success.
-
A lot of people in the media saw MON as the golden child, now he's gone they'll use it as a stick to beat us with!
The way to shut them up is for everyone to knuckle down and show the business on the pitch!
-
The media are saying exactly the sort of thing that has been on here. We're rudderless, kitless, hopeless, crap against poor teams.....
It's different when it's outsiders criticising us isn't it?!
-
Whilst i appreciate we have had a difficult time since MON left us in the shit i find it amazing how the media have really started to talk about us like we are a pub team.
at least Curtis will get a game then :-)
-
Can't say I'm too fussed about the media. It's their job to make shit up, let them get on with it.
-
For a club of our standing, we're only newsworthy if we're defying expectations or in turmoil.
-
The media are saying exactly the sort of thing that has been on here. We're rudderless, kitless, hopeless, crap against poor teams.....
It's different when it's outsiders criticising us isn't it?!
True about being crap against the more physical teams. We've been nuked by Newcastle, surrendered to Stoke and will probably be battered by Bolton, buggered by Blackburn and probably walloped by Wolves, all really Championship sides used to battling. When do we play a footballing side again? The Premier League seems to be getting bigger every season in terms of size of player and referees seem to turn more and more blind eyes to 'bullying'. They are more likely to show cards for dissent or shirt pulls than pushing or elbowing and players like Ashley Young are more likely to get booked for complaining than an opponent for chopping them down.. We are just not big enough or tough enough to face teams like this.
-
Whilst i appreciate we have had a difficult time since MON left us in the shit i find it amazing how the media have really started to talk about us like we are a pub team.
Terms like, chaos, disgrace, shambles, dont know what they are doing
FFS we are 5th in the league losing 2 out of 5 games
we are above manshitty / Spurs yet the slag us off when we dont even have a manager in place yet
Really fucks me off - maybe if they rely on their info from message boards then maybe i should not be suprised as they can get all the nbegative vibes they want from off here for a start
Maybe its time we all stuck together and stood by the management / board and players and see them through this shit time
I bet MON is laughing his cock off as mission accomplished as far as he must be concnered
I hate to disappoint you but we are actually 7th.Blose are 5th and we've won 2 out of 4
-
I couldn't give a monkey's what the media say about the Villa and its only the OP that has alerted me to the fact that they're saying these things anyway.
-
I find it hard to disagree with much in that Express and Star article. No accusations of crisis as such but an accurate summary of the Lerner team. For all their good intentions and good work at Villa, they were handed O'Neill on a plate when they arrived, and were happy not to get too invloved in the football side. Since the arsehole jumped ship it's hard to deny they have shown naivety and a lack of genuine football knowledge and experience in the way they have handled recruiting his successor. It should have been obvious to even the hard of thinking that, given the inexperience of the rest of the hierarchy, any CEO should have been an experienced football man, not a banker. If they couldn't find anyone suitable, why not keep Stride? Even as a non-executive director surely his experience could have been invaluable.
-
The press will always over react to sell papers but we aint half given them plenty of opportunities of late.
There's always one club that shoots itself in the foot early on and the press pile in smelling blood in the water, West Ham last year, Spuds the year before - this year it's us.
-
all we have done is slipped and stumbled. We haven't fallen, and once things settle down again with Houllier and his team in place, we'll be right back on track. The media would have ytou believe that the MON-less Villa are finished. We're not. Not by a long way.
-
6-0 away to a team that lose their next home game to a fellow promoted team, a poor defeat at Stoke, a struggle at home v Everton? We shoulkd be doing a lot better than we are. But hey ho, that's gone lets hope that we have a bit more stability now and we can just concentrate on the football rather than all the melodrama surrounding the club.
-
Whilst i appreciate we have had a difficult time since MON left us in the shit i find it amazing how the media have really started to talk about us like we are a pub team.
Terms like, chaos, disgrace, shambles, dont know what they are doing
FFS we are 5th in the league losing 2 out of 5 games
we are above manshitty / Spurs yet the slag us off when we dont even have a manager in place yet
Really fucks me off - maybe if they rely on their info from message boards then maybe i should not be suprised as they can get all the nbegative vibes they want from off here for a start
Maybe its time we all stuck together and stood by the management / board and players and see them through this shit time
I bet MON is laughing his cock off as mission accomplished as far as he must be concnered
Are you predicting the Bolton score?
-
I'm not too bothered. We've never exactly been media darlings - and quite a few journalists seem to have 'sided' with O'Neill over this whole thing and decided his departure means disaster is looming. It's been a rough month, that's for sure, and patience has definitely been tested but I'm hoping we're over the worst now.
-
Let them have their fun. It doesn't diminish our support for the club. These things come in cycles anyway - we were the best team in Britain when we won at Old Trafford and were going to push on for the title, let alone fourth, and when we got slaughtered at Chelsea we didn't even belong in the same division. In the cup game at Reading, we were the laughing stock of the country one minute and semi-finalists the next. There's no accounting for taste but all I care about is facts. Some other team will be in 'crisis' soon.
-
I have to say, that I cannot disagree with anything that Swain has put there. Whilst it's nowhere near as melodramatic as some of the Nationals, it still shows some of the gaffes that have been made
-
Just read that article, who cares what some yam yam writes about us. The thing that people need to remember when reading this rubbish, it is just one persons opinion. If a bloke in the pub said the same, it would be quickly dismissed, and you would move on to another subject, because some journo writes it we should take it seriously?
It is like Michael O Leary of Ryanair, he just comes out with shit so people are talking about his airline, we are now reading the local yam yam papers web site, really, who cares.
What did they used to say, todays newspapers are tomorrows chip papers
-
Fuck 'em!
Maz got it precisely right.
Whether it's accurate or not, fair or unfair, the media opinion of us is utterly immaterial to me. Nor, for that matter, do I care how we are perceived by other fans/clubs and all of that nonsense.
Fuck 'em.
-
Speaking of the media and Villa, have the Grauniad changed their Villa/West Midlands football writer? Most Villa articles used to be written by Stuart James, and were quite good, and the last few days they've been by Louise Taylor and been guff in all honesty, like today's: http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2010/sep/16/gerard-houllier-aston-villa
Heh, maybe it's more proof we're seen as a joke club, eh? ;-)
-
The Express and Star is a good paper. Swain’s article is solid, if flittering a little with the outrageous towards the end, but the naivety factor is definitely true and its something the distinguished members of this site have been saying as well.
You just have to pick and choose the journalists columns you read to be honest. If you’re starring at an uninformed piece by Holt then you have to ask yourself what is so wrong in your life that you bought the Mirror?
Louise Taylor’s article, complete with all the necessary typos and spelling mistakes, is bit bizarre really. I want the editor’s job at the Guardian. It must be the easiest job in the world!
-
i couldnt give a shit what the media think...
they are utter scum and i dont have time for their agenda filled nonsense that is spewed from their arse, in order to inform the brain dead moronic sheep general public their latest opinion...
-
Things are stable at Arse, Man U and Chelsea. Liverpool are irrelevant
The press have to have something to write about and Villa are an easy target
-
It was a not overly complimentary article from a bloke who writes not overly complimentary articles. Its fairly accurate, and mirrors many on this site.
Will Villa be gaining or losing any extra points from it, no. Will Villa be ruined because of it no, and no other media story will affect the club either, in the long run.
Villa can do several things to shut them all up, win the PL several times on the trot, stop selling our best players, and bringing in quality players to achieve that. Until then we remain a club who flits between 6th and 11th, who can't live up to their fans expectations and their new owners promises.
It was the same in the late 70's and early 80's when we did so I'm not expecting much change now.
-
Just read that article, who cares what some yam yam writes about us. The thing that people need to remember when reading this rubbish, it is just one persons opinion. If a bloke in the pub said the same, it would be quickly dismissed, and you would move on to another subject, because some journo writes it we should take it seriously?
It is like Michael O Leary of Ryanair, he just comes out with shit so people are talking about his airline, we are now reading the local yam yam papers web site, really, who cares.
What did they used to say, todays newspapers are tomorrows chip papers
Swain is not a Yam Yam, but lets not worry about the chip on your shoulder shall we.
His opinions regarding the Villa are well known in these parts as being by-and-large on the money. Unlike some of the crap comes out of the Birmingham and indeed the Nationals. He's always been favourable on the Villa and the E&S do the Villa a great service in their Sports Sections and a lot of Villa Fans this way will always gravitate towards that paper rather than the crap from Brum.
His article above, is pretty much bang on. If in your opinion it's not, well pray tell what you disagree with
-
Didn't Swain used to write for the Argus back 'in the day'?
-
My drive to work each morning is accompanied by fat twat Brazil and co - most mornings he has a guy who writes sport for the Daily Mirror (i know i know what most will say before i say it - dont listen to the shit)
Dont know the guys name but he is an obvious MON disciple as when he left - it was the Americans fault as we have no money, When it broke that we had a 5 trophy winning manager in Houllier he said it was a joke and Villa had the perfect manager for their size (GRRRRRR) in Curbishley and it showed naivity by the board to over look him (yes like all the other boards that have for 2 years - cock)
Today his term for us was shambolic, embarrassing and bordering on pathetic the way the club is being run.
They then went on to have a wank about Chelski / Arsenal and how great it would be to have another famous London club like QPR in the top flight.
Again my point is that these morons in the press feed the annoying kind of football fan with what they consider as being facts - so i get the Man United fan of all of 10 years and the new Man City fan tell me how shit and small time my team are
I just want to twat them
-
The red tops,sky,talksport all sing from the same hymn sheet,lazy journalism,making a story out of nothing.
On monday i heard a french journo on the guardian podcast,say before the news broke, that Houllier would take over after saturdays game,this is the same day that other reports stated that he may have to continue working one or two days a week in France.
I think we as fans have to take blame as well,as we latch onto these horsehit stories and go into overdrive as we post on here and other sites.Myself included have posted about the upcoming arrivals of Mcgeady,Bradley,Curbishley,etc. Sometimes we should give the club a bit more credit,and ignore these bullshit reports,but i suppose thats all part of football,in the internet age.
-
That article by Martin Swain is well written and in my opinion, bang on the money. Lerner hasn't done much wrong since he arrived, but I think the last few months have been a shambles. Of course we'll recover from it, but we don't have to pretend that what has been pretty farcical has been well handled do we?
-
From that Swain artivcle:
The first (error) was to put too much power into the hands of the man the Americans liked to call “coach O’Neill” when they made their entry into Villa Park and English football in 2006.
There's an article in the next fanzine saying just that *wink*
As for the rest of the Swain piece, I think he's bang on the money (unfortunately)
-
"With delicious gallows humour typical at times of discontent, one wit has already remarked he will only attend if he is promised a signed shirt from the new manager."
Read more: http://www.expressandstar.com/sport/aston-villa-fc/2010/09/15/why-villa-really-need-to-get-a-grip/#ixzz0zh7qAxgi
Gallows humour eh? and here`s me thinking I was just a sarcastic, sardonic,cynical clearing in the woods :o
Surprised the journo didn`t pick up on my location and add that the post was from a "witty scouser"
-
"clearing in the woods"?
VT Fail.
-
The Swain article is pretty fair I think. I'm not concerned at all with our long term prospects as I think the new manager will be fine. It still remains all about cash though to me. Big bullying players will retain a PL place and maybe get you half way up the league but its the £10million a man squads that get into the top 4 with a couple of £20 million game changers thrown in.
Randy can mess the kit delivery up ( thanks, thats few hundred quid I've saved by not buying 4 kits for the kids and a shirt for me ) and charge the man next to me a tenner while I paid £30 odd in advance in May it makes no odds really to me (I like where I sit) but its in Jan where we'll see his true intentions when he gets his dosh out. If he doesn't then we'll know his intentions and maybe MON was right: the money has run out.
Randy lack of footy knowledge is not crucial or who he appoints as a manager really as anyone he appoints will be qualified to coach. Its the size of his wallet that counts.
-
There is nothing in the article that most of us hav'nt been saying for a long time, he wasn't knocking Aston Villa as a club, he was critical of the way the club is and has been run. Having a boardroom with no experience of premirship football was amateurish, and putting Faulkner into a position of which he has zero experience smacks of who they like not who is best for the position. I hope Randy learns from this and gets more people that know the game involved and not leave everything to Houllier, oh and replace Faulkner.
-
I think some are being a bit over sensitive, its a good article.
I think the club are in a bit of a shambles for all the reasons he points to. People tend to under estimate the importance of leadership. We are crying out for some on the footballing side of The Villa.
-
Problem is, as is usual with the press, he has it wrong on the KMac situation; KMac was not pushed into anything. Swain does not know what went on behind the scenes anymore than any other journalist in the country nor does he understand the intricacies and difficulties of identifying and finding a manager when your previous one leaves five days before the opening of the season. As per usual on these sites, sadly, if it is written in black and white, it must be true.
And ROBBO, based on what evidence would you replace Faulkner. What has he done to deserve the sack? Give specific examples, please.
-
Give specific examples, please
It aint an A'level exam.
-
Problem is, as is usual with the press, he has it wrong on the KMac situation; KMac was not pushed into anything. Swain does not know what went on behind the scenes anymore than any other journalist in the country nor does he understand the intricacies and difficulties of identifying and finding a manager when your previous one leaves five days before the opening of the season. As per usual on these sites, sadly, if it is written in black and white, it must be true.
And ROBBO, based on what evidence would you replace Faulkner. What has he done to deserve the sack? Give specific examples, please.
As CEO isn't he responsible for anything that goes wrong?
-
Problem is, as is usual with the press, he has it wrong on the KMac situation; KMac was not pushed into anything. Swain does not know what went on behind the scenes anymore than any other journalist in the country nor does he understand the intricacies and difficulties of identifying and finding a manager when your previous one leaves five days before the opening of the season. As per usual on these sites, sadly, if it is written in black and white, it must be true.
And ROBBO, based on what evidence would you replace Faulkner. What has he done to deserve the sack? Give specific examples, please.
As CEO isn't he responsible for anything that goes wrong?
Sure. What has gone so wrong here? The manager quit; it took some time to identify and contact parties w/ whom the club were interested and who were interested in the club. The interview process took further time. Once Houllier was identified, it took even more time to work out the contract and the details of his remaining issues with the FFF. It is not simply a matter of "We want you for X pounds tomorrow" and GH saying, "OK, see you then!" So where exactly is the problem? A statement was released in late August about the process, so the fans were kept informed in that way as well. Just because peoples' hands were not held the whole way, they feel as though it has all gone horribly wrong. This is not the case. The board knew of GH's commitments and decided that it was worth the wait. I suppose you can criticize them for that, but beyond that, I do not get it.
-
I avoid most publications and TalkShite as they are less than informative than this site and will stir up shit at every opportunity. Reading some of these linked articles reinforce my belief that most journalists have given up actually doing research themselves and totally rely of surfing the net for content. For a bit of excitement they'll then put a negative spin on whatever they publish.
Look into any mainstream publication and after a bit of thought you'll realise that behind the majority of news stories they've missed the real point. They all have some sort of agenda whether it's personal or the proprietor's view.
Football reporting is the same, however most journos will have their pet managers who will feed them plenty of stuff for publication and make their life easy - MON was one of these. The PR void left by MON has been filled with the worst sort of speculation and accusations which the club does not deserve and the claims that the club is in a shambles are unfounded. The fact is we just don't know what has gone on behind closed doors. Anybody who has ever tried to recruit a top executive at no notice will know how long it takes, and that your chosen man will probably have a few commitments to see through before he can join you. Where the club has performed poorly over recent weeks is in the PR and communication with the fans. Randy's style is to be discreet but his silence has only fueled the accusations of mismanagement which are unwarranted in my view. I also don't buy into the critisicm that the delay in appointing a manger is due to us not having a 'fotball man' on the Board - the club will have been inundated with applications for the Manager's job, they confirmed that they sought advice and after the decision was made it became a HR process to sort out the detail and nothing to do with football.
Of course none of this matters for a journalist looking for a cheap line although what concerns me is that many Villa fans seem to have followed suit and turned on the Board. There are some people around here with conveniently short memories.
Bad news sells and the old newspaper adage for deciding on front page content is 'If it bleeds it leads'. Take these people seriously at your peril.
-
Problem is, as is usual with the press, he has it wrong on the KMac situation; KMac was not pushed into anything. Swain does not know what went on behind the scenes anymore than any other journalist in the country nor does he understand the intricacies and difficulties of identifying and finding a manager when your previous one leaves five days before the opening of the season. As per usual on these sites, sadly, if it is written in black and white, it must be true.
And ROBBO, based on what evidence would you replace Faulkner. What has he done to deserve the sack? Give specific examples, please.
As CEO isn't he responsible for anything that goes wrong?
He can't really be responsible for a manager chucking the towel in 5 days before the season can he?
-
Good article by Swain.
While fresh-faced chief executive Paul Faulkner, recruited from Lerner’s MBNA group where he was previously ‘relationship manager,’ floundered in the hunt for O’Neill’s successor, UEFA have persuaded Stride to interrupt his retirement and take on the role of senior delegate at major European games this winter.
This bit hurts.
Wolves are accused of being the new Stoke. Blues are endeavouring to be the new Villa, while Villa are looking more and more like the new Blues. All gaffes and own goals.
-
Problem is, as is usual with the press, he has it wrong on the KMac situation; KMac was not pushed into anything. Swain does not know what went on behind the scenes anymore than any other journalist in the country nor does he understand the intricacies and difficulties of identifying and finding a manager when your previous one leaves five days before the opening of the season. As per usual on these sites, sadly, if it is written in black and white, it must be true.
And ROBBO, based on what evidence would you replace Faulkner. What has he done to deserve the sack? Give specific examples, please.
As CEO isn't he responsible for anything that goes wrong?
Off the pitch mainly I'd say, and I can't see a lot that's gone right OFF the pitch lately.
I am concerned that Randy is giving 'jobs for the boys' at VP I must say.
Faulkner has a degree from Cambridge, maybe he is a clever bastard, but we have to see it in action ( his intelligence that is).
-
You're right Pelty but we needed a more open two way flow of information. The club decided not to purchase players throughout the summer so were immediately on the backfoot with most fans. They, your dad, thn decided to communicate with the press through here and other sites. So, again, it seemed a strange way of going about business.
I have no idea about his relative strengths and weaknesses but since he's been on board what has he done to improve us as a football club? It appears that everything since the summer onwards has seen a general spiralling downwards. if he, the board, MON, are not wholly to blame for the situation then who is?
Bad communication, slow process, no players, unhappy fans...no, not down to the CEO alone, but he is as culpable as everyone involved in the mess that has been our summer.
-
For his many faults, the club's previous Chairman never allowed the club to be without a manager during the season for five weeks.
-
Good article by Swain.
While fresh-faced chief executive Paul Faulkner, recruited from Lerner’s MBNA group where he was previously ‘relationship manager,’ floundered in the hunt for O’Neill’s successor, UEFA have persuaded Stride to interrupt his retirement and take on the role of senior delegate at major European games this winter.
This bit hurts.
Wolves are accused of being the new Stoke. Blues are endeavouring to be the new Villa, while Villa are looking more and more like the new Blues. All gaffes and own goals.
I thought the second bit was a bit of a piss take to be honest. The season is 4 games old
-
Good article by Swain.
While fresh-faced chief executive Paul Faulkner, recruited from Lerner’s MBNA group where he was previously ‘relationship manager,’ floundered in the hunt for O’Neill’s successor, UEFA have persuaded Stride to interrupt his retirement and take on the role of senior delegate at major European games this winter.
This bit hurts.
Wolves are accused of being the new Stoke. Blues are endeavouring to be the new Villa, while Villa are looking more and more like the new Blues. All gaffes and own goals.
I thought the second bit was a bit of a piss take to be honest. The season is 4 games old
I don't think he was talking about on the pitch.
-
Good article by Swain.
While fresh-faced chief executive Paul Faulkner, recruited from Lerner’s MBNA group where he was previously ‘relationship manager,’ floundered in the hunt for O’Neill’s successor, UEFA have persuaded Stride to interrupt his retirement and take on the role of senior delegate at major European games this winter.
This bit hurts.
Wolves are accused of being the new Stoke. Blues are endeavouring to be the new Villa, while Villa are looking more and more like the new Blues. All gaffes and own goals.
I thought that cheapened his piece to be honest.
-
Speaking of the media and Villa, have the Grauniad changed their Villa/West Midlands football writer? Most Villa articles used to be written by Stuart James, and were quite good, and the last few days they've been by Louise Taylor and been guff in all honesty, like today's: http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2010/sep/16/gerard-houllier-aston-villa
Heh, maybe it's more proof we're seen as a joke club, eh? ;-)
Nothing wrong with that one - it's a light-hearted 'how things have changed' about football in general and hardly mentions us. The only people calling us a joke or a laughing stock are our own supporters.
-
Good article by Swain.
While fresh-faced chief executive Paul Faulkner, recruited from Lerner’s MBNA group where he was previously ‘relationship manager,’ floundered in the hunt for O’Neill’s successor, UEFA have persuaded Stride to interrupt his retirement and take on the role of senior delegate at major European games this winter.
This bit hurts.
Wolves are accused of being the new Stoke. Blues are endeavouring to be the new Villa, while Villa are looking more and more like the new Blues. All gaffes and own goals.
I thought the second bit was a bit of a piss take to be honest. The season is 4 games old
I don't think he was talking about on the pitch.
I don't think things are that bad !!
-
Speaking of the media and Villa, have the Grauniad changed their Villa/West Midlands football writer? Most Villa articles used to be written by Stuart James, and were quite good, and the last few days they've been by Louise Taylor and been guff in all honesty, like today's: http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2010/sep/16/gerard-houllier-aston-villa
Heh, maybe it's more proof we're seen as a joke club, eh? ;-)
Nothing wrong with that one - it's a light-hearted 'how things have changed' about football in general and hardly mentions us. The only people calling us a joke or a laughing stock are our own supporters.
Can't see much wrong with that article, either, it's about football, not us.
FWIW, though, a friend of mine from the north east, where Louise Taylor was the Graun's correspondent for a while, absolutely insists that she's the worst sports journo on the planet, so I hope she's not moving down here.
-
I don't see much wrong with the Swain piece to be honest. For me he is on the money.
The reason for this is of course the absence of a manager or any kind of defacto leader in the media. There has been very little coming out of the club in the time and so the media have been jumping on every quote and every idle piece of speculation to make a story. Negativity loves a vacuum it is said and with so little coming out of the club in particular that of a positive variety means that obviously every rumour gains in credibility.
-
Problem is, as is usual with the press, he has it wrong on the KMac situation; KMac was not pushed into anything. Swain does not know what went on behind the scenes anymore than any other journalist in the country nor does he understand the intricacies and difficulties of identifying and finding a manager when your previous one leaves five days before the opening of the season. As per usual on these sites, sadly, if it is written in black and white, it must be true.
And ROBBO, based on what evidence would you replace Faulkner. What has he done to deserve the sack? Give specific examples, please.
As CEO isn't he responsible for anything that goes wrong?
Sure. What has gone so wrong here? The manager quit; it took some time to identify and contact parties w/ whom the club were interested and who were interested in the club. The interview process took further time. Once Houllier was identified, it took even more time to work out the contract and the details of his remaining issues with the FFF. It is not simply a matter of "We want you for X pounds tomorrow" and GH saying, "OK, see you then!" So where exactly is the problem? A statement was released in late August about the process, so the fans were kept informed in that way as well. Just because peoples' hands were not held the whole way, they feel as though it has all gone horribly wrong. This is not the case. The board knew of GH's commitments and decided that it was worth the wait. I suppose you can criticize them for that, but beyond that, I do not get it.
What has gone wrong? I'm not entirely sure.
At the time Faulkner was appointed CEO, Randy Lerner held a press conference where he said the Manager was staying, Milner wouldn't be sold and there was money available for players to come in during the summer transfer window. I had high hopes we would be able to improve again on what had been arguably our best season in about 15 years.
We then are told two months later by the General, minutes after you posted a diatribe against O'Neill that the focus is on getting to grips with wages and that we needed to sell some players.
My understanding was that Faulkner had taken over some of O'Neill's responsibilities for conducting transfers and that he, Randy and O'Neill had identified 6 players who could be made available for sale to another club. Only one of those 6 has been sold.
I don't know the reason why O'Neill suddenly decided to resign. The club hasn't offered any explanation. I don't know if there was a change in policy or an agreement was broken that left the manager feeling his position was untenable. I'm not at all convinced that his leaving was the start of our difficulties rather than another symptom.
So from a feeling of high optimism in May, I now have to accept that rather than building upon last season's relative success, we have instead lost our manager, sold our best player, are still waiting 6 weeks later for a new manager to arrive.
It's all well and good you saying that the press don't know what is going on at Villa but they're just filling an information vacuum left by our reclusive executive board.
Perhaps you have a more upbeat version of our CEO's "first 100 days in office".
-
Good article by Swain.
I trust you agree where he says,"..after Martin O’Neill made his spitefully-timed and melodramatic exit", Chris?
-
Good article by Swain.
I trust you agree where he says,"..after Martin O’Neill made his spitefully-timed and melodramatic exit", Chris?
No, he's picked that up from the psychics on here.
I agree with this though "O’Neill’s legacy is a mixed bag of brilliant but unfulfilled potential on the pitch and a club worryingly bereft of football experience off it".
-
Problem is, as is usual with the press, he has it wrong on the KMac situation; KMac was not pushed into anything. Swain does not know what went on behind the scenes anymore than any other journalist in the country nor does he understand the intricacies and difficulties of identifying and finding a manager when your previous one leaves five days before the opening of the season. As per usual on these sites, sadly, if it is written in black and white, it must be true.
And ROBBO, based on what evidence would you replace Faulkner. What has he done to deserve the sack? Give specific examples, please.
As CEO isn't he responsible for anything that goes wrong?
Sure. What has gone so wrong here? The manager quit; it took some time to identify and contact parties w/ whom the club were interested and who were interested in the club. The interview process took further time. Once Houllier was identified, it took even more time to work out the contract and the details of his remaining issues with the FFF. It is not simply a matter of "We want you for X pounds tomorrow" and GH saying, "OK, see you then!" So where exactly is the problem? A statement was released in late August about the process, so the fans were kept informed in that way as well. Just because peoples' hands were not held the whole way, they feel as though it has all gone horribly wrong. This is not the case. The board knew of GH's commitments and decided that it was worth the wait. I suppose you can criticize them for that, but beyond that, I do not get it.
This statement from the article struck a chord with me Pelty:
"It may be the American way to line up all the candidates outside the chairman’s office with their power-point presentations in an executive briefcase, but it doesn’t work like that in English football."
I know the timing of O'Neill's exit didn't help but it is rather unusual for a top football club to go through a (rather lengthy) process of first identifying suitable candidates and then interviewing them. I can't think of many other top clubs that have done it this way, or at least taken so long about it. More often than not I believe most boards would have quickly and quietly identified the man they wanted, or at least narrowed it down to two or three with a first choice, and have gone about securing their target at the earliest opportunity. I could be wrong but I don't recall Liverpool going through a lengthy interview process to recruit Hodgson, nor Fulham with Hughes, nor Spurs when they recruited Redknapp, or Blues when recruiting McLeish.
They would have understood the urgency of getting a good manager in quickly to make use of what was left of the transfer window and to avoid a vacuum. Even the bad timing and apparent lack of available candidates ought not have precluded a much more decisive and dynamic response to the manager situation, in my view. This is where the football knowledge of the Board comes in to play, and is crucial. Our board, in the opinion of many, including myself, were found wanting. A knowledgable, experienced CEO with contacts throughout the game could have guided them through this far more quickly and effectively.
And of course it is all compounded by the fact that after this laborious process we recruited a manager that wasn't even available to start.
In short, the PL is a merciless beast and won't hang around and wait for us while we fanny about with normal business procedures.
-
Just because peoples' hands were not held the whole way, they feel as though it has all gone horribly wrong.
I think that the current board over the last 4 years have turned us into a Nanny Club, always trying desperately hard to please us, what with free coaches, cheap tickets, better food, basically everything the fans request. To then suddenly not hold our hand when that naughty man Martin O'Neill left is both shocking and a disgrace.
-
Good article by Swain.
I trust you agree where he says,"..after Martin O’Neill made his spitefully-timed and melodramatic exit", Chris?
No, he's picked that up from the psychics on here.
I agree with this though "O’Neill’s legacy is a mixed bag of brilliant but unfulfilled potential on the pitch and a club worryingly bereft of football experience off it".
The last part we can't confirm but we do know about the "mixed bag". Some great players bought but clueless in maximising their potential. Agreed?
-
Good article by Swain.
I trust you agree where he says,"..after Martin O’Neill made his spitefully-timed and melodramatic exit", Chris?
No, he's picked that up from the psychics on here.
I agree with this though "O’Neill’s legacy is a mixed bag of brilliant but unfulfilled potential on the pitch and a club worryingly bereft of football experience off it".
That is certainly a very fair point, and one I would also agree with.
-
Just because peoples' hands were not held the whole way, they feel as though it has all gone horribly wrong.
I think that the current board over the last 4 years have turned us into a Nanny Club, always trying desperately hard to please us, what with free coaches, cheap tickets, better food, basically everything the fans request. To then suddenly not hold our hand when that naughty man Martin O'Neill left is both shocking and a disgrace.
MON was a living god, the fact that the board didn't carry on dishing out mega wages to players who never played is a disgrace, the board should do the decent thing and sell up, in the meantime, he's a picture of lovely honest MON, the man who would have led us to European cup glory.
http://schriftman.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/god-the-father.jpg
-
Good article by Swain.
I trust you agree where he says,"..after Martin O’Neill made his spitefully-timed and melodramatic exit", Chris?
No, he's picked that up from the psychics on here.
I agree with this though "O’Neill’s legacy is a mixed bag of brilliant but unfulfilled potential on the pitch and a club worryingly bereft of football experience off it".
The last part we can't confirm but we do know about the "mixed bag". Some great players bought but clueless in maximising their potential. Agreed?
Clueless, definitely not. It could have been better, could have been a lot worse.
I think we can confirm the last part; who on the board has any football experience?
-
More upbeat? No. It has been a tough month+. My issue is laying it at the feet of PF with no evidence to back it beyond your own assumptions. PF works hard for the club and has its best interests at heart, to include ensuring the long-term fiscal health of the club. That was endangered by the previous manager who, rather than accepting the limits to which he had previously agreed on MULTIPLE occasions, left the club high-and-dry. For whatever reason, you wish not to believe this. Why you have such a suspicion of the club's owner and board is beyond me. What have they done over the past four years to warrant such distrust? Not a whole lot, but when the going gets tough, you push all the blame on them and look for some sort of conspiracy theory. That is sad.
***I had written a point-by-point refutation of the entirety of your post, but upon reflection I think it would have been wasted on you. You prefer your conspiracy theories, so I will leave you to them. Cheers.***
-
Problem is, as is usual with the press, he has it wrong on the KMac situation; KMac was not pushed into anything. Swain does not know what went on behind the scenes anymore than any other journalist in the country nor does he understand the intricacies and difficulties of identifying and finding a manager when your previous one leaves five days before the opening of the season. As per usual on these sites, sadly, if it is written in black and white, it must be true.
And ROBBO, based on what evidence would you replace Faulkner. What has he done to deserve the sack? Give specific examples, please.
As CEO isn't he responsible for anything that goes wrong?
Sure. What has gone so wrong here? The manager quit; it took some time to identify and contact parties w/ whom the club were interested and who were interested in the club. The interview process took further time. Once Houllier was identified, it took even more time to work out the contract and the details of his remaining issues with the FFF. It is not simply a matter of "We want you for X pounds tomorrow" and GH saying, "OK, see you then!" So where exactly is the problem? A statement was released in late August about the process, so the fans were kept informed in that way as well. Just because peoples' hands were not held the whole way, they feel as though it has all gone horribly wrong. This is not the case. The board knew of GH's commitments and decided that it was worth the wait. I suppose you can criticize them for that, but beyond that, I do not get it.
This statement from the article struck a chord with me Pelty:
"It may be the American way to line up all the candidates outside the chairman’s office with their power-point presentations in an executive briefcase, but it doesn’t work like that in English football."
I know the timing of O'Neill's exit didn't help but it is rather unusual for a top football club to go through a (rather lengthy) process of first identifying suitable candidates and then interviewing them. I can't think of many other top clubs that have done it this way, or at least taken so long about it. More often than not I believe most boards would have quickly and quietly identified the man they wanted, or at least narrowed it down to two or three with a first choice, and have gone about securing their target at the earliest opportunity. I could be wrong but I don't recall Liverpool going through a lengthy interview process to recruit Hodgson, nor Fulham with Hughes, nor Spurs when they recruited Redknapp, or Blues when recruiting McLeish.
They would have understood the urgency of getting a good manager in quickly to make use of what was left of the transfer window and to avoid a vacuum. Even the bad timing and apparent lack of available candidates ought not have precluded a much more decisive and dynamic response to the manager situation, in my view. This is where the football knowledge of the Board comes in to play, and is crucial. Our board, in the opinion of many, including myself, were found wanting. A knowledgable, experienced CEO with contacts throughout the game could have guided them through this far more quickly and effectively.
And of course it is all compounded by the fact that after this laborious process we recruited a manager that wasn't even available to start.
In short, the PL is a merciless beast and won't hang around and wait for us while we fanny about with normal business procedures.
This is a fair post. The timing of the departure definitely threw the board, no doubt, and necessitated a dual-pronged approach of stabilizing the club from within and turning the attention outwards as well. In the examples of the other clubs you mentioned, there was a difference in the timing (summer) and/or the board's recognition that they would be losing their manager and needed to get on with the hiring process (did anyone not know Benitez was leaving?).
That being said, once MON left, contact with potential managers was made immediately and, sometimes, multiple contacts with the same person. I am not sure I agree entirely w/ your scenario of a "football man" and his contacts because who would he have thought to contact that the board did not? Perhaps a promising young manager from a lower league, but would this really have been the appointment to make at this time? Some might argue for this, but I think the stick the board would take for such a move would have been hot and heavy. So, without knowing exactly what you have in mind with this, I cannot refute or agree with it. The usual suspects were contacted but were not interested.
As for GH and his responsibilities w/ the FFF, the delay was thought to be worth it as GH was, to their mind, easily the best option. Are they happy with the delay? No, but it is what it is.
-
More upbeat? No. It has been a tough month+. My issue is laying it at the feet of PF with no evidence to back it beyond your own assumptions. PF works hard for the club and has its best interests at heart, to include ensuring the long-term fiscal health of the club. That was endangered by the previous manager who, rather than accepting the limits to which he had previously agreed on MULTIPLE occasions, left the club high-and-dry. For whatever reason, you wish not to believe this. Why you have such a suspicion of the club's owner and board is beyond me. What have they done over the past four years to warrant such distrust? Not a whole lot, but when the going gets tough, you push all the blame on them and look for some sort of conspiracy theory. That is sad.
***I had written a point-by-point refutation of the entirety of your post, but upon reflection I think it would have been wasted on you. You prefer your conspiracy theories, so I will leave you to them. Cheers.***
Whether it is fair or not the perception is that the club have handled the situation poorly. You can't keep blaming everything on Martin O'Neill, at some point you have to take responsibility. The article in the E & S is only saying what a lot of fans have been saying in recent weeks and the lack of any clear response from the club has only fuelled it.
Your last little snippet was, with respect, a kop out. If you've got answers to his points, then let's hear them. I'd be really interested to know why we had to sell Milner and why we haven't signed anyone. If there are good reasons then why hasn't anyone bothered to let us know?
-
More upbeat? No. It has been a tough month+. My issue is laying it at the feet of PF with no evidence to back it beyond your own assumptions. PF works hard for the club and has its best interests at heart, to include ensuring the long-term fiscal health of the club. That was endangered by the previous manager who, rather than accepting the limits to which he had previously agreed on MULTIPLE occasions, left the club high-and-dry. For whatever reason, you wish not to believe this. Why you have such a suspicion of the club's owner and board is beyond me. What have they done over the past four years to warrant such distrust? Not a whole lot, but when the going gets tough, you push all the blame on them and look for some sort of conspiracy theory. That is sad.
***I had written a point-by-point refutation of the entirety of your post, but upon reflection I think it would have been wasted on you. You prefer your conspiracy theories, so I will leave you to them. Cheers.***
Pelty
I think it is too easy to brush away the criticisms as unmerited criticism / paranoid suspicion / lack of gratitude, or whatever.
I, personally, think the former manager left us right up shit creek having been asked - like any manager is asked from time to time - to do something about the wage bill. My own opinion is also that he knew exactly what he was doing, leaving when he did.
I also think a lot of the "OMG, you're so cheap!" drama queenery ( (c) Mark Kelly) over the summer at the board is ungracious, undeserved and not what the board deserve after the investment of the last four years. In fact, I think it is incredibly embarassing.
However, having said that, I do think that some of the things over the period since the manager left have been handled less than brilliantly. I'm talking about:
- giving KM two weeks to make his mind up whether he even wanted to apply. This was, in itself, a strange move, but it also left you open to criticism of "they're timing it so the transfer window closes before they make a decision". I don't think that was what you were aiming for, but I'm surprised you allowed a situation to develop where people could level that accusation at you.
- unveiling GH at a press conference without actually telling people up front that he'd not signed a contract, didn't know when he could start, it might be Wolves, but it might be even later, he might have to go back to France for a few days here and there etc.
I'm sure this was an attempt to create some sort of stability, but it didn't really. It just introduced more uncertainties.
We then had KM - made to believe he was hot favourite (it's hard to believe he was otherwise when the interview process wasn't even started until he'd had two weeks to decide whether to even apply) - interviewed for the job, passed over, sat and watched the new bloke unveiled, been offered the number two role, turned it down, but then expected to run the team for at least another two games (and could have been even more at that point).
That to me sounds unfair on KM apart from anything else.
Throw into the mix the confusion and ridiculous delays over the shirt (regardless of whether it is Nike's fault rather than ours, the club manages these relations with the supplier and allowed this to happen) and you can see why people are starting to think the club is drifting.
I have no idea whatsoever if it is PF's fault. I don't know who does what at the club, so I'm not going to point the finger at him.
I do, though, think that - even taking into account the mess MON dropped the club in - the last five weeks have been a real mess, and the club could have done much better.
Also, whilst I appreciate the job the General does, and I understand Randy's reluctance to enter the spotlight, if ever there was a time we needed our chairman to be visible, to make himself heard, to be our "leader", this was it.
-
"Your last little snippet was, with respect, a kop out. If you've got answers to his points, then let's hear them. I'd be really interested to know why we had to sell Milner and why we haven't signed anyone. If there are good reasons then why hasn't anyone bothered to let us know?"
A fair criticism. I removed that portion of the post not to "kop out," but because I think it would go unheeded. Also, I am concerned about saying too much. Let me say this: I think Swain has it right in saying that the board allowed MON too much sway. Right or wrong, this is Randy's way. He hires the people he thinks are best and let's them get on with it; to my mind, MON needed more oversight, but look at how MON reacted when steps in this direction were made!
RE: Milner, I want to be careful. Let me put it this way, no one was more surprised by the comments made by MON in mid-July than the board *and* Milner. To my knowledge, things were NOT in motion prior to those comments. Why they were made? Who knows?
-
Pelty
I think it is too easy to brush away the criticisms as unmerited criticism / paranoid suspicion / lack of gratitude, or whatever.
I, personally, think the former manager left us right up shit creek having been asked - like any manager is asked from time to time - to do something about the wage bill. My own opinion is also that he knew exactly what he was doing, leaving when he did.
I also think a lot of the "OMG, you're so cheap!" drama queenery ( (c) Mark Kelly) over the summer at the board is ungracious, undeserved and not what the board deserve after the investment of the last four years. In fact, I think it is incredibly embarassing.
However, having said that, I do think that some of the things over the period since the manager left have been handled less than brilliantly. I'm talking about:
- giving KM two weeks to make his mind up whether he even wanted to apply. This was, in itself, a strange move, but it also left you open to criticism of "they're timing it so the transfer window closes before they make a decision". I don't think that was what you were aiming for, but I'm surprised you allowed a situation to develop where people could level that accusation at you.
- unveiling GH at a press conference without actually telling people up front that he'd not signed a contract, didn't know when he could start, it might be Wolves, but it might be even later, he might have to go back to France for a few days here and there etc.
I'm sure this was an attempt to create some sort of stability, but it didn't really. It just introduced more uncertainties.
We then had KM - made to believe he was hot favourite (it's hard to believe he was otherwise when the interview process wasn't even started until he'd had two weeks to decide whether to even apply) - interviewed for the job, passed over, sat and watched the new bloke unveiled, been offered the number two role, turned it down, but then expected to run the team for at least another two games (and could have been even more at that point).
That to me sounds unfair on KM apart from anything else.
Throw into the mix the confusion and ridiculous delays over the shirt (regardless of whether it is Nike's fault rather than ours, the club manages these relations with the supplier and allowed this to happen) and you can see why people are starting to think the club is drifting.
I have no idea whatsoever if it is PF's fault. I don't know who does what at the club, so I'm not going to point the finger at him.
I do, though, think that - even taking into account the mess MON dropped the club in - the last five weeks have been a real mess, and the club could have done much better.
Also, whilst I appreciate the job the General does, and I understand Randy's reluctance to enter the spotlight, if ever there was a time we needed our chairman to be visible, to make himself heard, to be our "leader", this was it.
I see your points here and agree with some of them. The KMac issue was not a "wait-and-see" job. I am not going to say more here about this, so I will just have to let the common opinion prevail, I guess. I am not trying to be coy, but I just do not think it is right to say much more about it. My main issue, and why I posted originally, is that PF was getting unmerited stick. I will leave it at that.
-
Just read that article, who cares what some yam yam writes about us. The thing that people need to remember when reading this rubbish, it is just one persons opinion. If a bloke in the pub said the same, it would be quickly dismissed, and you would move on to another subject, because some journo writes it we should take it seriously?
It is like Michael O Leary of Ryanair, he just comes out with shit so people are talking about his airline, we are now reading the local yam yam papers web site, really, who cares.
What did they used to say, todays newspapers are tomorrows chip papers
Swain is not a Yam Yam, but lets not worry about the chip on your shoulder shall we.
His article above, is pretty much bang on. If in your opinion it's not, well pray tell what you disagree with
Firstly, not sure how me calling someone a yam yam equates to a chip on my shoulder. If i am wrong and he indeed is not a yam yam, then i am mistaken, if in fact he is, then i am right.
Whilst i am not arguing the thrust of the article, there are a number of points i agree with, but some of the points he makes are rubbish in my opinion.
"while Villa are looking more and more like the new Blues. All gaffes and own goals.
Lerner needs to get a grip more quickly than his chosen manager has decided to.
Past evidence does not fill me with much hope he will do so".
I do not agree that GH has been treating the job with disregard.
I also do not agree with the view that Villa are in the hands of " hopelessly naive and ill equipped administrators".
If that is what you think of Randy and the General, so be it, you can carry on reading and agreeing with Swain, i wont, and that is my point, i don't have to agree with one journos opinion of something.
I don't know how i got sucked into this, i should have just said Fuck 'em (the yam yams). ;)
-
......... if it is written in black and white, it must be true.
Which is not the case with me believe me, I'm too long in the tooth with the Villa for that. However, Swain very rarely puts wild accusations down and has a lot of contacts in Midlands football, so he deserves a little more respect than the lazy Journos from Fleet Street and indeed the Mail and Mercury.
Whilst I don't think that he has all the cast iron facts, I'm sure that he above most would at least try and make sure that what he publishes, can stand up somewhat.
-
Good article by Swain.
While fresh-faced chief executive Paul Faulkner, recruited from Lerner’s MBNA group where he was previously ‘relationship manager,’ floundered in the hunt for O’Neill’s successor, UEFA have persuaded Stride to interrupt his retirement and take on the role of senior delegate at major European games this winter.
This bit hurts.
Wolves are accused of being the new Stoke. Blues are endeavouring to be the new Villa, while Villa are looking more and more like the new Blues. All gaffes and own goals.
I thought the second bit was a bit of a piss take to be honest. The season is 4 games old
To me it was more a dig at them, 'cos they are past masters at it
-
He's from Coventry.
-
I am not sure I agree entirely w/ your scenario of a "football man" and his contacts because who would he have thought to contact that the board did not? Perhaps a promising young manager from a lower league, but would this really have been the appointment to make at this time? Some might argue for this, but I think the stick the board would take for such a move would have been hot and heavy. So, without knowing exactly what you have in mind with this, I cannot refute or agree with it. The usual suspects were contacted but were not interested.
Not being a football insider myself it's hard to be specific about what a football man as CEO might have been able to bring to the table. I'd imagine many of them would have it in their MO to build a network of contacts throughout the game, at home and abroad, and have access to a grapevine providing info as to who might be available, who might be interested, who might be prised away with the right offer. I suspect that many CEOs and Chairmen foster good relationships with a number of top managers and coaches and along the way maybe drop in the odd "would you ever be interested in managing us if it became available" over a post match G&T in the Boardroom. I know for example, Liverpool Board members had good links with Houllier before they recruited him, and I understand David Dein and Arsene Wenger were well acquainted long before Wenger was recruited for Arsenal. The selection and recruitment job was half done before the job was vacant in those cases. That kind of thing can be extremely useful when the shit hits the fan. Capable and intelligent as Faulkner may be, I doubt he has the background in the game to have built up such a network or the insider knowledge, and it's possible Randy is not around enough to have done so either. Running a top PL club with, apparently, little or no experience of the PL and Football in general in the boardroom seems a risky strategy to say the least.
-
Pelty thanks for being so candid, i understand you are walking a difficult path, Cheers
-
More upbeat? No. It has been a tough month+. My issue is laying it at the feet of PF with no evidence to back it beyond your own assumptions. PF works hard for the club and has its best interests at heart, to include ensuring the long-term fiscal health of the club. That was endangered by the previous manager who, rather than accepting the limits to which he had previously agreed on MULTIPLE occasions, left the club high-and-dry. For whatever reason, you wish not to believe this. Why you have such a suspicion of the club's owner and board is beyond me. What have they done over the past four years to warrant such distrust? Not a whole lot, but when the going gets tough, you push all the blame on them and look for some sort of conspiracy theory. That is sad.
***I had written a point-by-point refutation of the entirety of your post, but upon reflection I think it would have been wasted on you. You prefer your conspiracy theories, so I will leave you to them. Cheers.***
Which is utter garbage to be honest. A minority have turned on the Board, but there are issues that the Club have allowed to happen in recent weeks, perhaps initially not of their making when "The Messiah" left us, but have not dealt with brilliantly.
Randy deserves our respect for what his done and to an extent, we should trust him. He's earned it, but we are also at liberty to question things to do with the Club that are currently concerning us. Believe me, there are many of us that have earned that right too.
-
More upbeat? No. It has been a tough month+. My issue is laying it at the feet of PF with no evidence to back it beyond your own assumptions. PF works hard for the club and has its best interests at heart, to include ensuring the long-term fiscal health of the club. That was endangered by the previous manager who, rather than accepting the limits to which he had previously agreed on MULTIPLE occasions, left the club high-and-dry. For whatever reason, you wish not to believe this. Why you have such a suspicion of the club's owner and board is beyond me. What have they done over the past four years to warrant such distrust? Not a whole lot, but when the going gets tough, you push all the blame on them and look for some sort of conspiracy theory. That is sad.
***I had written a point-by-point refutation of the entirety of your post, but upon reflection I think it would have been wasted on you. You prefer your conspiracy theories, so I will leave you to them. Cheers.***
I don't wish to believe or disbelieve anything in particular, I want to have enough information on which to base my own opinion regarding the reasons for O'Neill leaving.
You take issue with me laying the blame at the feet of PF with no evidence to back it up and then castigate me for not laying it at the feet of MON with no evidence to back it up. Having you and the general tell me what I should think, without providing any information to back it up is not enough.
I'm hearing a lot lately about the issues related to the long-term fiscal health of the club, I'm not hearing a lot about competing to win trophies and play in the Champions League. Why is that? What happened between Randy's press conference and the posts you and the general made on the first day of pre-season? Randy wasn't talking about focussing on wages and having to sell players. What changed? Why doesn't someone actually explain to us what has been happening at our club?
I have equal respect for everyone who works for Aston Villa, not just the board. I think the entire club, including the manager had done a reasonably good job up till this summer. I'd like to know what went wrong.
If your point by point response contained useful information or explanation then it wouldn't be wasted. If its just more of you offering veiled accusations and telling me what I should believe then yes, it probably would be wasted on me. Cheers.
-
The problem for Villa is that even if there are very good reasons for everything that has happened (and not happened) the perception in the wider world is that it has been badly handled. We can argue until we're blue in the face that it is unfair but it won't make a bit of difference. If we start winning games when GH arrives then it will all be forgotten but if things go badly then it will come back in spades.
-
I am not sure I agree entirely w/ your scenario of a "football man" and his contacts because who would he have thought to contact that the board did not? Perhaps a promising young manager from a lower league, but would this really have been the appointment to make at this time? Some might argue for this, but I think the stick the board would take for such a move would have been hot and heavy. So, without knowing exactly what you have in mind with this, I cannot refute or agree with it. The usual suspects were contacted but were not interested.
Not being a football insider myself it's hard to be specific about what a football man as CEO might have been able to bring to the table. I'd imagine many of them would have it in their MO to build a network of contacts throughout the game, at home and abroad, and have access to a grapevine providing info as to who might be available, who might be interested, who might be prised away with the right offer. I suspect that many CEOs and Chairmen foster good relationships with a number of top managers and coaches and along the way maybe drop in the odd "would you ever be interested in managing us if it became available" over a post match G&T in the Boardroom. I know for example, Liverpool Board members had good links with Houllier before they recruited him, and I understand David Dein and Arsene Wenger were well acquainted long before Wenger was recruited for Arsenal. The selection and recruitment job was half done before the job was vacant in those cases. That kind of thing can be extremely useful when the shit hits the fan. Capable and intelligent as Faulkner may be, I doubt he has the background in the game to have built up such a network or the insider knowledge, and it's possible Randy is not around enough to have done so either. Running a top PL club with, apparently, little or no experience of the PL and Football in general in the boardroom seems a risky strategy to say the least.
I do not think your post is entirely without merit, but I do think that the expectations you might have re: the differences of having or not having a "football man" in place may be slightly misplaced. Again, there was contact with managers currently employed who were of a proper pedigree from the board's perspective who simply would not walk out on their clubs. I am not sure that having a pal who resides in the AVFC boardroom would make the difference. That said, I cannot say it would not have with 100% certainty. Nevertheless, those contacted felt a real sense of obligation to their current boards and were not willing to leave them in the lurch ala MON. If that is truly their conviction, I am not sure it would be easy to change. The timing of it was a MASSIVE issue for the employed managers, plain and simple.
-
The problem for Villa is that even if there are very good reasons for everything that has happened (and not happened) the perception in the wider world is that it has been badly handled. We can argue until we're blue in the face that it is unfair but it won't make a bit of difference. If we start winning games when GH arrives then it will all be forgotten but if things go badly then it will come back in spades.
I agree with ChrislaW9aq5-0a'dw=-#af';=-
Sorry, the world went all funny then.
-
"I'm hearing a lot lately about the issues related to the long-term fiscal health of the club, I'm not hearing a lot about competing to win trophies and play in the Champions League. Why is that? What happened between Randy's press conference and the posts you and the general made on the first day of pre-season?"
Nothing. The manager knew of ALL the issues, WELL BEFORE May even, and had agreed to address them. The desires of the board to compete for top honors domestically and in Europe have not changed. That said, would you really expect a owner, esp. one as reclusive as Randy, to speak at a press conference about the wage bill? This seems unrealistic to me, but it does not mean that these sorts of conversations had not been occurring in May and prior to May. The public simply were not privy to it which seems to make decent sense, but you might disagree.
-
The problem for Villa is that even if there are very good reasons for everything that has happened (and not happened) the perception in the wider world is that it has been badly handled. We can argue until we're blue in the face that it is unfair but it won't make a bit of difference. If we start winning games when GH arrives then it will all be forgotten but if things go badly then it will come back in spades.
Agreed.
-
Nothing. The manager knew of ALL the issues, WELL BEFORE May even, and had agreed to address them.
That's something I have no doubt about. This media-spun perception that O'Neill quit in a fury because the goalposts moved at the last minute with the Milner deal and subsequent use of the funds... I've never bought that. It was publicly known that City had bid for Milner in May - and that was when it was publicly revealed. They may have signalled their intention or made a bid before then. So, to my mind, O'Neill exactly what the picture was regarding transfers, available funds. My hunch is he still expected to be able to spend despite not selling on those six players identified, and that's what triggered this. We'll (I'll) probably never know for sure but that would be my guess.
Anyway, not long to go now. Roll on Monday and the start of the GH era.
-
I heard us described today as an absolute embarrassment, by a journalist on the radio
-
I heard us described today as an absolute embarrassment, by a journalist on the radio
Which journalist was that?
-
I heard us described today as an absolute embarrassment, by a journalist on the radio
Which journo gibbo?
-
I take your point about the timing Pelty - It certainly made it difficult to even consider Hughes and Hodgson (who would probably have gone to Liverpool anyway) and probably Jol who was close to taking the Fulham job but probably thought it too late to ditch Ajax by the time we were looking. I'd like to think we at least approached him nonetheless. And it's worth bearing in mind though that often a big pot of financial compensation has been known to alleviate many a "timing difficulty".
-
I take your point about the timing Pelty - It certainly made it difficult to even consider Hughes and Hodgson (who would probably have gone to Liverpool anyway) and probably Jol who was close to taking the Fulham job but probably thought it too late to ditch Ajax by the time we were looking. I'd like to think we at least approached him nonetheless. And it's worth bearing in mind though that often a big pot of financial compensation has been known to alleviate many a "timing difficulty".
I can't believe anyone would not recognise that it is much, much harder to find a manager five days before the start of the season than, say, five days after the end of the season.
You don't just have to convince them to want the job, you have to convince them to want it enough to be willing to shit on their current employers, too.
Whilst I think they made a bit of a dogs dinner of the last five weeks, I do think they got the best man they could have got in Houllier.
-
I take your point about the timing Pelty - It certainly made it difficult to even consider Hughes and Hodgson (who would probably have gone to Liverpool anyway) and probably Jol who was close to taking the Fulham job but probably thought it too late to ditch Ajax by the time we were looking. I'd like to think we at least approached him nonetheless. And it's worth bearing in mind though that often a big pot of financial compensation has been known to alleviate many a "timing difficulty".
Not in these instances. Money was not the issue for any of them.
-
It would have also thrown up the sceanrio of "They've left their current club in the shit when we came calling. Could they do the same to us at a later date?"
In the case of Moyes and Jol, it's very hard to argue that we would be a huge step up at the minute anyway.
A smaller club might have felt it would be wrong to deny a manager such an opportunity. But Everton are about on a par. They (unlike us) convinced their best player to stay and Moyes is building something there. The way they played v us this season was in marked contrast to a few years ago; passing, movement and imagination. They've definitely missed a trick in not signing a forward this summer though (or a decent one anyroad, I know they signed Beckford).
As for Jol, he's managing one of the most famous sides in Europe -probably still the most popular club in his homeland- and feels he has unfinished business there this season re the Eredivisie. The little matter of Real Madrid and AC Milan in the CL might have helped persuade him to stay too.
That's not to say that the above might not be available at a later date though. Moyes might get frustrated at the glass ceiling at Everton - how higher can he get them on such tight resources realistically? And If Jol has a decent year or two in Holland he might feel that's job done.
Both might have expressed a degree of interest in the job - just not now. The hope is that GH leaves us in relatively good shape, so that if in a year or two we ask again we might well get a different response.
-
I think both managers are, for different reasons, giving their clubs another season. If Gezza doesn't work out expect a massive attempt to get either of them in the summer.
-
"Your last little snippet was, with respect, a kop out. If you've got answers to his points, then let's hear them. I'd be really interested to know why we had to sell Milner and why we haven't signed anyone. If there are good reasons then why hasn't anyone bothered to let us know?"
A fair criticism. I removed that portion of the post not to "kop out," but because I think it would go unheeded. Also, I am concerned about saying too much. Let me say this: I think Swain has it right in saying that the board allowed MON too much sway. Right or wrong, this is Randy's way. He hires the people he thinks are best and let's them get on with it; to my mind, MON needed more oversight, but look at how MON reacted when steps in this direction were made!
RE: Milner, I want to be careful. Let me put it this way, no one was more surprised by the comments made by MON in mid-July than the board *and* Milner. To my knowledge, things were NOT in motion prior to those comments. Why they were made? Who knows?
That's my main criticism of Mr Lerner to be honest. Yes I was a massive critic of O'Neill, but in the final analysis it was Randy signing the cheques and giving O'Neill more or less carte blanche to do what he wanted. Having said that, for many years under Ellis all we really wanted was an owner prepared to back his manager's judgement to the hilt.
My main worry now is that O'Neill wasted so much money that he's effectively stymied our ambition for good. Did the alarm bells not start ringing at board level, when having bought defenders like Cuellar, Davies and Shorey, O'Neill then went out and still had to spend millions on Dunne, Collins and Warnock? Or when we effectively made the 31 year old Heskey our highest paid player, despite him having a less than brilliant reputation?
I think the last few weeks have been a bit rubbish, but as long as Randy and the General are still in it, both in heart and with finance, then I think having Houllier in place, long term we'll be all the stronger.
Anyway Pelty, thanks for all the replies, it's made for interesting reading. I imagine the General is glad of a bit of a reprieve as well!
-
I think both managers are, for different reasons, giving their clubs another season. If Gezza doesn't work out expect a massive attempt to get either of them in the summer.
Unless we have a truly disasterous season, I think Houllier deserves at least all of next season. He's hardly taken over in ideal circumstances, and would need a summer transfer window to try and bring in some of his old players.
-
"That's my main criticism of Mr Lerner to be honest. Yes I was a massive critic of O'Neill, but in the final analysis it was Randy signing the cheques and giving O'Neill more or less carte blanche to do what he wanted. Having said that, for many years under Ellis all we really wanted was an owner prepared to back his manager's judgement to the hilt."
There is truth in this, but Randy was trying to be precisely that type of owner. Indeed, that is how he is on both continents and, for me, it is to be preferred. I say this as a Washington Redskins fan (an American football team) where we have an owner who meddled in player personnel affairs for an entire decade and really set the progress of the team back. The good news is that in the NFL, progress can be made over 2-3 years that allows a team to compete for or win a Super Bowl. The salary cap, the draft, etc. make it easier in that regard. Anyway, a meddling owner could really set a team back in (real) football as it is much more difficult to recover it seems.
"My main worry now is that O'Neill wasted so much money that he's effectively stymied our ambition for good. Did the alarm bells not start ringing at board level, when having bought defenders like Cuellar, Davies and Shorey, O'Neill then went out and still had to spend millions on Dunne, Collins and Warnock? Or when we effectively made the 31 year old Heskey our highest paid player, despite him having a less than brilliant reputation?"
Of course! Why do you think the the discussions about all these matters cropped up in the first place. What was worse is that several of those players were not even in the squad, much less seeing time on the pitch!
I think the last few weeks have been a bit rubbish, but as long as Randy and the General are still in it, both in heart and with finance, then I think having Houllier in place, long term we'll be all the stronger.
Anyway Pelty, thanks for all the replies, it's made for interesting reading. I imagine the General is glad of a bit of a reprieve as well!
Well, I think it is fair to say that all parties are "in it." From what I have been told, GH will be given every opportunity to succeed.
-
Just read that article, who cares what some yam yam writes about us. The thing that people need to remember when reading this rubbish, it is just one persons opinion. If a bloke in the pub said the same, it would be quickly dismissed, and you would move on to another subject, because some journo writes it we should take it seriously?
It is like Michael O Leary of Ryanair, he just comes out with shit so people are talking about his airline, we are now reading the local yam yam papers web site, really, who cares.
What did they used to say, todays newspapers are tomorrows chip papers
Swain is not a Yam Yam, but lets not worry about the chip on your shoulder shall we.
His article above, is pretty much bang on. If in your opinion it's not, well pray tell what you disagree with
Firstly, not sure how me calling someone a yam yam equates to a chip on my shoulder. If i am wrong and he indeed is not a yam yam, then i am mistaken, if in fact he is, then i am right.
Whilst i am not arguing the thrust of the article, there are a number of points i agree with, but some of the points he makes are rubbish in my opinion.
"while Villa are looking more and more like the new Blues. All gaffes and own goals.
Lerner needs to get a grip more quickly than his chosen manager has decided to.
Past evidence does not fill me with much hope he will do so".
I do not agree that GH has been treating the job with disregard.
I also do not agree with the view that Villa are in the hands of " hopelessly naive and ill equipped administrators".
If that is what you think of Randy and the General, so be it, you can carry on reading and agreeing with Swain, i wont, and that is my point, i don't have to agree with one journos opinion of something.
I don't know how i got sucked into this, i should have just said Fuck 'em (the yam yams). ;)
The chip was there as far as I could see, "some yam yam journo" etc, like he has no right to comment, when if you read some of the posts above, you'll see that he is more than qualified.
If you actually READ what he says, he actually sums the last few weeks up to a tea. The Board have been great for this Club, but it doesn't mean that everything that they do is always right. Hence, we see a balanced article.
-
As Peter W and Chris Smith both touched on, the communication has been the real problem. It's fine saying a statement from the club was issued in the middle of August but the reality is it was never going to be enough. Even the Houllier press conference was poorly presented. Sometimes it not the news that gets people upset, more the way it's delivered.
It's easy to say journalist X has got it wrong but the vacuum of information was never going to help. It's one thing Randy avoiding the press, it's quite another for the club to do the same.
-
If Randy / the board don't make any statements then the press make their own assumptions, mor often than not that are not quite 'right'.
-
That's something I have no doubt about. This media-spun perception that O'Neill quit in a fury because the goalposts moved at the last minute with the Milner deal and subsequent use of the funds... I've never bought that. It was publicly known that City had bid for Milner in May - and that was when it was publicly revealed. They may have signalled their intention or made a bid before then. So, to my mind, O'Neill exactly what the picture was regarding transfers, available funds. My hunch is he still expected to be able to spend despite not selling on those six players identified, and that's what triggered this. We'll (I'll) probably never know for sure but that would be my guess.
Anyway, not long to go now. Roll on Monday and the start of the GH era.
That has been my feelings on the situation as well Merv.
I can imagine it would have hit MON hard to sell players that he had spent a considerable amount on at far reduced fees. It is almost an admission of failure.
Perhaps there was method in MON's madness of signing players late in transfer windows, knowing that there was insufficient time to sell others.
I just get the feeling that MON's budget for wages of incoming players was going to be the same as that of the players going out with Randy willing to invest more in transfer fees e.g. sell Heskey for, say, £2m and buy somebody for £10m as long as the wages were no more than Heskey's. This would have left MON in an unusual position that didn't fit his modus operandi. Perhaps he even tried to call Randys bluff and failed.
-
Problem is, as is usual with the press, he has it wrong on the KMac situation; KMac was not pushed into anything. Swain does not know what went on behind the scenes anymore than any other journalist in the country nor does he understand the intricacies and difficulties of identifying and finding a manager when your previous one leaves five days before the opening of the season. As per usual on these sites, sadly, if it is written in black and white, it must be true.
And ROBBO, based on what evidence would you replace Faulkner. What has he done to deserve the sack? Give specific examples, please.
I don't need to give specifics all that needs to be said is with him as CEO we have appeared rudderless on more than one occassion. The CEO has all over responsibility for the running of the club, he has to be across everything, this isn't personal it's just that someone with a sound knowledge and background in the game would have been an advantage. I am one who thinks it's agood thing Oneills gone and it will take time to settle things down but leadership starts at the top.
-
Only history will tell us if the way the club have acted over the manager appointment was the right way or not. What has happened over the last 5 or 6 weeks will not.
The trouble is today, we want it now and the steady Eddy controlled approach has been consigned to the dustbin.
I have read so much melodramatic rubbish from some on here it is no wonder the press have had a field day on us recently. We reap what we sow.
The number of people that have said, "I respect Randy but ........". 'BUT' - Do you really respect him or is it just hollow words. Positive and fair criticism is one thing but stereotypical and xenophobic comments are another.
-
Only history will tell us if the way the club have acted over the manager appointment was the right way or not. What has happened over the last 5 or 6 weeks will not.
The trouble is today, we want it now and the steady Eddy controlled approach has been consigned to the dustbin.
I have read so much melodramatic rubbish from some on here it is no wonder the press have had a field day on us recently. We reap what we sow.
The number of people that have said, "I respect Randy but ........". 'BUT' - Do you really respect him or is it just hollow words. Positive and fair criticism is one thing but stereotypical and xenophobic comments are another.
Very well stated. We constantly challenge the contempt the way we are treated by the media. But they only have to take a look on this forum and see how we are so negative about almost everything. It really should come as no suprise .......
-
Quality thread, best for ages.
-
That's something I have no doubt about. This media-spun perception that O'Neill quit in a fury because the goalposts moved at the last minute with the Milner deal and subsequent use of the funds... I've never bought that. It was publicly known that City had bid for Milner in May - and that was when it was publicly revealed. They may have signalled their intention or made a bid before then. So, to my mind, O'Neill exactly what the picture was regarding transfers, available funds. My hunch is he still expected to be able to spend despite not selling on those six players identified, and that's what triggered this. We'll (I'll) probably never know for sure but that would be my guess.
Anyway, not long to go now. Roll on Monday and the start of the GH era.
That has been my feelings on the situation as well Merv.
I can imagine it would have hit MON hard to sell players that he had spent a considerable amount on at far reduced fees. It is almost an admission of failure.
Perhaps there was method in MON's madness of signing players late in transfer windows, knowing that there was insufficient time to sell others.
I just get the feeling that MON's budget for wages of incoming players was going to be the same as that of the players going out with Randy willing to invest more in transfer fees e.g. sell Heskey for, say, £2m and buy somebody for £10m as long as the wages were no more than Heskey's. This would have left MON in an unusual position that didn't fit his modus operandi. Perhaps he even tried to call Randys bluff and failed.
I remember reading similar elsewhere.
Can't remember if it was just speculation in a similar thread to this, or from a well placed source. The gist of it was MON fully accepted what he was told in March and then again confirmed in May - but hoped that he could work RL over between then and the end of the window. And that if RL had to side with one from MON and Faulkner it would be MON everytime.
When RL indicated that he wouldn't be manipulated on this one and the wages issue would still need to be addressed around the weekend of the Valencia game (or soon after), MON felt the writing was on the wall. That combined with a feeling that he couldn't realistically improve on 6th with the progress of Spurs and Man Citeh and -for the sake of his reputation- felt maybe it was better to bail out now rather than at the end of a campaign that might result in his lowest league placing for three years.
He was also faced with the scenario of a number of unhappy players -players he signed- still on the books and obviously not as receptive to his ideas as they might have otherwise been. Luke Young turned down what looked like an attractive move to Liverpool and NRC was apparently quoted as telling Blackburn that he'd rather "sit and wait" as the feeling was something was in the offing at Villa.
-
"Your last little snippet was, with respect, a kop out. If you've got answers to his points, then let's hear them. I'd be really interested to know why we had to sell Milner and why we haven't signed anyone. If there are good reasons then why hasn't anyone bothered to let us know?"
A fair criticism. I removed that portion of the post not to "kop out," but because I think it would go unheeded. Also, I am concerned about saying too much. Let me say this: I think Swain has it right in saying that the board allowed MON too much sway. Right or wrong, this is Randy's way. He hires the people he thinks are best and let's them get on with it; to my mind, MON needed more oversight, but look at how MON reacted when steps in this direction were made!
RE: Milner, I want to be careful. Let me put it this way, no one was more surprised by the comments made by MON in mid-July than the board *and* Milner. To my knowledge, things were NOT in motion prior to those comments. Why they were made? Who knows?
That's my main criticism of Mr Lerner to be honest. Yes I was a massive critic of O'Neill, but in the final analysis it was Randy signing the cheques and giving O'Neill more or less carte blanche to do what he wanted. Having said that, for many years under Ellis all we really wanted was an owner prepared to back his manager's judgement to the hilt.
My main worry now is that O'Neill wasted so much money that he's effectively stymied our ambition for good. Did the alarm bells not start ringing at board level, when having bought defenders like Cuellar, Davies and Shorey, O'Neill then went out and still had to spend millions on Dunne, Collins and Warnock? Or when we effectively made the 31 year old Heskey our highest paid player, despite him having a less than brilliant reputation?
So, in other words, Randy's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't?
What if Houllier starts getting in some French players that we believe are a little suspect, maybe being paid too much or perhaps not suited to the premiership? Should Randy start questioning Houllier's decisions after the MoN experience? Or should he, once again, put his money where his mouth is and give the manager some faith?
Is it possible to have a chairman that 'kind of' interferes? That 'sort of' questions the manager? That trusts him but 'well, no not really'? And at what point does that little bit of interference become too much? How does Randy go about knocking on Houllier's office door with suggestions that, as the last manager blew wads of dough on utter shit, he'd like to look over any potential players himself rather than put complete trust in the manager and /or his scouting system?
Does he stay at arms length from all of this and get Faulkner to do his dirty work for him (again?) and, should worse come to worse, he can kick one or both to the curb and still maintain respect from the fans.
As I say, he's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't.
-
So, in other words, Randy's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't?
What if Houllier starts getting in some French players that we believe are a little suspect, maybe being paid too much or perhaps not suited to the premiership? Should Randy start questioning Houllier's decisions after the MoN experience? Or should he, once again, put his money where his mouth is and give the manager some faith?
I'd imagine he'd get some freedom to take chances on French players - as long as its not Mattieu Berson again.
-
I heard us described today as an absolute embarrassment, by a journalist on the radio
An embarassment to who, exactly? I'm not embarrassed by my Club, as I can see the long term goal is still to compete without sacrificing their integrity.
-
I started this in regard to the way the media are having a real negative go at the club, the board and even the fans in some quarters.
My biggest concern also is our communication and how we conduct ourselves in the media - I thought we were quiet when we had Phil Mepham on board - but the new guy (whoever he / she is) is astoundingly quiet. Surely it is their remit to filter information out and to ensure that the club is seen in a good light - even in shit times a good PR man will spin it to be a positive. I am proud that randy keeps a low profile (Especially after Doug who would do anything to get in the press) but it does create a monster with the press so to combat that we need a media / PR man with the skills and knowledge of the process like Max Clifford.
To organise a press conference without a firm employment date was niave at best and incompetent at worst. This is what the media have picked up on and this is what is continuing to hurt us - the same goes with the 2nd in command and support team for GH, even if it took a little longer the whole set up should have been sorted before the press were allowed to know who had turned us down. Lets just get it done so we can all focus on getting the club kick started again - the season is not over (as some would believe) it really has only just begun
Lets get behind our club and stop slagging it off - as to do so only fuels these fuckwits in the press to put us down even further
Pelty
I really appreciate your input and insight into this thread and other aspects of our great club - keep it going
-
I take your point about the timing Pelty - It certainly made it difficult to even consider Hughes and Hodgson (who would probably have gone to Liverpool anyway) and probably Jol who was close to taking the Fulham job but probably thought it too late to ditch Ajax by the time we were looking. I'd like to think we at least approached him nonetheless. And it's worth bearing in mind though that often a big pot of financial compensation has been known to alleviate many a "timing difficulty".
Not in these instances. Money was not the issue for any of them.
I was thinking more about the clubs receiving compensation for losing their manager.
-
I heard us described today as an absolute embarrassment, by a journalist on the radio
These people will say any old crap to get a response. They love it when fans take the bait and inundate them with complaints and arguments. If nobody took any notice of them, they would just go away.
-
Whilst i appreciate we have had a difficult time since MON left us in the shit i find it amazing how the media have really started to talk about us like we are a pub team.
Terms like, chaos, disgrace, shambles, dont know what they are doing
FFS we are 5th in the league losing 2 out of 5 games
we are above manshitty / Spurs yet the slag us off when we dont even have a manager in place yet
Really fucks me off - maybe if they rely on their info from message boards then maybe i should not be suprised as they can get all the nbegative vibes they want from off here for a start
Maybe its time we all stuck together and stood by the management / board and players and see them through this shit time
I bet MON is laughing his cock off as mission accomplished as far as he must be concnered
Are u taking the piss???
What is said on here dwarfs what the media are saying. They couldn't really give a shit!
Your MON conspiracy theory is getting a bit pathetic now
-
Your MON conspiracy theory is getting a bit pathetic now
It's not a conspiracy theory when only one man's involved and it's true.
-
So, in other words, Randy's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't?
What if Houllier starts getting in some French players that we believe are a little suspect, maybe being paid too much or perhaps not suited to the premiership? Should Randy start questioning Houllier's decisions after the MoN experience? Or should he, once again, put his money where his mouth is and give the manager some faith?
Is it possible to have a chairman that 'kind of' interferes? That 'sort of' questions the manager? That trusts him but 'well, no not really'? And at what point does that little bit of interference become too much? How does Randy go about knocking on Houllier's office door with suggestions that, as the last manager blew wads of dough on utter shit, he'd like to look over any potential players himself rather than put complete trust in the manager and /or his scouting system?
Houllier is going to have time to make his mark on the club, and that will involve shaping the squad as he wants it - which is going to mean players moving on and others coming in.
It's naive to think that it is possible to have a chairman who doesn't interfere, because at the end of the day, they were the ones looking after the club's financial health and future. There's always going to be some involvement.
I don't think Randy's interference was on the basis of "you've bought Steve Sidwell, but he's shit, so sell him", rather he'd asked something to be done to work on the wage bill. In that context, he's bound to suggest the manager looks at moving on expensive players he never uses.
Is that interfering? I guess it is, but it is inevitable and it happens at every single PL club, bar possibly one.
-
Really enjoyed this thread, here's my first post. It's a biggie. Sorry
Could the appointment of a new manager been made more smoothly? From the outside looking in, yes. But who knows? The constant calls from fans to know what was going on led to the “premature” appointment of Houllier, without a start date. It seems silly that this could happen but wasn’t it the club just trying to provide what the fans were clambering for?
Of course, I’m not blaming the fans for wanting to know. It’s just that sometimes the only thing worse than not getting what you want is getting what you want.
Some have sought to blame the CEO, Paul Faulkner. “If only we had a ‘football man’ like Steve Stride it would have gone more smoothly.” Who’s to know? Certainly we never had problems appointing a new manager when he was club secretary. However, I can’t recall a manager walking out on us and taking his entire backroom staff with him 5 days before the start of the season. The spiteful timing of Martin O’Neill’s resignation, plus his usual procrastination in the transfer market left the club in an impossible situation. I seriously doubt Stephen Stride could have handled it any better.
Paul is Randy’s third CEO in 4 years. I’ve always suspected that Martin O’Neill, in his quest for power at the club fell out with FitzGerald and (I forget what his name was). Paul was Randy’s simple statement. “You can’t find fault with this guy, because I know exactly what he’s like. He’s served me well over previous years and I know what he’s capable of”. I don’t know Paul Faulkner’s job exactly, like I didn’t know Stephen Stride, but Randy’s no fool. He’s not going to hand over running of the club to someone he doesn’t think is up to it.
Perhaps Paul does lack some of the contacts/friendships that Stephen Stride built up over 20 years – who doesn’t? But I’m sure he doesn’t lack any of the ability to do the job and criticism of him has been unfair.
The parameters within he and the club have had to work to deliver a new manger have been almost impossible. Or would people rather have us poach a manager of other clubs and leave them in the mess we were? It’s a strange way to suddenly behave. Have we not just held the moral high ground on giving away our shirt sponsorship to a children’s charity for two years? Villa once again set the standard on how clubs should behave. It's admiral and to be applauded. We should be proud.
Houllier could well turn out to be an inspired choice. And it was messy getting to this point. But we are not “a laughing stock”, we are not “a shambles”, the club is not “in crisis”. The hyperbole is laughable. A couple of wins under Gerard and we’ll be back to normal moaning about the manner of the victories and debating who should be in the team!
If I’ve failed to convince you and you’re still looking for someone to blame look no further than Martin O’Neill, the architect of the situation.
-
A very succinct summing-up.
-
Good post Mac.
There's only one person at fault for the situation we find ourselves in and he's no longer with us.
-
Good post Mac.
There's only one person at fault for the situation we find ourselves in and he's no longer with us.
It doesn't really matter who is to blame though, Bren.
It is how the club have dealt with it that is the issue. The way it has been handled has given the appearance of dithering. As I said above, that might not be fair but it is how it is being perceived by the wider world and the lack of clear commuication has s only given that more credence.
How long do we give the club the get out of jail free card of blaming everything that happens on MON walking out?
-
Good post Mac.
There's only one person at fault for the situation we find ourselves in and he's no longer with us.
It doesn't really matter who is to blame though, Bren.
It is how the club have dealt with it that is the issue. The way it has been handled has given the appearance of dithering. As I said above, that might not be fair but it is how it is being perceived by the wider world and the lack of clear commuication has s only given that more credence.
How long do we give the club the get out of jail free card of blaming everything that happens on MON walking out?
I'd agree with you on the dithering point, but if their response is that we were left in a very difficult situation, then you can't really ignore the fact that MON caused it in the first place.
Personally, I think this whole season will be pretty much written off - new manager arriving after start of season (in which time we're out of one competition already), transfer window shut, has to start from scratch with new players, can't strengthen until the (very difficult) January window ...... it's going to be a fair while before we get to the "not MON's fault anymore" stage.
-
Hookeysmith, I don't really see it as people on here slagging off the club, just pointing out that certain representatives of the club might have handled things better, and avoided giving ammunition to those ignorant journos who are blowing it up out of all proportion to embellish their stories. That does not equate to us slagging off the club any more than ciriticising O'Neill meant we were not behind the team. I think it's been a fairly balanced and well argued discussion on the whole.
-
Mac - great post, on a really good and interesting thread.
-
Hookeysmith, I don't really see it as people on here slagging off the club, just pointing out that certain representatives of the club might have handled things better, and avoided giving ammunition to those ignorant journos who are blowing it up out of all proportion to embellish their stories. That does not equate to us slagging off the club any more than ciriticising O'Neill meant we were not behind the team. I think it's been a fairly balanced and well argued discussion on the whole.
... and on a positive note, at least from Monday we can begin to move on. Onwards and upwards, hopefully.
-
Some very good points Mac, but, even ignoring the recent situation, and taking it just as a matter of policy issue, do you think it is sensible to have no-one on the board with a strong background in English or European football? It's not necessary, but it would seem to make sense - Not necessarilly at CEO, where I'm sure Faulkner has his abilities, but, say, SGT as a non-executive director for example? That said, you may well be right that we had that previously but they were forced out by his ego-ness.
I also have to say I'm never that convinced by the moral high ground argument. It's admirable, and great for the image of the club, but even better would be winning trophies. It's a dog eat dog world and there's a lot of truth in the phrase " nice guys finish last".
But ultimately you are right - O'Neill is the one to blame.
-
Mac's post on page 8 sums up my feelings very nicely thank you
-
It was SGT and BFR who originally suggested the theories that O'Neill may have left the club due to a change in policy or perhaps a broken agreement that left him in an untenable position. They weren't conspiracy theories, they're just theories.
A lot of people seem intent on insisting that the timing and manner of him leaving was an act of spiteful vindictiveness. Is that not just another theory or have I missed some vital piece of information that adds credence to this particular theory?
Just prior to O'Neill leaving there was a stalwart poster on here saying that Lerner and O'Neill hadn't spoken for four months and he seemed to be believed by many fellow posters. We now have those same posters appearing to insist that O'Neill's resignation came from out of the blue, which is it?
-
Good post Mac.
There's only one person at fault for the situation we find ourselves in and he's no longer with us.
It doesn't really matter who is to blame though, Bren.
It is how the club have dealt with it that is the issue. The way it has been handled has given the appearance of dithering.
How long do we give the club the get out of jail free card of blaming everything that happens on MON walking out?
From what Pelty is saying the club were happy to appoint GH under the conditions it wasn't to be an immediate appointment. That was their decision which I don't see as dithering. If you are going to appoint someone for the most crucial role in the club then I think the decision to do so should be given a lot of thought and time. That's the way the club have gone about it.
If there is any fault by the board it is that even having been given assurances by MON that he was staying to finish the job they should have had an inkling that he could at any time throw the towel in and with that in mind have a name or names primed to fill the void. The week they players reported back to training MON didn't look like a man enthusiastic about the season ahead. That should have been apparent to the board.
-
Good post Mac.
There's only one person at fault for the situation we find ourselves in and he's no longer with us.
It doesn't really matter who is to blame though, Bren.
It is how the club have dealt with it that is the issue. The way it has been handled has given the appearance of dithering.
How long do we give the club the get out of jail free card of blaming everything that happens on MON walking out?
From what Pelty is saying the club were happy to appoint GH under the conditions it wasn't to be an immediate appointment. That was their decision which I don't see as dithering. If you are going to appoint someone for the most crucial role in the club then I think the decision to do so should be given a lot of thought and time. That's the way the club have gone about it.
If there is any fault by the board it is that even having been given assurances by MON that he was staying to finish the job they should have had an inkling that he could at any time throw the towel in and with that in mind have a name or names primed to fill the void. The week they players reported back to training MON didn't look like a man enthusiastic about the season ahead. That should have been apparent to the board.
Thats exactly how I see it Bren, we wanted GH, we have had to wait for him to finish his role at his former job. We have done the decent thing and allowed that to happen.
Fair play to Villa and fair play to GH for honoring his contract to the French FA. there is not a lot of respect in football so why knock whats happened here at the Villa.
He'll be in charge soon and hopefully whip us into shape and we can get our season back on track and stop worrying about what other people think, who's at fault and so on.
-
Good post Mac.
There's only one person at fault for the situation we find ourselves in and he's no longer with us.
It doesn't really matter who is to blame though, Bren.
It is how the club have dealt with it that is the issue. The way it has been handled has given the appearance of dithering.
How long do we give the club the get out of jail free card of blaming everything that happens on MON walking out?
From what Pelty is saying the club were happy to appoint GH under the conditions it wasn't to be an immediate appointment. That was their decision which I don't see as dithering. If you are going to appoint someone for the most crucial role in the club then I think the decision to do so should be given a lot of thought and time. That's the way the club have gone about it.
If there is any fault by the board it is that even having been given assurances by MON that he was staying to finish the job they should have had an inkling that he could at any time throw the towel in and with that in mind have a name or names primed to fill the void. The week they players reported back to training MON didn't look like a man enthusiastic about the season ahead. That should have been apparent to the board.
Absolutely, Bren. Add to that the rumours of MON begging for the Liverpool job, you would have thought we'd have had a contingency plan in place, something we were discussing on here in the weeks before O'Neill's mutiny.
-
The best thread that has been on here, and thankyou Pelty for your input.
I think the club did have an inkling that MON may have been going, especially with the Liverpool episode, and from the rumours around would appear to have discussed the matter with Mark Hughes/and/or his advisors. However, MON remained in post and Hughes obviously wasn't prepared to wait for something that might never happen.
It will be interesting to see if, in some time ahead, there are any changes/additions to the boardroom/managerial (not football) positions within the club. I would think that once some time has passed RL and others will be having a good look at what has happened/how it was handled and what they can learn from it. I have no doubt that if this happened again things would go a little differently.
-
The club did have an idea O'Neill would walk out. Their mistake was thinking in terms of months when he was thinking weeks, and then days.
They certainly didn't think he would go when he did. After all, what decent man would leave a job in such circumstances?
-
Good post Mac.
There's only one person at fault for the situation we find ourselves in and he's no longer with us.
It doesn't really matter who is to blame though, Bren.
It is how the club have dealt with it that is the issue. The way it has been handled has given the appearance of dithering. As I said above, that might not be fair but it is how it is being perceived by the wider world and the lack of clear commuication has s only given that more credence.
How long do we give the club the get out of jail free card of blaming everything that happens on MON walking out?
Glad you read my post with an open mind Chris.
-
Very nicely put Mac.
-
Well done Mac-spot on
-
Well done Mac-spot on
Strange comment from you that when yesterday you were calling for Faulkner to be replaced.
-
Well done Mac-spot on
Strange comment from you that when yesterday you were calling for Faulkner to be replaced.
My argument was clearly persuasive.
-
Good post Mac.
There's only one person at fault for the situation we find ourselves in and he's no longer with us.
It doesn't really matter who is to blame though, Bren.
It is how the club have dealt with it that is the issue. The way it has been handled has given the appearance of dithering.
How long do we give the club the get out of jail free card of blaming everything that happens on MON walking out?
From what Pelty is saying the club were happy to appoint GH under the conditions it wasn't to be an immediate appointment. That was their decision which I don't see as dithering. If you are going to appoint someone for the most crucial role in the club then I think the decision to do so should be given a lot of thought and time. That's the way the club have gone about it.
If there is any fault by the board it is that even having been given assurances by MON that he was staying to finish the job they should have had an inkling that he could at any time throw the towel in and with that in mind have a name or names primed to fill the void. The week they players reported back to training MON didn't look like a man enthusiastic about the season ahead. That should have been apparent to the board.
As I said it might not be a fair criticism but that is how it is being seen by the wider world.
-
Good post Mac.
There's only one person at fault for the situation we find ourselves in and he's no longer with us.
It doesn't really matter who is to blame though, Bren.
It is how the club have dealt with it that is the issue. The way it has been handled has given the appearance of dithering. As I said above, that might not be fair but it is how it is being perceived by the wider world and the lack of clear commuication has s only given that more credence.
How long do we give the club the get out of jail free card of blaming everything that happens on MON walking out?
Glad you read my post with an open mind Chris.
I did and agreed with most of it. I was replying to Bren's comment. I don't think anyone would argue that MON walking out dropped us in it. My argument is that it doesn't really matter now, it's what happens from now on that is important.
There are people, not you or Bren, that don't seem to have been able to get beyond calling MON names and thereby excusing everything else that happens as his fault. I don't think that's a useful approach.
-
Just read that article, who cares what some yam yam writes about us. The thing that people need to remember when reading this rubbish, it is just one persons opinion. If a bloke in the pub said the same, it would be quickly dismissed, and you would move on to another subject, because some journo writes it we should take it seriously?
It is like Michael O Leary of Ryanair, he just comes out with shit so people are talking about his airline, we are now reading the local yam yam papers web site, really, who cares.
What did they used to say, todays newspapers are tomorrows chip papers
Swain is not a Yam Yam, but lets not worry about the chip on your shoulder shall we.
His article above, is pretty much bang on. If in your opinion it's not, well pray tell what you disagree with
Firstly, not sure how me calling someone a yam yam equates to a chip on my shoulder. If i am wrong and he indeed is not a yam yam, then i am mistaken, if in fact he is, then i am right.
Whilst i am not arguing the thrust of the article, there are a number of points i agree with, but some of the points he makes are rubbish in my opinion.
"while Villa are looking more and more like the new Blues. All gaffes and own goals.
Lerner needs to get a grip more quickly than his chosen manager has decided to.
Past evidence does not fill me with much hope he will do so".
I do not agree that GH has been treating the job with disregard.
I also do not agree with the view that Villa are in the hands of " hopelessly naive and ill equipped administrators".
If that is what you think of Randy and the General, so be it, you can carry on reading and agreeing with Swain, i wont, and that is my point, i don't have to agree with one journos opinion of something.
I don't know how i got sucked into this, i should have just said Fuck 'em (the yam yams). ;)
The chip was there as far as I could see, "some yam yam journo" etc, like he has no right to comment, when if you read some of the posts above, you'll see that he is more than qualified.
If you actually READ what he says, he actually sums the last few weeks up to a tea. The Board have been great for this Club, but it doesn't mean that everything that they do is always right. Hence, we see a balanced article.
Just thought i couldn't let you away without a response.
It is obvious from your signature that it is you who has the chip on the shoulder about being called a yam yam. Because i never called you a yam yam, you obviously do have an issue, but that's your problem, deal with it.
I only called Swain a yam yam in relation to him being a journalist writing about a football club from Birmingham, when the article he is writing is not even in a Birmingham newspaper, it is in a "Black Country" paper. i could have called him a Geordie, or Scouser or Cockney.
As it turns out he is a Cov' twat anyway!
-
What a good thread this is.
-
Stuart James with a pointless dig in the Guardian (which was also repeated by that prick Nursey in the Mirror).
Houllier was certainly in need of some help after a poor opening 45 minutes that did nothing to improve the subdued mood in a stadium that was less than half full, after only 18,753 turned up to witness Houllier's first game – lower than any crowd during Martin O'Neill's reign.
Apart from the pointlessness of this catty remark, worth remembering that last year, 23k against Cardiff, with 6k+ away fans, and the year before Leicester, with even more away fans.
Tonight, 5-600 away fans.
-
There is a lot being written about Villa at the moment. Some of it is worth reading but most of it is just rubbish.
I wanted to say something about current press coverage of Villa because of a piece I just read. Did a search to see if the subject already exists and lo, the very same journalist that riled me was the topic of the last post here 2 and a half years ago.
Football journalists are enjoying Villa’s current plight as it gives them a chance to have a right good go. They write in a style that suggests concern for our situation but is actually just gloating. Comes with the territory of being a big club I suppose. They wouldn’t bother if it was Albion or Birmingham.
Stuart James is clearly enjoying himself. 'Crestfallen', 'disastrous', 'plumbed new depths', 'humiliation', 'shortcomings', 'depressing', 'misery' and 'turmoil' all in the first 5 lines!
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2013/jan/23/aston-villa-new-low-bradford
Really poor tabloid style writing. I don't mind writing that is critical/poking fun but it has to be good or intelligent or something.
-
In my opinion, Stuart James is generally one of the more informed and balanced journalists when it comes to reporting on Aston Villa.
He wrote a report last Saturday that generally distilled most of what we have been saying on here for a national audience.
-
by far the worst stuff i read about the Villa and the utter slagging they get is on here
not saying people cant post what they want, but you would go along way to see the club slagged of worse than on H+V (maybe VT, i havent looked)
-
In my opinion, Stuart James is generally one of the more informed and balanced journalists when it comes to reporting on Aston Villa.
He wrote a report last Saturday that generally distilled most of what we have been saying on here for a national audience.
I agree, particularly about last Saturday's piece. He's usually pretty well informed considering he works for a national title.
-
There is a lot being written about Villa at the moment. Some of it is worth reading but most of it is just rubbish.
I wanted to say something about current press coverage of Villa because of a piece I just read. Did a search to see if the subject already exists and lo, the very same journalist that riled me was the topic of the last post here 2 and a half years ago.
Football journalists are enjoying Villa’s current plight as it gives them a chance to have a right good go. They write in a style that suggests concern for our situation but is actually just gloating. Comes with the territory of being a big club I suppose. They wouldn’t bother if it was Albion or Birmingham.
Stuart James is clearly enjoying himself. 'Crestfallen', 'disastrous', 'plumbed new depths', 'humiliation', 'shortcomings', 'depressing', 'misery' and 'turmoil' all in the first 5 lines!
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2013/jan/23/aston-villa-new-low-bradford
Really poor tabloid style writing. I don't mind writing that is critical/poking fun but it has to be good or intelligent or something.
Haven't clicked on the link but those words you have a problem with are just about what every Villa fan I know has said about the Villa this season.
-
Maybe his expectations of what Aston Villa should be is the reason for such a description. Let's face it, everything about the club is first class except the football team. How much longer must we wait before somebody finally gets it right?
-
Pelty, any chance of returning and shedding a bit of light on the current situation?
-
There is a lot being written about Villa at the moment. Some of it is worth reading but most of it is just rubbish.
I wanted to say something about current press coverage of Villa because of a piece I just read. Did a search to see if the subject already exists and lo, the very same journalist that riled me was the topic of the last post here 2 and a half years ago.
Football journalists are enjoying Villa’s current plight as it gives them a chance to have a right good go. They write in a style that suggests concern for our situation but is actually just gloating. Comes with the territory of being a big club I suppose. They wouldn’t bother if it was Albion or Birmingham.
Stuart James is clearly enjoying himself. 'Crestfallen', 'disastrous', 'plumbed new depths', 'humiliation', 'shortcomings', 'depressing', 'misery' and 'turmoil' all in the first 5 lines!
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2013/jan/23/aston-villa-new-low-bradford
Really poor tabloid style writing. I don't mind writing that is critical/poking fun but it has to be good or intelligent or something.
Haven't clicked on the link but those words you have a problem with are just about what every Villa fan I know has said about the Villa this season.
I was just left with the feeling that the guy loved writing it. Loved the chance to spew out as many negative adjectives as he could think up about Villa. Just a vitriolic chunk of writing disguised as being worried over Villa's future (whatever happened to that thread?). It bothered me this morning possibly because it was sent to me by an Albion fan who took great delight in it.
-
latest from The Guardian
"The whole of football is rubbernecking in their direction now. Their manager is not wearing the stress well. The crowd are restless, bordering on mutiny but holding back for now. All the signs are in place of a relegation waiting to happen and this, remember, is no longer the era of the yo-yo club"
Good article actually:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2013/jan/26/randy-lerner-aston-villa-paul-lambert
-
latest from The Guardian
"The whole of football is rubbernecking in their direction now. Their manager is not wearing the stress well. The crowd are restless, bordering on mutiny but holding back for now. All the signs are in place of a relegation waiting to happen and this, remember, is no longer the era of the yo-yo club"
Good article actually:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2013/jan/26/randy-lerner-aston-villa-paul-lambert
Any worth in this article is undone by the cheap jibe towards Birmingham. As a regular Observer reader I have been digesting Taylor's articles for some time and have come to the conclusion that he, like many before, has been given a high profile column long before he has earned the experience and education to do it justice.
-
latest from The Guardian
"The whole of football is rubbernecking in their direction now. Their manager is not wearing the stress well. The crowd are restless, bordering on mutiny but holding back for now. All the signs are in place of a relegation waiting to happen and this, remember, is no longer the era of the yo-yo club"
Good article actually:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2013/jan/26/randy-lerner-aston-villa-paul-lambert
yep. it will be a big thing if we go down. Not blowing our own trumpet at all but you'd have to be well into your 20's to remember a villaless top Division. Everyone's stopping to watch the carcrash...
-
latest from The Guardian
"The whole of football is rubbernecking in their direction now. Their manager is not wearing the stress well. The crowd are restless, bordering on mutiny but holding back for now. All the signs are in place of a relegation waiting to happen and this, remember, is no longer the era of the yo-yo club"
Good article actually:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2013/jan/26/randy-lerner-aston-villa-paul-lambert
Any worth in this article is undone by the cheap jibe towards Birmingham. As a regular Observer reader I have been digesting Taylor's articles for some time and have come to the conclusion that he, like many before, has been given a high profile column long before he has earned the experience and education to do it justice.
Hey come on now Nev, he was previously the 'Guardian's man in Manchester' and has written a book about Man Utd so he knows what he's talking about.
-
latest from The Guardian
"The whole of football is rubbernecking in their direction now. Their manager is not wearing the stress well. The crowd are restless, bordering on mutiny but holding back for now. All the signs are in place of a relegation waiting to happen and this, remember, is no longer the era of the yo-yo club"
Good article actually:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2013/jan/26/randy-lerner-aston-villa-paul-lambert
yep. it will be a big thing if we go down. Not blowing our own trumpet at all but you'd have to be well into your 20's to remember a villaless top Division. Everyone's stopping to watch the carcrash...
I'm 32 and I don't remember a Villa-less top division.
-
latest from The Guardian
"The whole of football is rubbernecking in their direction now. Their manager is not wearing the stress well. The crowd are restless, bordering on mutiny but holding back for now. All the signs are in place of a relegation waiting to happen and this, remember, is no longer the era of the yo-yo club"
Good article actually:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2013/jan/26/randy-lerner-aston-villa-paul-lambert
yep. it will be a big thing if we go down. Not blowing our own trumpet at all but you'd have to be well into your 20's to remember a villaless top Division. Everyone's stopping to watch the carcrash...
Absolutely. We've spent just 1 season in the 30+ years out of the top division and only 12 in our entire history. Obviously it's going to be big news if a big club gets relegated.
-
latest from The Guardian
"The whole of football is rubbernecking in their direction now. Their manager is not wearing the stress well. The crowd are restless, bordering on mutiny but holding back for now. All the signs are in place of a relegation waiting to happen and this, remember, is no longer the era of the yo-yo club"
Good article actually:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2013/jan/26/randy-lerner-aston-villa-paul-lambert
Any worth in this article is undone by the cheap jibe towards Birmingham. As a regular Observer reader I have been digesting Taylor's articles for some time and have come to the conclusion that he, like many before, has been given a high profile column long before he has earned the experience and education to do it justice.
No way mate; he's one of the best football journalists in the country.
-
latest from The Guardian
"The whole of football is rubbernecking in their direction now. Their manager is not wearing the stress well. The crowd are restless, bordering on mutiny but holding back for now. All the signs are in place of a relegation waiting to happen and this, remember, is no longer the era of the yo-yo club"
Good article actually:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2013/jan/26/randy-lerner-aston-villa-paul-lambert
yep. it will be a big thing if we go down. Not blowing our own trumpet at all but you'd have to be well into your 20's to remember a villaless top Division. Everyone's stopping to watch the carcrash...
I'm 32 and I don't remember a Villa-less top division.
eh? you'd have been 7. me 17
-
I wasn't raised a Villa fan, I only found my way to the fold when I was about 9. The first season I remember was when we nearly won the league under Taylor. Imagine my surprise when I realised that wasn't a typical season.
-
I wasn't raised a Villa fan, I only found my way to the fold when I was about 9. The first season I remember was when we nearly won the league under Taylor. Imagine my surprise when I realised that wasn't a typical season.
It was back then.
Near relegation, followed by a title tilt.
Them were the days.
-
I wasn't raised a Villa fan, I only found my way to the fold when I was about 9. The first season I remember was when we nearly won the league under Taylor. Imagine my surprise when I realised that wasn't a typical season.
heh. fair enough. Can't remember the early 80's golden era myself. It was going shit by the time i took a real interest.
-
My earliest football memory is watching my dad call my granddad from a spanish hotel whilst on holiday to find out how we'd done against Swindon when we were worried to death by Bradford and Middlesboro on the last day of the 87-88 season to get promoted. He'd talked about it for days and that was when expectation and real football supporting began for me. I was 7 years old and remember it clear as tap water.
-
Fair play to Henry Winter in The Telegraph (!), giving the supporters a good bit of praise.
The only innocents in this Villa blame game are the supporters.
What did the fans want when the season started? Positive football, a push for the top 10, a cup run or two to stir some dreams, players to show pride in the shirt and, soon, for serial maladies such as an inability to defend crosses to be addressed by Lambert and his coaches. Villa fans are not asking for titles or Champions League places. They just want their team to be respected.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/aston-villa/9829476/Aston-Villa-fans-showing-their-quality-by-standing-by-Paul-Lambert-during-difficult-times.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/aston-villa/9829476/Aston-Villa-fans-showing-their-quality-by-standing-by-Paul-Lambert-during-difficult-times.html)
-
Fair play to Henry Winter in The Telegraph (!), giving the supporters a good bit of praise.
The only innocents in this Villa blame game are the supporters.
What did the fans want when the season started? Positive football, a push for the top 10, a cup run or two to stir some dreams, players to show pride in the shirt and, soon, for serial maladies such as an inability to defend crosses to be addressed by Lambert and his coaches. Villa fans are not asking for titles or Champions League places. They just want their team to be respected.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/aston-villa/9829476/Aston-Villa-fans-showing-their-quality-by-standing-by-Paul-Lambert-during-difficult-times.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/aston-villa/9829476/Aston-Villa-fans-showing-their-quality-by-standing-by-Paul-Lambert-during-difficult-times.html)
Des,
I know it is not always a popular view on here, but I honestly think Winter gets what we are about as a club.
That is a fair piece from a fan's perspective
-
Not so sure.
"They want Lambert to succeed, partly because he replaced Alex McLeish, who was never embraced because of his Birmingham City connections."
-
Not so sure.
"They want Lambert to succeed, partly because he replaced Alex McLeish, who was never embraced because of his Birmingham City connections."
He performed a lot better than Lambert has, but got 10 times more stick.
-
Fair play to Henry Winter in The Telegraph (!), giving the supporters a good bit of praise.
The only innocents in this Villa blame game are the supporters.
What did the fans want when the season started? Positive football, a push for the top 10, a cup run or two to stir some dreams, players to show pride in the shirt and, soon, for serial maladies such as an inability to defend crosses to be addressed by Lambert and his coaches. Villa fans are not asking for titles or Champions League places. They just want their team to be respected.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/aston-villa/9829476/Aston-Villa-fans-showing-their-quality-by-standing-by-Paul-Lambert-during-difficult-times.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/aston-villa/9829476/Aston-Villa-fans-showing-their-quality-by-standing-by-Paul-Lambert-during-difficult-times.html)
Decent article. My only complaint is he is acting like the Newcastle game is a clash of similar clubs. It isnt. Newcastle have strengthened an already decent team which had been ravaged by injuries but now coming back on line. Newcastle will be just fine.
-
Not so sure.
"They want Lambert to succeed, partly because he replaced Alex McLeish, who was never embraced because of his Birmingham City connections."
He performed a lot better than Lambert has, but got 10 times more stick.
Yes, last season I always dismissed the suggestion that abuse of McLeish was based on his last club. Having seen how differently Lambert has been treated I am not so sure. Doesn't mean TSM wasn't a shit manager.
-
Of all the stuff in that article....and it's back to debating TSM. Again
-
Not so sure.
"They want Lambert to succeed, partly because he replaced Alex McLeish, who was never embraced because of his Birmingham City connections."
He performed a lot better than Lambert has, but got 10 times more stick.
No he did not.
-
We might be failing to do it enough, but at least Lambert is a manager who believes in attacking football.
McLesh may have had a few more points on the board but his negative nonsense was humiliating and not worthy of Aston Villa.
And yes yada yada neither is being shit this season either, we can all see how shit we are, nobody is in denial about that, but I'd rather a manager who at least *tried*
-
We might be failing to do it enough, but at least Lambert is a manager who believes in attacking football.
McLesh may have had a few more points on the board but his negative nonsense was humiliating and not worthy of Aston Villa.
And yes yada yada neither is being shit this season either, we can all see how shit we are, nobody is in denial about that, but I'd rather a manager who at least *tried*
Someone on here coined the phrase "defensive nihilism" last week, which sums him up perfectly.
-
Only if you don't know what nihilism means.
-
Only if you don't know what nihilism means.
That's both refreshingly honest and humble of you.
-
Only if you don't know what nihilism means.
That's both refreshingly honest and humble of you.
Hmmm, 'you' appears to be another word you're struggling with.
-
Kudos to Winter for not going down the "you moaned about that last shit manager so you can't moan about this one" road.
-
Only if you don't know what nihilism means.
Well I've got a kind of Villa nihilism right now. Strangely, before we were this shit I could only watch Villa and had no interest in watching other football. Now I can sit through other games and just enjoy them as a neutral.
-
Only if you don't know what nihilism means.
Well I've got a kind of Villa nihilism right now. Strangely, before we were this shit I could only watch Villa and had no interest in watching other football. Now I can sit through other games and just enjoy them as a neutral.
Don't go into the light, peter
-
Only if you don't know what nihilism means.
Well I've got a kind of Villa nihilism right now. Strangely, before we were this shit I could only watch Villa and had no interest in watching other football. Now I can sit through other games and just enjoy them as a neutral.
Don't go into the light, peter
Damned straight. Its warm and cosy in here.
-
Only if you don't know what nihilism means.
That's both refreshingly honest and humble of you.
Hmmm, 'you' appears to be another word you're struggling with.
Nihilism (pron.: /ˈnaɪ.ɨlɪzəm/ or /ˈniː.ɨlɪzəm/; from the Latin nihil, nothing) is the philosophical doctrine suggesting the negation of one or more putatively meaningful aspects of life.
McLeish's footballing philosophy negated the meaningful aspect of football, namely attacking the opposition goal.
-
Not so sure.
"They want Lambert to succeed, partly because he replaced Alex McLeish, who was never embraced because of his Birmingham City connections."
He performed a lot better than Lambert has, but got 10 times more stick.
Oh right, so Villa fans in fact weren't more patient with Mcleish than they were given credit for?
-
Not so sure.
"They want Lambert to succeed, partly because he replaced Alex McLeish, who was never embraced because of his Birmingham City connections."
He performed a lot better than Lambert has, but got 10 times more stick.
I would say he performed worse than Lambert. At least we have shown glimpses of good football this season. Last season was depressing and dull.
-
Not so sure.
"They want Lambert to succeed, partly because he replaced Alex McLeish, who was never embraced because of his Birmingham City connections."
He performed a lot better than Lambert has, but got 10 times more stick.
Oh right, so Villa fans in fact weren't more patient with Mcleish than they were given credit for?
The Bolton and Spurs home games right at the end of the season were the only home games when he got stick off the majority of the crowd as far as I'm aware. That and Wigan away.
-
Not so sure.
"They want Lambert to succeed, partly because he replaced Alex McLeish, who was never embraced because of his Birmingham City connections."
He performed a lot better than Lambert has, but got 10 times more stick.
Oh right, so Villa fans in fact weren't more patient with Mcleish than they were given credit for?
The Bolton and Spurs home games right at the end of the season were the only home games when he got stick off the majority of the crowd as far as I'm aware. That and Wigan away.
Yep.
For all the talk amongst ourselves that we are quick to turn, both Houllier and McLeish got hardly any stick for a long time.
I think we are pretty patient, but when we do turn, it is usually done en masse.
-
I was just listening to The Press Pass on TalkSport and, do you know what, I think the press boys are starting to get the message that they are not giving the Midlands the coverage that they should. From about 7pm onwards (I think) they had a little debate about Paul Lambert which side tracked on to them discussing Matt Kendrick and then Fleet Street's lack of coverage of the region's football. Worth a quick listen on their Listen Again service, if you get the chance.
-
Listened to that. Even when the topic was set as Villa, they couldn't get onto London quick enough. They don't give a flying fuck about the Midlsnds and admitted as much.
-
I just heard it Billy, and it just proved what we have all thought for years about Fleet Street, that they have always favoured the north west and London teams. To be fair at least they were honest about it, when they said they couldnt care less about Midlands clubs...at the end of the day, its nothing new to us, you can go back as far as 1981 in our title run, we were treated with contempt then.
-
Feck the Press, even the Midlands press isn't too keen on the Villa. Remember '94. It was all talk about Manure's treble, and when we beat them it was 'cos Kancheslkis(sp) was sent of, handling on the line...I remember as a lad going to a football forum at the Grand hotel, with Steve Curry Saint n Greavsie, and Villa wasn't a big topic that night, with a few digs at the Villa, yet plenty of talk about the wolves, baggies and blues, at a time when all them were at least 1 div. lower and facing bankcruptcy ...Feck the press