Houllier confirms Ireland wants to leave!

[Karl Bridges]

Also how can he get a loyalty bonus if he has asked to leave?

My understanding is that he is probably entitled to a cut of the fee unless he puts in a written transfer request, despite him doing what equates just that by getting these stories placed in the papers.

It stinks.

So surely GH says OK Stephen we will do our best to get you a move but do us a favour, just put it in writing.

[olaftab]

Stupid decision by Paul Faulkner to accept cash+Irleland deal. We have effectively lost 8m in the Milner transaction.
Complete waster. I just hope someone is mad enough to sign him and we can get some money back.

[dicedlam]

I wouldn't let him leave unless we get what we ask for him.
Put it in writing son..not just verbally announce it.
If there are no takers in January, then I would let the bastard rot and have him train on his own at Bodymoor Heath, or a venue closer to his home and beloved citeh.

Twat of the highest order.

[peter w]

Nah, he'll just whine and whinge throught he press, or his agent will, and make it difficult to keep a player who may cause unrest within the squad, and dresing-room.

[olaftab]

So surely GH says OK Stephen we will do our best to get you a move but do us a favour, just put it in writing.

or Stephen do us a favour and put in some storming performances so that some one  wants you in January!

[Eigentor]

At Liverpool GH was good at getting rid of players he didn't want. Hopefully he can do the same here, so we don't have to put up with having a lot of unhappy deadbeats on high wages around. But times may have changed.

[Karl Bridges]

Jimmy Milner has contributed more the the Villa this season than Ireland has.

He's contributed more than Dunne, Warnock, Luke etc etc

Luke? The Luke Young that scored the winner against Everton? As opposed to the third goal in a match that was already won.

[peter w]

Jimmy Milner has contributed more the the Villa this season than Ireland has.

He's contributed more than Dunne, Warnock, Luke etc etc

Luke? The Luke Young that scored the winner against Everton? As opposed to the third goal in a match that was already won.

Well not Luke then, but I thought the less than serious nature of the post wouldn't need to be explained.

[gervilla]

Thought he would be a sensation for us. I was sensationally wrong.

You  are not alone there.

[Eigentor]

I agree that the board gets a lot of undeserved criticism these says. Even so, I think it is possible to question the wisdom of signing a £8m player on a £70,000 a week four-year contract when we are managerless and, also, want to trim our wage bill.

The details of the contract would have been set out before MON left. Don't forget it only dragged its heels because ireland also wanted a 'loyalty' pay-off from Man City before going. As it was already a done deal it was unlikely that we would have risked the deal falling through and losing Milner for less money 5 - 10 months later. Can't blame the board for this one.

The board had their reasons but were they good reasons? We rejected an offer of £18m for Milner earlier in the summer. Then we accepted an offer of £26 later which included Ireland valued at £8m. If MON wanted Ireland for £8m, then ok. But when MON left, I would have wanted the board to say: "Hang on, we don't know if the new manager will rate Ireland at £8m. We don't even know if he will want him at all. (Ie, we no longer know the value of this deal.)" Clearly, Man City didn't want to sign Milner. They wanted to sign Milner AND get rid of Ireland. Without a manager to evaluate the football decision of signing a player, we should not have let them have it both ways.

[peter w]

I agree that the board gets a lot of undeserved criticism these says. Even so, I think it is possible to question the wisdom of signing a £8m player on a £70,000 a week four-year contract when we are managerless and, also, want to trim our wage bill.

The details of the contract would have been set out before MON left. Don't forget it only dragged its heels because ireland also wanted a 'loyalty' pay-off from Man City before going. As it was already a done deal it was unlikely that we would have risked the deal falling through and losing Milner for less money 5 - 10 months later. Can't blame the board for this one.

The board had their reasons but were they good reasons? We rejected an offer of £18m for Milner earlier in the summer. Then we accepted an offer of £26 later which included Ireland valued at £8m. If MON wanted Ireland for £8m, then ok. But when MON left, I would have wanted the board to say: "Hang on, we don't know if the new manager will rate Ireland at £8m. We don't even know if he will want him at all. (Ie, we no longer know the value of this deal.)" Clearly, Man City didn't want to sign Milner. They wanted to sign Milner AND get rid of Ireland. Without a manager to evaluate the football decision of signing a player, we should not have let them have it both ways.

Agreed. But there's a way of conducting transfer negotiations and as seen with Delph we were commended for how we go about our business. It seems that the deal for the swap was all but done and without knowing any legal issues - probably none - its very rare that a deal will be scuppered at the 11th hour if you still want to be seen as an honourable club to deal with. We should take the hit on this one as it may work in our favour later down the road when we go back to Man City when buying or selling someone else.

[Karl Bridges]

Jimmy Milner has contributed more the the Villa this season than Ireland has.

He's contributed more than Dunne, Warnock, Luke etc etc

Luke? The Luke Young that scored the winner against Everton? As opposed to the third goal in a match that was already won.

Well not Luke then, but I thought the less than serious nature of the post wouldn't need to be explained.

Sorry Peter I just presumed from the first two names you mentioned your post was serious.

[john2710]

It seems to me that Ireland sees us (the club, players & fans) as being beneath him. Quite where he thinks he's going to go to from us I can't imagine. He's had, at most,  one good season at Man City. You'd hope that someone around him would have a quiet word in his ear but I doubt he'd take any notice.

It annoys me beyond words when a runt like Ireland seems to treat those who pay his vast salary with complete contempt.
 

[CJ]

I think it's very easy to criticise the board with the benefit of 20-20 hindsight vision, but at the time I thought it was a brilliant deal - even with MON gone.  A couple of seasons ago when Ireland was at his best with Citeh I thought I'd love to see him at Villa. So at the time I thought £18m plus Ireland was excellent business - and like many others, including the board, I've been proved very wrong. There's a great player in there but for whatever reason he doesn't want to show that with us so good riddance.

[Eigentor]

I agree that the board gets a lot of undeserved criticism these says. Even so, I think it is possible to question the wisdom of signing a £8m player on a £70,000 a week four-year contract when we are managerless and, also, want to trim our wage bill.

The details of the contract would have been set out before MON left. Don't forget it only dragged its heels because ireland also wanted a 'loyalty' pay-off from Man City before going. As it was already a done deal it was unlikely that we would have risked the deal falling through and losing Milner for less money 5 - 10 months later. Can't blame the board for this one.

The board had their reasons but were they good reasons? We rejected an offer of £18m for Milner earlier in the summer. Then we accepted an offer of £26 later which included Ireland valued at £8m. If MON wanted Ireland for £8m, then ok. But when MON left, I would have wanted the board to say: "Hang on, we don't know if the new manager will rate Ireland at £8m. We don't even know if he will want him at all. (Ie, we no longer know the value of this deal.)" Clearly, Man City didn't want to sign Milner. They wanted to sign Milner AND get rid of Ireland. Without a manager to evaluate the football decision of signing a player, we should not have let them have it both ways.

Agreed. But there's a way of conducting transfer negotiations and as seen with Delph we were commended for how we go about our business. It seems that the deal for the swap was all but done and without knowing any legal issues - probably none - its very rare that a deal will be scuppered at the 11th hour if you still want to be seen as an honourable club to deal with. We should take the hit on this one as it may work in our favour later down the road when we go back to Man City when buying or selling someone else.

Thinking of Ireland and Dunne (this season), it will hopefully be some time before we buy or sell someone from Man City!

I see the "honourable club" argument, but I think the manager suddenly leaving is a valid reason for cancelling a deal. Still, I'll admit it's easy to criticise when you don't know the details. Maybe Man City refused to pay more than £18m, and the board considered it impossible to keep a player wanting to leave, so they thought the best they could do was to get as much out of the deal as possible.