Villa man seen stumbling out of spanish bar prior to game.

[Greg N'Ash]

i reckon he got quite a few proviso's when he sold the club yes. Say what you like about the blose but they haven't got a Kumar stand or wolves a Bhatti stand. Embarassing.

[Stu]

The arguement for Doug is that we could have had a lot worse owners and Chairman.

The arguement against is he really never maximised or recognised the potential of the Club.
It could have been a lot worse, it could have been a lot better.

Hurrah for mediocrity!

[dave.woodhall]

i reckon he got quite a few proviso's when he sold the club yes. Say what you like about the blose but they haven't got a Kumar stand or wolves a Bhatti stand. Embarassing.

Doug's still in control. Nice to see the old gregnash back.

[Stu]

no you're missing the point. He misses the control, he misses the celebrity by association and he misses the money Villa earned him. Now he's just an old fart desperately remembering his glory days. He cares about us in the same way a 1 hit wonder remembers his 30 seconds (years?) of fame, but love?

no.

How the fuck do you know what he misses, or what he wants to remember? You don't half talk some fucking bollocks, Greg. Even for you, the above is absolutely crazy.

[dave.woodhall]

The arguement for Doug is that we could have had a lot worse owners and Chairman.

The arguement against is he really never maximised or recognised the potential of the Club.
It could have been a lot worse, it could have been a lot better.

Hurrah for mediocrity!

I know it's going over old ground, but we had less mediocrity under Doug than during any lengthy period for almost a century. We tended to veer from good to staggeringly awful on a regular basis. It was rare that we were average. 

[Greg N'Ash]

bottom line is we were going broke. Our last accounts before the takeover was something like a 6-8m loss in 6 months and Ellis desperately trying to sell land. Usually you don't keep a stand named after a chairman who nearly puts you in administration especially one who used to whitter on about how he was such a steady hand at the the tiller compared to the risdale's of this world. If RL hadn't turned up we wouldn't have this revisionism

[Greg N'Ash]

no you're missing the point. He misses the control, he misses the celebrity by association and he misses the money Villa earned him. Now he's just an old fart desperately remembering his glory days. He cares about us in the same way a 1 hit wonder remembers his 30 seconds (years?) of fame, but love?

no.

How the fuck do you know what he misses, or what he wants to remember? You don't half talk some fucking bollocks, Greg. Even for you, the above is absolutely crazy.

he's just a failed travel agent stu. any love he feels towards villa is purely because he associates it with money.. Thats my opinion anyway

[dave.woodhall]

bottom line is we were going broke. Our last accounts before the takeover was something like a 6-8m loss in 6 months and Ellis desperately trying to sell land. Usually you don't keep a stand named after a chairman who nearly puts you in administration especially one who used to whitter on about how he was such a steady hand at the the tiller compared to the risdale's of this world. If RL hadn't turned up we wouldn't have this revisionism

You say we were going broke. Every director I've spoken to says the major reason why Randy bought the club was the healthy state of the accounts. I'll take their word over yours. 

[KevinGage]

I am not going to pretend he was only a force for good for the club - that is far from the truth. However, maybe we should let bygones be bygones.

A view I've increasingly come around to.

Vain, a serial name dropper, occasional(?) bullshitter, but in his own way he is a Villa fan.  I too would be a fan of any pension fund that transformed me from successful small businessman to multi millionaire.

The club gave him status, a chance to hobnob it with the great and the good of football (Beckenbauer, Platini and Cruyff are all 'friends,') and gave him many sons; Little, McGrath and Yorke to name but a few. Not sure what Heidi made of that. Maybe we'll find out in the next book.

[Stu]

The arguement for Doug is that we could have had a lot worse owners and Chairman.

The arguement against is he really never maximised or recognised the potential of the Club.
It could have been a lot worse, it could have been a lot better.

Hurrah for mediocrity!

I know it's going over old ground, but we had less mediocrity under Doug than during any lengthy period for almost a century. We tended to veer from good to staggeringly awful on a regular basis. It was rare that we were average. 

I was taking the piss

I seem to remember Gregory's term being a bit average though. There were some great games but I seem to remember us being upper-mid table all the time, not really pulling up any trees and not really ever looking awful. Actually, the football did look awful, but you know what I mean.

[Stu]

no you're missing the point. He misses the control, he misses the celebrity by association and he misses the money Villa earned him. Now he's just an old fart desperately remembering his glory days. He cares about us in the same way a 1 hit wonder remembers his 30 seconds (years?) of fame, but love?

no.

How the fuck do you know what he misses, or what he wants to remember? You don't half talk some fucking bollocks, Greg. Even for you, the above is absolutely crazy.

he's just a failed travel agent stu. any love he feels towards villa is purely because he associates it with money.. Thats my opinion anyway

A failed travel agent with 10's of millions in the bank. What a useless businessman he is.

[dave.woodhall]

There were times he was good for us. There were times when he was disastrous. And there were times when we did well despite him. His biggest fault may have been that to put it politely, he often blurred the lines between Aston Villa Ltd/PLC and Doug Ellis inc. But ironicallly, those who campaigned loudest against him gave him what he wanted most. They made him Mr Aston Villa. 

[dave.woodhall]

I seem to remember Gregory's term being a bit average though. There were some great games but I seem to remember us being upper-mid table all the time, not really pulling up any trees and not really ever looking awful. Actually, the football did look awful, but you know what I mean.

Under Gregory great-to-awful was usually in the same season.

[Stu]

I seem to remember Gregory's term being a bit average though. There were some great games but I seem to remember us being upper-mid table all the time, not really pulling up any trees and not really ever looking awful. Actually, the football did look awful, but you know what I mean.

Under Gregory great-to-awful was usually in the same season.

Ha ha, yep, quite right. We had bad luck with strikers as well - Dublin cracked a bone in his neck while in good form and Luc Nilis had a career finisher against, erm, I've forgotten now. What a goal against Chelsea though.

[*shellac*]

Ha ha, yep, quite right. We had bad luck with strikers as well - Dublin cracked a bone in his neck while in good form and Luc Nilis had a career finisher against, erm, I've forgotten now. What a goal against Chelsea though.

Nilis broke his leg following a clash with then Ipswich Town keeper, Richard Wright.