The Martin O'Neill thread (with added sacking #2188)

[dave.woodhall]

Paulie...

I would suspect that putting a football man on the board would have seen O'Neill disappear off out of the door a lot sooner than he did. It probably would have been a good thing for the club for the wrong reasons. It would also have flown in the face of what has and hasn't worked elsewhere in English football.

By 'football man' forget the idea of a DoF and think more about someone who knows football and, more importantly, football people. Much as you can criticise Doug, there wasn't anyone in the game who wouldn't answer his calls. We did, of course, have the best in the business until we thought we could do without him.   

[saunders_heroes]

What's all this "hindsight" rubbish.  It was clear to see at the time he was a very limited manager blowing the once in a generation war chest on mostly dross.     

Not to me it wasn't. We were competing with the top four and often giving them a bloody nose. I enjoyed winning more often than not and clubs seeing us as a threat.

It all ended sadly but we had a good team with some top quality players and many memorable games. We were very close to making the breakthrough.

I half agree. I really enjoyed O'Neill's tenure. We had a fine team with some fantastic players and played some fantastic memorable games. Just why oh why did he waste so much money on the Harewoods and Heskeys though? The amount of money he wasted on utter dross is mind boggling, and it's clear we're still in the shit because of it.
Still, those 3 or 4 fine seasons are a million miles from the shit we find ourselves in at the moment though.

[Whiney MacWhineface]

Incidentally, "we could do with a football person on the board" was something which was said on here thousands of times over the last six years.

It's pretty hard to argue that we were incorrect on that front, given the way things panned out.

Can I also point out that some of us were against him having 100% control at the same time as others were falling over themselves to demand he got it?

I remember. You and the much missed Mr. Page. I disagreed.

[Steve R]

Paulie...

I would suspect that putting a football man on the board would have seen O'Neill disappear off out of the door a lot sooner than he did. It probably would have been a good thing for the club for the wrong reasons. It would also have flown in the face of what has and hasn't worked elsewhere in English football.

By 'football man' forget the idea of a DoF and think more about someone who knows football and, more importantly, football people. Much as you can criticise Doug, there wasn't anyone in the game who wouldn't answer his calls. We did, of course, have the best in the business until we thought we could do without him.

I don't think it would have made any difference what job title or capacity a 'football man' would have made. I seems to me - and seemed - that O'Neill considered 'football' as his fiefdom and would have been off.

I'd agree that the club lost a lot when Steve Stride left. A bigger loss than any player we sold.

[dave.woodhall]

Paulie...

I would suspect that putting a football man on the board would have seen O'Neill disappear off out of the door a lot sooner than he did. It probably would have been a good thing for the club for the wrong reasons. It would also have flown in the face of what has and hasn't worked elsewhere in English football.

By 'football man' forget the idea of a DoF and think more about someone who knows football and, more importantly, football people. Much as you can criticise Doug, there wasn't anyone in the game who wouldn't answer his calls. We did, of course, have the best in the business until we thought we could do without him.

I don't think it would have made any difference what job title or capacity a 'football man' would have made. I seems to me - and seemed - that O'Neill considered 'football' as his fiefdom and would have been off.

I'd agree that the club lost a lot when Steve Stride left. A bigger loss than any player we sold.

Agreed. Given that he managed to get rid of two CEOS and two media directors, I can't see that O'Neill would have stood for anyone interfering in his business. I remember saying at the time that he had more power than any other Premier League manager.

[pauliewalnuts]

I enjoyed his tenure too, but I can't think of too many fantastic memorable home games in the last two seasons.

[Risso]

I've heard contrasting stories on Stride.  One school of thought is that he was happy to retire with a big payout having served Villa admirably for years.  The other is that he'd have liked to stay but Lerner wanted a clean sweep and to bring his own men in.  Even if he had stayed, I don't think it would have worked for long, it rarely does in cases like that.

[Risso]

Paulie...

I would suspect that putting a football man on the board would have seen O'Neill disappear off out of the door a lot sooner than he did. It probably would have been a good thing for the club for the wrong reasons. It would also have flown in the face of what has and hasn't worked elsewhere in English football.

By 'football man' forget the idea of a DoF and think more about someone who knows football and, more importantly, football people. Much as you can criticise Doug, there wasn't anyone in the game who wouldn't answer his calls. We did, of course, have the best in the business until we thought we could do without him.

I don't think it would have made any difference what job title or capacity a 'football man' would have made. I seems to me - and seemed - that O'Neill considered 'football' as his fiefdom and would have been off.

I'd agree that the club lost a lot when Steve Stride left. A bigger loss than any player we sold.

Agreed. Given that he managed to get rid of two CEOS and two media directors, I can't see that O'Neill would have stood for anyone interfering in his business. I remember saying at the time that he had more power than any other Premier League manager.

I think that's as a result of him being appointed just as Lerner was taking over.  Lerner was obviously new to the business and didn't really know how things worked.  If O'Neill had been appointed a year or two after Lerner had taken over, maybe things would have been different, although seeing what's happening at Sunderland at the moment, probably not.

[eastie]

Paulie...

I would suspect that putting a football man on the board would have seen O'Neill disappear off out of the door a lot sooner than he did. It probably would have been a good thing for the club for the wrong reasons. It would also have flown in the face of what has and hasn't worked elsewhere in English football.

By 'football man' forget the idea of a DoF and think more about someone who knows football and, more importantly, football people. Much as you can criticise Doug, there wasn't anyone in the game who wouldn't answer his calls. We did, of course, have the best in the business until we thought we could do without him.

I don't think it would have made any difference what job title or capacity a 'football man' would have made. I seems to me - and seemed - that O'Neill considered 'football' as his fiefdom and would have been off.

I'd agree that the club lost a lot when Steve Stride left. A bigger loss than any player we sold.

Agreed. Given that he managed to get rid of two CEOS and two media directors, I can't see that O'Neill would have stood for anyone interfering in his business. I remember saying at the time that he had more power than any other Premier League manager.

Do you think Faulkner tried to clip mons wings or interfere on the football side dave? Just wondering whether he was a reason for mons departure ?

[dave.woodhall]

I don't know, apart from the fairly obvious reason that the unlimited money wasn't there anymore.

[eastie]

I don't know, apart from the fairly obvious reason that the unlimited money wasn't there anymore.

Mon doesn't strike me as a man who would be comfortable if he had to keep Faulkner in the loop - he seems very much a man who likes to run things his way .

[Monty]

I don't know, apart from the fairly obvious reason that the unlimited money wasn't there anymore.

Mon doesn't strike me as a man who would be comfortable if he had to keep Faulkner in the loop - he seems very much a man who likes to run things his way .

i.e. on his own, on a whim.

[Legion]

I've heard contrasting stories on Stride.  One school of thought is that he was happy to retire with a big payout having served Villa admirably for years.  The other is that he'd have liked to stay but Lerner wanted a clean sweep and to bring his own men in.  Even if he had stayed, I don't think it would have worked for long, it rarely does in cases like that.

The former is correct.

[ktvillan]

What's all this "hindsight" rubbish.  It was clear to see at the time he was a very limited manager blowing the once in a generation war chest on mostly dross.     

Well said.  There was no need for hindsight to see that signings like Harewood, Heskey, Reo-Coker, Knight and a few others were not what we'd been led to expect and were not going to transform us into CL standard performers.  Or that MON's transfer policy was incredibly blinkered, and his playing style dreadful to watch with no plan B. All of which was stated by many at the time.   

[Eugene Fraxby]

What's all this "hindsight" rubbish.  It was clear to see at the time he was a very limited manager blowing the once in a generation war chest on mostly dross.     

Well said.  There was no need for hindsight to see that signings like Harewood, Heskey, Reo-Coker, Knight and a few others were not what we'd been led to expect and were not going to transform us into CL standard performers.  Or that MON's transfer policy was incredibly blinkered, and his playing style dreadful to watch with no plan B. All of which was stated by many at the time.

I'll never forgive him for Heskey. Absurd signing.