Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine
Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: pestria on December 09, 2010, 08:20:53 AM
-
Dave
An interesting decision to lock a thread which was asking perfectly reasonable questions about what the General saw as the role of the club's board, and on what issues they were working hard - which were prompted incidently by the General's own comments.
I'll admit I've never been 100% convinced by this board, from the very early days I never knew why they needed to compulsory purchase all the existing shares. But to be fair they made a promising start, I readily acknowledge the good work they did and the funds made available to buy players. And obviously it was much appreciated that the board were trying to listen to fans through the message boards.
But the start was the easy bit. Essentially picking off the low lying fruit. Now times are tougher it appears they don't like criticism and awkward questions.
I'll repeat what I've said previously here. This board is replaying all the mistakes of old (burning cash on moderate players, meddling in buying players, lurching into managerial appointments, poor marketing, not developing overseas scouting networks). Lerner is in danger of becoming an american version of HDE but without the ego and the occasional trophy.
Maybe we should be satisfied with that, but when they're talking the talk and not walking the walk then it's legitimate to ask questions.
AP
-
Each to their own and all that. But what a load of old tripe.
-
I think the General has answered the questions. As for not trusting the board that's your choice, but I don't know what makes you distrust the board.
-
I'll admit I've never been 100% convinced by this board
Who can blame you?
Everything they've done from day 1 has helped to destabilise the club.
The wholesale improvements to Bodymoor Heath to make us one of the country's best training grounds
The £3m yearly investment in the Academy
The seemingly limitless funds given to the previous manager
The open dialogue between fans message boards and a member of the club's board
The never ending work on making the club more customer friendly
The General is never endingly asked about playing matters, something which has been endlessly stated as a no go area at least 366 times, so the thread is temporarily shut to let things simmer down and you have a hissy fit.
-
Dave was right to lock the thread to allow things to calm down.Compared to the thread on VT this one is tame.No wonder the media are having a field day this morning ::)
-
Now times are tougher it appears they don't like criticism and awkward questions.
That is probably why a member of the board spends so much time reading (and replying to) criticism and awkward questions on every Aston Villa message board.
-
very impressed by the generals openness in his last post - its sad that he cant express his views without the press latching onto it , but i think randy needs to be a bit more media friendly or at least communicate with us once a month on the website , the general is an asset but in times of trouble he must expect hard questions to be asked and i respect him for his frankness!
-
We have the best board and the best chairman in the Premiership.
Jumping up and down with the General on the Holte when Der Hammer showed the Noses his big one is probably my best memory of Villa Park in nearly 70 years.
We do not know how lucky we are to have Randy and the General.
-
I couldn't agree more Brian.
-
I think the ONLY fair criticism of the board is the decision to appoint Houllier. Now to me that isn't worthy of criticism, but it is to be at least questioned while results are so poor, but should others do so fair enough.
Beyond that Randy & Co have done nothing but good for the club and we're lucky to have them.
-
I too think we're very luck to have the board we have.
Unfortunately the open dialogue can be a double edged sword when the press have the field day they're having today. It makes it look like there is internal conflict in the club and heaps further pressure on the manager and players for Saturday.
-
I too think we're very luck to have the board we have.
Unfortunately the open dialogue can be a double edged sword when the press have the field day they're having today. It makes it look like there is internal conflict in the club and heaps further pressure on the manager and players for Saturday.
this is my worry. The team are going to feel like they're on a knife edge let's hope it pumps them up not crack them up
-
But the start was the easy bit. Essentially picking off the low lying fruit. Now times are tougher it appears they don't like criticism and awkward questions.
The General answered the criticism, or did you not see his reply through your red mist from Monday night?
What exactly do you expect him to say?
"Yes, you're right, Randy has failed, he'll be selling up as soon as he can, good luck Aston Villa."
-
I can't see that the board have done much wrong since they were put in place four years ago, to be honest.
Martin O'Neill was backed totally in the transfer market, as far as I can tell; his total net spend during his time at Villa Park put us right up there in terms of PL spenders. The quality of certain players he signed? Well, that's not the remit of the board.
Jury's out on Houllier, but the guy hasn't even begin to be able to make any changes yet. I am pleased, however, that the club recognised the need to build a better coaching infrastructure and we now have a promising assistant manager, and rightful promotions for club legends like Cowans, who now has an input in first team matters. Our youth policy is now being rightfully recognised as among the best, if not the best, in the country.
If the main thrust of criticism if not answering every single question on a fans' forum..... ask yourself this: how many club directors are regular and active members of such forums? I'll wager one. We were screaming for an apology from Houllier after his odd post-match comments - and we got one, 24 hours later. Can't ask for a lot more than that.
-
We would be relegated if Randy weren't here.
I love how Randy doesn't shout his mouth off, he stays quiet and uses the general as a way of communicating.
Things will get better and better!
-
I think the most tactical thing I can say to the OP is that disagree 100%.
-
The only thing you could have a go at the board at is for trusting Mon and that's hardly their fault a lot of people trusted him and he was backed more than ANY Villa manager we have ever had.
We have a lot to be happy about in that sense, would we want someone like say..Mike Ashley or The wankers that used to be at the sty or the glaziers?
-
Comparing Randy to Doug? Weren't you around in the 80s?
-
We have the best board and the best chairman in the Premiership.
Yep
-
Its interesting that some fans don't trust the present board, must admit I can't see why, especially when comparing it to other Premiership Boards and of course the fun and games we had under Doug, and under his predecessors.
I can't see how any Board can be perfect for all fans especially in times of strife, but Randy hasn't done too badly considering the leeway he's given his managers. Yes perhaps he could have been quicker in choosing a new man, yes perhaps he could have signed a more suitable choice, but even there its too early to tell, even if so far Houllier doesn't look that promising, but over all he's done OK, I hope he stays.
As to closing the General's thread, must admit I find that a strange decision but obviously one Dave felt justified, the General knew fully what he was getting into to and seems able and willing to continue on the other boards to answer the inane questions along with the odd good one.
Here's hoping no new astounding event occurs, needing the clubs input, although I suppose many have dual memberships and can get their info first hand from the other sites and post updates on here.
-
And Malcolm is as snide as ever. Well done, Malcolm.
First, we approached the general and asked if he thought the thread was losing its original purpose. He agreed.
Second, go back through all the various incarnations of the general's thread. Count the number of times he's said he can't answer questions on playing matters, the number of times we've asked not to have such questions and the amount of times both he and we have subsequently been ignored. Add in the posts that aren't questions but are comments about the board, often insulting ones, and the times the papers pick up on what's been said on there. Now yo know why it's not there for a while.
-
Thank you Dave.
Yet the other sites seem able to cope, as does the General when replying to the same and often more idiotic questions. He's often said that he's here for the good and the bad, he uses such threads as a vehicle to get his/ the clubs view over, and he and they know full well the media read, not just this site, but all the others and quote accordingly.
Perhaps you have set a lead that the others will follow, it could turn out to be a brave decision, I know not.
-
I know not.
You missed out the HING on the end.
-
Dear Mrs Overall. Please visit these other sites exclusively.
Please.
Oh yes, and take the similarly clued up genius pestria with you.
-
I'll admit I've never been 100% convinced by this board
Who can blame you?
Everything they've done from day 1 has helped to destabilise the club.
The wholesale improvements to Bodymoor Heath to make us one of the country's best training grounds
The £3m yearly investment in the Academy
The seemingly limitless funds given to the previous manager
The open dialogue between fans message boards and a member of the club's board
The never ending work on making the club more customer friendly
The General is never endingly asked about playing matters, something which has been endlessly stated as a no go area at least 366 times, so the thread is temporarily shut to let things simmer down and you have a hissy fit.
The issues that some people have with the Board surround the fact that they left the Cult of Martin. I hope this is doesn't lead to some Waco kind of incident come Saturday
-
The issues that some people have with the Board surround the fact that they left the Cult of Martin. I hope this is doesn't lead to some Waco kind of incident come Saturday
You do realise that it's only the people that didn't like him/thought he wasn't up to the job that keep mentioning him, don't you?
-
Re the board. In my opinion, you cant deny some of the great things they have done for the club. The last for years have been the best in my Villa following life. (I was around in the 90s, but not going regularly)
However, some things that have been questionable are very quickly glossed over and forgotten. i think there should be as much talk about the negative things as the positive things, rather than people being shot down for their views when they say something that goes against the 'Best board in the country'
-
The issues that some people have with the Board surround the fact that they left the Cult of Martin. I hope this is doesn't lead to some Waco kind of incident come Saturday
You do realise that it's only the people that didn't like him/thought he wasn't up to the job that keep mentioning him, don't you?
In keeping with the Season .... "oh no it isn't"
-
some things that have been questionable are very quickly glossed over and forgotten. i think there should be as much talk about the negative things as the positive things
You're right, but I just thing there really isn't much at all in that negative column that warrants getting worked up over.
-
So what else has Randy got to do to get your trust?
This takes me back to 'What have the Romans ever done for us?' comedy sketch.
-
I'll admit I've never been 100% convinced by this board
Who can blame you?
Everything they've done from day 1 has helped to destabilise the club.
The wholesale improvements to Bodymoor Heath to make us one of the country's best training grounds
The £3m yearly investment in the Academy
The seemingly limitless funds given to the previous manager
The open dialogue between fans message boards and a member of the club's board
The never ending work on making the club more customer friendly
The General is never endingly asked about playing matters, something which has been endlessly stated as a no go area at least 366 times, so the thread is temporarily shut to let things simmer down and you have a hissy fit.
Spot on Fletch.
Question them on their record.
Hold them to account if/when they mess up.
But there has been far more good than bad and even the things that you could maybe pull them up on (such as giving MON virtually a free hand for so long) were done with the best intentions.
-
I'll admit I've never been 100% convinced by this board
Who can blame you?
Everything they've done from day 1 has helped to destabilise the club.
The wholesale improvements to Bodymoor Heath to make us one of the country's best training grounds
The £3m yearly investment in the Academy
The seemingly limitless funds given to the previous manager
The open dialogue between fans message boards and a member of the club's board
The never ending work on making the club more customer friendly
The General is never endingly asked about playing matters, something which has been endlessly stated as a no go area at least 366 times, so the thread is temporarily shut to let things simmer down and you have a hissy fit.
Spot on Fletch.
Question them on their record.
Hold them to account if/when they mess up.
But there has been far more good than bad and even the things that you could maybe pull them up on (such as giving MON virtually a free hand for so long) were done with the best intentions.
Totally agree. Some of the comments have been a disgrace. The club has made HUGE strides in the last four years or so and despite the recent poor form we're in a far better state than when Randy took over. I'm almost tempted to question whether or not one or two of the posters are actually Villa fans....
-
Re the board. In my opinion, you cant deny some of the great things they have done for the club. The last for years have been the best in my Villa following life. (I was around in the 90s, but not going regularly)
However, some things that have been questionable are very quickly glossed over and forgotten. i think there should be as much talk about the negative things as the positive things, rather than people being shot down for their views when they say something that goes against the 'Best board in the country'
Even if the positive things far outweight the negative ones?
-
Dear Mrs Overall. Please visit these other sites exclusively.
Please.
Oh yes, and take the similarly clued up genius pestria with you.
This would please me immensely.
-
I'd like to know what all of those negative things are. Questioning decisions in hindsight is a piece of piss, but for the most part decisions they've made that are now considered negatives were hardly seen as obvious disasters at the time. There are so many good things that this board has done in the past 4+ years that it beggars belief when you read some of the nonsense being thrown in their direction.
-
To say that we shouldn't question the board and their motives strikes me as a little odd.
I agree that their actions thus far have been encouraging, but I'll always keep in mind the mantra of football club owners, that it's a business, and we're paying customers, and the relationship between the two means that there will always be an image that the business wants to project, and then there will be the reality.
-
Locking it was the correct decision. To much juvenile ranting from (a few) posters who could not respect the opportunity of talking to a Director.
How many other Clubs have this contact? The Guy deserves another medal.
Pestria - you are one angry man. Take it somewhere else.
-
We have the right to ask questions. We do not have the right to demand answers. No other board is as open as ours before criticising them for "glossing over the negatives" maybe we should be grateful they gave us the opportunity.
-
I'd put it like this:
There is the right to question Randy/the board but is there the grounds?
Not really.
-
Since a couple of things happened in my life I have always believed in NEVER looking back as there is nothing you can do about it.......We as a club have to move on and try and make the future as bright/good as possible.
-
Just think we could have a board like newcastle's, then where do you think we would be?
-
I made the original comment on this thread - and I now know how politicians must feel to be mis-quoted.
I said I've never been 100% convinced by the board's capabilities to move the club forward and that they are repeating the mistakes of their predecessors - I gave clear examples of this.
I acknowledged the excellent financial support, but ventured that much of it has been wasted and that the same level of support is not financially viable in the longer term.
I asked what the senior management actually do when there's little evidence of sustained development. All I hear in response is 'they're the best board in the league' - because they communicate on here and Lerner doesn't say much.
To summarise my position - they made a good start and made substantial funds available. Times are now tougher and I'm not sure whether they're well equipped to deal with them. Of course many think differently and time will tell who's right.
-
I think the board has to take some share of the blame over the events of the summer. It should have been made clear to MON at the start of the summer, what funds were/werent available etc and if he wasnt happy they should have shown him the door.
If that didnt happen, it should have. If it did something must have happened in the interim for MON to walk. What that was is anybody's guess, but the most likely scenario to me is that MON was told no more transfers, so he walked.
Why that didnt happen at the end of May is a mystery to me.
Before this summer, they acted flawlessly. The next 2 windows will tell us more about how committed Randy is....maybe we should let GH go on a spending spree, then get rid of him....Liverpool won the CL doing that ;)
-
Pestria I suspect you are a knuckledragger on the wind up.
If you are a Villa fan, which I doubt, you should attempt not to twist the facts to fit your prejudices.
The example which springs immediately from your most recent post is your claim that the board does not have the capabilities to move the club forward. How can a statement like that be taken seriously? It implies that things are as bad as they were in the time of Doug Ellis and David O'Leary when the England team refused to use our training facilities.
-
Locking it was the correct decision. To much juvenile ranting from (a few) posters who could not respect the opportunity of talking to a Director.
I agree entirely. It's almost as if it gives some poster's a bit of power, being able to ask a director of a football club questions. I'm surprised the thread is not locked more often to be honest.
-
I think the board has to take some share of the blame over the events of the summer. It should have been made clear to MON at the start of the summer, what funds were/werent available etc and if he wasnt happy they should have shown him the door.
If that didnt happen, it should have. If it did something must have happened in the interim for MON to walk. What that was is anybody's guess, but the most likely scenario to me is that MON was told no more transfers, so he walked.
Why that didnt happen at the end of May is a mystery to me.
Before this summer, they acted flawlessly. The next 2 windows will tell us more about how committed Randy is....maybe we should let GH go on a spending spree, then get rid of him....Liverpool won the CL doing that ;)
The explanation I heard (I forget exactly where, could have been here) is that MON was made fully aware of the financial situation at the end of March and again in May.
He reasoned that (a) he could probably shift Curtis Davies, Luke Young, NRC and co off the wage bill, but that (b) If he couldn't, RL would probably relent.
As we know, Shorey apart, he didn't shift most of those off the wage bill and RL wasn't prepared to bloat it further with the arrival of McGeady and Keane with seemingly no movement in the other direction.
-
My only gripe with the board in the summer was the amount of time they took replacing O'Neill and in particular the interviewing process. You don't interview manager's for a job like this. It's not a job in an office. You make a short-list of people you'd like and approach them, their clubs etc.
Other than that, i've not got too many complaints with what the board have done since they've been here, they get my respect and i'm delighted they're here.
-
Pestria I suspect you are a knuckledragger on the wind up.
If you are a Villa fan, which I doubt, you should attempt not to twist the facts to fit your prejudices.
The example which springs immediately from your most recent post is your claim that the board does not have the capabilities to move the club forward. How can a statement like that be taken seriously? It implies that things are as bad as they were in the time of Doug Ellis and David O'Leary when the England team refused to use our training facilities.
I'm a Villa fan of 40+ years standing having had my first season ticket in the late '60s just prior to the drop to div 3. I'm not at all sure of what facts I'm supposed to be twisting. I'm merely saying what I see and how it compares the ups and downs I've witnessed in years gone by.
I am not comparing the current situation to the fag end of HDE's reign. The comparison I've been drawn to is that at the end of the Gregory era. At that time the we'd finished 6th ish on a number of occassions on the back of the NTL windfall. This time around we've done the same on with the Lerner windfall.
At that time the club failed to market itself effectively, failed to develop overseas scouting networks, failed to appoint an effective chief executive, etc - ie exactly the same situation as now.
I suppose the big difference is that there's always the get-out of using more of Lerner's personal fortune. However, that misses the point I'm trying to make. The issue for me is that on the evidence we've seen so far I doubt the ability of the senior management team to leverage the financial resources at their disposal and translate them into sustained development.
Anyhow I can see that not sticking to the party line on this one seems to be upsetting certain members here. In speaking out I've been accused of being a knuckledragger and angry. In reality I'm the opposite - a passionate Villa fan who's disappointed at what appears to have been another wasted opportunity.
....... btw if you want to extend the footballing comparison you could even directly compare the appointments of Taylor and Houlier. Both dropped right in it by previous managers, both given virtually no time to prepare, both 'football men' who build and develop squads in their style. Both had strong records in being very succesful relative to the resources at their disposal. Let's hope the comparisons end there and Houlier doesn't end up getting the same treatment at Sir Graham.
-
I'm not sure of the relevance of the Generals thread to be honest, any informaton he is able to give can be obtained either from the club or pm him. When we are in strife no matter how temperary a member of the board can expect to get playing matters thrown at him,he's a direct link to the club,not knocking anyone here just believe if you come on a forum you shouldn't pick which questions you refuse to reply to. As a board member it puts the general in a very difficult position that's why he probaly shouldn't have his own thread.
-
Pestria I suspect you are a knuckledragger on the wind up.
If you are a Villa fan, which I doubt, you should attempt not to twist the facts to fit your prejudices.
The example which springs immediately from your most recent post is your claim that the board does not have the capabilities to move the club forward. How can a statement like that be taken seriously? It implies that things are as bad as they were in the time of Doug Ellis and David O'Leary when the England team refused to use our training facilities.
I'm a Villa fan of 40+ years standing having had my first season ticket in the late '60s just prior to the drop to div 3. I'm not at all sure of what facts I'm supposed to be twisting. I'm merely saying what I see and how it compares the ups and downs I've witnessed in years gone by.
I am not comparing the current situation to the fag end of HDE's reign. The comparison I've been drawn to is that at the end of the Gregory era. At that time the we'd finished 6th ish on a number of occassions on the back of the NTL windfall. This time around we've done the same on with the Lerner windfall.
At that time the club failed to market itself effectively, failed to develop overseas scouting networks, failed to appoint an effective chief executive, etc - ie exactly the same situation as now.
I suppose the big difference is that there's always the get-out of using more of Lerner's personal fortune. However, that misses the point I'm trying to make. The issue for me is that on the evidence we've seen so far I doubt the ability of the senior management team to leverage the financial resources at their disposal and translate them into sustained development.
Anyhow I can see that not sticking to the party line on this one seems to be upsetting certain members here. In speaking out I've been accused of being a knuckledragger and angry. In reality I'm the opposite - a passionate Villa fan who's disappointed at what appears to have been another wasted opportunity.
....... btw if you want to extend the footballing comparison you could even directly compare the appointments of Taylor and Houlier. Both dropped right in it by previous managers, both given virtually no time to prepare, both 'football men' who build and develop squads in their style. Both had strong records in being very succesful relative to the resources at their disposal. Let's hope the comparisons end there and Houlier doesn't end up getting the same treatment at Sir Graham.
I'm not sure if you're right on all of this, but its an intelligent post and worthy of discussion, rather than throwing accusation's about being a blue nose.
-
Bloody typical, the night i was going to ask the general a question it gets locked !
Ive heard today from someone in the know at the sty that the 2 clubs have come to an agreement to give us only 500 tickets for next months game... Wondered if that was true.
-
If that is true, which I doubt it is for one second, there goes the safety in numbers theory.
-
Pestria I suspect you are a knuckledragger on the wind up.
If you are a Villa fan, which I doubt, you should attempt not to twist the facts to fit your prejudices.
The example which springs immediately from your most recent post is your claim that the board does not have the capabilities to move the club forward. How can a statement like that be taken seriously? It implies that things are as bad as they were in the time of Doug Ellis and David O'Leary when the England team refused to use our training facilities.
I'm a Villa fan of 40+ years standing having had my first season ticket in the late '60s just prior to the drop to div 3. I'm not at all sure of what facts I'm supposed to be twisting. I'm merely saying what I see and how it compares the ups and downs I've witnessed in years gone by.
I am not comparing the current situation to the fag end of HDE's reign. The comparison I've been drawn to is that at the end of the Gregory era. At that time the we'd finished 6th ish on a number of occassions on the back of the NTL windfall. This time around we've done the same on with the Lerner windfall.
At that time the club failed to market itself effectively, failed to develop overseas scouting networks, failed to appoint an effective chief executive, etc - ie exactly the same situation as now.
I suppose the big difference is that there's always the get-out of using more of Lerner's personal fortune. However, that misses the point I'm trying to make. The issue for me is that on the evidence we've seen so far I doubt the ability of the senior management team to leverage the financial resources at their disposal and translate them into sustained development.
Anyhow I can see that not sticking to the party line on this one seems to be upsetting certain members here. In speaking out I've been accused of being a knuckledragger and angry. In reality I'm the opposite - a passionate Villa fan who's disappointed at what appears to have been another wasted opportunity.
....... btw if you want to extend the footballing comparison you could even directly compare the appointments of Taylor and Houlier. Both dropped right in it by previous managers, both given virtually no time to prepare, both 'football men' who build and develop squads in their style. Both had strong records in being very succesful relative to the resources at their disposal. Let's hope the comparisons end there and Houlier doesn't end up getting the same treatment at Sir Graham.
Pestria,
I take it therefore that you are not the Pestria that was posting on the Small Heath Alliance blog earlier in the year?
-
If that is true, which I doubt it is for one second, there goes the safety in numbers theory.
Yeah that was my first thoughts too. Obviously don't take it as gospel, as these things are normally chinese whispers, BUT I don't have any reason to doubt this "source". Heres hoping i'm wrong.
-
Pestria I suspect you are a knuckledragger on the wind up.
If you are a Villa fan, which I doubt, you should attempt not to twist the facts to fit your prejudices.
The example which springs immediately from your most recent post is your claim that the board does not have the capabilities to move the club forward. How can a statement like that be taken seriously? It implies that things are as bad as they were in the time of Doug Ellis and David O'Leary when the England team refused to use our training facilities.
From the site rules:
Please do not accuse people of being, for example, "a bluenose" or "a manyoo fan" because you don't like or agree with what they are saying.
-
I suspect Brian is not accusing him of being a Bluenose because he doesnt like what he's saying but rather that he thinks he actually is a bluenose.
-
Anyhow I can see that not sticking to the party line on this one seems to be upsetting certain members here.
God knows how anyone thinks there can be a party line on here on anything.
Have you missed the thousands of threads of petty squabbling?
-
I rang the H&V party line once.
Once!
A fucking nonsense.
-
Jumping up and down with the General on the Holte when Der Hammer showed the Noses his big one is probably my best memory of Villa Park in nearly 70 years.
Que?
-
Seeing as this is a thread we can finally speak freely on I agree with Pestria in his response to the replies he has got to his post.
He does not sound to me as if he is saying anything provocative or even in my view, that remarkable. The replies mainly make the mistakes of selectively interpreting what he has said and joining in the stoning of the infidel.
I don't necessarily agree with the totality of his post but find no reason to round on him for voicing his concerns and implying betrayal, lies and deceit in his comments.
Before I am subject to the same, I would ask, please can we all just stop beating each other up? I understand why people would feel a strong need to defend the board and the club. Like me, many of us have given years to it before the Preeemiership was invented by Doug, Edwards and Bates
Mods, as usual, I am probably being drawn in to an argument I do not have the full facts about, but I am only going on what is actually posted above-not on the last years of semi-deleted history.
-
when you have a direct line from a board member to fan forums, its inevitable that every now and again there will be a few problems.
especially as he seems to be a straight talking man
i never post on the generals thread, but i am glad we can read his thoughts, even if they are tempered.
i am happy he posts on Villa sites, gives us that little bit of inside information that other clubs fans dont get,
we would be worse off without his input in my view
-
Re the board. In my opinion, you cant deny some of the great things they have done for the club. The last for years have been the best in my Villa following life. (I was around in the 90s, but not going regularly)
However, some things that have been questionable are very quickly glossed over and forgotten. i think there should be as much talk about the negative things as the positive things, rather than people being shot down for their views when they say something that goes against the 'Best board in the country'
I'd like to second that. They have done an awful lot of good, but some things have gone wrong - they must take some responsibility for the manner of MON's departure - they knew the man and therefore how best to manage him. They stumped up the money and salaries for the current players, and appear to now be repeating a mantra about making us live within our business structures, however it doesn't appear that our revenue streams have increased dramatically enough to allow us to grow effectively within the current business model to become the top 4 club we want to be. We still couldn't sell out against Arsenal this season, and yet there are discussions about expanding the stadium to increase capacity.
They've done a lot of good, but at least allow some criticism to come their way, they're not the messiah!
-
Seeing as this is a thread we can finally speak freely on I agree with Pestria in his response to the replies he has got to his post.
He does not sound to me as if he is saying anything provocative or even in my view, that remarkable. The replies mainly make the mistakes of selectively interpreting what he has said and joining in the stoning of the infidel.
I don't necessarily agree with the totality of his post but find no reason to round on him for voicing his concerns and implying betrayal, lies and deceit in his comments.
Before I am subject to the same, I would ask, please can we all just stop beating each other up? I understand why people would feel a strong need to defend the board and the club. Like me, many of us have given years to it before the Preeemiership was invented by Doug, Edwards and Bates
Mods, as usual, I am probably being drawn in to an argument I do not have the full facts about, but I am only going on what is actually posted above-not on the last years of semi-deleted history.
I agree. Well done to Pestria for at least raising a subject that he must have known he would get a lot of flack back on. And he is expressing a view which, whilst many won't agree, merits discussion. I posted on the General's thread the other night in the heat of the moment and now wish I hadn't for a lot of the very good reasons that others have elicited here. That tends to be my nature as I can fly off the handle and I do my best to rein it in most of the time. Half the time these days, I think I am probably venting my spleen more at the state of football in general rather than specifically about the Villa!
-
A Director of the club taking the time to post on Villa message-boards like the General does is something other clubs would dream of.
I think we must not start ( as fans ) to take his postings for granted.
Pity he has to temper his posts and be careful with his words - nonetheless it's still fantastic to be taken seriously by a member of the Board in this way.
-
randy has been brilliant from the off. Its difficult to say 'the board' have as well as we don't know who they are and what they have done. But, up until this summer everything was fine.
But, whatever happened with MON is definitely not just one way and we don't know what went on and the reasons he's left. Whilst O'Neill has kept his own counsel the General came on here to appeal to the fans need for someone to blame, used infallmatory anti-MON language which was jumped on by supporters and the press alike. Although I wasn't unhappy to see him go I don't think the board have dealt with teh situation since then at all well.
First of all they tried to give Kevin McDonald all the time in the woprld to get things right even when after a game or two we could all see that it wasn't going to work. They decided that they would not appoint a manager until after transfer deadline day because they wanted to gamble on us not being this bad on the pitch. Forget all about the 'we had to wait to get the right man' nonsense because it is that. Losing 6-0 at Newcastle should have gotten the alarm beels clanging for all they're worth but didn't. It is no surprise that Houllier was appointed on Sept 2 ( I think - not withstanding actual start dates) so fans couldn't expect signings.
Under the previous manager there would have been contact with certain players/agents. Even without MON being there we could have looked to follow that through if the player was deemed good enough. But any signings have been conveniently forgotten and overlooked.
I am still prepared to give Houllier time, but the time is looking very very poor at the moment and we are conceding left right and centre. We have the look of a relegation bound team with the defence thatw e have at the moment. It also appears that the manager, and the coaching staff cannot do anything to drastically change the situation. Is this what the board were gambling with? Our season? If things do not change soon - and the January sales are invariably hit and miss, then you can't just blame O'Neill walking 5 days befopre the season as the reason alone that we are this poor on the pitch. You have to look at the current management, and te only constant throughout this season, which have been the board.
They gambled and at the moment it hasn't paid off. It could get worse - probably won't - but they should be held more to account for poor decision making.
-
Can't see how the board could have handled it any differently personally. Basically they had to rip up all their plans at 5 days notice and start again. I'm sure Mcdonald was given a go in the hope that he would provide some continuation but it didn't work out. As for going for the transfer targets that MON had earmarked, its a brave/stupid chairman who stumps up the clubs money on players the new manager may not rate. End of the day, MON strung the club along for a good 6 months before walking out, all the time keeping his options open in the hope the bindippers would take him on. If they made one error it was trusting him for so long and not kicking him to the curb earlier but then they weren't alone in that making that mistake.
-
Locking it was the correct decision. To much juvenile ranting from (a few) posters who could not respect the opportunity of talking to a Director.
I agree entirely. It's almost as if it gives some poster's a bit of power, being able to ask a director of a football club questions. I'm surprised the thread is not locked more often to be honest.
therefore could you possibly explain to me how on the most 'open' site of all, the General's thread is closed yet on other less open supposedly sites, are keeping theirs running?
I have to admit, I have a long history with many of the site owners but in fairness to them they are the least 'controlled' by the Villa hierarchy and this site remains the most impartial concerning Villa matters. If anything that's why I queried the veracity of the decision. Again I say though it was a brave one and may in the long term prove to be exactly the right one.
-
If they made one error it was trusting him for so long and not kicking him to the curb earlier but then they weren't alone in that making that mistake.
Nice to see you again :)
Was it a mistake though? There are plenty of fans, many on here in fact, who still try to shift the blame away from Mon, for the way he left.
Even above some still apportion some unknown blame to the Board.
Had Randy sacked him and them appointed say Houllier, imagine the flack they'd be having here and most everywhere else now. Mon would be turned from the Messiah to the Martyr of Aston :)
-
They decided that they would not appoint a manager until after transfer deadline day because they wanted to gamble on us not being this bad on the pitch. Forget all about the 'we had to wait to get the right man' nonsense because it is that.
Which is exactly why they've become reluctant to talk, when someone with no evidence at all calls them liars.
-
If they made one error it was trusting him for so long and not kicking him to the curb earlier but then they weren't alone in that making that mistake.
Nice to see you again :)
Was it a mistake though? There are plenty of fans, many on here in fact, who still try to shift the blame away from Mon, for the way he left.
Even above some still apportion some unknown blame to the Board.
Had Randy sacked him and them appointed say Houllier, imagine the flack they'd be having here and most everywhere else now. Mon would be turned from the Messiah to the Martyr of Aston :)
You keep telling each other how right you were and we'll be fine.
2009/2010
Aston Villa 16 8 5 3 26 14 +12 29
2010/2011
Aston Villa 16 4 5 7 17 27 -10 17
-
A Director of the club taking the time to post on Villa message-boards like the General does is something other clubs would dream of.
I think we must not start ( as fans ) to take his postings for granted.
Pity he has to temper his posts and be careful with his words - nonetheless it's still fantastic to be taken seriously by a member of the Board in this way.
On thw whole it is an excellent method of communicating with the fans but some will also see it as a method of manipulating / spinning the fans and getting the news/opinions they want to get out
-
You could argue that this is the first time in 4 years that the club have had to look after the football side and have not done a good job thus far.
-
If they made one error it was trusting him for so long and not kicking him to the curb earlier but then they weren't alone in that making that mistake.
Nice to see you again :)
Was it a mistake though? There are plenty of fans, many on here in fact, who still try to shift the blame away from Mon, for the way he left.
Even above some still apportion some unknown blame to the Board.
Had Randy sacked him and them appointed say Houllier, imagine the flack they'd be having here and most everywhere else now. Mon would be turned from the Messiah to the Martyr of Aston :)
You keep telling each other how right you were and we'll be fine.
2009/2010
Aston Villa 16 8 5 3 26 14 +12 29
2010/2011
Aston Villa 16 4 5 7 17 27 -10 17
Does anyone wish to state the obvious at this point?
-
If they made one error it was trusting him for so long and not kicking him to the curb earlier but then they weren't alone in that making that mistake.
Nice to see you again :)
Was it a mistake though? There are plenty of fans, many on here in fact, who still try to shift the blame away from Mon, for the way he left.
Even above some still apportion some unknown blame to the Board.
Had Randy sacked him and them appointed say Houllier, imagine the flack they'd be having here and most everywhere else now. Mon would be turned from the Messiah to the Martyr of Aston :)
well i don't think the sun shines out of Lerner's behind, but there's no doubt as far as chairman go he's a manager's dream compared to the likes of the newcastle clown, Ambramovich etc.,.. Lerner isn't stupid and if was him wanting to part ways with the manager or even a joint decision he'd choose a better time to do it than the eve of the season. MON threw a hissy fit basically and fucked us over intending to do maximum damage in the process. I think a lot of clubs have looked at the way MON behaved and no doubt whispers have reached them about what went on which is why a manager who got consistant top6 finishes can't seem to get a job
-
They decided that they would not appoint a manager until after transfer deadline day because they wanted to gamble on us not being this bad on the pitch. Forget all about the 'we had to wait to get the right man' nonsense because it is that.
Which is exactly why they've become reluctant to talk, when someone with no evidence at all calls them liars.
Where exactly can you back up your claim that I called them liars? If not then I'd assume you'd happily retract the post inferring that I have done so.
It was in their own interests to leave the manager appointment until after the transfer deadline day had passed. They even commented that they wouldn't appoint anyone until after the transfer deadline day had passed. Why? Because only after August 31st would they know the man they wanted in? Is Septmeber the month when they can only start seeing things clearly? Of course not. The purposely picked a date after the window had shut.
We know little about why the previous manager went but assume it was due to O'Neill not shifting players of the wage bill, and wanting to spend the Milner money but the board decreeing otherwise. Fair enough. If they chose to say no then they must have been aware from the moment he walked that they were just hoping to get lucky with Kev Mac. After 6-0 at Newcastle and resulting poor performances they must have known they were then gambling with our start to the season.
If players were being looked at under O'Neill and they must have been at an advanced stage seeing when he left, then the board must have pulled the rug from under the feet of any further negotiations. Further gambling with our season.
They weren't to know we'd get injuries, but anyone could have predicted us going backwards with no money being spent on players. They chose to take us down this route post-MON and know we are paying for it. For that they should hold their hands up. Also, why is MON's departure still shrouded in secrecy? You usually know more or less why a manager's gone but this time we are still completely in the dark.
-
As supporters what do we hope for more than anything, not a 60.000 stadium, not a great reserve side , not great catering facilites, what we want most is a first team to be proud of, to look forward to watching, players to hero worship. When the General says he cannot talk about football matters all that's left is the perifary because when it comes down to it, all that really matters is what happens on the pitch. Look at our main topics of discussion, possible transfers, injuries, players form, who should we sell who should we buy, because it all leads to what happens on the pitch. Any thread that precludes any discussion of these matters is a nonsense.
-
Where exactly can you back up your claim that I called them liars? If not then I'd assume you'd happily retract the post inferring that I have done so.
They decided that they would not appoint a manager until after transfer deadline day because they wanted to gamble on us not being this bad on the pitch. Forget all about the 'we had to wait to get the right man' nonsense because it is that.
Which is saying you don't believe their story. Which is calling them liars.
Do you know why Brian Little left? John Gregory? The full story behind O'Leary? We don't even know the real reason why Ron Saunders resigned and that's almost thirty years ago so stop making out that O'Neill walking out is in some way unique.
-
If they made one error it was trusting him for so long and not kicking him to the curb earlier but then they weren't alone in that making that mistake.
Nice to see you again :)
Was it a mistake though? There are plenty of fans, many on here in fact, who still try to shift the blame away from Mon, for the way he left.
Even above some still apportion some unknown blame to the Board.
Had Randy sacked him and them appointed say Houllier, imagine the flack they'd be having here and most everywhere else now. Mon would be turned from the Messiah to the Martyr of Aston :)
I think a lot of clubs have looked at the way MON behaved and no doubt whispers have reached them about what went on which is why a manager who got consistant top6 finishes can't seem to get a job
There's not been that many jobs available Greg, Chris Houghton is the first Premiership manager to be sacked this season.
-
As supporters what do we hope for more than anything, not a 60.000 stadium, not a great reserve side , not great catering facilites, what we want most is a first team to be proud of, to look forward to watching, players to hero worship. When the General says he cannot talk about football matters all that's left is the perifary because when it comes down to it, all that really matters is what happens on the pitch. Look at our main topics of discussion, possible transfers, injuries, players form, who should we sell who should we buy, because it all leads to what happens on the pitch. Any thread that precludes any discussion of these matters is a nonsense.
Aye. Always said it would end in tears. you can't have a board member come on to answer questions and expect people to stick to queries about the price of the pies. Not fair on him and it becomes impossible when things aren't going well
-
If they made one error it was trusting him for so long and not kicking him to the curb earlier but then they weren't alone in that making that mistake.
Nice to see you again :)
Was it a mistake though? There are plenty of fans, many on here in fact, who still try to shift the blame away from Mon, for the way he left.
Even above some still apportion some unknown blame to the Board.
Had Randy sacked him and them appointed say Houllier, imagine the flack they'd be having here and most everywhere else now. Mon would be turned from the Messiah to the Martyr of Aston :)
I think a lot of clubs have looked at the way MON behaved and no doubt whispers have reached them about what went on which is why a manager who got consistant top6 finishes can't seem to get a job
There's not been that many jobs available Greg, Chris Houghton is the first Premiership manager to be sacked this season.
maybe but there's enough desperate chairman around who would look at his record on paper and be tempted. If you discount the top clubs then MON is easily the best qualifed candidate for clubs 6th and lower. and yet the only clubs he's been linked to are north of the border and championship clubs. Maybe he's waiting for a big club to become available but i think he's gonna be disappointed if he thinks they'll come calling
-
Where exactly can you back up your claim that I called them liars? If not then I'd assume you'd happily retract the post inferring that I have done so.
They decided that they would not appoint a manager until after transfer deadline day because they wanted to gamble on us not being this bad on the pitch. Forget all about the 'we had to wait to get the right man' nonsense because it is that.
Which is saying you don't believe their story. Which is calling them liars.
Do you know why Brian Little left? John Gregory? The full story behind O'Leary? We don't even know the real reason why Ron Saunders resigned and that's almost thirty years ago so stop making out that O'Neill walking out is in some way unique.
No, its not calling them liars at all. I'm saying that they are using the dates conveniently to fit the ends of not spending money. I haven't said that they are trying to deceive us just that they have set the date for a reason. Huge difference.
As for all managers, no I don't know the full reasons why any of the managers left but reasons have been offered on both sides as to why they departed. Whether true or not the club and the fans have an idea as to why the manager's you said left at the time they did. Maybe not there and then but reasons were offered. With O'Neill we've had mudslinging from the General but not much more. We have absolutely no idea why MOn walked when he did and who was to blame.
-
Its been a while since I read much of the thread anyway, in the beginning it was interesting and useful, but the way it has descended, particularly since the Annual March Slump of 2010, into a ridiculous amount of waffle, ill-informed observations, name-calling and second-guessing about the motives and meanings behind the Board's actions and comments, its been one of the most pointless threads on this site. Release the General from his limbo. Close it, and keep it closed. (Just my opinion, like).
-
No, its not calling them liars at all. I'm saying that they are using the dates conveniently to fit the ends of not spending money. I haven't said that they are trying to deceive us just that they have set the date for a reason. Huge difference.
As for all managers, no I don't know the full reasons why any of the managers left but reasons have been offered on both sides as to why they departed. Whether true or not the club and the fans have an idea as to why the manager's you said left at the time they did. Maybe not there and then but reasons were offered. With O'Neill we've had mudslinging from the General but not much more. We have absolutely no idea why MOn walked when he did and who was to blame.
"They decided that they would not appoint a manager until after transfer deadline day because they wanted to gamble on us not being this bad on the pitch. Forget all about the 'we had to wait to get the right man' nonsense because it is that."
You cannot get more cast-iron evidence of an accusation of lying.
Maybe O'Neill doesn't want to say anything because there's nothing for him to say. He walked out.
-
But we don't know the reasons behind him walking out. What was the trigger?
As for the lying point, I'd suggest that they are shaping the facts to reflect their truth. I have never said they are lying nor would I.
-
he was being courted by Dalglish all last spring and was using that to put pressure on the board to give him more money. When he lost the liverpool gig the board held firm and having no more cards to play he flounced off. Simple.
-
Welcome back GN...looks like treatment worked just remember to keep taking the tablets and the new cuddly form will continue...trust me. ;)
Joking apart I find myself in agreement with you....not a regular occurrence I must say! :o
-
But we don't know the reasons behind him walking out. What was the trigger?
As for the lying point, I'd suggest that they are shaping the facts to reflect their truth. I have never said they are lying nor would I.
You do know the reasons as they have been stated many times. You just prefer not to believe them and to call it mudslinging. Whatever floats your boat...
-
But we don't know the reasons behind him walking out. What was the trigger?
As for the lying point, I'd suggest that they are shaping the facts to reflect their truth. I have never said they are lying nor would I.
You do know the reasons as they have been stated many times. You just prefer not to believe them and to call it mudslinging. Whatever floats your boat...
Has it? The only thing that has been said is that, and I cannot remember the actual quote, that MON thought he was bigger than the club, or that he hadn't the best interests of the club in his work.
If you want my boat to be flaoted even more, or even just sink it, then tell me went on. Why did MON go, and why did he do it when he did.
-
For what it's worth, i'm accusing them of lying about that :p
-
I would like to comment to all those who say Lerner shouldn't waste money on players, or make sure "this and that", and should be more at Villa doing this and that.
It is perfectly acceptable for the chairman to delegate responsibilities to his Directors. If he was interfering with day to day things, he would undermine his employees, and would not get top people to work for him. The same goes with the Manager. RL can only support him in his requests for players - not tell him which ones to buy. He can set constraints, goals etc.. but not micromanagement - as it would not work with top managers.
just my opinion
-
But we don't know the reasons behind him walking out. What was the trigger?
As for the lying point, I'd suggest that they are shaping the facts to reflect their truth. I have never said they are lying nor would I.
You do know the reasons as they have been stated many times. You just prefer not to believe them and to call it mudslinging. Whatever floats your boat...
Has it? The only thing that has been said is that, and I cannot remember the actual quote, that MON thought he was bigger than the club, or that he hadn't the best interests of the club in his work.
If you want my boat to be flaoted even more, or even just sink it, then tell me went on. Why did MON go, and why did he do it when he did.
If I understood it correctly, the issue was that the board decided the wage bill was too high and the manager didn't think he could improve the squad whilst reducing the wage bill, so he left.
-
MON had threatened to leave Celtic on a few occasions unless he was given more transfer money.
-
But we don't know the reasons behind him walking out. What was the trigger?
As for the lying point, I'd suggest that they are shaping the facts to reflect their truth. I have never said they are lying nor would I.
You do know the reasons as they have been stated many times. You just prefer not to believe them and to call it mudslinging. Whatever floats your boat...
Has it? The only thing that has been said is that, and I cannot remember the actual quote, that MON thought he was bigger than the club, or that he hadn't the best interests of the club in his work.
If you want my boat to be flaoted even more, or even just sink it, then tell me went on. Why did MON go, and why did he do it when he did.
If I understood it correctly, the issue was that the board decided the wage bill was too high and the manager didn't think he could improve the squad whilst reducing the wage bill, so he left.
As for your last sentence, has that been confirmed or is that what we have been left to believe from what the General posted, what others have posted, and what we have seen between the lines?
-
If I understood it correctly, the issue was that the board decided the wage bill was too high and the manager didn't think he could improve the squad whilst reducing the wage bill, so he left.
If that was the case, we are still in the same situation then, as the wage bill must be still roughly the same, so what have the Board done to address the problem six months later?
-
Edit:quote fail.
But we don't know the reasons behind him walking out. What was the trigger?
As for the lying point, I'd suggest that they are shaping the facts to reflect their truth. I have never said they are lying nor would I.
You do know the reasons as they have been stated many times. You just prefer not to believe them and to call it mudslinging. Whatever floats your boat...
Has it? The only thing that has been said is that, and I cannot remember the actual quote, that MON thought he was bigger than the club, or that he hadn't the best interests of the club in his work.
If you want my boat to be flaoted even more, or even just sink it, then tell me went on. Why did MON go, and why did he do it when he did.
If I understood it correctly, the issue was that the board decided the wage bill was too high and the manager didn't think he could improve the squad whilst reducing the wage bill, so he left.
As for your last sentence, has that been confirmed or is that what we have been left to believe from what the General posted, what others have posted, and what we have seen between the lines?
It's a bit from column A and a bit from column B. The official statement from Randy said something about focusing on resolving issues between Milner and Man City and aiming to be as successful as we can, given our size and resources. I didn't like it.
-
But we don't know the reasons behind him walking out. What was the trigger?
As for the lying point, I'd suggest that they are shaping the facts to reflect their truth. I have never said they are lying nor would I.
You do know the reasons as they have been stated many times. You just prefer not to believe them and to call it mudslinging. Whatever floats your boat...
What he said
-
MON had threatened to leave Celtic on a few occasions unless he was given more transfer money.
Did he not do the same at Leicester too ?
-
MON had threatened to leave Celtic on a few occasions unless he was given more transfer money.
Did he not do the same at Leicester too ?
At Leicester the problem was more the fact that the business operations (ie selling shirts) was becoming more important than the football.
-
If I understood it correctly, the issue was that the board decided the wage bill was too high and the manager didn't think he could improve the squad whilst reducing the wage bill, so he left.
If that was the case, we are still in the same situation then, as the wage bill must be still roughly the same, so what have the Board done to address the problem six months later?
Has that to do with the transfer window being closed and most of those sat doing nothing, which was the complaint, have played, or played and been injured?
-
MON had threatened to leave Celtic on a few occasions unless he was given more transfer money.
Did he not do the same at Leicester too ?
At Leicester the problem was more the fact that the business operations (ie selling shirts) was becoming more important than the football.
But didn't he threaten to leave several times before he finally did ?
-
MON had threatened to leave Celtic on a few occasions unless he was given more transfer money.
Did he not do the same at Leicester too ?
At Leicester the problem was more the fact that the business operations (ie selling shirts) was becoming more important than the football.
Don't know about Leicester but the Celtic threats of walking out come from Archie McPherson's brilliant book 'Flower of Scotland'
He kept dropping veiled hints to the media that he was ready to walk at any time.
Like at our club, he was pretty much given free rein at Celtic Park.
-
Amongst all the who did what and why there are a few indisputable facts. MON had employed players for Aston Villa that he never used, it was costing an enormous amount of money to have them sit idle, no business can sustain that and be successful.
Whatever the reason for Martin leaving he would have known it was the worst possible time for the club.
If i were the chairman of a soccer club looking for a new manager i would look at what he did to Villa and look elsewhere.
Randy Lerner has been the best owner/chairman we've ever had.
-
Amongst all the who did what and why there are a few indisputable facts. MON had employed players for Aston Villa that he never used, it was costing an enormous amount of money to have them sit idle, no business can sustain that and be successful.
Whatever the reason for Martin leaving he would have known it was the worst possible time for the club.
If i were the chairman of a soccer club looking for a new manager i would look at what he did to Villa and look elsewhere.
Randy Lerner has been the best owner/chairman we've ever had.
OK so now Houllier is here, the players have not sat idle, but the wage bill is the same (give or take), but are we actually worse off now, lower attendances, more first team players to pay (Clark, Bannan, Albrighton, Hogg all on new contracts), reduced shirt sales, looking less and less like a CL team. So it will be interesting to see what the board decide next, financially nothing has changed, and i agree no business can sustain losses, so will we have to sell to buy first, and if we do does that mean MON was right?
-
Amongst all the who did what and why there are a few indisputable facts. MON had employed players for Aston Villa that he never used, it was costing an enormous amount of money to have them sit idle, no business can sustain that and be successful.
Whatever the reason for Martin leaving he would have known it was the worst possible time for the club.
If i were the chairman of a soccer club looking for a new manager i would look at what he did to Villa and look elsewhere.
Randy Lerner has been the best owner/chairman we've ever had.
OK so now Houllier is here, the players have not sat idle, but the wage bill is the same (give or take), but are we actually worse off now, lower attendances, more first team players to pay (Clark, Bannan, Albrighton, Hogg all on new contracts), reduced shirt sales, looking less and less like a CL team. So it will be interesting to see what the board decide next, financially nothing has changed, and i agree no business can sustain losses, so will we have to sell to buy first, and if we do does that mean MON was right?
But look at the injury crisis we have had, and are still going through.
It is unreasonable to expect to combine that with the uncertainty and change that comes with replacing the entire management team at short notice, and still get the same kind of results. It's also extra unfair to be judging the new management team halfway through the season.
As for your last point re will it mean MON was right if we sell to buy first, that's an interesting question, but what about turning it around? If we spend more than we recoup in January, will that bury this whole "woe is us" nonsense that has arisen about our transfer investment since O'Neill went?
I can't speak for the General, but I am willing to bet several pounds of my money that one of the things which hurt him and pissed him off the most was the surprisingly high number of people who seemed ready to lay into Randy as a reincarnation of Doug with his tightfisted ways at the first, very slight slow down in the spending - and regardless of the reasons for it.
Truly embarassing, and to be honest, if I were Randy Lerner, I'd have told us all to fuck off and got on with something more rewarding in my life. He still might - billionaire football owners have been known to do that. There's a good example in the north east, for starters.
-
Amongst all the who did what and why there are a few indisputable facts. MON had employed players for Aston Villa that he never used, it was costing an enormous amount of money to have them sit idle, no business can sustain that and be successful.
Whatever the reason for Martin leaving he would have known it was the worst possible time for the club.
If i were the chairman of a soccer club looking for a new manager i would look at what he did to Villa and look elsewhere.
Randy Lerner has been the best owner/chairman we've ever had.
OK so now Houllier is here, the players have not sat idle, but the wage bill is the same (give or take), but are we actually worse off now, lower attendances, more first team players to pay (Clark, Bannan, Albrighton, Hogg all on new contracts), reduced shirt sales, looking less and less like a CL team. So it will be interesting to see what the board decide next, financially nothing has changed, and i agree no business can sustain losses, so will we have to sell to buy first, and if we do does that mean MON was right?
Well you could argue that -Sidwell apart- the outcasts have featured more this year and Davies (in part or in total) is off the wage bill at present as he's at Leicester.
So if they're not idle, there is more justification in keeping them on the wage bill. I also doubt with the sheer volume of injuries we've had to endure this year that there will be any more departures until we get some fresh faces in.
-
Yes, but I think there's something special there which means he will be with us for quite a while yet.
-
Amongst all the who did what and why there are a few indisputable facts. MON had employed players for Aston Villa that he never used, it was costing an enormous amount of money to have them sit idle, no business can sustain that and be successful.
Whatever the reason for Martin leaving he would have known it was the worst possible time for the club.
If i were the chairman of a soccer club looking for a new manager i would look at what he did to Villa and look elsewhere.
Randy Lerner has been the best owner/chairman we've ever had.
OK so now Houllier is here, the players have not sat idle, but the wage bill is the same (give or take), but are we actually worse off now, lower attendances, more first team players to pay (Clark, Bannan, Albrighton, Hogg all on new contracts), reduced shirt sales, looking less and less like a CL team. So it will be interesting to see what the board decide next, financially nothing has changed, and i agree no business can sustain losses, so will we have to sell to buy first, and if we do does that mean MON was right?
Well you could argue that -Sidwell apart- the outcasts have featured more this year and Davies (in part or in total) is off the wage bill at present as he's at Leicester.
So if they're not idle, there is more justification in keeping them on the wage bill. I also doubt with the sheer volume of injuries we've had to endure this year that there will be any more departures until we get some fresh faces in.
but surely we needed them on the wage bill in order that we could use them in a situation like this? If I'm reading you right, the implication is that we should have dropped Milner/Petrov for NRC/Sidwell at times in order to justify having them on the wage bill.
-
At times, yes.
The dreaded 'r' word.
Not so much Sidwell, but NRC and a few of the others certainly.
These arguments were done to death at the time, but prevention can be better than cure. Rather than running our best players into the ground.
If MON didn't trust these fringe players to come in and do a job, that would illustrate that he had blind spots when it came transfers, would it not? I know he didn't necessarily sign them as fringe players. But the financial commitment he made in both transfer fee and wages indicated that he had a degree of faith in their ability at one point. But not -seemingly- enough to play them when other players were fatigued or to head off that possibility in the first place. So do we accept that his judgement might have been flawed in this area?
Wouldn't having the farcical situation of two right-backs on 40k a week not getting a game (or being played at left back) whilst a CB plays there instead also indicate a weakness in that regard?
Should the board (more specifically RL) have just kept on throwing money at the thing and watched a whole host of assets constantly sitting on the bench or in the stands depreciating in value and not raise a murmur? I'd suggest that might be just a tad unrealistic.
RL might be relatively benevolent as far as owners of major football clubs go.
But the above sounds more like a business plan borrowed from the plot of Brewster's Millions. Only without the cash windfall at the end, obv.
-
I've heard the theory that Houllier is merely a stopgap, to keep the club in a saleable position whilst Randy touts for potential buyers. Why not?
-
I've heard the theory that Houllier is merely a stopgap, to keep the club in a saleable position whilst Randy touts for potential buyers. Why not?
Because this is your first post and anyone whose first post is something like this will be treated with a great deal of suspicion.
-
When we started to struggle in the latter half of last season many wanted underperforming players rested and others given a chance, MON was immovable and just kept picking the same players. I still support GH in his effort to give everyone a chance to prove themselves even if injuries probably forced his hand somewhat.
-
Dear Not The General,
now that the original 5 year plan is surely going to have missed it's original targets of CL football and the additional revenues entailed, what is the new 5 year plan in order that the club can be profitable in time to repay the original loan notes in 2016?
Not exactly sure how much of the original investment has actually been converted into shares, but there is certainly a timebomb ticking.
-
http://www.birminghammail.net/birmingham-sport/aston-villa-fc/aston-villa-news/2010/12/11/aston-villa-gerard-houllier-issues-a-rallying-call-after-worst-week-of-his-claret-and-blue-career-97319-27806440/
What's Matt Kendrick's agenda ?
'Controversial' ?
I'd say 'communicative' myself.
-
Doug was right when he said that when we are winning the manager and players got the praise, and when we were losing he would get the blame. Its much the same now.
-
I've heard the theory that Houllier is merely a stopgap, to keep the club in a saleable position whilst Randy touts for potential buyers. Why not?
Because this is your first post and anyone whose first post is something like this will be treated with a great deal of suspicion.
In fairness Dave it is a theory some have propagated elsewhere, hence my unanswered question to General K 2 weeks back
Not the best of conspiracy theories, but not an impossible scenario.
-
And more likely to complete bollocks than true.
-
I've heard the theory that Houllier is merely a stopgap, to keep the club in a saleable position whilst Randy touts for potential buyers. Why not?
Because this is your first post and anyone whose first post is something like this will be treated with a great deal of suspicion.
In fairness Dave it is a theory some have propagated elsewhere, hence my unanswered question to General K 2 weeks back
Not the best of conspiracy theories, but not an impossible scenario.
It's a theory born in the depths of the murky underworld, where the the members all subscribe to The Onion, and have frame prints of the fake moon landing, Bush dining with Bin Laden planning 9/11, and white suited blokes enjoying yet another new years bash down at Area 51.
-
http://www.birminghammail.net/birmingham-sport/aston-villa-fc/aston-villa-news/2010/12/11/aston-villa-gerard-houllier-issues-a-rallying-call-after-worst-week-of-his-claret-and-blue-career-97319-27806440/
What's Matt Kendrick's agenda ?
'Controversial' ?
I'd say 'communicative' myself.
Mat's agenda is to write about the Villa, as it has been since he started writing about the Villa in H&V some 15 years ago.
-
If there was a Questions to The Genera Thread, I' d ask him this question.
A mate of mine with whom I was having dinner last night keeps getting non solicited emails from AVFC with invitations / promotions to go to games etc.
Before the ManUre game, he got one.
He called the ticket office to buy 2 tickets who asked him if he had a record of buying tickets.
He said 'no' ( he usually goes the corporate route), and was refused 2 tickets !
His disquiet is based on the fact that he's receiving emails informing him about an upcoming game and that tickets were available etc., only to not be able to buy tickets !
In the end, the ManUre game wasn't a sell out, so Villa are, in effect, turning money down here ...
-
And more likely to complete bollocks than true.
Couldn't agree more .
-
I've heard the theory that Houllier is merely a stopgap, to keep the club in a saleable position whilst Randy touts for potential buyers. Why not?
Because this is your first post and anyone whose first post is something like this will be treated with a great deal of suspicion.
In fairness Dave it is a theory some have propagated elsewhere, hence my unanswered question to General K 2 weeks back
Not the best of conspiracy theories, but not an impossible scenario.
It's a theory born in the depths of the murky underworld, where the the members all subscribe to The Onion, and have frame prints of the fake moon landing, Bush dining with Bin Laden planning 9/11, and white suited blokes enjoying yet another new years bash down at Area 51.
They did fake the moon landing though ;)
-
On the 9th December, 2010 I said this :-
"ll admit I've never been 100% convinced by this board, from the very early days I never knew why they needed to compulsory purchase all the existing shares. But to be fair they made a promising start, I readily acknowledge the good work they did and the funds made available to buy players. And obviously it was much appreciated that the board were trying to listen to fans through the message boards.
But the start was the easy bit. Essentially picking off the low lying fruit. Now times are tougher it appears they don't like criticism and awkward questions.
I'll repeat what I've said previously here. This board is replaying all the mistakes of old (burning cash on moderate players, meddling in buying players, lurching into managerial appointments, poor marketing, not developing overseas scouting networks). Lerner is in danger of becoming an american version of HDE but without the ego and the occasional trophy.
Maybe we should be satisfied with that, but when they're talking the talk and not walking the walk then it's legitimate to ask questions."
In response I was accused of being a bluenose, a wind up merchant and a heretic for speaking out against the party line. In defending myself I wrote ....
"I'm a Villa fan of 40+ years standing having had my first season ticket in the late '60s just prior to the drop to div 3. I'm not at all sure of what facts I'm supposed to be twisting. I'm merely saying what I see and how it compares the ups and downs I've witnessed in years gone by.
I am not comparing the current situation to the fag end of HDE's reign. The comparison I've been drawn to is that at the end of the Gregory era. At that time the we'd finished 6th ish on a number of occassions on the back of the NTL windfall. This time around we've done the same on with the Lerner windfall.
At that time the club failed to market itself effectively, failed to develop overseas scouting networks, failed to appoint an effective chief executive, etc - ie exactly the same situation as now.
I suppose the big difference is that there's always the get-out of using more of Lerner's personal fortune. However, that misses the point I'm trying to make. The issue for me is that on the evidence we've seen so far I doubt the ability of the senior management team to leverage the financial resources at their disposal and translate them into sustained development."
I just wondered in the light of recent events if anyone who argued against me at the time had now changed their mind, or are they still right behind Lerner and his merry men?
-
I've changed my view of the Board completely.
-
I've changed my view of the Board completely.
What do you think now then Lee?
-
I've changed my view of the Board completely.
What do you think now then Lee?
Can you ask me that in a week mate. I have to say that I would like to treat this like my mattress at the moment and sleep on it.
I have the feeling that I have been duped along with a lot more Villa Fans
-
Pestria its difficult to argue with anything you said!!
-
I've changed my view of the Board completely.
What do you think now then Lee?
Can you ask me that in a week mate. I have to say that I would like to treat this like my mattress at the moment and sleep on it.
I have the feeling that I have been duped along with a lot more Villa Fans
Fair enough mate.
-
Do we have any info from Browns fans on what they think of Randy?
-
I have not only changed my view of the board, but of the MON walk out too. He must have seen that mediocrity was all they'd settle for and was fed up of it all.
If this isn't the case, board have only themselves to blame for people like me reaching this conclusion on hearing of this appointment.
-
How have we been duped? The board have been fantastic and this is the 1st true test of faith they've asked of us and we turn our backs on them
Keep the faith!
-
Pestria its difficult to argue with anything you said!!
I too find myself in agreement, the failing of this board started 2 years ago, they allowed MON to squander the resources for the final push, the result was an ageing over paid squad and 2 failing Wembley appearances. Since then the wheels have been coming off the wagon and they have presided over folly and crisis.RL has been brilliant at putting the financial resources behind the club but pretty useless at finding the talent to maximise those resources.
-
I have not only changed my view of the board, but of the MON walk out too. He must have seen that mediocrity was all they'd settle for and was fed up of it all.
If this isn't the case, board have only themselves to blame for people like me reaching this conclusion on hearing of this appointment.
Had the same conversation today. I wanted MON to go at the end, 'cos I felt that he had run his course, but it does get you thinking now we have finally found how intransigent Lerner really is
-
How have we been duped? The board have been fantastic and this is the 1st true test of faith they've asked of us and we turn our backs on them
Keep the faith!
You think that this appointment is part of the "Proud History, Bright Future" ethos? I don't. They have probably produced the biggest PR gaffe ever in English Football.
-
I have not only changed my view of the board, but of the MON walk out too. He must have seen that mediocrity was all they'd settle for and was fed up of it all.
If this isn't the case, board have only themselves to blame for people like me reaching this conclusion on hearing of this appointment.
Had the same conversation today. I wanted MON to go at the end, 'cos I felt that he had run his course, but it does get you thinking now we have finally found how intransigent Lerner really is
Whenever the truth comes out it'll be interesting. I feel a right tool for taking the board's side in all that. Fans of other clubs and the media might have been right afterall but I blindly followed.
-
I have not only changed my view of the board, but of the MON walk out too. He must have seen that mediocrity was all they'd settle for and was fed up of it all.
If this isn't the case, board have only themselves to blame for people like me reaching this conclusion on hearing of this appointment.
Had the same conversation today. I wanted MON to go at the end, 'cos I felt that he had run his course, but it does get you thinking now we have finally found how intransigent Lerner really is
Whenever the truth comes out it'll be interesting. I feel a right tool for taking the board's side in all that. Fans of other clubs and the media might have been right afterall but I blindly followed.
.. me too mate.
-
Do we have any info from Browns fans on what they think of Randy?
Try this one, just ignore the crap about 'soccer and football' and there are some very interesting parallels.
http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=19625
-
I have not only changed my view of the board, but of the MON walk out too. He must have seen that mediocrity was all they'd settle for and was fed up of it all.
If this isn't the case, board have only themselves to blame for people like me reaching this conclusion on hearing of this appointment.
Had the same conversation today. I wanted MON to go at the end, 'cos I felt that he had run his course, but it does get you thinking now we have finally found how intransigent Lerner really is
Whenever the truth comes out it'll be interesting. I feel a right tool for taking the board's side in all that. Fans of other clubs and the media might have been right afterall but I blindly followed.
.. me too mate.
Must admit that I'm coming round to that view as well. Like Lee I'd had enough of O'Neill at the end, as I thought that he'd hit his ceiling with us. I still think that's true actually, but I foolishly thought that when O'Neill left (either under his own steam or given the push) that Lerner would appoint a better manager to take us forward from the base that O'Neill had built. I don't think I've ever been more wrong in my life.
-
yep they lost the plot