Who Should be Aston Villa Manager ? Now with new, revised poll

[Chris Smith]

As I said earlier that argument would have stopped them appointing Redknapp.

And as Mark said earlier, the point was about who they'd appoint today.

So they wouldn't appoint Redknapp today?

[Rudy Can't Fail]

As I said earlier that argument would have stopped them appointing Redknapp.

And as Mark said earlier, the point was about who they'd appoint today.

So they wouldn't appoint Redknapp today?

Not if they were looking to replace him, no.

[Concrete John]

How do we know that?  The Scouse rivalry may rule out Liverpool, but I'd think Moyes would be a strong candidate for Spurs if it became available.

Because they want CL football and / or trophies and Moyes and Hughes have a proven track record of not delivering that (except once) while playing not particularly scintillating football.

They would have said that when 'arry went there also and they got it.  There's never a track record of anything until it happens and with the monopoly the top 4 have over the Cl places and trophies limiting ourselves to that criteria only leaves a ridiculously small list of candidates. 

[hilts_coolerking]

So they wouldn't appoint Redknapp today?

If they were managerless today they wouldn't appoint Moyes or Hughes.  That was the point.

[hilts_coolerking]

They would have said that when 'arry went there also and they got it.  There's never a track record of anything until it happens and with the monopoly the top 4 have over the Cl places and trophies limiting ourselves to that criteria only leaves a ridiculously small list of candidates.

Again, if Spurs or Liverpool were managerless today they wouldn't appoint Hughes or Moyes.  That's the point being made.

In any case, you're arguing that Ancelotti's track record of not having taken a team into the CL is a reason to doubt that he can.  But you're also arguing that Hughes and Moyes inability to deliver sustained CL football shouldn't be held against them.  You can't have it both ways.

[Merv]

Don't think anyone can say with any certainty who Liverpool would today, seeing as the two managerial appointments they've made in the last 12 months (one of them just a couple of weeks ago) were Kenny Dalglish and Roy Hodgson. Both very pragmatic, grounded, old school, British managers.

[adrenachrome]

Peter W. poking a hornets' nest with a sharp stick; shock! horror!
(Yes I know it is not our Peter W.)

Sporting Life

VILLA FAN CHIEF BACKS HUGHES

The chairman of the Aston Villa Supporters Trust believes it is "almost certain" that manager Gerard Houllier will leave the club this summer, and has called for Fulham's Mark Hughes to replace him.

Villa are currently assessing Houllier's position after he was forced to miss the last month of the season because of heart problems - the second time the Frenchman has suffered from such ill health in his career.

It has been reported that Villa are awaiting test results to determine if the 63-year-old is fit to return to work, but Peter Warrilow, head of AVST, believes the conclusion is inevitable.

He said today: "It's almost certainly the case that Gerard Houllier will depart, and his departure would be in the best interests of both his health and Aston Villa.

"It's all very unsettling at a time when what we really need is some stability."

The Villa fans have not been convinced by Houllier ever since his appointment last September, and a flirtation with the relegation zone earlier this year did not help that.

He still polarises opinion despite the club eventually finishing ninth, but Warrilow does not believe the club will use Houllier's health as an excuse to remove him from his post.

"My knowledge of (owner) Randy Lerner and (chief executive) Paul Faulkner doesn't suggest that they would be that cynical," he said.

"But if you look at Aston Villa's long-term future then it would be quite wrong to go into the new season having committed a lot of money to a man to go out and rebuild the squad, then two months into the season find themselves in the same situation of his health being in decline and him not being able to continue.

"In terms of practicality, his departure would be sensible so that Villa can secure a new manager for the longer-term future."

Should Houllier leave, Warrilow feels the club could find the perfect replacement in the shape of Hughes.

The former Wales and Manchester City manager enjoyed an excellent first season with Fulham and has an option to extend his deal at Craven Cottage.

Warrilow, though, feels Villa should strike before he exercises that option.

"Everyone knows that Mark Hughes has the opportunity to break his contract today at Fulham," he said.

"I think Mark Hughes would be an ideal choice.

"He has demonstrated that he can work well with a limited squad and I think that he won't have the personnel issues that Gerard Houllier seems to have had where he's fallen out with people and we've had expensive players on the books who weren't available for selection for one reason or another.

"I think Hughes would come in and he'd sort those kinds of issues out."

[eastie]

They would have said that when 'arry went there also and they got it.  There's never a track record of anything until it happens and with the monopoly the top 4 have over the Cl places and trophies limiting ourselves to that criteria only leaves a ridiculously small list of candidates.

Again, if Spurs or Liverpool were managerless today they wouldn't appoint Hughes or Moyes.  That's the point being made.

In any case, you're arguing that Ancelotti's track record of not having taken a team into the CL is a reason to doubt that he can.  But you're also arguing that Hughes and Moyes inability to deliver sustained CL football shouldn't be held against them.  You can't have it both ways.

Who says they wouldnt appoint hughes or moyes? I think both would probably be on any shortlist drawn up by spurs.,just because ancelotti is free does not mean he would get it.

Liverpool appointed hodgson last season from fulham rather than look for a big name foreigner like rijkaerd or klinsmann.

[Chris Smith]

So they wouldn't appoint Redknapp today?

If they were managerless today they wouldn't appoint Moyes or Hughes.  That was the point.

I think they'd seriously consider it after the way Redknapp turned comapred to Ramos. They've proven that a manager does not have to have prior expereince of the CL to qualify for it.

[Merv]

Strange, then, that Chelsea have been linked with Harry Redknapp so much of late. Someone had better tell them.

[eastie]

So they wouldn't appoint Redknapp today?

If they were managerless today they wouldn't appoint Moyes or Hughes.  That was the point.

I think they'd seriously consider it after the way Redknapp turned comapred to Ramos. They've proven that a manager does not have to have prior expereince of the CL to qualify for it.

Exactly right chris.

[hilts_coolerking]

Liverpool appointed hodgson last season from fulham rather than look for a big name foreigner like rijkaerd or klinsmann.

That's because they still had muppets in charge who were blinded by Woy's wemarkable wun to the UEFA Cup Final.  Pretty much everyone at the time thought it was a mistake and so it was proved to be.

[eastie]

Strange, then, that Chelsea have been linked with Harry Redknapp so much of late. Someone had better tell them.

chelsea have also been linked with hughes as well.
http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/2304340.hughes_odds_slashed_for_chelsea_job/
http://www.clubcall.com/fulham/hughes-rejects-chelsea-link-1210603.html

[Concrete John]

They would have said that when 'arry went there also and they got it.  There's never a track record of anything until it happens and with the monopoly the top 4 have over the Cl places and trophies limiting ourselves to that criteria only leaves a ridiculously small list of candidates.

Again, if Spurs or Liverpool were managerless today they wouldn't appoint Hughes or Moyes.  That's the point being made.

In any case, you're arguing that Ancelotti's track record of not having taken a team into the CL is a reason to doubt that he can.  But you're also arguing that Hughes and Moyes inability to deliver sustained CL football shouldn't be held against them.  You can't have it both ways.

It is within fairly recent history that they apointed Redknapp and Kenny, so say what you want about what you tTHINK they'd do know, recent history is against an Ancelotti type apointment.  And unless they've got a club legend waiting in the wings, that same history does point to a Moyes/Hughes.   

I'm not try to have it both ways.  What I am trying to do is present the case that a manager like Ancelotti may not be the answer simply because he's been the other side of the CL fence and won trophies there.

[Damo70]

I've got to disagree with a couple of points which are cropping up. I think if 'Arry became England boss today Hughes and Moyes would certainly be on Spurs radar as replacements. Also, people who suggest  Ancelotti couldn't take us into the champions league because he needs to be at an established CL club like Milan or Chelsea are forgetting that he managed to do it with Parma courtesy of a runners up spot in Serie A.