Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine
Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: Leighton on April 08, 2014, 10:56:35 PM
-
In your opinion, do you think that the club, as it stands right NOW both on and off the field, is in any better state than the final days of the Ellis and O'Dreary era?
-
In my opinion , it's time for you to get down to brownhills market and invest in another orange bed sheet, Leighton.
-
That was the finest cloth that the Hole in the Wall at the top of Walsall market had to offer, plus- it was cheap.
-
If we only Lerner's personal investment during Doug's era we might have won many more titles.
O'Leary is a complete wanker
-
Right at this moment it feels like we are comparing differing shades of shit. I'm sure in the long run we'll be all the better for these dark days but at present it's pretty similar as it was back then.
-
Under Lerner/Lambert we've got no chance of getting close to top 6. O Leary finished his first season 6th (joint 5th) with 56 points. I don't think under the current budgetary restraints we'd ever see Lambert getting anywhere close to a points tally like that (even if he had the money O Neill had to spend, he'd struggle to achieve that) and these days you need comfortably over 60 to finish top 6 too. It's unlikely this season that Lambert will even match O Leary's worst haul of 42 points.
Even comfortably mid-table seems beyond us at the moment.
-
Doug would not have put up with the record breaking achievements that Lambert is responsible for.
The situation is worse now because at least you knew with Doug that he would not tolerate epic failure and for all his faults at least he cared.
-
Doug would not have put up with the record breaking achievements that Lambert is responsible for.
The situation is worse now because at least you knew with Doug that he would not tolerate epic failure and for all his faults at least he cared.
Would that be the Doug Ellis who was chairman during 40% of the relegations in our history?
-
Doug would not have put up with the record breaking achievements that Lambert is responsible for.
The situation is worse now because at least you knew with Doug that he would not tolerate epic failure and for all his faults at least he cared.
Would that be the Doug Ellis who was chairman during 40% of the relegations in our history?
In fairness, when he did get us relegated, he at least got really angry about it. One assumes.
-
Doug would not have put up with the record breaking achievements that Lambert is responsible for.
The situation is worse now because at least you knew with Doug that he would not tolerate epic failure and for all his faults at least he cared.
revisionist nonsense
Were in a mess when Lerner took over but in a worse financial position now and probably have a worse squad now too.
Ellis put the breaks on spending at the club in order to maximise the personal profit he was going to make from a sale. Whether Lerner is at the same game remains to be seen. Will only know when he sells up I guess.
-
For all that he apparently cared, does anyone really think Doug would have given GH all that money to go out and sign Darren Bent to keep us in the league? He didn't care that much.
The funny thing is that, if it is worse now, it's worse because you just can't doubt the good intentions of the folks at the top, you just can't. Their off-the-pitch stuff has been immaculate, really. It's just that they don't appear to understand the first thing about on-the-pitch stuff, which is still an apparently fashionable gauge of the success of a football team.
-
This is a bit like asking which would you prefer to eat - Cat shit or Dog shit.
-
Doug would not have put up with the record breaking achievements that Lambert is responsible for.
The situation is worse now because at least you knew with Doug that he would not tolerate epic failure and for all his faults at least he cared.
revisionist nonsense
Were in a mess when Lerner took over but in a worse financial position now and probably have a worse squad now too.
Ellis put the breaks on spending at the club in order to maximise the personal profit he was going to make from a sale. Whether Lerner is at the same game remains to be seen. Will only know when he sells up I guess.
Correct about HDE, I would say.
On Randy, he has already demonstrated that he is not in it for the dosh, or he would have set up things differently by now. What he is doing, in my opinion, is setting us up to be self sufficient by the time he sells us on. This is not entirely altruistic, because he has a reputation to maintain. Cynics would use the term "brand", but this would be difficult to justify in purely commercial terms. More likely, he would like to be known as the person who did things the correct way and maintained his integrity, while the various oligarchs of various oil based denominations broke every rule to demonstrate their power.
In PL, he has found a football man who has convinced him this can be done. I was convinced we would drop last year after the Wigan game at VP; PL was never in doubt that we would survive. For all we know, PL and others have told RL, it would be rocky for a couple of years, but we will stay up, then consolidate in the 3rd year. Or the 4th or 5th year. We know there is plan, but we do not know what it is.
What we do know is that visits to our home ground are becoming a chore and when football is marketed as entertainment, there are surely many attractive alternatives for the man on the terrace who wants a bang for his buck.
-
HDE presided over mediocrity at a time when a balanced but more ambitious investment approach would have comfortably propelled us into the Top Four and the Chumps League.
Lerner has the mega-rich to contend with - Citeh, Chelski et al.
Not that this excuses L&L from the shit that is currently being served up.
-
Ellis was prepared to face the wrath of the supporters. Lerner is never seen.
-
That is because Ellis pocketed a bundle when we went public and was legally obligated under the Companies Act to hold pesky AGM's where he pretended to listen to shareholders. Much good it did us.
I know this isn't the thrust of Leighton's post and its more Chicago's revision of history, but I hold Ellis in utter contempt for his failure to move as Edwards did in 1992 and that cost us more than anything. Arguably a far more significant failure than Ellis dismantling the European Cup winning side and seeing us relegated, as Taylor had us bouncing back in double quick time. Now, because of the corner shop mentality, our chance has gone forever.
-
You can't blame Ellis for Lerner's ineptitude. We may never be able to stand up against the oil barons but should be doing a fuck sight better against some of the dross that we are losing to now.
How can anyone want us to be run by a recluse?
-
This is like offering me the choice the Ducking Stool or being Hung, Drawn and Quartered.
At least with Ducking Stool if you die you are posthumously considered innocent. I'll go with Lerner / Lambert.
-
You can't blame Ellis for Lerner's ineptitude. We may never be able to stand up against the oil barons but should be doing a fuck sight better against some of the dross that we are losing to now.
How can anyone want us to be run by a recluse?
I am blaming Ellis for his own ineptitude.
-
How can anyone want us to be run by a recluse?
As long as the club is being run well and the right people are being appointed I couldn't really care if Lerner wanted to live as a hermit in Tibet.
It's that the first two of those don't seem to be happening that is the problem.
Spurs seem to have been very well-run (this season notwithstanding) over the past half dozen years and I couldn't even tell you what their owner looks like.
-
Give me Lerner/Lambert any day of the week.
-
Ellis was prepared to face the wrath of the supporters. Lerner is never seen.
this. at least ellis took the flak.
we had our worst ever league defeat in our 139 year history, and the worst home league records are tumbling by the season.
does lerner even raise an eyelid? does he fuck!
you've got more chance of bumping into lerner on bond street, than you have at villa park.
-
Ellis was prepared to face the wrath of the supporters. Lerner is never seen.
this. at least ellis took the flak.
we had our worst ever league defeat in our 139 year history, and the worst home league records are tumbling by the season.
does lerner even raise an eyelid? does he fuck!
you've got more chance of bumping into lerner on bond street, than you have at villa park.
He took a lot more than the flak. About £50 million, for a start.
-
Doug would not have put up with the record breaking achievements that Lambert is responsible for.
The situation is worse now because at least you knew with Doug that he would not tolerate epic failure and for all his faults at least he cared.
revisionist nonsense
Were in a mess when Lerner took over but in a worse financial position now and probably have a worse squad now too.
Ellis put the breaks on spending at the club in order to maximise the personal profit he was going to make from a sale. Whether Lerner is at the same game remains to be seen. Will only know when he sells up I guess.
Correct about HDE, I would say.
On Randy, he has already demonstrated that he is not in it for the dosh, or he would have set up things differently by now.
I'd love to know, what exactly is he in it for then? Is he a lifelong supporter? does he have a long standing passion for football? did he inherit a fortune and not have a clue what to do with it?
Im not aware that he owns property or a base of operations over here, he doesnt appear to come to many games....all we ever get is Beebop and Rocksteady telling us he attends games in secret and sits in a room away from the cameras. Fuck right off, these secret match attendances are never backed up by staff employees or workers at airports. This club is standing on the edge of the abyss and Lerners legacy may soon be the man who royally messed it up. And yet, still nothing from the management on what the hell is going on.
-
At least in the Ellis days the club had some Villa men at the top to balance things out. When things were shit you could see at least some of them cared.
Stride
Big Ron
Little
Gregory
coaches too.
Now when we get beat (again) there's an air or unaccountability, no one seems to really give a fuck, the next pay check comes in and we go again. Corporate bullshitters, chancers and recluses run the club now and barely a single one of them act like they want to be here and take some responsibility for what has happened, after all it's all Martin O'neills fault still.
-
The funny thing is that, if it is worse now, it's worse because you just can't doubt the good intentions of the folks at the top, you just can't. Their off-the-pitch stuff has been immaculate, really. It's just that they don't appear to understand the first thing about on-the-pitch stuff, which is still an apparently fashionable gauge of the success of a football team.
When you say their off the pitch stuff, what exactly do you mean? I agree they are great with the charity/community stuff (we must be one of the top clubs there is at that), but the financial side they are failing if my memory of the accounts is correct. Are we (IIRC) struggling to get any decent corporate income?
-
The funny thing is that, if it is worse now, it's worse because you just can't doubt the good intentions of the folks at the top, you just can't. Their off-the-pitch stuff has been immaculate, really. It's just that they don't appear to understand the first thing about on-the-pitch stuff, which is still an apparently fashionable gauge of the success of a football team.
When you say their off the pitch stuff, what exactly do you mean? I agree they are great with the charity/community stuff (we must be one of the top clubs their is at that), but the financial side they are failing if my memory of the accounts is correct. Are we (IIRC) struggling to get any decent corporate income?
Our turnover is less than it was 4 years ago isn't it?
-
The funny thing is that, if it is worse now, it's worse because you just can't doubt the good intentions of the folks at the top, you just can't. Their off-the-pitch stuff has been immaculate, really. It's just that they don't appear to understand the first thing about on-the-pitch stuff, which is still an apparently fashionable gauge of the success of a football team.
When you say their off the pitch stuff, what exactly do you mean? I agree they are great with the charity/community stuff (we must be one of the top clubs their is at that), but the financial side they are failing if my memory of the accounts is correct. Are we (IIRC) struggling to get any decent corporate income?
Our turnover is less than it was 4 years ago isn't it?
Is that with the additional TV money?
-
The funny thing is that, if it is worse now, it's worse because you just can't doubt the good intentions of the folks at the top, you just can't. Their off-the-pitch stuff has been immaculate, really. It's just that they don't appear to understand the first thing about on-the-pitch stuff, which is still an apparently fashionable gauge of the success of a football team.
When you say their off the pitch stuff, what exactly do you mean? I agree they are great with the charity/community stuff (we must be one of the top clubs their is at that), but the financial side they are failing if my memory of the accounts is correct. Are we (IIRC) struggling to get any decent corporate income?
Our turnover is less than it was 4 years ago isn't it?
Is that with the additional TV money?
Not last summers no I don't think so.
-
Ellis was prepared to face the wrath of the supporters. Lerner is never seen.
this. at least ellis took the flak.
we had our worst ever league defeat in our 139 year history, and the worst home league records are tumbling by the season.
does lerner even raise an eyelid? does he fuck!
you've got more chance of bumping into lerner on bond street, than you have at villa park.
He took a lot more than the flak. About £50 million, for a start.
Dave, I don't think most fans ever think or care much about that. I don't want to re-write history but you could never doubt Ellis's love for the club, the fact he dedicated much of his life and was there every day, the fact he felt the pain of losing as much as the fans, and even though he never really had the vision, wanted us to be challenging the top sides. He also had Steve Stride, a top administrator who helped to project a positive image of the club.
Today, I'm not sure where the club is going. The fans care passionately but it doesn't feel like the club does.
-
Ellis was prepared to face the wrath of the supporters. Lerner is never seen.
this. at least ellis took the flak.
we had our worst ever league defeat in our 139 year history, and the worst home league records are tumbling by the season.
does lerner even raise an eyelid? does he fuck!
you've got more chance of bumping into lerner on bond street, than you have at villa park.
He took a lot more than the flak. About £50 million, for a start.
Dave, I don't think most fans ever think or care much about that. I don't want to re-write history but you could never doubt Ellis's love for the club, the fact he dedicated much of his life and was there every day, the fact he felt the pain of losing as much as the fans, and even though he never really had the vision, wanted us to be challenging the top sides. He also had Steve Stride, a top administrator who helped to project a positive image of the club.
Today, I'm not sure where the club is going. The fans care passionately but it doesn't feel like the club does.
O
The greatest stroke Doug Ellis ever pulled was to convince supporters he cared as much about the Villa as they do. Of course he was there every day - he was (very well) paid to be there.
-
Ellis was prepared to face the wrath of the supporters. Lerner is never seen.
this. at least ellis took the flak.
we had our worst ever league defeat in our 139 year history, and the worst home league records are tumbling by the season.
does lerner even raise an eyelid? does he fuck!
you've got more chance of bumping into lerner on bond street, than you have at villa park.
He took a lot more than the flak. About £50 million, for a start.
Dave, I don't think most fans ever think or care much about that. I don't want to re-write history but you could never doubt Ellis's love for the club, the fact he dedicated much of his life and was there every day, the fact he felt the pain of losing as much as the fans, and even though he never really had the vision, wanted us to be challenging the top sides. He also had Steve Stride, a top administrator who helped to project a positive image of the club.
Today, I'm not sure where the club is going. The fans care passionately but it doesn't feel like the club does.
O
The greatest stroke Doug Ellis ever pulled was to convince supporters he cared as much about the Villa as they do. Of course he was there every day - he was (very well) paid to be there.
You make it sound like it's a crime to be paid for your job.
Perhaps we should start paying Lerner a wage. Maybe then he'd bother to turn up for the odd game.
-
Ellis was prepared to face the wrath of the supporters. Lerner is never seen.
this. at least ellis took the flak.
we had our worst ever league defeat in our 139 year history, and the worst home league records are tumbling by the season.
does lerner even raise an eyelid? does he fuck!
you've got more chance of bumping into lerner on bond street, than you have at villa park.
He took a lot more than the flak. About £50 million, for a start.
Dave, I don't think most fans ever think or care much about that. I don't want to re-write history but you could never doubt Ellis's love for the club, the fact he dedicated much of his life and was there every day, the fact he felt the pain of losing as much as the fans, and even though he never really had the vision, wanted us to be challenging the top sides. He also had Steve Stride, a top administrator who helped to project a positive image of the club.
Today, I'm not sure where the club is going. The fans care passionately but it doesn't feel like the club does.
O
The greatest stroke Doug Ellis ever pulled was to convince supporters he cared as much about the Villa as they do. Of course he was there every day - he was (very well) paid to be there.
I'm guessing you have inside knowledge because I'm inclined to believe he did care and he loves the club. He gets to more games than I do and I've been going for 40 years.
-
Ellis was prepared to face the wrath of the supporters. Lerner is never seen.
this. at least ellis took the flak.
we had our worst ever league defeat in our 139 year history, and the worst home league records are tumbling by the season.
does lerner even raise an eyelid? does he fuck!
you've got more chance of bumping into lerner on bond street, than you have at villa park.
He took a lot more than the flak. About £50 million, for a start.
Dave, I don't think most fans ever think or care much about that. I don't want to re-write history but you could never doubt Ellis's love for the club, the fact he dedicated much of his life and was there every day, the fact he felt the pain of losing as much as the fans, and even though he never really had the vision, wanted us to be challenging the top sides. He also had Steve Stride, a top administrator who helped to project a positive image of the club.
Today, I'm not sure where the club is going. The fans care passionately but it doesn't feel like the club does.
O
The greatest stroke Doug Ellis ever pulled was to convince supporters he cared as much about the Villa as they do. Of course he was there every day - he was (very well) paid to be there.
I'm guessing you have inside knowledge because I'm inclined to believe he did care and he loves the club. He gets to more games than I do and I've been going for 40 years.
Oh of course he cared for the club! He was a complete pain in the arse at times, a penny pincher and he held us back at times as well, but no one will convince me he didn't care for the Villa. He certainly would have cared enough to rid the club of Lambert way before now as well. Meanwhile Lerner sits on his arse somewhere in the US and continues to let Lambert humiliate the club and its fans on a weekly basis.
So much for having a caring owner.
-
Ellis was prepared to face the wrath of the supporters. Lerner is never seen.
this. at least ellis took the flak.
we had our worst ever league defeat in our 139 year history, and the worst home league records are tumbling by the season.
does lerner even raise an eyelid? does he fuck!
you've got more chance of bumping into lerner on bond street, than you have at villa park.
He took a lot more than the flak. About £50 million, for a start.
Dave, I don't think most fans ever think or care much about that. I don't want to re-write history but you could never doubt Ellis's love for the club, the fact he dedicated much of his life and was there every day, the fact he felt the pain of losing as much as the fans, and even though he never really had the vision, wanted us to be challenging the top sides. He also had Steve Stride, a top administrator who helped to project a positive image of the club.
Today, I'm not sure where the club is going. The fans care passionately but it doesn't feel like the club does.
O
The greatest stroke Doug Ellis ever pulled was to convince supporters he cared as much about the Villa as they do. Of course he was there every day - he was (very well) paid to be there.
You make it sound like it's a crime to be paid for your job.
Perhaps we should start paying Lerner a wage. Maybe then he'd bother to turn up for the odd game.
Exactly, it was his job.
-
Ellis was prepared to face the wrath of the supporters. Lerner is never seen.
this. at least ellis took the flak.
we had our worst ever league defeat in our 139 year history, and the worst home league records are tumbling by the season.
does lerner even raise an eyelid? does he fuck!
you've got more chance of bumping into lerner on bond street, than you have at villa park.
He took a lot more than the flak. About £50 million, for a start.
Dave, I don't think most fans ever think or care much about that. I don't want to re-write history but you could never doubt Ellis's love for the club, the fact he dedicated much of his life and was there every day, the fact he felt the pain of losing as much as the fans, and even though he never really had the vision, wanted us to be challenging the top sides. He also had Steve Stride, a top administrator who helped to project a positive image of the club.
Today, I'm not sure where the club is going. The fans care passionately but it doesn't feel like the club does.
O
The greatest stroke Doug Ellis ever pulled was to convince supporters he cared as much about the Villa as they do. Of course he was there every day - he was (very well) paid to be there.
You make it sound like it's a crime to be paid for your job.
Perhaps we should start paying Lerner a wage. Maybe then he'd bother to turn up for the odd game.
Exactly, it was his job.
It's not his job anymore, yet still he puts Lerner to shame when it comes to turning up to games.
How long is it now, Dave, 16 months since he last sat at Villa Park for a match? What a disgrace.
Meanwhile the Villa stumble from one disaster to another.
-
And what difference would it make if the owner was at every game? Paul Faulkner and Robin Russell are there, so by your benchmark they care every bit as much as Doug ever did.
-
Is it me, or are the same people spitting bile at our current chairman the same people defending Doug?
Has the world gone fucking mad? Try and think of the shit we'd be in if he was still in charge, we hadn't got a pot to piss in by the time he left, and I think I stand on solid ground when I say he was unlikely to inject his own funds to keep us going.
His love for the Villa would fall well behind his love for money or himself.
Dave, do you still have that '101 reasons to hate your chairman' knocking about.
-
And what difference would it make if the owner was at every game? Paul Faulkner and Robin Russell are there, so by your benchmark they care every bit as much as Doug ever did.
Faulkner and Russell are nobodies. Lerner is the chairman and he should be at the games to see the rubbish we have to put up with. Perhaps then he'd get a grip and realise where the club is heading.
-
Is it me, or are the same people spitting bile at our current chairman the same people defending Doug?
Has the world gone fucking mad? Try and think of the shit we'd be in if he was still in charge, we hadn't got a pot to piss in by the time he left, and I think I stand on solid ground when I say he was unlikely to inject his own funds to keep us going.
His love for the Villa would fall well behind his love for money or himself.
Dave, do you still have that '101 reasons to hate your chairman' knocking about.
No, but I'm sure a couple of solicitors would be interested if it ever re-surfaced.
-
I have to agree with people on here. The fans are not listened to, its almost like a wall of silence, no one answers our questions and we as well as fans, are customers treated almost like those of eBay or Amazon. Lerner shows no interest, his old mate Krulak did one pretty early on when the going got a little tough and Faulkner does cut and paste press releases or interviews. We have no direction and are becoming a laughing stock especially at our beloved home ground where the majority of games the away fans take the piss!
Our history is the only thing keeping us going with any sort of pride.
-
The malaise at the club stems from the top. We are a leaderless club.
Doug had his problems as has been pointed out. One of his strengths was that people were held to account.
Today you just feel that we are drifting with nobody with the nous to impose a standard or the ability to get somebody in to sort us out. Sure we got relegated in the past but we fought back and re-established ourselves at the top.
I have zero confidence in the powers that be to arrest this decline. Moreover, it baffles me how people can talk about where we were drifting in 2005/06 and blame Ellis and yet absolve Faulkner and Lerner for both the points haul of the last two seasons, and for assembling a squad which is not competing in the top half of the table.
-
Is it me, or are the same people spitting bile at our current chairman the same people defending Doug?
Has the world gone fucking mad? Try and think of the shit we'd be in if he was still in charge, we hadn't got a pot to piss in by the time he left, and I think I stand on solid ground when I say he was unlikely to inject his own funds to keep us going.
His love for the Villa would fall well behind his love for money or himself.
Dave, do you still have that '101 reasons to hate your chairman' knocking about.
No, the debate is being driven onto the rocks. It should not be an either/or debate. It is being driven there by Randy's supporters. Doug's time has come and gone and had its highs and lows just as Randy's has. It shouldn't even be a 'board out' debate.
It should be assessing the stewardship of the current regime and where it has taken us, and where it is possibly leading us.
-
I have to agree with people on here. The fans are not listened to, its almost like a wall of silence, no one answers our questions and we as well as fans, are customers treated almost like those of eBay or Amazon. Lerner shows no interest, his old mate Krulak did one pretty early on when the going got a little tough and Faulkner does cut and paste press releases or interviews. We have no direction and are becoming a laughing stock especially at our beloved home ground where the majority of games the away fans take the piss!
Our history is the only thing keeping us going with any sort of pride.
And what notice did Ellis take?
-
To his credit, he usually sacked a disastrous manager when he saw they were losing control / or out of their depth.
-
To his credit, he usually sacked a disastrous manager when he saw they were losing control / or out of their depth.
If only he was here now to rid us of the disaster that is Paul Lambert.
-
Is it me, or are the same people spitting bile at our current chairman the same people defending Doug?
Has the world gone fucking mad? Try and think of the shit we'd be in if he was still in charge, we hadn't got a pot to piss in by the time he left, and I think I stand on solid ground when I say he was unlikely to inject his own funds to keep us going.
His love for the Villa would fall well behind his love for money or himself.
Dave, do you still have that '101 reasons to hate your chairman' knocking about.
No, the debate is being driven onto the rocks. It should not be an either/or debate. It is being driven there by Randy's supporters. Doug's time has come and gone and had its highs and lows just as Randy's has. It shouldn't even be a 'board out' debate.
It should be assessing the stewardship of the current regime and where it has taken us, and where it is possibly leading us.
The debate isn't being driven anywhere, by anyone. It involves Ellis because the topic is about him. If you want it to be on a different subject, feel free to start one.
-
I am also interested to know what money people think Doug put in out of his own pocket seeing as how lack of investment is being used as a stick to beat Lerner with.
Anyway, the despicable performance he put up around the Tony Barton testimonial will always mark him out as a scrote in my house.
-
I cannot believe that people are seriously talking about Ellis and his love for the club and comparing him to Lerner.
The man was on the board at the Sty and the Custard Bowl.
Ellis never put a penny of his own money into the club, took out a wage, profited heavily from our flotation and even more so when he sold to Lerner.
He is the man that failed to see what the Premier League was when the likes of Martin Edwards and Ken Bates, other olds beasts of the 70's and 80's too, got with it and we missed our chance forever. Dismantling the European Cup winning side and seeing us relegated another dubious accolade of his.
Doug wasn't the anti-Christ, but this ridiculous veneer that people are glossing him with as some sort of loveable old uncle is nonsense and revisionism. Lerner at worst is a naïve fool who has splurged £200 million plus on this club to achieve something and thus far failed, in part through his own naivety with O'Neill and the subsequent failure of well-paid decision makers, evidently not qualified at the time to do so, in more recent times.
The argument is so thin as to boil down to "well at least Doug attended!"; and so he bloody well should, he was being paid £230,000 a year and was an employ of the club.
-
I am also interested to know what money people think Doug put in out of his own pocket seeing as how lack of investment is being used as a stick to beat Lerner with.
Anyway, the despicable performance he put up around the Tony Barton testimonial will always mark him out as a scrote in my house.
It's not Doug's fault that Lerner inherited a billion quid to play around with.
-
To his credit, he usually sacked a disastrous manager when he saw they were losing control / or out of their depth.
Or if they were successful when he wasn't there.
-
I am also interested to know what money people think Doug put in out of his own pocket seeing as how lack of investment is being used as a stick to beat Lerner with.
Anyway, the despicable performance he put up around the Tony Barton testimonial will always mark him out as a scrote in my house.
Its not the lack of investment is it though? Its the poor investment that has seen a few hundred million pound spent since the take over, yet our team is arguably worse tahn Dolly's, and the reputation and standing of the club appears to also be on the decline (obviously not helped by the emergence of the super clubs).
-
I cannot believe that people are seriously talking about Ellis and his love for the club and comparing him to Lerner.
The man was on the board at the Sty and the Custard Bowl.
Ellis never put a penny of his own money into the club, took out a wage, profited heavily from our flotation and even more so when he sold to Lerner.
He is the man that failed to see what the Premier League was when the likes of Martin Edwards and Ken Bates, other olds beasts of the 70's and 80's too, got with it and we missed our chance forever. Dismantling the European Cup winning side and seeing us relegated another dubious accolade.
Doug wasn't the anti-Christ, but this ridiculous veneer that people are glossing him with as some sort of loveable old uncle is nonsense and revisionism. Lerner at worst is a naïve fool who has splurged £200 million plus on this club to achieve something and thus far failed, in part through his own naivety with O'Neill and the failure of well-paid decision makers evidently not qualified at the time to do so.
The argument is so thin as to boil down to "well at least Doug attended!"; and so he bloody well should, he was being paid £230,000 a year and was an employ of the club.
I couldn't care less that Ellis was on the board of both Small Heath and Wolves, and why should it? Dennis Mortimer played for Blues as did Peter Withe and many others as well. Does that leave a stain on their memory at Villa? Not at all.
As for Lerner - if we were top 6 and playing terrific football we wouldn't give a damn that he didn't attend games, but sadly we aren't and we don't. So the fact that he hasn't seen a Villa game in person for 16 months makes it look like he doesn't give a damn especially with the club stumbling from one disaster to another.
I'm surprised there's so many fans that stick up for him.
-
Is it me, or are the same people spitting bile at our current chairman the same people defending Doug?
Has the world gone fucking mad? Try and think of the shit we'd be in if he was still in charge, we hadn't got a pot to piss in by the time he left, and I think I stand on solid ground when I say he was unlikely to inject his own funds to keep us going.
His love for the Villa would fall well behind his love for money or himself.
Dave, do you still have that '101 reasons to hate your chairman' knocking about.
No, the debate is being driven onto the rocks. It should not be an either/or debate. It is being driven there by Randy's supporters. Doug's time has come and gone and had its highs and lows just as Randy's has. It shouldn't even be a 'board out' debate.
It should be assessing the stewardship of the current regime and where it has taken us, and where it is possibly leading us.
But it is easy to criticise Ellis to take the limelight away from Lerner.
-
To his credit, he usually sacked a disastrous manager when he saw they were losing control / or out of their depth.
If only he was here now to rid us of the disaster that is Paul Lambert.
Agreed.
-
Is it me, or are the same people spitting bile at our current chairman the same people defending Doug?
Has the world gone fucking mad? Try and think of the shit we'd be in if he was still in charge, we hadn't got a pot to piss in by the time he left, and I think I stand on solid ground when I say he was unlikely to inject his own funds to keep us going.
His love for the Villa would fall well behind his love for money or himself.
Dave, do you still have that '101 reasons to hate your chairman' knocking about.
No, the debate is being driven onto the rocks. It should not be an either/or debate. It is being driven there by Randy's supporters. Doug's time has come and gone and had its highs and lows just as Randy's has. It shouldn't even be a 'board out' debate.
It should be assessing the stewardship of the current regime and where it has taken us, and where it is possibly leading us.
The debate isn't being driven anywhere, by anyone. It involves Ellis because the topic is about him. If you want it to be on a different subject, feel free to start one.
Thanks Dave, I was going to refer the gentleman to the thread title.
-
Is it me, or are the same people spitting bile at our current chairman the same people defending Doug?
Has the world gone fucking mad? Try and think of the shit we'd be in if he was still in charge, we hadn't got a pot to piss in by the time he left, and I think I stand on solid ground when I say he was unlikely to inject his own funds to keep us going.
His love for the Villa would fall well behind his love for money or himself.
Dave, do you still have that '101 reasons to hate your chairman' knocking about.
No, the debate is being driven onto the rocks. It should not be an either/or debate. It is being driven there by Randy's supporters. Doug's time has come and gone and had its highs and lows just as Randy's has. It shouldn't even be a 'board out' debate.
It should be assessing the stewardship of the current regime and where it has taken us, and where it is possibly leading us.
But it is easy to criticise Ellis to take the limelight away from Lerner.
You're right, it is easy to criticise Doug.
-
Is it me, or are the same people spitting bile at our current chairman the same people defending Doug?
Has the world gone fucking mad? Try and think of the shit we'd be in if he was still in charge, we hadn't got a pot to piss in by the time he left, and I think I stand on solid ground when I say he was unlikely to inject his own funds to keep us going.
His love for the Villa would fall well behind his love for money or himself.
Dave, do you still have that '101 reasons to hate your chairman' knocking about.
No, the debate is being driven onto the rocks. It should not be an either/or debate. It is being driven there by Randy's supporters. Doug's time has come and gone and had its highs and lows just as Randy's has. It shouldn't even be a 'board out' debate.
It should be assessing the stewardship of the current regime and where it has taken us, and where it is possibly leading us.
But it is easy to criticise Ellis to take the limelight away from Lerner.
You're right, it is easy to criticise Doug.
I knew that was coming. However, two wrongs, if that's what they are, do not make a right. It was made clear to Ellis that most wanted rid of him. He left when he thought the time was right, but still maintains a keen and active interest in the club. Now we are left with a manager and first team coach who seem to be able to get away with everything, almost as if the club is just Lerner's toy. If Lerner had anything about him, he would have sacked those clowns a long time ago. I hope, in this long period of apparent disinterest, he has been actively seeking replacements.
-
I really do not understand this obsession that some people have with Lerner attending games. Why does it matter? It isn't 1970 where you have to physically be somewhere to see something. He can watch all of the games and stay in touch with people at the club using his thumbs. The truth is if we were playing well those people criticising the chairman wouldn't give a shit if he attended. In fact they'd tell him to stay away. Unless you physically want to go up to his face to tell him how you felt, what else would him being there really accomplish? Do you think if heard boos from the crowd it would change anything substantially or provide him information that can probably already figure out for himself? Losing creates discontent and he doesn't need to be at the ground to work that out.
-
It's like a boss never being in his office. It creates anarchy. This can extend to senior employees such as football managers.
-
I really do not understand this obsession that some people have with Lerner attending games. Why does it matter? It isn't 1970 where you have to physically be somewhere to see something. He can watch all of the games and stay in touch with people at the club using his thumbs. The truth is if we were playing well those people criticising the chairman wouldn't give a shit if he attended. In fact they'd tell him to stay away. Unless you physically want to go up to his face to tell him how you felt, what else would him being there really accomplish? Do you think if heard boos from the crowd it would change anything substantially or provide him information that can probably already figure out for himself? Losing creates discontent and he doesn't need to be at the ground to work that out.
I thought the Bolton game had an impact on him but I may have read that on here.
It's the clubs communication that's the problem for me and the feeling of drift and sleepwalking. The fact he is not around just gives the impression of a club lacking direction so its a perception thing.
-
I really do not understand this obsession that some people have with Lerner attending games. Why does it matter? It isn't 1970 where you have to physically be somewhere to see something. He can watch all of the games and stay in touch with people at the club using his thumbs. The truth is if we were playing well those people criticising the chairman wouldn't give a shit if he attended. In fact they'd tell him to stay away. Unless you physically want to go up to his face to tell him how you felt, what else would him being there really accomplish? Do you think if heard boos from the crowd it would change anything substantially or provide him information that can probably already figure out for himself? Losing creates discontent and he doesn't need to be at the ground to work that out.
I thought the Bolton game had an impact on him but I may have read that on here.
It's the clubs communication that's the problem for me and the feeling of drift and sleepwalking. The fact he is not around just gives the impression of a club lacking direction so its a perception thing.
The Bolton game was a culmination of a lot of poor results and a general feeling that things weren't going well. I think McLeish would have been fired whether or not the chairman was in attendance. As for the communication, it's really a case of how information is received. If results are going well you wouldn't notice a lot of things that are now perceived as negative. It's not like we were communicating as a club any better than under MON, but because overall the results were better and fans felt better you just didn't notice as much. If Lerner didn't attend games during that period I don't there would have been the same criticism as there is now. It's like Sheik Mansoor at Man City. Do the fans really care if he attends games? All they care about is that the money keeps flowing and the team does well. If the team does well because the chosen manager is doing a good job and the players are playing well, then everything else at a football club is window dressing.
-
It's like a boss never being in his office. It creates anarchy. This can extend to senior employees such as football managers.
Maybe if he was there all week he could offer snippets of advice like Doug.
Like "pick Curbishley" or "get rid or Mortimer".
-
Given that Lerner has now seemingly imposed the same "live with in our means" restrictions as Doug, chaiman wise it is a draw.
Manager wise, regardless of results, Lambert looks like the lord McGrath next to Pig Nose. Fuck Pig Nose!
-
Given that Lerner has now seemingly imposed the same "live with in our means" restrictions as Doug, chaiman wise it is a draw.
Manager wise, regardless of results, Lambert looks like the lord McGrath next to Pig Nose. Fuck Pig Nose!
But don't we owe a fortune to Lerner now?
-
It's like a boss never being in his office. It creates anarchy. This can extend to senior employees such as football managers.
Maybe if he was there all week he could offer snippets of advice like Doug.
Like "pick Curbishley" or "get rid or Mortimer".
So the story goes.
-
It's like a boss never being in his office. It creates anarchy. This can extend to senior employees such as football managers.
Maybe if he was there all week he could offer snippets of advice like Doug.
Like "pick Curbishley" or "get rid or Mortimer".
So the story goes.
I think it's more believable than Bodymoor Heath being a modern day version of National Lampoons Animal House.
-
LeeB's posts have said most of the things I would have to say. Doug loved Villa but loved himself and money even more. Also, he didn't seem to have a lot of love for the most loveable Villa side in living memory. In fact he seemed to have a grudge against a number of individuals who were part of that team and staff. I also didn't enjoy being told by DOL on a regular basis how lucky I was that he had taken time out of his life to do me the honour of managing my club. I'm not chuffed with Lerner or Lambert at the moment but I know which pair I would rather go for a pint with.
-
It's like a boss never being in his office. It creates anarchy. This can extend to senior employees such as football managers.
Maybe if he was there all week he could offer snippets of advice like Doug.
Like "pick Curbishley" or "get rid or Mortimer".
So the story goes.
That's what Mortimer said.
-
I am also interested to know what money people think Doug put in out of his own pocket seeing as how lack of investment is being used as a stick to beat Lerner with.
Anyway, the despicable performance he put up around the Tony Barton testimonial will always mark him out as a scrote in my house.
Totally agree
-
Still all we get is anti- Ellis. What is pro-Lerner and pro-Lambert? That is more important because it is what we are left with.
-
Still all we get is anti- Ellis. What is pro-Lerner and pro-Lambert? That is more important because it is what we are left with.
There are plenty of other threads that are commenting on current problems. If a thread comes up that brings up the past it's more likely it will focus on that part.
-
Lambert or O'Dreary is an easy one. Lambert's just run out of ideas, whereas the other halfwit seemed to go out of his way whenever possible to ridicule both the club and supporters. I wouldn't piss on him if he was on fire.
-
I have to agree with people on here. The fans are not listened to, its almost like a wall of silence, no one answers our questions and we as well as fans, are customers treated almost like those of eBay or Amazon. Lerner shows no interest, his old mate Krulak did one pretty early on when the going got a little tough and Faulkner does cut and paste press releases or interviews. We have no direction and are becoming a laughing stock especially at our beloved home ground where the majority of games the away fans take the piss!
Our history is the only thing keeping us going with any sort of pride.
And what notice did Ellis take?
More than the wall of silence we are stuck with at the moment, even if it wasn't much.
-
It's like a boss never being in his office. It creates anarchy. This can extend to senior employees such as football managers.
Maybe if he was there all week he could offer snippets of advice like Doug.
Like "pick Curbishley" or "get rid or Mortimer".
So the story goes.
That's what Mortimer said.
What did Barton say? Does anyone know?
-
If I have remembered this right H&V did an interview with Barton ten years after the cup win. I seem to recall him saying Ellis was difficult to deal with and a story about not matching the contract offer Albion made to McNaught. Then months later McNaught wasn't happy and was up for returning to Villa for less money but Ellis blocked it.
-
Happier, better times under Herbert:
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1705000/images/_1709493_jmvilla300.jpg)
I get so misty-eyed remembering those halcyon days.
-
Happier, better times under Herbert:
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1705000/images/_1709493_jmvilla300.jpg)
I get so misty-eyed remembering those halcyon days.
that must be photoshopped Dave because that never happened. Ellis was great compared to that asset stripping Lerner bloke who nobody ever sees.
-
Still all we get is anti- Ellis. What is pro-Lerner and pro-Lambert? That is more important because it is what we are left with.
Would you indulge with me with something I find at odds?
How come you were so staunchly pro-McLeish until the bitter end, but turned very quickly on Lambert?
I am not saying either opinion is wrong, just wondering at the difference.
-
That does put stuff in perspective. If only Lerner knew more about the sport he was watching, I don't think many people would complain much.
-
Lerner appointed TSM,Ellis appointed McNeil call it a score draw.
I saw a piece a white dog poo today,last time I saw one I felt this seperated from my football club.
-
ellis for me just , as I had two cracking days at Wembley .
-
Happier, better times under Herbert:
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1705000/images/_1709493_jmvilla300.jpg)
I get so misty-eyed remembering those halcyon days.
that must be photoshopped Dave because that never happened. Ellis was great compared to that asset stripping Lerner bloke who nobody ever sees.
Isn't the real issue that back then the Fans did care and did vent their spleen where as now, everybody is just punch drunk by the now years of mismanagement and piss poor appointments. I think all the protest has been sucked out of the fans. It just feels like we are all walking Zombie like to the Championship.
Lerner is the unqualified architect of this demise, Faulkner his corporate bullshit yes man and Lambert his clueless foreman.
-
It took a quarter of a century of Ellis miss-rule to get to that point, with far, far, far more disastrous events occurring in that time.
We're a very patient group of fans.
-
I think Doug Ellis deserves credit for bringing SGT and BFR to the club. Also, his two gambles on Little (I think his Leicester side were bottom at the time) and Gregory worked well. The Dr Jo gamble didn't work and McNeil was a disaster, although it didn't seem the world's worst appointment at the time. Don't get me started on the Ellis and Turner period and the eagerness to break up the European cup winning team.
-
Ellis also appointed O'Neill...
-
I have to agree with people on here. The fans are not listened to, its almost like a wall of silence, no one answers our questions and we as well as fans, are customers treated almost like those of eBay or Amazon. Lerner shows no interest, his old mate Krulak did one pretty early on when the going got a little tough and Faulkner does cut and paste press releases or interviews. We have no direction and are becoming a laughing stock especially at our beloved home ground where the majority of games the away fans take the piss!
Our history is the only thing keeping us going with any sort of pride.
And what notice did Ellis take?
More than the wall of silence we are stuck with at the moment, even if it wasn't much.
I remember Doug being like the fucking Scarlett Pimpernel when the shit was hitting the fan, but first in front of the cameras if anything positive was happening.
-
It took a quarter of a century of Ellis miss-rule to get to that point, with far, far, far more disastrous events occurring in that time.
We're a very patient group of fans.
I'll give you a relegation, but we also had two Wembley wins, two runners up and a few fine sides in that period aswell. We had some mediocrity but I'd settle for that at the moment.
-
It took a quarter of a century of Ellis miss-rule to get to that point, with far, far, far more disastrous events occurring in that time.
We're a very patient group of fans.
I'll give you a relegation, but we also had two Wembley wins, two runners up and a few fine sides in that period aswell. We had some mediocrity but I'd settle for that at the moment.
We also had our fate sealed by his corner shop mentality.
-
Ellis also appointed O'Neill...
Just as the takeover was being completed. I have never been convinced MON would have signed up for working under Doug.
-
Ellis also appointed O'Neill...
Just as the takeover was being completed. I have never been convinced MON would have signed up for working under Doug.
It was Dougs last hurrah in front of the cameras.
-
Depending on whether or not you believe it he also reckons he saved us from life under Carson.
-
That was Gillett and Hicks.
-
It took a quarter of a century of Ellis miss-rule to get to that point, with far, far, far more disastrous events occurring in that time.
We're a very patient group of fans.
I'll give you a relegation, but we also had two Wembley wins, two runners up and a few fine sides in that period aswell. We had some mediocrity but I'd settle for that at the moment.
Those trophy wins took 12 years.
-
The way things are panning out under Randy, we'll be lucky to see a trophy in 22
-
Happier, better times under Herbert:
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1705000/images/_1709493_jmvilla300.jpg)
I get so misty-eyed remembering those halcyon days.
that must be photoshopped Dave because that never happened. Ellis was great compared to that asset stripping Lerner bloke who nobody ever sees.
Must be nice to have a thread where you still have plenty of like-minded people.
-
Happier, better times under Herbert:
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1705000/images/_1709493_jmvilla300.jpg)
I get so misty-eyed remembering those halcyon days.
that must be photoshopped Dave because that never happened. Ellis was great compared to that asset stripping Lerner bloke who nobody ever sees.
Must be nice to have a thread where you still have plenty of like-minded people.
Isn't that why we all use Heroes & Villains?
-
I'll always judge Ellis on him treating the manager of the greatest moment in our history with less respect than small heath, and numerous other clubs, did. We'll never forget that Ellis.
-
I think Lerner has more empathy with the club than Ellis ever had as Chairman ...
If that surprises you, consider all the altruistic stuff that has taken place that didn't need to happen (Acorns, the Holte Hotel, the Mosaics above the Holte, the free coaches to Chelsea). I cannot imagine HDE doing any of that.
Also, HDE had around 35 years in football involvement; Lerner has had 7-8.
Our Chairman and owner is not a paragon and has much to learn - he really does need a footballing man at his side - but I don't think we should challenge his commitment in sinking £200m into the club.
-
I think Lerner has more empathy with the club than Ellis ever had as Chairman ...
If that surprises you, consider all the altruistic stuff that has taken place that didn't need to happen (Acorns, the Holte Hotel, the Mosaics above the Holte, the free coaches to Chelsea). I cannot imagine HDE doing any of that.
Also, HDE had around 35 years in football involvement; Lerner has had 7-8.
Our Chairman and owner is not a paragon and has much to learn - he really does need a footballing man at his side - but I don't think we should challenge his commitment in sinking £200m into the club.
Our current owner is almost unambiguously a good man in his off-the-pitch dealings with the club. I just find it hard to see what he sees in some of these managers, though - a board which swings between Martinez and McLeish has no firm grip on matters football.
-
I think Lerner has more empathy with the club than Ellis ever had as Chairman ...
If that surprises you, consider all the altruistic stuff that has taken place that didn't need to happen (Acorns, the Holte Hotel, the Mosaics above the Holte, the free coaches to Chelsea). I cannot imagine HDE doing any of that.
Also, HDE had around 35 years in football involvement; Lerner has had 7-8.
Our Chairman and owner is not a paragon and has much to learn - he really does need a footballing man at his side - but I don't think we should challenge his commitment in sinking £200m into the club.
Our current owner is almost unambiguously a good man in his off-the-pitch dealings with the club. I just find it hard to see what he sees in some of these managers, though - a board which swings between Martinez and McLeish has no firm grip on matters football.
You're right, Monty, and I was making a specific point.
Re matters football, words like 'naive', 'uninformed' and 'lacking judgement' spring to mind.
-
I think Lerner has more empathy with the club than Ellis ever had as Chairman ...
If that surprises you, consider all the altruistic stuff that has taken place that didn't need to happen (Acorns, the Holte Hotel, the Mosaics above the Holte, the free coaches to Chelsea). I cannot imagine HDE doing any of that.
Also, HDE had around 35 years in football involvement; Lerner has had 7-8.
Our Chairman and owner is not a paragon and has much to learn - he really does need a footballing man at his side - but I don't think we should challenge his commitment in sinking £200m into the club.
Our current owner is almost unambiguously a good man in his off-the-pitch dealings with the club. I just find it hard to see what he sees in some of these managers, though - a board which swings between Martinez and McLeish has no firm grip on matters football.
You're right, Monty, and I was making a specific point.
Re matters football, words like 'naive', 'uninformed' and 'lacking judgement' spring to mind.
I do agree with the point you made. The idea that Herbert would've done almost anything good that Lerner has done is a hard one to believe. As for the football, well, I just think that he simply doesn't know enough.
-
I forgot. It's SIR Herbert.
My apologies.
-
Happier, better times under Herbert:
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1705000/images/_1709493_jmvilla300.jpg)
I get so misty-eyed remembering those halcyon days.
that must be photoshopped Dave because that never happened. Ellis was great compared to that asset stripping Lerner bloke who nobody ever sees.
Isn't the real issue that back then the Fans did care and did vent their spleen where as now, everybody is just punch drunk by the now years of mismanagement and piss poor appointments. I think all the protest has been sucked out of the fans. It just feels like we are all walking Zombie like to the Championship.
Lerner is the unqualified architect of this demise, Faulkner his corporate bullshit yes man and Lambert his clueless foreman.
Spot on.
-
Don't expect Learner to learn from his mistakes any time soon,things at the Browns were getting worse towards the end of his ownership.
Coach after coach with him not turning up to games,we are just his British version.
-
Happier, better times under Herbert:
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1705000/images/_1709493_jmvilla300.jpg)
I get so misty-eyed remembering those halcyon days.
that must be photoshopped Dave because that never happened. Ellis was great compared to that asset stripping Lerner bloke who nobody ever sees.
Isn't the real issue that back then the Fans did care and did vent their spleen where as now, everybody is just punch drunk by the now years of mismanagement and piss poor appointments. I think all the protest has been sucked out of the fans. It just feels like we are all walking Zombie like to the Championship.
Lerner is the unqualified architect of this demise, Faulkner his corporate bullshit yes man and Lambert his clueless foreman.
Spot on.
Let me get this right. Back then it was so bad that we protested. Now it's worse so we... don't protest.
Could you explain the logic there, please?
-
It took the best part of 20 years before there were any real protests against Ellis from fans, and even then they were sporadic and generally short lived. 86/87 was hardly a hotbed of protests as we finished bottom for example.
-
Happier, better times under Herbert:
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1705000/images/_1709493_jmvilla300.jpg)
I get so misty-eyed remembering those halcyon days.
that must be photoshopped Dave because that never happened. Ellis was great compared to that asset stripping Lerner bloke who nobody ever sees.
Isn't the real issue that back then the Fans did care and did vent their spleen where as now, everybody is just punch drunk by the now years of mismanagement and piss poor appointments. I think all the protest has been sucked out of the fans. It just feels like we are all walking Zombie like to the Championship.
Lerner is the unqualified architect of this demise, Faulkner his corporate bullshit yes man and Lambert his clueless foreman.
Spot on.
After the amount of money Lerner has put in, i'd be embarrassed to be hanging signs over the top of the Holte End.
-
Ah the good old days of the "Spend or Go" poster campaign around the city.
-
Ah the good old days of the "Spend or Go" poster campaign around the city.
Many years later I found out who did them. You'd be amazed to learn his identity.
-
After the amount of money Lerner has put in, i'd be embarrassed to be hanging signs over the top of the Holte End.
You mean our money, as in don't we owe it him in 'loans' ?
Or will he feck off and not want it all back ?
If it's the latter and he will walk without wanting to recoup it then, and only then will I considered it as his money that's been wasted
-
Howard Hodgson? ;D
-
After the amount of money Lerner has put in, i'd be embarrassed to be hanging signs over the top of the Holte End.
You mean our money, as in don't we owe it him in 'loans' ?
Or will he feck off and not want it all back ?
If it's the latter and he will walk without wanting to recoup it then, and only then will I considered it as his money that's been wasted
There's no pleasing some people is there?
-
After the amount of money Lerner has put in, i'd be embarrassed to be hanging signs over the top of the Holte End.
You mean our money, as in don't we owe it him in 'loans' ?
Or will he feck off and not want it all back ?
If it's the latter and he will walk without wanting to recoup it then, and only then will I considered it as his money that's been wasted
There's no pleasing some people is there?
Learner is untouchable to some,don't see why.
-
After the amount of money Lerner has put in, i'd be embarrassed to be hanging signs over the top of the Holte End.
You mean our money, as in don't we owe it him in 'loans' ?
Or will he feck off and not want it all back ?
If it's the latter and he will walk without wanting to recoup it then, and only then will I considered it as his money that's been wasted
So, in this hypothetical scenario for which there isn't just no evidence but which in fact runs contrary to the evidence, you're furious with the owner? I too am livid with him because of the part he'll play in the assassination of President Hillary Clinton. I'll never forgive him for this once it's happened if it happens.
-
After the amount of money Lerner has put in, i'd be embarrassed to be hanging signs over the top of the Holte End.
You mean our money, as in don't we owe it him in 'loans' ?
Or will he feck off and not want it all back ?
If it's the latter and he will walk without wanting to recoup it then, and only then will I considered it as his money that's been wasted
So, in this hypothetical scenario for which there isn't just no evidence but which in fact runs contrary to the evidence, you're furious with the owner? I too am livid with him because of the part he'll play in the assassination of President Hillary Clinton. I'll never forgive him for this once it's happened if it happens.
See what I mean.
-
After the amount of money Lerner has put in, i'd be embarrassed to be hanging signs over the top of the Holte End.
You mean our money, as in don't we owe it him in 'loans' ?
Or will he feck off and not want it all back ?
If it's the latter and he will walk without wanting to recoup it then, and only then will I considered it as his money that's been wasted
So, in this hypothetical scenario for which there isn't just no evidence but which in fact runs contrary to the evidence, you're furious with the owner? I too am livid with him because of the part he'll play in the assassination of President Hillary Clinton. I'll never forgive him for this once it's happened if it happens.
See what I mean.
Not really, no.
So, if you want to protest then go ahead. What's your banner going to say?
-
After the amount of money Lerner has put in, i'd be embarrassed to be hanging signs over the top of the Holte End.
You mean our money, as in don't we owe it him in 'loans' ?
Or will he feck off and not want it all back ?
If it's the latter and he will walk without wanting to recoup it then, and only then will I considered it as his money that's been wasted
So, in this hypothetical scenario for which there isn't just no evidence but which in fact runs contrary to the evidence, you're furious with the owner? I too am livid with him because of the part he'll play in the assassination of President Hillary Clinton. I'll never forgive him for this once it's happened if it happens.
See what I mean.
Well spotted, I have indeed never made a criticism of Randy Lerner in all my 10,000+ posts during his ownership.
-
After the amount of money Lerner has put in, i'd be embarrassed to be hanging signs over the top of the Holte End.
You mean our money, as in don't we owe it him in 'loans' ?
Or will he feck off and not want it all back ?
If it's the latter and he will walk without wanting to recoup it then, and only then will I considered it as his money that's been wasted
So, in this hypothetical scenario for which there isn't just no evidence but which in fact runs contrary to the evidence, you're furious with the owner? I too am livid with him because of the part he'll play in the assassination of President Hillary Clinton. I'll never forgive him for this once it's happened if it happens.
See what I mean.
Not really, no.
So, if you want to protest then go ahead. What's your banner going to say?
'Who said anything about a protest' on a blue bedsheet in red paint.
I expected an answer like that.
-
After the amount of money Lerner has put in, i'd be embarrassed to be hanging signs over the top of the Holte End.
You mean our money, as in don't we owe it him in 'loans' ?
Or will he feck off and not want it all back ?
If it's the latter and he will walk without wanting to recoup it then, and only then will I considered it as his money that's been wasted
So, in this hypothetical scenario for which there isn't just no evidence but which in fact runs contrary to the evidence, you're furious with the owner? I too am livid with him because of the part he'll play in the assassination of President Hillary Clinton. I'll never forgive him for this once it's happened if it happens.
See what I mean.
Well spotted, I have indeed never made a criticism of Randy Lerner in all my 10,000+ posts during his ownership.
This getting the same as the Lambert thread,some of the answers coming back are getting silly,and are trying to get a reaction.
Its a boring way of getting a point across.
-
After the amount of money Lerner has put in, i'd be embarrassed to be hanging signs over the top of the Holte End.
You mean our money, as in don't we owe it him in 'loans' ?
Or will he feck off and not want it all back ?
If it's the latter and he will walk without wanting to recoup it then, and only then will I considered it as his money that's been wasted
So, in this hypothetical scenario for which there isn't just no evidence but which in fact runs contrary to the evidence, you're furious with the owner? I too am livid with him because of the part he'll play in the assassination of President Hillary Clinton. I'll never forgive him for this once it's happened if it happens.
See what I mean.
Well spotted, I have indeed never made a criticism of Randy Lerner in all my 10,000+ posts during his ownership.
This getting the same as the Lambert thread,some of the answers coming back are getting silly,and are trying to get a reaction.
Its a boring way of getting a point across.
BLF, I thought sirlordbaltimore's comment was fairly ridiculous, so in a light-hearted way (I'm sure he's a nice guy and all that) I tried to poke some fun at it. You, in a fairly heroic non-sequitur, took this as an example of how Lerner is untouchable to me, which was, again, fairly ridiculous. If you don't want to get ridiculed, don't say ridiculous things.
-
After the amount of money Lerner has put in, i'd be embarrassed to be hanging signs over the top of the Holte End.
You mean our money, as in don't we owe it him in 'loans' ?
Or will he feck off and not want it all back ?
If it's the latter and he will walk without wanting to recoup it then, and only then will I considered it as his money that's been wasted
So, in this hypothetical scenario for which there isn't just no evidence but which in fact runs contrary to the evidence, you're furious with the owner? I too am livid with him because of the part he'll play in the assassination of President Hillary Clinton. I'll never forgive him for this once it's happened if it happens.
See what I mean.
Well spotted, I have indeed never made a criticism of Randy Lerner in all my 10,000+ posts during his ownership.
This getting the same as the Lambert thread,some of the answers coming back are getting silly,and are trying to get a reaction.
Its a boring way of getting a point across.
BLF, I thought sirlordbaltimore's comment was fairly ridiculous, so in a light-hearted way (I'm sure he's a nice guy and all that) I tried to poke some fun at it. You, in a fairly heroic non-sequitur, took this as an example of how Lerner is untouchable to me, which was, again, fairly ridiculous. If you don't want to get ridiculed, don't say ridiculous things.
So if somebody hasn't got the same point of view as you they are ridiculous.
Oh and your just not funny.
-
BLS, sorry, not BLF. And your just unable to spell.
And no, it's not if they don't have the same view as me. I have civil debates on here with Concrete John, Chris Smith, all sorts of people with massively different viewpoints from me but who argue sanely and rationally. If your viewpoint is 'I'm furious because Randy Lerner might do something bad' then you're not being sane or rational.
-
BLS, sorry, not BLF. And your just unable to spell.
And no, it's not if they don't have the same view as me. I have civil debates on here with Concrete John, Chris Smith, all sorts of people with massively different viewpoints from me but who argue sanely and rationally. If your viewpoint is 'I'm furious because Randy Lerner might do something bad' then you're not being sane or rational.
What on earth are you on about?
I haven't said any of that.
-
No, SLB said that. You said that my calling his point ridiculous was an example of my never criticising Lerner, part of a wider omerta on criticism of the owner which you appear to believe is going on.
-
BLS, sorry, not BLF. And your just unable to spell.
And no, it's not if they don't have the same view as me. I have civil debates on here with Concrete John, Chris Smith, all sorts of people with massively different viewpoints from me but who argue sanely and rationally. If your viewpoint is 'I'm furious because Randy Lerner might do something bad' then you're not being sane or rational.
What on earth are you on about?
I haven't said any of that.
I want to commend you on not having any spelling errors in this post.
-
No, SLB said that. You said that my calling his point ridiculous was an example of my never criticising Lerner, part of a wider omerta on criticism of the owner which you appear to believe is going on.
Yet again I haven't said that,and thank's for letting me know what I am beliving.Dear me we really do think alot of ourself don't we.
-
No, SLB said that. You said that my calling his point ridiculous was an example of my never criticising Lerner, part of a wider omerta on criticism of the owner which you appear to believe is going on.
Yet again I haven't said that,and thank's for letting me know what I am beliving.Dear me we really do think alot of ourself don't we.
I beliving in Castle Bromwich.
-
No, SLB said that. You said that my calling his point ridiculous was an example of my never criticising Lerner, part of a wider omerta on criticism of the owner which you appear to believe is going on.
Yet again I haven't said that,and thank's for letting me know what I am beliving.Dear me we really do think alot of ourself don't we.
oh deer
-
No, SLB said that. You said that my calling his point ridiculous was an example of my never criticising Lerner, part of a wider omerta on criticism of the owner which you appear to believe is going on.
Yet again I haven't said that,and thank's for letting me know what I am beliving.Dear me we really do think alot of ourself don't we.
You only appear to believe that - if you don't believe it, then you can thank your unique relationship to the language for so successfully putting across a point so different to the one which you intended.
And I don't know who else is with you, but if you both have high self-esteem then good for both of you.
-
No, SLB said that. You said that my calling his point ridiculous was an example of my never criticising Lerner, part of a wider omerta on criticism of the owner which you appear to believe is going on.
Yet again I haven't said that,and thank's for letting me know what I am beliving.Dear me we really do think alot of ourself don't we.
You only appear to believe that - if you don't believe it, then you can thank your unique relationship to the language for so successfully putting across the opposite point to the one which you intended.
And I don't know who else is with you, but if you both have high self-esteem then good for both of you.
Another poor attempt at humour keep trying.
-
No, SLB said that. You said that my calling his point ridiculous was an example of my never criticising Lerner, part of a wider omerta on criticism of the owner which you appear to believe is going on.
Yet again I haven't said that,and thank's for letting me know what I am beliving.Dear me we really do think alot of ourself don't we.
You only appear to believe that - if you don't believe it, then you can thank your unique relationship to the language for so successfully putting across the opposite point to the one which you intended.
And I don't know who else is with you, but if you both have high self-esteem then good for both of you.
Another poor attempt at humour keep trying.
Another poor attempt at grammar keep trying.
-
Nice to see the usual suspects are out to play again.
-
Nice to see the usual suspects are out to play again.
Is this your catchphrase?
-
I'm Keyser Söze
-
No, SLB said that. You said that my calling his point ridiculous was an example of my never criticising Lerner, part of a wider omerta on criticism of the owner which you appear to believe is going on.
Yet again I haven't said that,and thank's for letting me know what I am beliving.Dear me we really do think alot of ourself don't we.
In fairness BLS, you did come out with 'see what I mean' a bit earlier after Montbert's sarcastic comment about defending Lerner. I can only presume that's what Montbert is referring to.
-
No, SLB said that. You said that my calling his point ridiculous was an example of my never criticising Lerner, part of a wider omerta on criticism of the owner which you appear to believe is going on.
Yet again I haven't said that,and thank's for letting me know what I am beliving.Dear me we really do think alot of ourself don't we.
In fairness BLS, you did come out with 'see what I mean' a bit earlier after Montbert's sarcastic comment about defending Lerner. I can only presume that's what Montbert is referring to.
Then why didn't he say that instead of trying be a clever sod.
-
No, SLB said that. You said that my calling his point ridiculous was an example of my never criticising Lerner, part of a wider omerta on criticism of the owner which you appear to believe is going on.
Yet again I haven't said that,and thank's for letting me know what I am beliving.Dear me we really do think alot of ourself don't we.
In fairness BLS, you did come out with 'see what I mean' a bit earlier after Montbert's sarcastic comment about defending Lerner. I can only presume that's what Montbert is referring to.
Then why didn't he say that instead of trying be a clever sod.
I didn't think it was that clever. If you did, then I suppose that says what it says about you.
-
And the pack is out again all this anti/pro bollocks has to stop.Just because somebody doesn't agree it why does take so many of the pro camp to make the point.
-
No, SLB said that. You said that my calling his point ridiculous was an example of my never criticising Lerner, part of a wider omerta on criticism of the owner which you appear to believe is going on.
Yet again I haven't said that,and thank's for letting me know what I am beliving.Dear me we really do think alot of ourself don't we.
In fairness BLS, you did come out with 'see what I mean' a bit earlier after Montbert's sarcastic comment about defending Lerner. I can only presume that's what Montbert is referring to.
Then why didn't he say that instead of trying be a clever sod.
I didn't think it was that clever. If you did, then I suppose that says what it says about you.
Yawn.
-
And the pack is out again all this anti/pro bollocks has to stop.Just because somebody doesn't agree it why does take so many of the pro camp to make the point.
Pro fucking what?
My issue with points in this thread has been with revisionism about the reign of Doug.
-
And the pack is out again all this anti/pro bollocks has to stop.Just because somebody doesn't agree it why does take so many of the pro camp to make the point.
It's not a pack though, it's just individual comments made by individual posters.
-
And the pack is out again all this anti/pro bollocks has to stop.Just because somebody doesn't agree it why does take so many of the pro camp to make the point.
It's not a pack though, it's just individual comments made by individual posters.
Sorry don't see it that way at the moment.
-
And the pack is out again all this anti/pro bollocks has to stop.Just because somebody doesn't agree it why does take so many of the pro camp to make the point.
It's not a pack though, it's just individual comments made by individual posters.
Sorry don't see it that way at the moment.
No, that's your problem mate.
-
Despite all the shite claimed, there is no pack on either side. Just people posting their views and different posters agreeing or disagreeing depending on when they are online. It's how an internet forum works funnily enough.
-
And very few people are solely pro or anti, most have good and bad things to say about Lerner. And anyway, even if people are entirely pro or anti it doesn't matter - what is objected to are hysterical statements based on no evidence whatsoever. If someone had come out and said that they support Lerner because he might one day put in £200m to buy Messi that would be just as ridiculous as someone saying they hate him because he might pull the plug and call in his loans.
-
Despite all the shite claimed, there is no pack on either side. Just people posting their views and different posters agreeing or disagreeing depending on when they are online. It's how an internet forum works funnily enough.
No it isnt :)
Sorry just trying to start an arguement
-
Despite all the shite claimed, there is no pack on either side. Just people posting their views and different posters agreeing or disagreeing depending on when they are online. It's how an internet forum works funnily enough.
No it isnt :)
Sorry just trying to start an arguement
Yes it is!
And until everyone agrees i'll scweam and scweam until i'm sick.
-
Is this the room for an argument?
-
Despite all the shite claimed, there is no pack on either side. Just people posting their views and different posters agreeing or disagreeing depending on when they are online. It's how an internet forum works funnily enough.
We are going to have to agree to disagree on this one.Since Saturday there has been a change of posting style if anybody 'has a go at the club'.
-
Anyone fancy a dust-up about the Swiss Rambler?
-
Despite all the shite claimed, there is no pack on either side. Just people posting their views and different posters agreeing or disagreeing depending on when they are online. It's how an internet forum works funnily enough.
We are going to have to agree to disagree on this one.Since Saturday there has been a change of posting style if anybody 'has a go at the club'.
I'm sorry but that's rubbish, it really is.
-
Despite all the shite claimed, there is no pack on either side. Just people posting their views and different posters agreeing or disagreeing depending on when they are online. It's how an internet forum works funnily enough.
We are going to have to agree to disagree on this one.Since Saturday there has been a change of posting style if anybody 'has a go at the club'.
I'm sorry but that's rubbish, it really is.
No it isn't some of it has been aimed at me.
-
And very few people are solely pro or anti, most have good and bad things to say about Lerner. And anyway, even if people are entirely pro or anti it doesn't matter - what is objected to are hysterical statements based on no evidence whatsoever. If someone had come out and said that they support Lerner because he might one day put in £200m to buy Messi that would be just as ridiculous as someone saying they hate him because he might pull the plug and call in his loans.
I actually think there are a number of purely anti-Lerner people out there hoping and praying he'll sell up. The so called Pro lobby aren't pro at all. I would like to see him fix the manager problem and increase his net spending in the summer from what it has been in recent years. I've been critical of him for hiring McLeish, but also acknowledge that while he has made errors he has done a lot of good things. I'm not oblivious to the fact that most fans view the club only from a footballing side of things and that's absolutely within their rights to do so. It has not been a success, and the last three seasons have been very poor. However I choose to look at it as a complete body of work. It's not perfect, but it is far from shit as some might have you believe. He's made massive investments and I am sure he's not happy about the return.
-
And the pack is out again all this anti/pro bollocks has to stop.Just because somebody doesn't agree it why does take so many of the pro camp to make the point.
You think there should be a limit to anyone disagreeing with you?
-
I would say I am pro-Villa and desperate for everybody connected to succeed.
-
And the pack is out again all this anti/pro bollocks has to stop.Just because somebody doesn't agree it why does take so many of the pro camp to make the point.
You think there should be a limit to anyone disagreeing with you?
And very few people are solely pro or anti, most have good and bad things to say about Lerner. And anyway, even if people are entirely pro or anti it doesn't matter - what is objected to are hysterical statements based on no evidence whatsoever. If someone had come out and said that they support Lerner because he might one day put in £200m to buy Messi that would be just as ridiculous as someone saying they hate him because he might pull the plug and call in his loans.
I actually think there are a number of purely anti-Lerner people out there hoping and praying he'll sell up. The so called Pro lobby aren't pro at all. I would like to see him fix the manager problem and increase his net spending in the summer from what it has been in recent years. I've been critical of him for hiring McLeish, but also acknowledge that while he has made errors he has done a lot of good things. I'm not oblivious to the fact that most fans view the club only from a footballing side of things and that's absolutely within their rights to do so. It has not been a success, and the last three seasons have been very poor. However I choose to look at it as a complete body of work. It's not perfect, but it is far from shit as some might have you believe. He's made massive investments and I am sure he's not happy about the return.
So you can have purely anti Learner but only so called pro lobby?
-
I would say I am pro-Villa and desperate for everybody connected to succeed.
count me in
-
And the pack is out again all this anti/pro bollocks has to stop.Just because somebody doesn't agree it why does take so many of the pro camp to make the point.
You think there should be a limit to anyone disagreeing with you?
No and I didn't mean it like that.
-
And very few people are solely pro or anti, most have good and bad things to say about Lerner. And anyway, even if people are entirely pro or anti it doesn't matter - what is objected to are hysterical statements based on no evidence whatsoever. If someone had come out and said that they support Lerner because he might one day put in £200m to buy Messi that would be just as ridiculous as someone saying they hate him because he might pull the plug and call in his loans.
I actually think there are a number of purely anti-Lerner people out there hoping and praying he'll sell up. The so called Pro lobby aren't pro at all. I would like to see him fix the manager problem and increase his net spending in the summer from what it has been in recent years. I've been critical of him for hiring McLeish, but also acknowledge that while he has made errors he has done a lot of good things. I'm not oblivious to the fact that most fans view the club only from a footballing side of things and that's absolutely within their rights to do so. It has not been a success, and the last three seasons have been very poor. However I choose to look at it as a complete body of work. It's not perfect, but it is far from shit as some might have you believe. He's made massive investments and I am sure he's not happy about the return.
There probably are these purely antis out there, and they're perfectly entitled to their view - God knows the football's given us all enough to complain about. I would side with you, in that I the football is actually the aberration in what has generally been a very well-meant stewardship (pretty big aberration at a, you know, football club, but there it is). However, I don't think anybody is saying there are no problems, and there are quite a few people who seem intent on making up problems about which to bitch and moan - pretty unnecessary, given how many problems there actually are.
-
And the pack is out again all this anti/pro bollocks has to stop.Just because somebody doesn't agree it why does take so many of the pro camp to make the point.
You think there should be a limit to anyone disagreeing with you?
And very few people are solely pro or anti, most have good and bad things to say about Lerner. And anyway, even if people are entirely pro or anti it doesn't matter - what is objected to are hysterical statements based on no evidence whatsoever. If someone had come out and said that they support Lerner because he might one day put in £200m to buy Messi that would be just as ridiculous as someone saying they hate him because he might pull the plug and call in his loans.
I actually think there are a number of purely anti-Lerner people out there hoping and praying he'll sell up. The so called Pro lobby aren't pro at all. I would like to see him fix the manager problem and increase his net spending in the summer from what it has been in recent years. I've been critical of him for hiring McLeish, but also acknowledge that while he has made errors he has done a lot of good things. I'm not oblivious to the fact that most fans view the club only from a footballing side of things and that's absolutely within their rights to do so. It has not been a success, and the last three seasons have been very poor. However I choose to look at it as a complete body of work. It's not perfect, but it is far from shit as some might have you believe. He's made massive investments and I am sure he's not happy about the return.
So you can have purely anti Learner but only so called pro lobby?
yes, read my explanation. There have been a number of posters that want him to sell and go. Plenty of "fuck off Lerner" posts and accusations of asset stripping. If you had any balance in your argument you'd never write that sort of stuff. Nobody that I know endorses Lerner, Faulkner or Lambert 100%.
And it's LERNER, NOT LEARNER, unless you are having trouble LEARNING how to spell his name.
-
Despite all the shite claimed, there is no pack on either side. Just people posting their views and different posters agreeing or disagreeing depending on when they are online. It's how an internet forum works funnily enough.
We are going to have to agree to disagree on this one.Since Saturday there has been a change of posting style if anybody 'has a go at the club'.
I'm sorry but that's rubbish, it really is.
No it isn't some of it has been aimed at me.
And you're big enough to dish it out as well. If for example you and SH are making the same point to a poster you disagree with at the same time are you ganging up or is it simply a case of you both disagree and are both online at the same time?
Or if I stated right now I love Lambert and Lerner and fully support them i'm going to take a wild guess that a number of different posters would quote my post saying they disagreed, some more vociferously than others, doesn't mean they are ganging up does it? They'd simply be stating their own view points when they are online.
As I said, it's how an internet forum works and it would be pretty damn boring if we all held the same viewpoint on everything.
-
And the pack is out again all this anti/pro bollocks has to stop.Just because somebody doesn't agree it why does take so many of the pro camp to make the point.
You think there should be a limit to anyone disagreeing with you?
And very few people are solely pro or anti, most have good and bad things to say about Lerner. And anyway, even if people are entirely pro or anti it doesn't matter - what is objected to are hysterical statements based on no evidence whatsoever. If someone had come out and said that they support Lerner because he might one day put in £200m to buy Messi that would be just as ridiculous as someone saying they hate him because he might pull the plug and call in his loans.
I actually think there are a number of purely anti-Lerner people out there hoping and praying he'll sell up. The so called Pro lobby aren't pro at all. I would like to see him fix the manager problem and increase his net spending in the summer from what it has been in recent years. I've been critical of him for hiring McLeish, but also acknowledge that while he has made errors he has done a lot of good things. I'm not oblivious to the fact that most fans view the club only from a footballing side of things and that's absolutely within their rights to do so. It has not been a success, and the last three seasons have been very poor. However I choose to look at it as a complete body of work. It's not perfect, but it is far from shit as some might have you believe. He's made massive investments and I am sure he's not happy about the return.
So you can have purely anti Learner but only so called pro lobby?
yes, read my explanation. There have been a number of posters that want him to sell and go. Plenty of "fuck off Lerner" posts and accusations of asset stripping. If you had any balance in your argument you'd never write that sort of stuff. Nobody that I know endorses Lerner, Faulkner or Lambert 100%.
And it's LERNER, NOT LEARNER, unless you are having trouble LEARNING how to spell his name.
I have never told him to fuck as far as I know,and stop with pulling up about the spellimg.
-
There are two types of posters on this forum. Those who agree with me and those who are wrong.
-
Can we try and keep it civil please folks rather than just getting in digs for the sake of it.
-
You can argue about Lerner/Lambert/Ellis as regards their good/bad intentions and success/failures but O'Leary was just an utter scumbag and it is regrettable he ever had any association with our club.
-
And the pack is out again all this anti/pro bollocks has to stop.Just because somebody doesn't agree it why does take so many of the pro camp to make the point.
You think there should be a limit to anyone disagreeing with you?
And very few people are solely pro or anti, most have good and bad things to say about Lerner. And anyway, even if people are entirely pro or anti it doesn't matter - what is objected to are hysterical statements based on no evidence whatsoever. If someone had come out and said that they support Lerner because he might one day put in £200m to buy Messi that would be just as ridiculous as someone saying they hate him because he might pull the plug and call in his loans.
I actually think there are a number of purely anti-Lerner people out there hoping and praying he'll sell up. The so called Pro lobby aren't pro at all. I would like to see him fix the manager problem and increase his net spending in the summer from what it has been in recent years. I've been critical of him for hiring McLeish, but also acknowledge that while he has made errors he has done a lot of good things. I'm not oblivious to the fact that most fans view the club only from a footballing side of things and that's absolutely within their rights to do so. It has not been a success, and the last three seasons have been very poor. However I choose to look at it as a complete body of work. It's not perfect, but it is far from shit as some might have you believe. He's made massive investments and I am sure he's not happy about the return.
So you can have purely anti Learner but only so called pro lobby?
yes, read my explanation. There have been a number of posters that want him to sell and go. Plenty of "fuck off Lerner" posts and accusations of asset stripping. If you had any balance in your argument you'd never write that sort of stuff. Nobody that I know endorses Lerner, Faulkner or Lambert 100%.
And it's LERNER, NOT LEARNER, unless you are having trouble LEARNING how to spell his name.
I have never told him to fuck as far as I know,and stop with pulling up about the spellimg.
you haven't but some people have. I would class those people as anti-Lerner. Do you know anyone who is 100% Pro-Lerner? I don't.
-
Nice to see the thread turn into a "Pick on bertlambshank tonight " type thread.
A long standing member of the forum and now he is rounded on by those who have got along with him.
Nothing fucking changes does it really.
Lambasting somebody for having a slightly different point of view seems to be popular on here of late.
Get your bloody house in order ffs.
Disgracefull.
Pick the spelling mistakes out of that, then shove them where the sun don't shine.
-
#facepalm
-
Nice to see the thread turn into a "Pick on bertlambshank tonight " type thread.
A long standing member of the forum and now he is rounded on by those who have got along with him.
Nothing fucking changes does it really.
Lambasting somebody for having a slightly different point of view seems to be popular on here of late.
Get your bloody house in order ffs.
Disgracefull.
Pick the spelling mistakes out of that, then shove them where the sun don't shine.
He hasn't been picked on at all. He joined in a discussion and he got disagreed with. It happens and it will always happen. It's called difference of opinion.
-
Nice to see the thread turn into a "Pick on bertlambshank tonight " type thread.
A long standing member of the forum and now he is rounded on by those who have got along with him.
Nothing fucking changes does it really.
Lambasting somebody for having a slightly different point of view seems to be popular on here of late.
Get your bloody house in order ffs.
Disgracefull.
Pick the spelling mistakes out of that, then shove them where the sun don't shine.
Will do.
-
This country has gone to pot.
-
I think I am totally pro-Lerner because I consider his faults to have arisen from being badly advised or not advised at all. I consider him to be entirely well meaning as far as Villa are concerned. The worst thing I can bring myself to blame him for is naivety and that compared with some of the nest of vipers who now own football clubs is nothing. For balance I admit I am anti pretty much everybody else.
-
I think I am totally pro-Lerner because I consider his faults to have arisen from being badly advised or not advised at all. I consider him to be entirely well meaning as far as Villa are concerned. The worst thing I can bring myself to blame him for is naivety and that compared with some of the nest of vipers who now own football clubs is nothing. For balance I admit I am anti pretty much everybody else.
I agree. Especially with being anti-everything.
-
If it helps, I hate everyone. Apart from Darren. Darren is ace.
-
bertlambshank has made an error of judgement and has subsequently apologised. Time to move on.
-
Sorry if caused any offence to anyone,a made a genuine mistake and feel awful.I will give myself a break for a few,I think I need it.
Once again very sorry.
-
bertlambshank has made an error of judgement and has subsequently apologised. Time to move on.
I agree
-
Sorry if caused any offence to anyone,a made a genuine mistake and feel awful.I will give myself a break for a few,I think I need it.
Once again very sorry.
Cheers for apologising Bert, much appreciated.
-
Sorry if caused any offence to anyone,a made a genuine mistake and feel awful.I will give myself a break for a few,I think I need it.
Once again very sorry.
Apology duly accepted.
-
I am especially anti having no magazine I can put in my tin box in my loft for my great grandchildren to find.
-
Is this the room for an argument?
I've told you once
-
I would say I am pro-Villa and desperate for everybody connected to succeed.
Me and all. And probably everybody who posts on this forum. Except the Birmingham City fans who log in occasionally.....
I still think something has to give somewhere, we can't stay fighting relegation forever and need to face up to whatever isn't working. Villa are a great club and should be doing better.
-
Well, there may be the first sign of discontent towards Lerner in his era in the form of banners at Selhurst Park on Saturday.
'Where has the ambition gone?' has apparently been prepared.
-
Still all we get is anti- Ellis. What is pro-Lerner and pro-Lambert? That is more important because it is what we are left with.
Would you indulge with me with something I find at odds?
How come you were so staunchly pro-McLeish until the bitter end, but turned very quickly on Lambert?
I am not saying either opinion is wrong, just wondering at the difference.
Could you enlighten me how quickly I turned on Lambert please?
-
I think Lerner has been unlucky, Naïve and sometimes incompetent. His appointment record is awful and I include Faulkner and every Manager since MON.
With our worst Home record ever the bloke is absolutely nowhere to be seen, his absence and silence is damning.
He should be at VP BH sorting this mess out and that includes getting rid of Lambert because there is nothing to be gained by keeping him. But again unfortunately when leadership is required it is not there. It is perfectly understandable why people are turning their attention towards him. I would love him to succeed but I don't think he has the necessary skills support or ambition to achieve anything with Villa. It looks like he has given up.
-
And the pack is out again all this anti/pro bollocks has to stop.Just because somebody doesn't agree it why does take so many of the pro camp to make the point.
It's not a pack though, it's just individual comments made by individual posters.
Just a coincidence that it is always the same ones.
-
This isn't coincidence, it's because it's what they think, it's a forum, when someone says something you agree or disagree with it, you might make a post agreeing or disagreeing with it!
-
Still all we get is anti- Ellis. What is pro-Lerner and pro-Lambert? That is more important because it is what we are left with.
Would you indulge with me with something I find at odds?
How come you were so staunchly pro-McLeish until the bitter end, but turned very quickly on Lambert?
I am not saying either opinion is wrong, just wondering at the difference.
Could you enlighten me how quickly I turned on Lambert please?
I think you were one of the first detractors of him last season. I am just curious as to why you defended McLeish to the hilt, but didn't afford Lambert the same leeway.
-
Still all we get is anti- Ellis. What is pro-Lerner and pro-Lambert? That is more important because it is what we are left with.
Would you indulge with me with something I find at odds?
How come you were so staunchly pro-McLeish until the bitter end, but turned very quickly on Lambert?
I am not saying either opinion is wrong, just wondering at the difference.
Could you enlighten me how quickly I turned on Lambert please?
I think you were one of the first detractors of him last season. I am just curious as to why you defended McLeish to the hilt, but didn't afford Lambert the same leeway.
I usually side with the underdog in the first instance. As the shit gets heaped on them more and more, it makes me side with them even more. In this case, Lambert was not the underdog and I rumbled him early on. A similar question could be asked why people stand by Lambert when there is no justifiable reason.
Seconds away....
-
Still all we get is anti- Ellis. What is pro-Lerner and pro-Lambert? That is more important because it is what we are left with.
Would you indulge with me with something I find at odds?
How come you were so staunchly pro-McLeish until the bitter end, but turned very quickly on Lambert?
I am not saying either opinion is wrong, just wondering at the difference.
Could you enlighten me how quickly I turned on Lambert please?
I think you were one of the first detractors of him last season. I am just curious as to why you defended McLeish to the hilt, but didn't afford Lambert the same leeway.
I usually side with the underdog in the first instance. As the shit gets heaped on them more and more, it makes me side with them even more. In this case, Lambert was not the underdog and I rumbled him early on. A similar question could be asked why people stand by Lambert when there is no justifiable reason.
Seconds away....
I don't really see anyone siding with Lambert as such. There are a few who want to give him until the end of the season and some who reckon he should be given till Christmas, both of which are fair enough.
-
Still all we get is anti- Ellis. What is pro-Lerner and pro-Lambert? That is more important because it is what we are left with.
Would you indulge with me with something I find at odds?
How come you were so staunchly pro-McLeish until the bitter end, but turned very quickly on Lambert?
I am not saying either opinion is wrong, just wondering at the difference.
Could you enlighten me how quickly I turned on Lambert please?
I think you were one of the first detractors of him last season. I am just curious as to why you defended McLeish to the hilt, but didn't afford Lambert the same leeway.
I usually side with the underdog in the first instance. As the shit gets heaped on them more and more, it makes me side with them even more. In this case, Lambert was not the underdog and I rumbled him early on. A similar question could be asked why people stand by Lambert when there is no justifiable reason.
Seconds away....
I don't really see anyone siding with Lambert as such. There are a few who want to give him until the end of the season and some who reckon he should be given till Christmas, both of which are fair enough.
Trouble with Christmas is, who would be around apart from sacked managers? Close season you have more chance of bending the ear of some still in a job.
-
I should have added 'defensive of the overall regime' rather than just Lambert.
-
ERM... didnt want to start a new thread in case it's rubbish but has anyone else heard the rumour that a takeover is in progress?
-
Still all we get is anti- Ellis. What is pro-Lerner and pro-Lambert? That is more important because it is what we are left with.
Would you indulge with me with something I find at odds?
How come you were so staunchly pro-McLeish until the bitter end, but turned very quickly on Lambert?
I am not saying either opinion is wrong, just wondering at the difference.
Could you enlighten me how quickly I turned on Lambert please?
I think you were one of the first detractors of him last season. I am just curious as to why you defended McLeish to the hilt, but didn't afford Lambert the same leeway.
I usually side with the underdog in the first instance. As the shit gets heaped on them more and more, it makes me side with them even more. In this case, Lambert was not the underdog and I rumbled him early on. A similar question could be asked why people stand by Lambert when there is no justifiable reason.
Seconds away....
I don't really see anyone siding with Lambert as such. There are a few who want to give him until the end of the season and some who reckon he should be given till Christmas, both of which are fair enough.
Trouble with Christmas is, who would be around apart from sacked managers? Close season you have more chance of bending the ear of some still in a job.
You're right.
It's a tough call for me. I want him to succeed, but I've got to admit this season has made it hard to believe he will. And I think come the summer we, as a club will be in a better position to rebuild than we were two years before.
So maybe it would be wise to say thanks for all the hard work, but we're going to use someone else for the next phase.
-
I think Lerner has been unlucky, Naïve and sometimes incompetent. His appointment record is awful and I include Faulkner and every Manager since MON.
With our worst Home record ever the bloke is absolutely nowhere to be seen, his absence and silence is damning.
He should be at VP BH sorting this mess out and that includes getting rid of Lambert because there is nothing to be gained by keeping him. But again unfortunately when leadership is required it is not there. It is perfectly understandable why people are turning their attention towards him. I would love him to succeed but I don't think he has the necessary skills support or ambition to achieve anything with Villa. It looks like he has given up.
I think too many poor appointments for him to be considered unlucky.
As for Bodymoor Heath I don't think I want him anywhere near there
-
ERM... didnt want to start a new thread in case it's rubbish but has anyone else heard the rumour that a takeover is in progress?
No - go on...?
-
I think I am totally pro-Lerner because I consider his faults to have arisen from being badly advised or not advised at all. I consider him to be entirely well meaning as far as Villa are concerned. The worst thing I can bring myself to blame him for is naivety and that compared with some of the nest of vipers who now own football clubs is nothing. For balance I admit I am anti pretty much everybody else.
I agree.
-
Still all we get is anti- Ellis. What is pro-Lerner and pro-Lambert? That is more important because it is what we are left with.
Would you indulge with me with something I find at odds?
How come you were so staunchly pro-McLeish until the bitter end, but turned very quickly on Lambert?
I am not saying either opinion is wrong, just wondering at the difference.
Could you enlighten me how quickly I turned on Lambert please?
I think you were one of the first detractors of him last season. I am just curious as to why you defended McLeish to the hilt, but didn't afford Lambert the same leeway.
I usually side with the underdog in the first instance. As the shit gets heaped on them more and more, it makes me side with them even more. In this case, Lambert was not the underdog and I rumbled him early on. A similar question could be asked why people stand by Lambert when there is no justifiable reason.
Seconds away....
I don't really see anyone siding with Lambert as such. There are a few who want to give him until the end of the season and some who reckon he should be given till Christmas, both of which are fair enough.
Trouble with Christmas is, who would be around apart from sacked managers? Close season you have more chance of bending the ear of some still in a job.
You're right.
It's a tough call for me. I want him to succeed, but I've got to admit this season has made it hard to believe he will. And I think come the summer we, as a club will be in a better position to rebuild than we were two years before.
So maybe it would be wise to say thanks for all the hard work, but we're going to use someone else for the next phase.
My problem with that is we end up withunwanted players who don't fit in with the new bloke's ideas and in another 12 months time we are having similar threads on here just with a different name in the heading.
I haven't seen one convincing argument against allowing him the chance to see what happens with a couple more signings and a fully fit squad. I don't buy the availability in December argument, such is the churn with managers there are always people looking for jobs and if we are such a draw why is it any different mid season?
-
Still all we get is anti- Ellis. What is pro-Lerner and pro-Lambert? That is more important because it is what we are left with.
Would you indulge with me with something I find at odds?
How come you were so staunchly pro-McLeish until the bitter end, but turned very quickly on Lambert?
I am not saying either opinion is wrong, just wondering at the difference.
Could you enlighten me how quickly I turned on Lambert please?
I think you were one of the first detractors of him last season. I am just curious as to why you defended McLeish to the hilt, but didn't afford Lambert the same leeway.
I usually side with the underdog in the first instance. As the shit gets heaped on them more and more, it makes me side with them even more. In this case, Lambert was not the underdog and I rumbled him early on. A similar question could be asked why people stand by Lambert when there is no justifiable reason.
Seconds away....
I thought as much.
I got the impression that you liked McLeish and may have met him a few times living Dorridge way. I assumed that Lambert was afforded less time by you as McLeish took stick at Norwich and Lambert's name was chanted as he was a popular choice. Your prerogative of course.
You do know that if you were in your 20's you'd have thick rimmed glasses, tight fitting jeans and wear 80's woolly jumpers in an ironic fashion? You big hipster.
Which leads me to a joke for the class, ahem;
How do you drown an hipster?
In the mainstream.
-
For me it's get to the end of the season and see where we are.
-
ERM... didnt want to start a new thread in case it's rubbish but has anyone else heard the rumour that a takeover is in progress?
Its the Sultan of Brunei I have heard. Apparently he got lost on Sherlock Street looking for the Sty and wound up at B6 instead.
-
Ads wrote:
'You do know that if you were in your 20's you'd have thick rimmed glasses, tight fitting jeans and wear 80's woolly jumpers in an ironic fashion? You big hipster. '
That's him in his 50's.
-
Chris - I would be surprised if we are not having similar threads with the same or different name(s) this time next season and possibly the season after next.
If Lambert got sacked today, in 6 weeks time or 6 months time I honestly don't think it will make the blindest bit of difference to our league position or rather the trajectory of the first team. The malaise within the club is deeper than that and maybe Lambert is just the most visible and significant symptom.
-
Chris - I would be surprised if we are not having similar threads with the same or different name(s) this time next season and possibly the season after next.
If Lambert got sacked today, in 6 weeks time or 6 months time I honestly don't think it will make the blindest bit of difference to our league position or rather the trajectory of the first team. The malaise within the club is deeper than that and maybe Lambert is just the most visible and significant symptom.
That malaise has been there since 2010.
-
It's not about things running deep at all. The position is very simple.
The decline happened when the quality of the squad began to decrease. You cannot lose the likes of Barry, Milner, Young and Petrov from a midfield, not replace them and then wonder why you're not doing so well.
Everybody is aware of the financially situation, but the fact remains that the midfield is poor and has been since our best players were pinched. Until we find new quality to supplement Delph, we will struggle.
The indication from the club is that the financial situation has normalised, so we should be in a position to direct the annual budget at 2-3 quality midfielders. That has to be the priority for whoever is in charge come August.
-
ERM... didnt want to start a new thread in case it's rubbish but has anyone else heard the rumour that a takeover is in progress?
No - go on...?
I know no more than that. Another fansite are quoting 'reliable' multiple sources that a takeover is in progress. Probably a total load of tosh.
But just in case it isn't, you heard from me first.
-
Under Lerner/Lambert we've got no chance of getting close to top 6. O Leary finished his first season 6th (joint 5th) with 56 points. I don't think under the current budgetary restraints we'd ever see Lambert getting anywhere close to a points tally like that (even if he had the money O Neill had to spend, he'd struggle to achieve that) and these days you need comfortably over 60 to finish top 6 too. It's unlikely this season that Lambert will even match O Leary's worst haul of 42 points.
Even comfortably mid-table seems beyond us at the moment.
im guessing here, but relative to income, o'leary probably had more to spend than lambert has. You'd expect him to do better. He's still a pig faced ****** though, so yes we are better off now.
The problem is, even though it was relatively recent times in our history, the playing field has changed so much in such a short space of time, we're comparing apples and oranges.
-
ERM... didnt want to start a new thread in case it's rubbish but has anyone else heard the rumour that a takeover is in progress?
No - go on...?
This is the second time I've seen this mentioned. The first mention of it was by the clowns who thought it would be funny to post up the Paul Lambert sacking as a "if carlsberg did updates" joke.
-
It's not about things running deep at all. The position is very simple.
The decline happened when the quality of the squad began to decrease. You cannot lose the likes of Barry, Milner, Young and Petrov from a midfield, not replace them and then wonder why you're not doing so well.
Everybody is aware of the financially situation, but the fact remains that the midfield is poor and has been since our best players were pinched. Until we find new quality to supplement Delph, we will struggle.
The indication from the club is that the financial situation has normalised, so we should be in a position to direct the annual budget at 2-3 quality midfielders. That has to be the priority for whoever is in charge come August.
I severely doubt that playing wise that is our only problem. We have currently 4 nailed on players of Premiership quality, 2 possibles (Okore and the Big K). The rest are maybes and couldbes and some are deinitely are not - the latter includes the left backs who belong to us and the two 'young' centre backs.
-
Still all we get is anti- Ellis. What is pro-Lerner and pro-Lambert? That is more important because it is what we are left with.
Would you indulge with me with something I find at odds?
How come you were so staunchly pro-McLeish until the bitter end, but turned very quickly on Lambert?
I am not saying either opinion is wrong, just wondering at the difference.
Could you enlighten me how quickly I turned on Lambert please?
I think you were one of the first detractors of him last season. I am just curious as to why you defended McLeish to the hilt, but didn't afford Lambert the same leeway.
I usually side with the underdog in the first instance. As the shit gets heaped on them more and more, it makes me side with them even more. In this case, Lambert was not the underdog and I rumbled him early on. A similar question could be asked why people stand by Lambert when there is no justifiable reason.
Seconds away....
I don't really see anyone siding with Lambert as such. There are a few who want to give him until the end of the season and some who reckon he should be given till Christmas, both of which are fair enough.
Trouble with Christmas is, who would be around apart from sacked managers? Close season you have more chance of bending the ear of some still in a job.
You're right.
It's a tough call for me. I want him to succeed, but I've got to admit this season has made it hard to believe he will. And I think come the summer we, as a club will be in a better position to rebuild than we were two years before.
So maybe it would be wise to say thanks for all the hard work, but we're going to use someone else for the next phase.
My problem with that is we end up withunwanted players who don't fit in with the new bloke's ideas and in another 12 months time we are having similar threads on here just with a different name in the heading.
I haven't seen one convincing argument against allowing him the chance to see what happens with a couple more signings and a fully fit squad. I don't buy the availability in December argument, such is the churn with managers there are always people looking for jobs and if we are such a draw why is it any different mid season?
I think it's probably easier on the conscience of any manager to leave a post in the close season rather than halfway through, so we're less likely to go down.
Chris, I'm not entirely against giving him more time, in fact until very recently I would've insisted on it, but the sheer volume of shit football I've witnessed this season is testing, we're nearly two years down the line and there's little evidence of any pattern to our play and we seem to have lost the momentum we built after last seasons struggles completely.
-
Irrespective when a manager leaves a club there are always going to be unwanted players. It's better that the many of unwanted players are of the value we have paid as opposed to giving Lambert significant funds and then having to fire him. Like I said earlier, if we fire him in the middle of next season, a lot has gone wrong and a lot more money will have been spent on players Lambert will have identified and that ultimately won't have worked out.
-
Irrespective when a manager leaves a club there are always going to be unwanted players. It's better that the many of unwanted players are of the value we have paid as opposed to giving Lambert significant funds and then having to fire him. Like I said earlier, if we fire him in the middle of next season, a lot has gone wrong and a lot more money will have been spent on players Lambert will have identified and that ultimately won't have worked out.
That's the crux of it, and I think you were right, either change it this summer or back him properly.
-
Irrespective when a manager leaves a club there are always going to be unwanted players. It's better that the many of unwanted players are of the value we have paid as opposed to giving Lambert significant funds and then having to fire him. Like I said earlier, if we fire him in the middle of next season, a lot has gone wrong and a lot more money will have been spent on players Lambert will have identified and that ultimately won't have worked out.
That's the crux of it, and I think you were right, either change it this summer or back him properly.
The other thing Lee is that if you do back him properly, you then need to give him the required time to integrate those players. It would likely mean extending his contract which would be a highly controversial move by the board.
-
Irrespective when a manager leaves a club there are always going to be unwanted players. It's better that the many of unwanted players are of the value we have paid as opposed to giving Lambert significant funds and then having to fire him. Like I said earlier, if we fire him in the middle of next season, a lot has gone wrong and a lot more money will have been spent on players Lambert will have identified and that ultimately won't have worked out.
That's the crux of it, and I think you were right, either change it this summer or back him properly.
The other thing Lee is that if you do back him properly, you then need to give him the required time to integrate those players. It would likely mean extending his contract which would be a highly controversial move by the board.
Agreed, that's sort of what I meant by backing him properly. Not just with money but time too.
It's not the kind of decision I'd want to have to make.
-
I have just written an article which concludes with just that.
-
Irrespective when a manager leaves a club there are always going to be unwanted players. It's better that the many of unwanted players are of the value we have paid as opposed to giving Lambert significant funds and then having to fire him. Like I said earlier, if we fire him in the middle of next season, a lot has gone wrong and a lot more money will have been spent on players Lambert will have identified and that ultimately won't have worked out.
Our position is unique in that we have just spent two years trying to shed the unwanted players from three former regimes. Just at the point where we might be able to exploit that it would be perverse to put ourselves in the position of having to do it again, particularly as there are no guarantees of any replacement doing any better. That then leaves us 12 months down the line having the same conversations.
Lambert might fall flat on his arse next year but as things stand I think he is better placed to make the most of the current situation than any potential replacement.
-
Irrespective when a manager leaves a club there are always going to be unwanted players. It's better that the many of unwanted players are of the value we have paid as opposed to giving Lambert significant funds and then having to fire him. Like I said earlier, if we fire him in the middle of next season, a lot has gone wrong and a lot more money will have been spent on players Lambert will have identified and that ultimately won't have worked out.
Our position is unique in that we have just spent two years trying to shed the unwanted players from three former regimes. Just at the point where we might be able to exploit that it would be perverse to put ourselves in the position of having to do it again, particularly as there are no guarantees of any replacement doing any better. That then leaves us 12 months down the line having the same conversations.
Lambert might fall flat on his arse next year but as things stand I think he is better placed to make the most of the current situation than any potential replacement.
That's a pretty big statement, Chris. You really think there isn't a manager we might attract who'd be likely to do better?
-
I don't disagree entirely Chris. Believe me I'm massively torn on not wanting to see much more of this under Lambert and giving him the proper tools and resources to push us forward properly. I realise he's agreed to work within the parameters set by the club and done what they have asked of him, which in itself creates mutual loyalty. But at the same time there needs to be some tangible evidence of improvement even if it is marginal due to the resources provided. I think that's where the problem lies. I get the limitations. I get the argument to carry this on, but I'm not seeing on a consistent basis any tangible improvement. Bright spots for sure. Injuries haven't helped, but there should have been a bit more. Now, it might come together on Saturday and the other 5 games. We'll see I suppose. I'm just struggling with this a little and the idea of him staying longer.
-
Irrespective when a manager leaves a club there are always going to be unwanted players. It's better that the many of unwanted players are of the value we have paid as opposed to giving Lambert significant funds and then having to fire him. Like I said earlier, if we fire him in the middle of next season, a lot has gone wrong and a lot more money will have been spent on players Lambert will have identified and that ultimately won't have worked out.
Our position is unique in that we have just spent two years trying to shed the unwanted players from three former regimes. Just at the point where we might be able to exploit that it would be perverse to put ourselves in the position of having to do it again, particularly as there are no guarantees of any replacement doing any better. That then leaves us 12 months down the line having the same conversations.
Lambert might fall flat on his arse next year but as things stand I think he is better placed to make the most of the current situation than any potential replacement.
That's a pretty big statement, Chris. You really think there isn't a manager we might attract who'd be likely to do better?
I think we're also in a position that our first 11 needs 4-5 new players anyway. A new manager would likely make that amount of signings, and you'd imagine at the very least, he'd be given 20 mill.
That a new man comes in inheriting the likes of Tonev, Sylla and Bowery is irrelivent. They don't cost us a great deal, and they don't have to be used.
Players like Bacuna, Westwood and obviously Benteke are good enough that a new man could use them. The rest may get their chance and if they don't, we get rid.
A new manager won't be inheriting a squad full over over priced, over paid, and past it players. It's a squad ready and primed to be built on.
A new man may not be able to do better with our current squad, but he would certainly have leighway to change the squad to fit his own vision. It may not be massive amount of leighway, but even 2-3 good quality additions and the right ideas and implementation could see us take a significant step up.
-
Quite true, SuperTom. But that is why the board have to show their hand this summer.
If they have faith he is the man for the future they need to give him a new contract and throw a few quid at it in the summer.
If they aren't sure then it is the ideal time to move on to someone else.
Keeping him will make some unhappy but they need to make judgement early so we don't end up with a squad wondering about the future and short term signings to get us to mid table to secure the managers job but possibly undoing some of the work on shipping out high earning wasters.
It is a big call.
-
Irrespective when a manager leaves a club there are always going to be unwanted players. It's better that the many of unwanted players are of the value we have paid as opposed to giving Lambert significant funds and then having to fire him. Like I said earlier, if we fire him in the middle of next season, a lot has gone wrong and a lot more money will have been spent on players Lambert will have identified and that ultimately won't have worked out.
Our position is unique in that we have just spent two years trying to shed the unwanted players from three former regimes. Just at the point where we might be able to exploit that it would be perverse to put ourselves in the position of having to do it again, particularly as there are no guarantees of any replacement doing any better. That then leaves us 12 months down the line having the same conversations.
Lambert might fall flat on his arse next year but as things stand I think he is better placed to make the most of the current situation than any potential replacement.
That's a pretty big statement, Chris. You really think there isn't a manager we might attract who'd be likely to do better?
Unless you are shopping at the top end of the market any new appointment is a gamble, as our history over the past few years succinctly demonstrates. So, on balance of probabilities, I would say for the reasons I stated above that Lambert is better placed than the latest 'next big thing' we might try.
-
Irrespective when a manager leaves a club there are always going to be unwanted players. It's better that the many of unwanted players are of the value we have paid as opposed to giving Lambert significant funds and then having to fire him. Like I said earlier, if we fire him in the middle of next season, a lot has gone wrong and a lot more money will have been spent on players Lambert will have identified and that ultimately won't have worked out.
Our position is unique in that we have just spent two years trying to shed the unwanted players from three former regimes. Just at the point where we might be able to exploit that it would be perverse to put ourselves in the position of having to do it again, particularly as there are no guarantees of any replacement doing any better. That then leaves us 12 months down the line having the same conversations.
Lambert might fall flat on his arse next year but as things stand I think he is better placed to make the most of the current situation than any potential replacement.
That's a pretty big statement, Chris. You really think there isn't a manager we might attract who'd be likely to do better?
Unless you are shopping at the top end of the market any new appointment is a gamble, as our history over the past few years succinctly demonstrates. So, on balance of probabilities, I would say for the reasons I stated above that Lambert is better placed than the latest 'next big thing' we might try.
I have to admit it's not a very positive one, but it could be that the best argument for retaining the current manager is that he's about as good as our board could appoint.
-
Unless you are shopping at the top end of the market any new appointment is a gamble, as our history over the past few years succinctly demonstrates
Even if you're shopping at the top end of the market it's still a gamble. Moyes? Scolari? Villas-Boas?
That doesn't mean you should never change just in case you end up with something worse, whether it's Man Utd, us or Crawley Town.
-
Any new appointment is a gamble full-stop. You can never guarantee the success of any but that doesn't mean you allow fear of the unknown to prevent removing a manager who is an abject failure.
-
I don't disagree entirely Chris. Believe me I'm massively torn on not wanting to see much more of this under Lambert and giving him the proper tools and resources to push us forward properly. I realise he's agreed to work within the parameters set by the club and done what they have asked of him, which in itself creates mutual loyalty. But at the same time there needs to be some tangible evidence of improvement even if it is marginal due to the resources provided. I think that's where the problem lies. I get the limitations. I get the argument to carry this on, but I'm not seeing on a consistent basis any tangible improvement. Bright spots for sure. Injuries haven't helped, but there should have been a bit more. Now, it might come together on Saturday and the other 5 games. We'll see I suppose. I'm just struggling with this a little and the idea of him staying longer.
I do get some of that.
He'll always get leeway because of the wage bill constraints he's had to work under. If he leaves this summer, I reckon the press will be pretty sympathetic to him.
But regardless of that, two years into the job there should be a clear pattern of play and footballing philosophy on display. Pretty much any coach/ manager who has two years at any football club should be capable of that.
We have looked like a disjointed rabble way to often this year. I don't think we are suddenly going to see a rapid transformation in year three, even with two or three signings in the £7 million plus category.
-
I don't disagree entirely Chris. Believe me I'm massively torn on not wanting to see much more of this under Lambert and giving him the proper tools and resources to push us forward properly. I realise he's agreed to work within the parameters set by the club and done what they have asked of him, which in itself creates mutual loyalty. But at the same time there needs to be some tangible evidence of improvement even if it is marginal due to the resources provided. I think that's where the problem lies. I get the limitations. I get the argument to carry this on, but I'm not seeing on a consistent basis any tangible improvement. Bright spots for sure. Injuries haven't helped, but there should have been a bit more. Now, it might come together on Saturday and the other 5 games. We'll see I suppose. I'm just struggling with this a little and the idea of him staying longer.
I do get some of that.
He'll always get leeway because of the wage bill constraints he's had to work under. If he leaves this summer, I reckon the press will be pretty sympathetic to him.
But regardless of that, two years into the job there should be a clear pattern of play and footballing philosophy on display. Pretty much any coach/ manager who has two years at any football club should be capable of that.
We have looked like a disjointed rabble way to often this year. I don't think we are suddenly going to see a rapid transformation in year three, even with two or three signings in the £7 million plus category.
That's the bit where I think criticism of him is fair. I don't think league position and overall results are a million miles from where we would realistically expect them to be, given the rebuilding job he had to undertake. However, the great inconsistencies we've seen says to me that he's failed to really stamp his own identity on to the side in terms of how we play. I would add the proviso that we don't know for certain they always play exactly to his instruction and better players may allow this to happen more, but we're still were we are right now, which is not really knowing what his Villa side would look like if we get that much needed uplift in quality.
-
Think I would split them and maybe have Lerner and O'Leary. I do think the running of the club has been better under Lerner, and while he has faults I do like how he has bought into the history of the club, and been very supportive of whoever the manager is, not letting his ego get in the way like Deadly Doug.
Lambert is still gaining experience and certainly did a good job at Norwich, so overtime I can see him becoming a much better manager than O'Dreary who history shows was very lucky at Leeds and has done nothing since. At least he did have a good first season, and made some solid signings. I am starting to wonder if Lambert is cut out for the Villa post after all.
-
I'm sorry but without trying to put him on a pedestal, O'Leary was way better than Lambert.
-
I'm sorry but without trying to put him on a pedestal, O'Leary was way better than Lambert.
but he was a wanker who publicly belittled us as fans and treated us with contempt. It trumps any qualities he has a man and manager, and puts him below any other current or former Villa manager.
-
I'm sorry but without trying to put him on a pedestal, O'Leary was way better than Lambert.
but he was a wanker who publicly belittled us as fans and treated us with contempt. It trumps any qualities he has a man and manager, and puts him below any other current or former Villa manager.
For you maybe. I rank our managers by managerial ability myself and Lambert easily finishes bottom of the list out of those I have known. Let's not act like Lambert treats the fans with respect either: regularly blaming us for the home-form, constant patronising bemoaning of how unrealistic we are just for daring to expect some sort of progression this season, complusively making bare-faced lies. Why people seem to think that he is some sort of likable character is beyond me.
-
when did he blame us for our home form? Yes, I think he's likeable. He's just not up to the job.
-
I'm sorry but without trying to put him on a pedestal, O'Leary was way better than Lambert.
I did say than Lambert would go on to be a better manager than O'Leary not than he is now to be fair.
-
Doug was far, far from perfect but at least he could be arsed to go to Swansea last Saturday.
-
Doug was far, far from perfect but at least he could be arsed to go to Swansea last Saturday.
It's a fair point given his age. When we consider he renamed a stand after himself when there's at least twenty individuals and a street/area more deserving, it's probably the least he can do.
-
Doug was far, far from perfect but at least he could be arsed to go to Swansea last Saturday.
Doug was far, far from perfect but at least he was better than Lerner. Certainly in the time i've been supporting the club anyway. I didn't quite witness the 1987 debacle mind.
O Leary was definately a bigger twat than Lambert, but i think Lambert has proven to be the worse manager, for us anyway.
-
O'Leary was a twat but a far better boss.
Doug would have sacked Lambert a long time ago.
Our squad in 05/06 was better than this team now.
-
I think it is unfair to compare and contrast the times we have now to what went on in 2006.
For all of Lerner's faults i do think he has acted with the best of intentions to the club, it is a real shame that it has not worked out for him and i suspect in a few years time people will view our current chairman in a diffrent light than they do know, just as Doug is being viewed in a diffrent light as times are so bad now.
As for Lambert well anything is better than DOL.
I think DOL was married to the Leeds job and when the divorce happened he picked us up on the rebound and always gave the impression we were doing him a favour by letting him manage the Villa.
McLeish had more dignity than DOL and he took a lot more abuse than DOL ever did.
-
I fucking hated O'Leary more than any other Villa manager in the last 40 years. I can hear him now, constantly referring to his babies at Leeds, his beloved Arsenal and how Villa were on a level with Charlton Athletic. He had no respect at all for our great club and was arrogant enough to think he didn't need to get the fans onside. Has he worked since he left us? Says something, don't you think? ******!!
-
Doug was far, far from perfect but at least he could be arsed to go to Swansea last Saturday.
Mat Kendrick in the Meaning Evil some time this week said quite correctly that given the importance of the Hull game Randy ought to be there. I am not holding my breath that he will be!
-
I think it is unfair to compare and contrast the times we have now to what went on in 2006.
For all of Lerner's faults i do think he has acted with the best of intentions to the club, it is a real shame that it has not worked out for him and i suspect in a few years time people will view our current chairman in a diffrent light than they do know, just as Doug is being viewed in a diffrent light as times are so bad now.
As for Lambert well anything is better than DOL.
I think DOL was married to the Leeds job and when the divorce happened he picked us up on the rebound and always gave the impression we were doing him a favour by letting him manage the Villa.
McLeish had more dignity than DOL and he took a lot more abuse than DOL ever did.
There is a lot of truth in that post and is closer to how feel than most on here right now.
For me Learner is a better owner than Ellis was because he lets the manager get on a manage, does not try to take the spotlight of the players, manager or the club, and I think has been running Villa very well at least from a business point of view, and has bought into the history of the club.
I am starting to think than Lambert may not be cut out for this job, but I think we should give him the first half of next season to prove us wrong.