Was the General right to comment on O'Neill

[Villa'Zawg]

First off I didn't say he made a statement , I said he responded to fans request for a statement. My point being that he was attempting to address the fans desire for information rather than responding to the media outcry. 

Secondly, as I recall I thought the general said O'Neill didn't or wouldn't agree to the cuts in the wage bill that Randy, Faulkner and the General all thought were necessary before any further spending could take place.  With the implication that O'Neill left because of that disagreemnt.  Sounds like an explanation of sorts to me. 

No he didn't, he said that some of the rumours were untrue and that MON quit, but he didn't tell us why. You even use the word 'implication' yourself, people have read into it what they want to see but that's all it is.

Fair enough, the fact that the General said O'Neill didn't agree with the requirement to cut the wage bill, and that he
seemed to think that his requirements were more important than those of the financial stability of the club, clearly had no bearing at all on O'Neill's decision to resign. 

I've paid close attention to the General's posts. He has told us the things he wants us to believe, which is fair enough when considering his role as a director and his duty to the owners/shareholders. He hasn't explained anything though.

[pauliewalnuts]

I've paid close attention to the General's posts. He has told us the things he wants us to believe, which is fair enough when considering his role as a director and his duty to the owners/shareholders. He hasn't explained anything though.

When has that been any different, though?

I guess we all have to decide how cynical we're going to be on the stuff the General says, but there seem to be quite a few people currently opting not to believe a word he says, who, prior to last week, seemed to believe everything he said and were pretty quick to put anyone who was cynical about him in their place.

He's in an awkward place, really.

If he says nothing, then he gets stick from people on here saying "why didn't you say something?"

If he says something which is perceived as a slight on the manager, he gets "who is this Colonel Sanders person?" from that prick at the Mirror, plus complaints from the more positively disposed to MON on here, suggesting that he shouldn't have said anything, as it is rolling with a pig in mud etc etc.

He's also not going to come out and say "yes, actually, we fucked around with Martin and moved the goalposts at the last moment", even if that were the case.

He's in a lose-lose situation - whatever he says, he's going to cop flack, and lots of it, from some quarters. I suspect what he did say, last week, and there wasn't much said, was mostly an emotional response to seeing the club and its leadership so roundly slated in the media. Bar Cascarino and Gray, it has all been extremely one-way.

[Rudy Can't Fail]

 I suspect what he did say, last week, and there wasn't much said, was as close to the truth as we're going to get. For that reason alone, I welcomed his comments.

[dave.woodhall]

Whatever he said, and whyever he said it, worked.

[Concrete John]

If he says something which is perceived as a slight on the manager, he gets "who is this Colonel Sanders person?"

Sorry, but his bit about being bigger than the club was a clear dig - there's nothing 'percieved' about it.

I would have preferred a statement that said something like "It was Martin's decision to go.  We thank him for his contribution over the last 4 years, but what we are trying to achieve with the club is bigger than any one man, so we will begin the process to finding the right manager to move the club forward.  You will understand that I'm not at liberty to disclose the inner financial workings of the club, but I can assure you that the media reports of becoming a 'selling club' are way wide of the mark and Randy's commitment to the cause is even stronger now that when he bought the club 4 years ago.  Judge us on what we have done so far and what we will do in the future and not people's ill informed perception of us."     

[Percy McCarthy]

 

I think the majority of Villa supporters are behind the manager and team at every game. The minority who found that difficult to do because of their antipathy towards the previous manager joined in is all.

Yes, welcome back lads. May you be solidly behind the club forever, or until you find another excuse at least.

Percy it's a bit cheap to suggest O'Neill's critics were not behind the club. Some of us can see the difference between giving unequivocal support to the club whilst reserving the right to withhold such support from individuals employed to serve the club if we feel they are not up to the job,  or not acting in the best interests of the club. 

If only you could think of a catchy tune to fit the words "The only reason we are booing, or  not joining in with the vocal support of the team from other fans is because we believe that certain individuals are not up to the job, and indeed, not acting in the best interest of the club", then perhaps the players would understand and be suitably encouraged by your 'support'.

Doesn't need a catchy tune Percy, it's blatantly obvious to most people.  Butthen they live in a world where expressing disapproval
of the Manager's tactics and team selection or a particular team/player performance does not = "I hate Aston Vill F.C."

You think the players consider all that when they are getting booed?[/]quote]

[pauliewalnuts]

If he says something which is perceived as a slight on the manager, he gets "who is this Colonel Sanders person?"

Sorry, but his bit about being bigger than the club was a clear dig - there's nothing 'percieved' about it.

I would have preferred a statement that said something like "It was Martin's decision to go.  We thank him for his contribution over the last 4 years, but what we are trying to achieve with the club is bigger than any one man, so we will begin the process to finding the right manager to move the club forward.  You will understand that I'm not at liberty to disclose the inner financial workings of the club, but I can assure you that the media reports of becoming a 'selling club' are way wide of the mark and Randy's commitment to the cause is even stronger now that when he bought the club 4 years ago.  Judge us on what we have done so far and what we will do in the future and not people's ill informed perception of us."     

Well, that's the point isn't it.

Whatever he says, there will always be people who wished he'd said something different.

[pauliewalnuts]

You think the players consider all that when they are getting booed?

Not everyone who disliked MON's football booed the team, mind.

And what's more

I think the majority of Villa supporters are behind the manager and team at every game. The minority who found that difficult to do because of their antipathy towards the previous manager joined in is all.

I find it hard to believe that anyone wasn't behind the team because they didn't like the manager. Suggesting otherwise strikes me as either incredibly "holier than thou" or just naive.

Personally, as mentioned before, I found our home football turgid and borderline unwatchable on an extremely regular basis for two years.

I still wanted us to win every single match, though.

[Rudy Can't Fail]

You think the players consider all that when they are getting booed?

When did the two become exclusive, Percy?

[Sister of Top Cat]

Sorry, but his bit about being bigger than the club was a clear dig - there's nothing 'percieved' about it.

I didn't see that as a dig - merely a statement of the truth.  The club is bigger than the chairman, directors, manager, chief executive etc. 

[Percy McCarthy]

I was talking specifically about booing and witholding vocal encouragement at the match.

[Concrete John]

Sorry, but his bit about being bigger than the club was a clear dig - there's nothing 'percieved' about it.

I didn't see that as a dig - merely a statement of the truth.  The club is bigger than the chairman, directors, manager, chief executive etc. 

Yes it is and I would have no issue with anyone stating that basic fact.  But when you then go on to say that one person didn't think that, then it is a dig.

[Mazrim]

Well if one person didn't think that, it's deserved.

[Concrete John]

Nobody is arguing whether what the General said was true or not, Maz, just whether he should have said it or not, both in terms of where he said it and the fact it's not in keeping with the dignified way they've run the club thus far.
 

[Villa'Zawg]

I've paid close attention to the General's posts. He has told us the things he wants us to believe, which is fair enough when considering his role as a director and his duty to the owners/shareholders. He hasn't explained anything though.

When has that been any different, though?

I guess we all have to decide how cynical we're going to be on the stuff the General says, but there seem to be quite a few people currently opting not to believe a word he says, who, prior to last week, seemed to believe everything he said and were pretty quick to put anyone who was cynical about him in their place.

He's in an awkward place, really.

If he says nothing, then he gets stick from people on here saying "why didn't you say something?"

If he says something which is perceived as a slight on the manager, he gets "who is this Colonel Sanders person?" from that prick at the Mirror, plus complaints from the more positively disposed to MON on here, suggesting that he shouldn't have said anything, as it is rolling with a pig in mud etc etc.

He's also not going to come out and say "yes, actually, we fucked around with Martin and moved the goalposts at the last moment", even if that were the case.

He's in a lose-lose situation - whatever he says, he's going to cop flack, and lots of it, from some quarters. I suspect what he did say, last week, and there wasn't much said, was mostly an emotional response to seeing the club and its leadership so roundly slated in the media. Bar Cascarino and Gray, it has all been extremely one-way.

I mostly agree with that. In fact if you placed my quote after yours as a response it wouldn't look out of place.

One thing though, I wouldn't wish to be classified in that group you define as "prior to last week, seemed to believe everything he said and were pretty quick to put anyone who was cynical about him in their place."

The issues I have stem from the extraordinary posts he and his son issued on the first day of pre-season training.  That was the first inkling I had that the club was going to reverse the investment strategy that we had been asked to support for 4 years.