5% Villa- Oliver Holt Interview

[Eigentor]

What I've heard is this. MON was unhappy at the end of the season and was going to call it a day. After a meeting with Paul Faulkner he was made certain promises which made him decide to remain. Five days before the start of the season another meeting with Paul Faulkner resulted in him being told that the promises made previously were either not going to be honoured or were unable to be honoured.

As the club had reneged on the promises that had stopped him from leaving earlier, MON walked.

FWIW, I think that this is a plausible explanation. From what I recall, the signing of Warnock was sanctioned by the board only on the premise that we sold someone in the coming January transfer window. In January we sold Gardner, but MON wanted new signings as he believed that would enable us to have a proper go at a top four finish. His request was rejected, and MON wasn't too happy about that.

[KevinGage]

In the rush to call him names people have not stopped to think what might have been behind MON walking out. Everyone wants to think the worst so that they can have a pantomime villain but don't appear curious as to what prompted it and why the LMA tribunal sided with him.

We're a club that sells our best player every year, maybe even 2 this summer, and have just resorted to tapping up the manager from a relegated side. Doesn't that get you thinking?

For all the aggro his leaving caused I'm reluctant to put the boot in too much (believe it or not) as he was one of our better post war managers. In time (maybe 10-15 years) he will probably be viewed more favourably, when the sting at the nature of his departure has subsided.  Similar to Ron Saunders in that regard - though that will be one of the few things he'll have in common with a manager who has a genuine claim to greatness. In terms of achievement, he's closer to JG rather than Saunders, Little, Taylor, BFR etc.

The period of 2006-up to 2010 was one of the better chapters in the clubs history and MON played a big part in that. It was largely positive and we felt we were 'on the move' for the majority of that time.

As to the nature of the LMA ruling, seeing as there was no mention of constructive dismissal, breach of contract, broken promises re transfers or anything else I'd say the balance of probability lies with it being a technicality, a personal financial issue concerning his own contract.

[Greg N'Ash]

I think the problem here is some of us have this idea (myth/image?) that he's an easy going honourable person so there must be a shocking reason why he left, but when you look at his real character and his actions elswhere you realise the only surprise is he lasted here so long. He's a hardnosed ambitious careerist prone to hissy fits who's walked out on 2 clubs and has threatened the same to most of the others. there's no 'smoking gun' to find imo, just loads of conspiracy theorists desperate to rehabilitate his image.

[Toronto Villa]

I think the problem here is some of us have this idea (myth/image?) that he's an easy going honourable person so there must be a shocking reason why he left, but when you look at his real character and his actions elswhere you realise the only surprise is he lasted here so long. He's a hardnosed ambitious careerist prone to hissy fits who's walked out on 2 clubs and has threatened the same to most of the others. there's no 'smoking gun' to find imo, just loads of conspiracy theorists desperate to rehabilitate his image.

Other than us, he's only walked out on Norwich. And that was really after only a few months so there isn't the body of work to compare it to what happened with us. I don't disagree with a lot of what you'd said there greg, but his departures from Wycombe and Leicester were career related, and Celtic may never have happened had his wife not taken ill. He's a strong willed person which has got him far in the game. That's not in any way to excuse him for his actions. By the time of his departure, even for some of his most ardent supporters, the camel's back was under heavy strain. It didn't take much more to break it.

[Greg N'Ash]

he stayed at celtic because they rolled over and gave into his demands everytime he threatened to leave them. He was literally bigger than the club and in complete control. No doubt he fancied the same here only they called his bluff

[Toronto Villa]

he stayed at celtic because they rolled over and gave into his demands everytime he threatened to leave them. He was literally bigger than the club and in complete control. No doubt he fancied the same here only they called his bluff

he also did very well up there. That helps a lot if your being difficult to deal with. I'm sure he'd have got his way last summer with us, had the previous season we'd won a trophy or two.

[LeeB]

he stayed at celtic because they rolled over and gave into his demands everytime he threatened to leave them. He was literally bigger than the club and in complete control. No doubt he fancied the same here only they called his bluff

I don't have a problem with him wanting control, in fact I think a manager should fight for as much as possible.

What I do have a problem with is his wilfull neglect of housekeeping, and fucking off when the issue needed to be addressed.

[Chris Smith]

I think the problem here is some of us have this idea (myth/image?) that he's an easy going honourable person so there must be a shocking reason why he left, but when you look at his real character and his actions elswhere you realise the only surprise is he lasted here so long. He's a hardnosed ambitious careerist prone to hissy fits who's walked out on 2 clubs and has threatened the same to most of the others. there's no 'smoking gun' to find imo, just loads of conspiracy theorists desperate to rehabilitate his image.

Not conspiracy theories but a curiosity about what happened and how it is related to events since, which has seen the club seemingly change direction. I accept it's not a debate you want to happen but I think it's more interesting than your name calling and rehashing of jokes you've found elsewhere on the Internet.

[eamonn]

By the time of his departure, even for some of his most ardent supporters, the camel's back was under heavy strain.

Some of his most ardent supporters but not all.

[Greg N'Ash]

I think the problem here is some of us have this idea (myth/image?) that he's an easy going honourable person so there must be a shocking reason why he left, but when you look at his real character and his actions elswhere you realise the only surprise is he lasted here so long. He's a hardnosed ambitious careerist prone to hissy fits who's walked out on 2 clubs and has threatened the same to most of the others. there's no 'smoking gun' to find imo, just loads of conspiracy theorists desperate to rehabilitate his image.

Not conspiracy theories but a curiosity about what happened and how it is related to events since, which has seen the club seemingly change direction. I accept it's not a debate you want to happen but I think it's more interesting than your name calling and rehashing of jokes you've found elsewhere on the Internet.

name calling? rehashing of old jokes?

!!!

[Greg N'Ash]

he stayed at celtic because they rolled over and gave into his demands everytime he threatened to leave them. He was literally bigger than the club and in complete control. No doubt he fancied the same here only they called his bluff

he also did very well up there. That helps a lot if your being difficult to deal with. I'm sure he'd have got his way last summer with us, had the previous season we'd won a trophy or two.

yeah but as we all know, if you're up north at the old firm you have to be pretty bad not to win something. Down here its a bit different

[Greg N'Ash]

he stayed at celtic because they rolled over and gave into his demands everytime he threatened to leave them. He was literally bigger than the club and in complete control. No doubt he fancied the same here only they called his bluff

I don't have a problem with him wanting control, in fact I think a manager should fight for as much as possible.

What I do have a problem with is his wilfull neglect of housekeeping, and fucking off when the issue needed to be addressed.

yep. you only have to look at the state of Dunne to see he wasn't doing his job. Mind you, the board obviously took their eye of the ball as well or trusted him so much they just ignored their eyes.

[Eigentor]

I think the problem here is some of us have this idea (myth/image?) that he's an easy going honourable person so there must be a shocking reason why he left, but when you look at his real character and his actions elswhere you realise the only surprise is he lasted here so long. He's a hardnosed ambitious careerist prone to hissy fits who's walked out on 2 clubs and has threatened the same to most of the others. there's no 'smoking gun' to find imo, just loads of conspiracy theorists desperate to rehabilitate his image.

No, I have no illusions about MON being anything other than a self-serving careerist. Also, I believe he as manager had severe limitations and that he had taken us as far as he could. I shed no tears about his departure.

That view doesn't rule out that he had a legitimate beef with the board (though I struggle to think that it could be anything grave enough justifying the timing and manner of the departure). Whether it was about the wage bill or something else, I don't know, but all the pieces known don't add up.

[Ian.]

I wonder if Harry will walk out on Spurs now he has to trim the wage bill and shift some players out?

I would laugh if he did mind, especially if it was early August and we had just swapped Ireland for Moderic with a couple million thrown in.

[Toronto Villa]

he stayed at celtic because they rolled over and gave into his demands everytime he threatened to leave them. He was literally bigger than the club and in complete control. No doubt he fancied the same here only they called his bluff

he also did very well up there. That helps a lot if your being difficult to deal with. I'm sure he'd have got his way last summer with us, had the previous season we'd won a trophy or two.

yeah but as we all know, if you're up north at the old firm you have to be pretty bad not to win something. Down here its a bit different

that's immaterial. Aside from having some influential allies at the club, he ultimately got his way because of his success. If the success had dried up, so would the patience of the board if he was being over demanding. It would have been no different with us. You bite your lip and put up with a lot of things if you're successful. I'm sure Ferguson was a cock at Man U as he asserted himself at Man U. Now he pretty much runs everything. Up there the board would never dare bite the hand that feeds, and make no mistake he has been feeding them for 20 years. If MON got us into the CL, or won the FA Cup last season and had walked out there would be far more vitriol being thrown at the board, and far less at him than we see today.