Now Beye in bust up....

[Chris Smith]

MON had the final say on who arrived and what they were paid, more's the pity. when lerner woke up and started querying it was when MON started playing up

That's good enough for me. If anyone understands the internal workings of Aston Villa it's Greg Nash.

hang on, when myself and others mentioned bringing in help on transfers you yourself used to lecture us on how MON would never stand for any sort of interferance and would walk out. Now apparently he was just part of a commitee....how times change.

You know very well that wan't the argument, it's just you getting back into your old trolling ways.

Of course it should be down to the manager to identify the players that he wants but it's then down to the business to decide what to pay them.

[Villa'Zawg]

MON had the final say on who arrived and what they were paid, more's the pity. when lerner woke up and started querying it was when MON started playing up

General Krulak:
oli: The Manager, Paul, the Club secretary, the finance people, the legal/contract people and, of course, Randy is kept in the loop the entire time. As you can see, it is not just one person.

Only one of you is right and my money is on the fella with the fancy uniform.

[Greg N'Ash]

Actions speak louder than words and the fact we massively overspent on some players (Davies 8m??!!) and paid Harewood 30k a week shows who had the final say up until MON's last season.

[PeterWithe]

I thought Doug still had the final say for the last four years?

[LeeB]

It's got his shadowy handprint all over it.

[eastie]

i think the tide turned against mon when paul faulkner joined the club , from that moment on it seemed that mon had lost his grip on running things hios way and the writing was on the wall.

[LeeB]

i think the tide turned against mon when paul faulkner joined the club , from that moment on it seemed that mon had lost his grip on running things hios way and the writing was on the wall.

I think you're probably right there. If that is a good or a bad thing, is open to debate.

[Ger Regan]

Still I would be amazed if the policy has changed greatly. If the people that the General mentions weren't involved previously then that would appear negligent on their behalf.

There's a difference being involved and having control. They were in all likelihood involved, but I would imagine, given what is known about about his management style, that MON had final say on the finer details of the deals being thrashed out. Certainly up until January of this year.

[Greg N'Ash]

MON had the final say on who arrived and what they were paid, more's the pity. when lerner woke up and started querying it was when MON started playing up

That's good enough for me. If anyone understands the internal workings of Aston Villa it's Greg Nash.

hang on, when myself and others mentioned bringing in help on transfers you yourself used to lecture us on how MON would never stand for any sort of interferance and would walk out. Now apparently he was just part of a commitee....how times change.

You know very well that wan't the argument, it's just you getting back into your old trolling ways.

Of course it should be down to the manager to identify the players that he wants but it's then down to the business to decide what to pay them.

if trolling means picking up on your revisionist version of history then i plead guilty.




The board backed him. If they'd said "hang on Martin, 8m for a WBA defender is a bit iffy" he would have stormed out in a huff. Just like he did two years down the line when they saw what bobbins he planned to bring in.

[cdward]

Isn't it the same at all football clubs, or certainly at the Villa.
1. A manager comes in, has the backing of the board, and  buys who he wants.
2. Results/circumstances change, the board no longer backs the manager/or the board start dictating what the manager should do.
3. Manager is sacked or leaves.
Start the process all over again, ad infinitum.

[Greg N'Ash]

no villa manager has ever had the resources that were made available to MON. or the control

[Concrete John]

Still I would be amazed if the policy has changed greatly. If the people that the General mentions weren't involved previously then that would appear negligent on their behalf.

There's a difference being involved and having control. They were in all likelihood involved, but I would imagine, given what is known about about his management style, that MON had final say on the finer details of the deals being thrashed out. Certainly up until January of this year.

I think Randy trusted his methods as we were heading in the right direction and saw a return on the money, or at least it being used for purpose.  What happened last summer was that that was no longer be the case with significant transfer fees and wages not being utilised.  Now, exactly who communicated that to Martin and how they did it may be why he walked.  In the same way we sometimes need to pamper to the egos of players (you're not dropped son, we're just resting you for next week) may be Faulkner could have discussed things better with his manager?

As I've said before, we'll never know for sure, but one way for the board to show it wasn't their fault is to heavily back Gezza in the market, backing that would presumably have been Martin's had to stayed and played along with the business plan they had.

[Concrete John]

no villa manager has ever had the resources that were made available to MON. or the control

No Villa manager has ever needed the resources he had to get us challenging in cash rich Premier League we are in.

[cdward]

no villa manager has ever had the resources that were made available to MON. or the control

  under Doug, it doesn't take a genius to figure that out.

[Bosco81]

Randy Lerner is not some doddering old granny who has been swindled by a sweet talking irishman.

"Here's £120M, spend it wisely, and let me know when we win the European Cup".