Has Houllier changed our club for the better?

[dave.woodhall]

O'Neill also sued the Mirror. 

[Rip Van We Go Again]

It surprises me that anybody doubts that O'Neill would have been after McGeady.  If ever there was a player that ticked all the O'Neill boxes, that was one.

He might well have been interested but it's now treated as though we did sign him and he was shit.

Well, we didn't sign him, but he's certainly shit.
I didn't see any other clubs of note show an interest in him.

Had we have signed him, he may well have given O'Neill a dirty look in training, then whoosh, £15m in transfer fee and wages down the khazi.

If funds were available, how do you think O'Neill would react if Faulkner told him that he couldn't spend them on the player of his choice?

The poor choice of players never came into it.
He was questioned about the high earners he'd signed and then tossed aside, he was also asked to look at the wage bill.
From what I was told, McGeady and Keane were acceptable, as long as he took steps to reduce said wage bill.
ALL of the Milner proceeds were available to him.
He then went into Man baby mode and we all know the rest.

[Rip Van We Go Again]

What pisses me of about mcAllister is that he sits on the bench and shows no emotion, rarely getting up and tbh he looks like he would rather be somewhere else.

Best line was from the WM commentary against man City:

"The only reason I know that Houllier & McAllister are not waxwork dummies is because Houllier just blinked"

I've never bought into this 'The Manager and coaches should be jumping around on the touch line like prawns on a hot plate.'

I don't think it proves a thing.

[Chris Smith]

Can I just check on the current state of the "all journalists are shit and lazy and hate Villa" conspiracy?

[Concrete John]

I've never bought into this 'The Manager and coaches should be jumping around on the touch line like prawns on a hot plate.'

I don't think it proves a thing.

However, when things aren't going well it becomes a useful hammer to hit them over the head with. 

[Toronto Villa]

What pisses me of about mcAllister is that he sits on the bench and shows no emotion, rarely getting up and tbh he looks like he would rather be somewhere else.

Best line was from the WM commentary against man City:

"The only reason I know that Houllier & McAllister are not waxwork dummies is because Houllier just blinked"

I've never bought into this 'The Manager and coaches should be jumping around on the touch line like prawns on a hot plate.'

I don't think it proves a thing.

I certainly don't recall Sir Graham or Ron Saunders sliding on both knees when we scored, or going completely off their heads with rage during games if players made errors. My memory isn't what it once was, but I think both of those manager's did quite well for us.

[Villa'Zawg]

It surprises me that anybody doubts that O'Neill would have been after McGeady.  If ever there was a player that ticked all the O'Neill boxes, that was one.

He might well have been interested but it's now treated as though we did sign him and he was shit.

Well, we didn't sign him, but he's certainly shit.
I didn't see any other clubs of note show an interest in him.

Had we have signed him, he may well have given O'Neill a dirty look in training, then whoosh, £15m in transfer fee and wages down the khazi.

If funds were available, how do you think O'Neill would react if Faulkner told him that he couldn't spend them on the player of his choice?

The poor choice of players never came into it.
He was questioned about the high earners he'd signed and then tossed aside, he was also asked to look at the wage bill.
From what I was told, McGeady and Keane were acceptable, as long as he took steps to reduce said wage bill.
ALL of the Milner proceeds were available to him.
He then went into Man baby mode and we all know the rest.

Didn't Faulkner take over responsibility for conducting transfers when he became CEO?

[Rip Van We Go Again]

It surprises me that anybody doubts that O'Neill would have been after McGeady.  If ever there was a player that ticked all the O'Neill boxes, that was one.

He might well have been interested but it's now treated as though we did sign him and he was shit.

Well, we didn't sign him, but he's certainly shit.
I didn't see any other clubs of note show an interest in him.

Had we have signed him, he may well have given O'Neill a dirty look in training, then whoosh, £15m in transfer fee and wages down the khazi.

If funds were available, how do you think O'Neill would react if Faulkner told him that he couldn't spend them on the player of his choice?

The poor choice of players never came into it.
He was questioned about the high earners he'd signed and then tossed aside, he was also asked to look at the wage bill.
From what I was told, McGeady and Keane were acceptable, as long as he took steps to reduce said wage bill.
ALL of the Milner proceeds were available to him.
He then went into Man baby mode and we all know the rest.

Didn't Faulkner take over responsibility for conducting transfers when he became CEO?

And your point is?
O'Neil wasn't refused a potential player by anybody at the club.
The trouble started when he was questioned about fringe players and ASKED to look at the wage bill.

It was the first time in his tenure at the club that he been challenged on anything.
His ego just couldn't take it.

[Risso]

Can I just check on the current state of the "all journalists are shit and lazy and hate Villa" conspiracy?

That depends on whether they've been invited for dinner chez Gerard ou not.

[Villa'Zawg]

...
And your point is?
O'Neil wasn't refused a potential player by anybody at the club.
The trouble started when he was questioned about fringe players and ASKED to look at the wage bill.

It was the first time in his tenure at the club that he been challenged on anything.
His ego just couldn't take it.

At the start of the summer he'd agreed with Lerner and Faulkner which players should be sold (Davies, L young, Beye, NRC, Sidwell, Shorey) and had apparently subsequently agreed to the sale of Milner.

My point is that I don't understand what more O'Neill could do to reduce wages when Faulkner was responsible for transfers.

[WikiVilla]

What pisses me of about mcAllister is that he sits on the bench and shows no emotion, rarely getting up and tbh he looks like he would rather be somewhere else.

Best line was from the WM commentary against man City:

"The only reason I know that Houllier & McAllister are not waxwork dummies is because Houllier just blinked"

Exactly,  a bit of passion would be nice. McAllister coaching / managing record also is a concern - he's been shite everywhere

Le Gaffeur tried to show some passion after the Bolton debacle but to me it seemed a bit contrived

[Mister E]

At the start of the summer he'd agreed with Lerner and Faulkner which players should be sold (Davies, L young, Beye, NRC, Sidwell, Shorey)

Had he?

[Chris Smith]

At the start of the summer he'd agreed with Lerner and Faulkner which players should be sold (Davies, L young, Beye, NRC, Sidwell, Shorey)

Had he?

According to the General, yes he had. His criticism was that MON then changed, which I took to mean he got impatient waiting for the club to sell some players and wanted to make his signings as the season was about to start.

[TheSandman]

So Paul Faulkner now owns, runs and makes every decision at the club? Or is it just that he is an easier target?

[hartman_1982]

At the start of the summer he'd agreed with Lerner and Faulkner which players should be sold (Davies, L young, Beye, NRC, Sidwell, Shorey)

Had he?

According to the General, yes he had. His criticism was that MON then changed, which I took to mean he got impatient waiting for the club to sell some players and wanted to make his signings as the season was about to start.

because he was well known for getting his business done early.