Gerard Houllier

[cdward]

No point in blaming Houllier and saying it's all his fault, he hasn't the chance to play his first choice of 11 yet... players are coming back from injury and we'll bringning in some additions hopefully, that's the time to judge.

Errmm, what about against Spurs, Petrov and NRC back from injury, so he plays Hogg and Delph. Houllier doesn't know his first choice 11. It is time to judge, our performances have been rubbish, the players are lacking confidence, and the man with the responsibility for getting results only looks happy when he is visiting Anfield.
I think Houllier has been told to sell all the high wage earners, that would explain the strange team selections.

[brian green]

I always wanted to know what a drama queen looked like.   Bit of a shock actually.   I thought more Hugh Fernley Whittingstall than Dave Woodhall.   There you go.

Martin O'Neill had the money and spent it badly.   Harry Redknapp had the money and spent it well.   Harry Redknapp would buy players quickly and decisively while Martin O'Neill pissanted about as my son so pithly put it buying players like they were Faberge eggs.   I put it far less elegantly comparing him to what car dealers call a tyre kicker.

[Dave]

I reckon the bust up with Dunne has had a big impact upon the dressing room
I imagine Dunne would be a big influence on the players down there, as would NRC and Carew

The bit I don't get is though, those 3 players would provide an excellenet spine to most teams, Carew scored what 16 goals last season ? if properly motivated and coached, we wouldn't be selling them but getting the best out of them whilst their on the payroll

have you not seen the pathetic lazyness of carew , a disgrace to the villa shirt and and cant wait to see him booted out anywhere!

Is that the same Carew that scored 16 Prem goals last term

Ten, actually.

[Mac]

Didn't we enquire every 6 months on Boswinga, with the price constantly going up as he became a better player and ended up going to Chelski.

[levico]

everyone is saying that Chelsea's 'demise' is due to the sacking of Wilkins. Perhaps we should bring him in as team manager and kick GH upstairs.

[koreanmeatballs]

everyone is saying that Chelsea's 'demise' is due to the sacking of Wilkins. Perhaps we should bring him in as team manager and kick GH upstairs.

Isn't thought that Wilkins was sacked as he was earning too much money? If they can't afford to keep him, can we?

[TheSandman]

Collins upfront was just a sign of desperation a lot of managers do when they are losing.

We did it with Dunney upfront for the last 5 minutes in the Arsenal game, Manure brought on Smalling and played him upfront against us and Mourinho did it with Huth a few times I seem to remember.

Zat Knight going up front against Arse two seasons ago yielded a crucial goal. It's not pretty or subtle but it's far from a bad idea. The man some are clamouring to be signed to replace Houllier spent most of a season with Chris Samba starting as a forward FFS.

[SteveD]

Houllier's job is to work what he has and what circumstances have thrown up - whether Randy twists or sticks. Apart from the loss of Milner - that same squad was achieving last season. If we wait until he works his magic with new signings - February, March, or will they all come good in April? - we could be in deep trouble. MON's signings weren't bad. On the whole (Young, Milner, Collins, the Dunne of last season, Carew for Baros, Petrov eventually) they were pretty fine; Sidwell, Beye and Davies didn't work but were hardly seen as poor signings when they arrived; arguably Downing (apart from yesterday) and Heskey have been successes after he left.  I'm actually pleased the likes of Albrighton, Hogg and Lichaj are getting their chance, just worried other more established players are going backwards. The failure to "handle" Ireland - I'm sure the player takes his share of the blame but it makes the exit of Milner even harder to swallow that we've hardly had a game out of someone with obvious potential, if baggage.

[Villa'Zawg]

I'm not sure why you have to act like such a drama queen. Where have I ever said he should hand over every penny his family possess?

It isn't a question of wanting Lerner to invest all of his money in Aston Villa, it is a question of whether he is willing to invest enough to achieve HIS stated aim of competing at the top of the Premier League and winning trophies.

You seem to be of the opinion that because his investment so far is a big number, then that means he has invested enough. Well I'm afraid he hasn't invested enough. The Sky four have been investing for many more years than we have and they all have wage bills in excess of £100m per year. Spurs and Man City have spent more than DOUBLE on their squads during the period Lerner has been here, Spurs spent £119.3m in one single season, Man City more than that. Our total outlay on the squad in all the time Lerner has been owner is £140m.

Either Randy Lerner was a bit stupid in not understanding what it would take financially to achieve parity with the best teams in the league or it was never a serious intention. Sorry if that sounds harsh but what other explanation is there?

Do you honestly think that Lerner's investment in the playing squad is having a significant impact on his family's overall wealth? Should we be worried that he is going to end up broke if he continued investing in the squad at the level he has so far?

You calling anyone a drama queen has to be the best line for a long while. Have you finished stamping your feet and insisting Spurs accounts are wrong yet? And it was you who brought up the Lerner family's alleged wealth so I can only assume you think it's all fair game in subsidising the Villa.

According to people with a bit more inside information than you, there's only one club who have invested more net than Villa since Randy took over. Whether that's true or not, Villa have spent enough to get into the Champions League at some stage in the past four seasons. I don't know what impact this has had on the Lerner family fortune - there you go again - but I do know that it's ever so easy to spend other peoples' money. 

As I've repeated countless times, I never said Spurs accounts were wrong. I said that the staff costs figure wasn't a like for like comparison, it's probably best not to reopen that can of worms even though Spurs mention in their latest accounts under contigent liabilities that they are in discussions with HMRC about "Image Rights" payments. Suffice to say Villa and Spurs have similar wage costs and the other five clubs I referred to all spend more than £100m on "staff costs" per year.

I mention the Lerner family wealth because they own 100% of the club and are the only potential source of external investment. I didn't suggest that additional investment should be in the form of subsidies, he might want to increase the debt that he has placed on the club and for which he earns a good rate of return in interest payments.

All of those other clubs have injected funds through debt or equity to strengthen their squad or improve facilities at various times. When Randy bought the club for the bargain basement price of £64m, it was understood by everyone that he would need to invest very significant sums in the playing squad to achieve his aim of competing at the top of the league. Had he bought one of the top five clubs at the time it would have cost him much,much more than he paid for Villa.

It isn't true that only one club has invested more net in the playing squad than Villa since Randy took over and its also a bit disingenuous to insist that our spending has been at a level that should ensure we improved from the squad O'Leary left to a position where we would be better than the traditional Sky 4. Man City have spent more and for the record, according to the Spurs financial accounts, they have spent £124.9m net since the 2006 summer transfer window. Perhaps the next time you're talking to these people with more inside information you could ask them to be a bit more specific.

What is it that makes you so affronted by discussions about the level of Randy Lerner's investment? Why do you behave as though I've thrown you a personal insult?

[olaftab]

I always wanted to know what a drama queen looked like.   Bit of a shock actually.   I thought more Hugh Fernley Whittingstall than Dave Woodhall.   There you go.

Martin O'Neill had the money and spent it badly.   Harry Redknapp had the money and spent it well.   Harry Redknapp would buy players quickly and decisively while Martin O'Neill pissanted about as my son so pithly put it buying players like they were Faberge eggs.    I put it far less elegantly comparing him to what car dealers call a tyre kicker.

Totally agree with your Harry R comment and thinking about most of MON's signings  they were tyre kickers rather than Faberge eggs.

[old man villa fan]

This season we have had the spine of the team ripped out.  Either by injury to midfield and forwards or by loss of form/minor injuries to centre of defence.

GH has had to cope with this the best he could by bringing in youngsters or trying to play players back into form or play them with minor injuries.  The shallowness of MON's squad has been exposed totally this season, particulary with the loss of the player (Milner) that papered over a lot of the cracks last season.

People are saying that the manager should be motivating the players better as they are good players.  In the PL today, you cannot carry so many inexperienced players, particularly against the top sides.  I have said it before but look at what inexperienced players do off the ball when the opposition have the ball.  The number of games when they have been caught ball watching and allowed players to run through to receive a ball unmarked.  They will learn with experience as they look to be a talented crop of players.

The loss of Dunne from last seasons form has had a major impact on the team.  Dropping him has meant Collins moving to the left side and playing two right sided defenders in the team.  We are unbalanced.

People have commented on bringing Delph back as opposed to Petrov or Reo Coker.  My opinion is that we needed somebody willing to push forward through the middle and that is why he brought Delph in.

I believe it unfair to judge GH on what has happened so far this season as he is trying to mend the wagon after the wheels had already fallen off without the tools to do it.  He should be given this season and at least to Xmas next season to judge whether he can build a future for the club.

The playing structure has to be rebalanced with some young players, some developing players and some senior players so that the wage bill is sustainable.  MON had lost sight of this as he became more and more short sighted.  Thus leaving us with a top heavy squad of players.

[ROBBO]

Collins is turning into the latest scapegoat, he always puts in the effort and looks as if he wants to win. Why not throw him forward our attack was powder puff. Dunne has been the biggest disppointment for me, i thought he was a true pro and led the defence superbly last saeson, he has let the club and himself down big time. One thing i did notice about Delph, he was always making space and running to position just the way that top players do and considering it was his first run for months he did well, Gabby should watch and learn.

[Toronto Villa]

in fairness to Gabby, I don't think he's fully fit either. Every time he's returned to the line up he's had a set back. I've never known a season where so many of our key players have suffered injuries at the same time. Or one comes back, and another goes out. I mean Heskey's probably out again tomorrow just as Petrov, Delph and NRC are returning. Add to the chaos at the start of the season, you couldn't ask for the club to be more fragmented from a playing side. That can't have made it easy on the new management team since they were assembled.

[ROBBO]

It's a pity some of our supporters don't fully understand.

[dave.woodhall]

As I've repeated countless times, I never said Spurs accounts were wrong. I said that the staff costs figure wasn't a like for like comparison, it's probably best not to reopen that can of worms even though Spurs mention in their latest accounts under contigent liabilities that they are in discussions with HMRC about "Image Rights" payments. Suffice to say Villa and Spurs have similar wage costs and the other five clubs I referred to all spend more than £100m on "staff costs" per year.

I mention the Lerner family wealth because they own 100% of the club and are the only potential source of external investment. I didn't suggest that additional investment should be in the form of subsidies, he might want to increase the debt that he has placed on the club and for which he earns a good rate of return in interest payments.

All of those other clubs have injected funds through debt or equity to strengthen their squad or improve facilities at various times. When Randy bought the club for the bargain basement price of £64m, it was understood by everyone that he would need to invest very significant sums in the playing squad to achieve his aim of competing at the top of the league. Had he bought one of the top five clubs at the time it would have cost him much,much more than he paid for Villa.

It isn't true that only one club has invested more net in the playing squad than Villa since Randy took over and its also a bit disingenuous to insist that our spending has been at a level that should ensure we improved from the squad O'Leary left to a position where we would be better than the traditional Sky 4. Man City have spent more and for the record, according to the Spurs financial accounts, they have spent £124.9m net since the 2006 summer transfer window. Perhaps the next time you're talking to these people with more inside information you could ask them to be a bit more specific.

What is it that makes you so affronted by discussions about the level of Randy Lerner's investment? Why do you behave as though I've thrown you a personal insult?

You spent weeks arguing the toss about Spurs wages but they're not wrong. Sorry, they're "Not like for like".  Strange how some figures are inaccurate, yet the ones that suit your argument are writ in stone.

Equally, it's strange how it was 'generally understood' that Randy would have to spend more when he took over when the general concensus as I remember it was that heavy spending wasn't the way forward. The bargain price paid is debatable as well, particularly as it was well over market value.

I don't get 'affronted' as you call it, even by your rather childish insults, but I do like to point out the inaccuracies of your odder theories.